Anyone Against Obama? (Republicans, preferably)

Does anyone?
I'm not sure I know what I'm trying to "get at". His extremism is his appeal to his followers, not his moderation. Some of that appeals to me as well, though I don't imagine it to be electable. I didn't see you address this. What did I miss?
You still haven't defined what you think moderate means in the context you use it in. You simply state you have some moderate views, which doesn't define it but simply puts the definition off.
How do you define moderate?

 

You just explained what you're trying to get at in the second sentence of the first paragraph... to which I replied that no, his "extremism" is not what universally appeals to his supports.

Yes... I did, and how did I put the definition off? I don't know how to make it any clearer to you. I'm not the status quo Conservative. The stances which make me so are things which I take a more "liberal" stance on.

 

You didn't read my past post did you? "big cuts" in military can be accomplished by cutting the amount of generals, and colonels we have. It can be done by closing bases overseas but keeping the personnel for border control. It can be done by stopping the mentality of "spend to get" budgets that the military operates off of where if you don't spend your allotment, you don't get that amount next year. There is a lot to do to get rid of wasteful spending in the military that doesn't hinder our performance.

 

@Dookieman

Between Ron Paul, the Tea Party, Romneycare, neocons and so on I don't know if there really is such a thing as a "regular" republican anymore.

Personally I think the GOP is or is going to become a big tent under which you get a whole bunch of people loosely held together by agreeing with each other on specific things more often than they don't and some core values such as family and personal responsibility.

Personally I think, if Ron Paul wanted a chance at being elected, he needs to very very clearly draw up what he intends to actually do and where he'd draw some lines regarding persuing his efforts towards his insane ideal.

In part because whether or not you agree with how his ideal system would operate, half measures are likely to just plain suck. However with his long history of going solo on voting, we don't have that indication that he'd be willing to accept and operate within reality instead of just throwing wrenches in anything he doesn't like.

Until he does that, he's mostly a government shutdown (and lord knows what else) waiting to happen.

 

I agree, and believe that he'll have no choice but to do so as the election nears.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I don't fear the RP views that I disagree with because I know that he can't snap his fingers and make things happen. He's claimed that executive orders are unconstitutional and we have a system of checks and balances. But, on the upside... Ron Paul will start shaking things up, important things which are relevant to our nation right now, issues that really need examined. Things like our foreign policy and our stretched too thin empire, this economic disaster (which he'd been talking about before it occurred), the balance of state and federal power. I think it's the kind of change we need, I think we're at a point where we seriously need to reexamine things.

 

Don't know how people can catagorize Ron Paul as "fringe"... in terms of Americanism, he never moved - it was the rest of you that moved to the left, and then conveniently labeled anyone who didn't go along with the leftist tide as a "right wing extremist".

Yes, we are to the right of the Republicrat/Big Government Party... but that is where freedom resides.

Skirting the edge of bankruptcy and fiscal collapse is "mainstream"??? building layer upon layer of bureaucractic governance with totalitarian overtones is "mainstream"???

Well, you'll forgive me if I refuse to dip my toe in that stream... we have many centuries of history which call the "mainstream" beliefs of today's Americans nothing less than foolish ignorance.

 

That's why I probalby would vote for him as a senator or something.

However as president he CAN snap his fingers and make some things happen. Equally as importantly he can sit on his fingers and not make things happen.

For example, I could easily see him using his veto to shut down the government. It's getting hard to enough to pass budgets on a simple majority, but requiring a bi-partisan supermajority?

As president he can do a whole heck of a lot regarding foreign policy. That's the area the president is the most powerful, and it's the area people tend to disagree with him the most.

And again, he could manage a host of half measures through vetos and constitutional executive powers.

 

All of which are reasons to vote for him...

Voting for Paul, is voting for the restoration of sanity; the restoration of fiscal responsibility; the end of imperialistic foreign adventurism; the disentangling and reduction of mind numbing, job killing regulations; the implementation of a rational tax code; the return of sound money; on and on...

Go ahead and vote for Perry, Obama, or Romney - how many times do you have to be stabbed in the back before you figure out you're being conned???

The Establishment agenda??? fiscal bankruptcy; debauched currency; socialist governmental controls over the people; endless wars and "police actions"; an uber empowered central bank that can steal from the people at will; mindless and endless codes, laws, and regulations designed to make criminals of us all; on and on...

As I said, go ahead and keep voting for all that nonsense... it's working beautifully - and as you cheer it on??? I would argue, just as our Founding Fathers argued, that you will get the government you deserve.

 

Sorry I punched the wrong button. I will not vote for Obama

 

I checked that I am not going to vote for Obama. I'm going to vote for an actual liberal.

 

Who's that?

 

I'm not sure where the meme got started about Paul being a right-wing extremist. If you go look at the poll data, you find that Paul is *very* popular among liberals and centrists; more so than the vast majority of the field, and at least as popular as Romney.
It's not the lefties who balk at Paul, it's the righties. Check it out...

Source

 

it would be asinine for substantial anti war liberals to vote for ron paul based on that one issue since everything else he stands for is against liberal left principles.

 

It depends on the level of importance of the issue with the specific liberal. I'm sure many liberals (and I've talked to a few) in which Ron Paul's anti-war and states rights views are enough for them to support him. Now, a liberal whose main focus is the economy probably won't support him, but those who focus on social issues and non-interventionism would probably gladly support him as Obama hasn't exactly been strong in those areas.

 

The 12 people that voted anybody but him are fools that have been played for dupes.THIS is why.everybody should take a look at this video if they have not seen it.Like i said and explained in my opening post on that thread in that link WHY it is stupid to vote for anybody other than Paul.Paul is not a member of that EVIL organization the CFR.all the other candidates are.

again please watch this video and get educated why voting for Obama or any other candidate than Paul is stupid.You are voting for evil either way unless you vote for Paul.

http://www.politicalforum.com/elections-campaigns/177580-wake-up-obama-lovers.html

 

While I am a registered republican, voted democrat over the last 7 or 8 years. Could not stand GWB...... for many reasons. I kind've admire Paul, he seems very honest and consistent in his convictions. While I probably would not vote for him I feel he is certainly the most sincere of candidates and some of his libertarian views are right up my alley.

 

Why are you registered as a republican if you agree with the Democrat platform more?