Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Blade Master Model 42]

I know I'll probably get chewed out for this one, but I'll probably be backing Ron Paul for the primaries. Hardcore, anti-big government conservative right here.

As for the actual presidential election, I have to put my faith in swing voters and more conservative democrats being disillusioned with Obama to get anybody else into office. Incumbents (think I'm using that word right) are notoriously difficult to run against.

[Nadaka]

If you don't think voting matters, you would be better off campaigning for voting system reform.

eliminating the electoral college is an option.

Instant runoff is an option.

So is negative voting: you have 1 vote, you can vote for the guy you like most, or against the guy you like least.

So are any number of alternative voting systems.

[Nadaka]

I know I'll probably get chewed out for this one, but I'll probably be backing Ron Paul for the primaries. Hardcore, anti-big government conservative right here.

As for the actual presidential election, I have to put my faith in swing voters and more conservative democrats being disillusioned with Obama to get anybody else into office. Incumbents (think I'm using that word right) are notoriously difficult to run against.

Gotcha, so you like suicidal economic policy that will end America as a world power and will put the US on equal footing with nations like Uganda, and you also worship the constitution as it was originally written and any further amendments like the bill of rights were a horrible idea and at best.

[Sirus]

I know I'll probably get chewed out for this one, but I'll probably be backing Ron Paul for the primaries. Hardcore, anti-big government conservative right here.

As for the actual presidential election, I have to put my faith in swing voters and more conservative democrats being disillusioned with Obama to get anybody else into office. Incumbents (think I'm using that word right) are notoriously difficult to run against.

Honestly, at the moment I'm just glad that you're actually voting

[Max White]

Can anybody explain to me why having conservative views is a good thing? I mean no need to change what isn't broken, but keeping everything the same just because 'That's how it has always been!'
I fail to see the positive side...

[Aqizzar]

Okay, yeah, whoa.  See, this is the kind of aetherial academic debate I don't want people fighting over in my thread.  If you want an explanation on what a specific candidate has espoused, or think you have one (without insulting anybody in the thread that is), feel free to explain.  I don't want another "Everybody talk about your personal political beliefs and try to pick apart everyone else's" thread.  We have and have had plenty of those already, okay?  Okay.

[Nadaka]

Can anybody explain to me why having conservative views is a good thing? I mean no need to change what isn't broken, but keeping everything the same just because 'That's how it has always been!'
I fail to see the positive side...

Well, sometimes things aint broke and don't need fixing. At this point I don't know what that might be.

You also need a skeptic that makes progressives really stop and think through and test the changes they want for validity.

[Capntastic]

Here is some healthy content:

I am probably going to be voting for Obama despite him not living up to expectations.  All of the Republican forerunners at this time are varying shades and degrees of lousy, and while Obama has proven himself to be something of a lame duck, I would rather have that than some of the reforms proposed by his opponents.

[Bauglir]

Spoiler: Redundant (click to show/hide)

That seems like an unnecessary post, Nadaka. In the absolute worst case, I think you could argue that he supports things that could lead to those things, without having considered all of their implications - which is what you would want to make an effort to illustrate. If I were to say, "I think Wal Mart provides a valuable service to society with its affordable prices", it'd be rather obnoxious to attack me for supporting what amount to viciously exploitative hiring practices. That's not what I said I supported, and it's entirely possible that I am naive and so didn't consider that, believe that the prices can be maintained without this necessity, or am even asserting that there are tradeoffs and think that the exploitation is a lesser evil (but still evil), all of which are distinct from "Yeah this is actually a pretty great way to treat employees".

Basically, try to make sure people are actually saying what you think they're saying before you rip into them. After the OP tried to keep the thread calm.

EDIT: I'll just defer to Aqizzar since he's the OP and even if he weren't he'd still be speaking more to something relevant to it than I did. Is the spoiler tied directly enough to the derail that I should delete it, or can I keep it up there?

Anyway, so yeah, echoing many of the other posters. I'll take a better 3rd party candidate if one arises, but otherwise going to vote Obama out of "Meh. Good enough. I guess. Compared to the competition, anyway."

[Blade Master Model 42]

Spoiler: In retrospect, spoilered for quite likely at least somewhat inflammatory rebuttal. Don't like, don't read. (click to show/hide)

I know I'll probably get chewed out for this one, but I'll probably be backing Ron Paul for the primaries. Hardcore, anti-big government conservative right here.

As for the actual presidential election, I have to put my faith in swing voters and more conservative democrats being disillusioned with Obama to get anybody else into office. Incumbents (think I'm using that word right) are notoriously difficult to run against.

Gotcha, so you like suicidal economic policy that will end America as a world power and will put the US on equal footing with nations like Uganda, and you also worship the constitution as it was originally written and any further amendments like the bill of rights were a horrible idea and at best.

Oh boy, here we go.

Do you know how North America got to be so profitable for England before we ran off on our own? Hands off federal government. Pure capitalism made this country what it is, and was the primary reason colonists got so worked up over taxes. They'd been promised no taxation, got it, got used to it, and then etc etc world power yadda yadda.

As far as I'm concerned, a lot of things that the federal government sticks their noses in could be handled better by smaller, local government, or even private company. Running a country is a business, and if government can't keep a rail line out of the red without bailing it out, I want them to be removed from every aspect they possibly can. At least local government can be more sympathetic to the needs of a particular region without screwing over the rest.

I need to go over the amendments again, I'm pretty sure there were a few I didn't care for, yeah, but several that I haven't the slightest problem with.

As for suicidal economic policies... I think our current economic state (and my State in particular, which only recently got out from under a Democrat governor) is evidence enough for me to take my vote somewhere else.

Can anybody explain to me why having conservative views is a good thing? I mean no need to change what isn't broken, but keeping everything the same just because 'That's how it has always been!'
I fail to see the positive side...

It isn't necessarily good or bad, it really depends on what you started with. To me, well. I think I've already made my position clear.

[Mego]

Can anybody explain to me why having conservative views is a good thing? I mean no need to change what isn't broken, but keeping everything the same just because 'That's how it has always been!'
I fail to see the positive side...

Extreme conservativism says that we already changed it, and it sucks. Groups like the Libertarian party want, for the most part, to revert political ideology to what the Founding Fathers intended, with some minor changes to address issues the Fathers never imagined would come up, like abortion and gay rights.

Moderate conservativism, like what you get from the Republican party, does embrace the "don't fix what isn't broken" philosophy, wanting only changes in areas that they feel need change.

Contrast that with liberalism like what you see in the Green and Democratic parties. Their philosophy is more towards "this is broken, let's fix it, and while we're at it, let's fix all this other stuff too."

None of this applies to individual candidates, for the most part, but rather trends in ideology the parties uphold. As far as candidates go, Obama certainly believes in being a fixer and a changer, as made evident by his 2008 campaign. The Republican candidates this year range from extreme conservatism to near-liberalism.

Interpret this how you wish. I'm being deliberately neutral in this post to avoid contributing to any more flare-ups.

[Sirus]

Okay, yeah, whoa.  See, this is the kind of aetherial academic debate I don't want people fighting over in my thread.  If you want an explanation on what a specific candidate has espoused, or think you have one (without insulting anybody in the thread that is), feel free to explain.  I don't want another "Everybody talk about your personal political beliefs and try to pick apart everyone else's" thread.  We have and have had plenty of those already, okay?  Okay.

C'mon dudes. Chill out.

[Capntastic]

Oh boy, here we go.

Spoiler: Aqizzar, please forgive me, but I can't let this slide (click to show/hide)

If you're going to refer to history for guidande:  The last time the US tried hands off federal government, it was called the Articles of Confederation.

That sure worked out well.

Further, running a country is not at all like a business because of macroeconomics being a zero-sum system, while microeconomics, as you'd see in an actual business, is not. 

But yeah, let's all discuss the topic at hand, as I've made an effort to do above.

[Blade Master Model 42]

Okay, I'm going to stick to the actual topic for the rest of the thread before I get into a full blown internet argument.

...Which means I probably won't post much more until either after the primaries, or the roster changes.

So, I won't respond to the esteemed Capn's response. Even though I really want to.

[G-Flex]

I know I'll probably get chewed out for this one, but I'll probably be backing Ron Paul for the primaries. Hardcore, anti-big government conservative right here.

Then you probably shouldn't be supporting Ron Paul, since he's extremely in favor of allowing your state and local government to control your life in ways that the federal government could only dream of. If you want the government out of your life, Ron Paul is a terrible choice. If you do want to support Ron Paul, then be prepared to support someone who wants your state and local government to be able to tell you which sex acts you can't do and which religion you can or can't believe in.