Anyone Against Obama? (Republicans, preferably)

This is something I really want to figure out, and I'd like to see if a poll here could help me figure this out.

It seems many people around here and many Republicans/conservatives say they will vote for ANYONE against Obama. What I'd like to know, does that "anyone" extend to Ron Paul? If so, then Paul would get their votes, and also the libertarians (like me) who wouldn't simply vote for anyone against Obama. I'd like to figure out if this "anyone" concept is true. If so, he would theoretically have the best chance against Obama: not only would he have the Republican vote, but also the vote of anti-war liberals. Also, I think someone of his beliefs would appeal more to independents than the other GOP candidates.

 

Should be a fun thread, if those with skeletons want to open their closets. RP is the only true and credible numbers threat to Obama, and there are many who chant the ABO mantra, but as usual, they don't back it up except to go way over the edge with support for the unelectable Trumps/Palins/Bachmanns/Perrys of the world.

 

Ron Paul is a Republican's nightmare in that he would turn his back on nation's like Iran getting nukes and using nukes to bomb Israel and others. The guy is simply weak on defense.

When you look at a strong national defense guy like Ronald Reagan and see how he had two blow out victories against the libs Mondale and carter--you can see that Republicans are just itching to find another anti Paul type to take over the White House. So a Rick Perry for instance would probably score an impressive victory over the feckless obama come 2012, as so would any other Republican candidate other than Paul, as they're all for a strong defense.

 

Anyone but Obama, but preferably Ron Paul. If someone else gets elected and continues on the same path of progressive bigger government of right wing ideas, that only strengthens RAND Pauls chance in 2016.

 

So...screw what the military wants...just elect someone that will drag us into another perpetual war with no end goals? There is a reason why RP has the most military contributions of all the GOP combined, and even more than Obama. We are tired of the wars, we are tired of putting our lives on the line for no stated goal. We are tired of leaving our families, missing out of years of private business experince then have our compensation (retirement) threatened before those NOT working getting welfare. We are tired of the war machine propoganda that says "If we don't attack them, they will attack us." Especially when there is no threat of that actually being able to occure.

 

You mean cut and run Ronnie? You remember Beirut, don't you? Hundreds of Marines killed and he tucked his tail, closed shop and came home.

 

You sound like your typical liberal who is weak on defense. I suppose if left to you, you would makes sizable cuts to our military. Looks like you'll be voting for obama.

 

We can see quite well what "Anybody but "X" will get you. That's what got us the current nitwit in the White House. He wasn't Bush. And, the people who voted for Obama were so stupid they didn't realize Bush couldn't run. That's said, Senator McCain didn't interest me much either.

I would not vote for "anyone" but President Obama but I will not vote for Barack Obama. But, I'm old. If I die before election day I might vote for Obama because when dead people vote it's always for Democrats.

 

What are you smoking? Reagan was the one who on his first day as president had the 400+ American hostages returned from that Mid East hell hole to America where they found safety and where Carter failed as our most miserable president--up until obama arrived of course. Terrorist attacks can and do happen all the time; how you can blame Reagan for that *******ed terrorist act is beyond anyone's reasonable comprehension.

 

I am simply observing his reaction to the attack, not blaming him for it. He cut and ran. Closed shop, closed the embassy, never responded to it. Poor reading skills to say I blamed him for the attack. Does this kind of poor argument convince the ignorant you pander to? Quite an impressive constituency.

 

I don't know what you mean by cut and ran. Please tell us just how he did that.

 

ABO ! Obamais a lying scumbucket, and is the worst president in the last 100 years! He is a racist(consider upcoming stimulus money spending) and probably a closet muslim.

 

No, not probably a Muslim, a born and bred die hard Muslim taking after his old man. Just listen to his apology tour and to his attacks on Israel while cozying up to ******* nation to see where his affilation lies.

 

More poor reading skills. Like I said, after the attack he closed the embassy, pulled out of Beirut and never returned. No retaliation, no consequences. Just ran away. You may notice I already said this in my last post. Your reading is frightfully poor.

By the way, what did you think of his secret selling of arms to Iran? Good idea?

 

Individual Conservatives have many different favorites, but as strategy we should all be willing to support which ever candidate shows the most promise in 2012.

The question comes down to whether you'd rather have a GOP candidate that is so-so in your mind, or Obama.

 

How do you conflate "moderate" in your name and being a Ron Paul supporter? I am not judging Paul here, only stating that it is a very difficult stretch to consider him a moderate.

 

Can a moderate Conservative not support Ron Paul?

 

It seems a non-sequitor to me. What is moderate about Paul? Isn't his appeal the extreme nature of his positions? His inflexibility in the face of his ideology?
I don't find these things emblematic of moderation. How do you?

 

Unlike many, I don't go into panic mode concerning some of Ron Paul's controversial views. I'm aware of the fact that Ron Paul can't simply march into Washington and turn the place upside down. That's not the way things work.

It's almost as if people assume that RP will simply start issuing executive orders on all sorts of things that the populace is against.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK6cJ83blP4"]Ron Paul: Executive Orders are Unconstitutional; We Need a Private Option in Healthcare - YouTube[/ame]

I don't agree with all of RP's views, I find myself at odds with Libertarians here at PF often. But some of his ideas are good, really good,... worthy of putting him in the White House.

He's more Conservative than not, yet he is more moderate than a lot of Conservatives concerning some issues.

 

No president can go in and unilaterally install his agenda. That is a given. But Paul is an ideological extremist, uncompromising in his vision. That is what appeals to people. But to see him as a moderate is simply not seeing him at all. Moderates by their nature compromise to govern. They make the deals that move the country incrementally forward. That is simply not his nature. Kucinich has some good ideas, but he is an idealogue. He is not a compromiser.
What does being a moderate mean to you?

 

What evidence do you have that Ron Paul is incapable of compromise? And obviously his controversial views are not what appeals to me or all his supporters. For example, he doesn't have the majority of military support because he's critical of the Federal Reserve... Conservatives who support his fiscal policies do not do so because he's introduce marijuana legislation... etc.

You're full of opinions, which is fine, but try providing a little substance.

In what context?

 

I wont vote for Ron Paul or Rick Santorum. I probably would not vote for Michelle Bachmann either.

But I wont be voting for Obama either for sure.

So it will be Republican or 3rd party for me this time around. I dont want to vote 3rd party, but if Obama or one of the fringe people above are the only options, I will take my chances with a 3rd party.

 

No, it doesn't. If a Republican wins, then there won't even be a primary in 2016. Perry/Romney will just run again.

 

The substance is that his extremity is what sets him apart. It is what makes him different from his contemporaries.
As far as context, you tell me. What does it mean to you to be a moderate? What defines that position?

 

I already addressed what you're trying to get at in my last post.

Well in the context of me calling myself a moderate Conservative, it simply means that I'm Conservative but I'm moderate in certain views... I don't fit within the established stereotype.