Meet The Candidates: 2012 GOP Thread

[mlmpetert]

Dirtbag, I agree with you that in time gay marriage will be more accepted but I don’t think it will be anytime soon. Old people arnt dying as fast as they used to, and younger people usually become more socially conservative as they age. I also see no chance of a federal marriage amendment ever happening, the only amendment that didn’t expand civil rights was prohibition and that didn’t work out.

And like you said Obama and Bush are essentially the same in that they are both big spending, big government politicians. Neither the Democratic or Republican parties are fiscally conservative/responsible whatsoever anymore. I too would vote for Ron Paul, but like 12th said I doubt he gets the nomination, but not necessarily because his views don’t resonate with the majority of Americans. To NCSkins point the MainStream Media is so quick to dismiss him, his views have no chance to resonate with the majority of Americans. Just the fact theres a 40+ page thread on a Redskins forum about GOP candidates with dozens of links makes me think a lot of news programs are going to have to change the way they report information. Calling out and discrediting news networks is now easily accessible and is/has become big business, maybe that will change or shape things more as the practice becomes mainstream.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

His views on foreign policy resonate with his base of followers and a small faction of liberals, but on the whole they don't reflect conservative values and I think the direction he wants to take government is pretty radical.

You mean the foreign policy that says we won't be meddling in other people's affairs? Dear god that's a great thing. Did you happen to watch that video I posted on the other page? Apparently not.

I think Americans are tired of war and want our government to get the hell out of other people's business and tend to our own. Paul is hands down the better candidate of those other clueless monkeys.



Also, this.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-out-and-said/

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Dirtbag, I agree with you that in time gay marriage will be more accepted but I don’t think it will be anytime soon. Old people arnt dying as fast as they used to, and younger people usually become more socially conservative as they age. I also see no chance of a federal marriage amendment ever happening, the only amendment that didn’t expand civil rights was prohibition and that didn’t work out.

And like you said Obama and Bush are essentially the same in that they are both big spending, big government politicians. Neither the Democratic or Republican parties are fiscally conservative/responsible whatsoever anymore. I too would vote for Ron Paul, but like 12th said I doubt he gets the nomination, but not necessarily because his views don’t resonate with the majority of Americans. To NCSkins point the MainStream Media is so quick to dismiss him, his views have no chance to resonate with the majority of Americans. Just the fact theres a 40+ page thread on a Redskins forum about GOP candidates with dozens of links makes me think a lot of news programs are going to have to change the way they report information. Calling out and discrediting news networks is now easily accessible and is/has become big business, maybe that will change or shape things more as the practice becomes mainstream.

My point about Ron Paul is that most of his foreign policy views don't resonate within his own party. I don't think the rest of America isn't paying attention to this guy yet.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Clinton is one of the greatest presidents in American history. We would be lucky to get another president that was committed to balancing the budget, creating jobs, and handling foreign affairs in a way that doesn't bankrupt the economy (see the Balkans). From what I understand Obama and Bush are two sides of the same coin in that they both created debt at an alarming rate.

The way I see it you need a Clinton in the white house in the event of the dem's getting the White House and a Regan if the GOP gets the election. Seeing as how Obama is not a Clinton we're left keeping our fingers crossed for a Regan-esque President to emerge from the GOP. Such is the life of an independent.

Clinton was going to bust the budget wide open with Hillary care if he was allowed. It was only when the Rep. and Newt. took control of the house that Clinton agreed to cut spending. I'll give him credit for seeing that the American people wanted to balance the budget but that was only after the land slide victory of the Rep. after his second yr in office.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You mean the foreign policy that says we won't be meddling in other people's affairs? Dear god that's a great thing. Did you happen to watch that video I posted on the other page? Apparently not.

I think Americans are tired of war and want our government to get the hell out of other people's business and tend to our own. Paul is hands down the better candidate of those other clueless monkeys.



Also, this.

PolitiFact | Michele Bachmann says "PolitiFact came out and said that everything I said was true" in last debate

You think the current administration likes war? We just ended the war in Iraq with Republicans kicking and screaming because we didn't leave 10,000 troops behind. And the President will begin a significant draw down in Afghanistan next summer. Exactly how is Ron Paul different than Obama or even John Huntsman on those two fronts? In fact, Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul agree to some extent about the wars. President Obama doesn't believe in torture, neither does Ron Paul. President Obama wants to close Gitmo and so does Ron Paul and John McCain and John Huntsman, I might add.

Now where they differ, and Ron Paul hasn't been completely clear on this, is how to execute the war on terror and sending foreign aid to some of our allies, which has always been a staple of good diplomacy.

Look, the idea that America with all of it's vast military resources and diplomatic clout around the globe will completely stay out other countries business is foolish thinking and probably not in our long term interests when it comes to a range of issues. If our intervention in Libya can keep the price of oil from spiking globally and keep inflation in check here at home, then I'm all for a measured response and a judicious use of our military capability.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

You think the current administration likes war? We just ended the war in Iraq with Republicans kicking and screaming because we didn't leave 10,000 troops behind. And the President will begin a significant draw down in Afghanistan next summer. Exactly how is Ron Paul different than Obama or even John Huntsman on those two fronts? In fact, Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul agree to some extent about the wars. President Obama doesn't believe in torture, neither does Ron Paul. President Obama wants to close Gitmo and so does Ron Paul and John McCain and John Huntsman, I might add.

You haven't been paying attention to his time in office. What he's said he will do and what he's done has been opposite of each other.

[NC_Skins]

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

President Obama doesn't believe in torture, neither does Ron Paul. President Obama wants to close Gitmo and so does Ron Paul and John McCain and John Huntsman, I might add.

Obama's true stance on Gitmo.

The Obama/Gitmo timeline - Guantanamo - Salon.com




Obama promises to veto law that allows indefinite detention of civilians but signs it anyway.

Happy Birthday, Bill [of Rights]: Obama Breaks Promise To Veto Bill Allowing Indefinite Detention of Americans « JONATHAN TURLEY


Obama signs extension of Patriot Act.

Patriot Act Extension Signed By Obama



You were saying again?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Obama's true stance on Gitmo.

The Obama/Gitmo timeline - Guantanamo - Salon.com




Obama promises to veto law that allows indefinite detention of civilians but signs it anyway.

Happy Birthday, Bill [of Rights]: Obama Breaks Promise To Veto Bill Allowing Indefinite Detention of Americans « JONATHAN TURLEY


Obama signs extension of Patriot Act.

Patriot Act Extension Signed By Obama



You were saying again?

Obama isn't going to rock the boat when it comes to "national security" issues and neither is the next guy in charge. He half-heatedly tried to close Gitmo and caved when the GOP threw a tantrum.

Good thing most of numnuts on the GOP side aren't of better quality than Obama. I pray Huntsman comes through.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

Obama isn't going to rock the boat when it comes to "national security" issues and neither is the next guy in charge. He half-heatedly tried to close Gitmo and caved when the GOP threw a tantrum.

Good thing most of numnuts on the GOP side aren't of better quality than Obama. I pray Huntsman comes through.

Quality of course being a relative term. I'm not convinced any of them on either side of the aisle are worth a darn anymore.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by saden1

Obama isn't going to rock the boat when it comes to "national security" issues and neither is the next guy in charge. He half-heatedly tried to close Gitmo and caved when the GOP threw a tantrum.

Good thing most of numnuts on the GOP side aren't of better quality than Obama. I pray Huntsman comes through.

His inability to do what he's says he's going to do will be his downfall. If he has no plans to do any of those things he says, he doesn't need to say he's going to do them.

Caving to the GOP? Is that leadership? Hardly. Civil liberties is a huge issue with me, and not standing up for the American people is spineless to say the least. Obama has zero credibility with me.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You haven't been paying attention to his time in office. What he's said he will do and what he's done has been opposite of each other.

So what hasn't he done that he said he would? And give me specifics.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

So what hasn't he done that he said he would? And give me specifics.

I already did.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

You think the current administration likes war? We just ended the war in Iraq with Republicans kicking and screaming because we didn't leave 10,000 troops behind. And the President will begin a significant draw down in Afghanistan next summer. Exactly how is Ron Paul different than Obama or even John Huntsman on those two fronts? In fact, Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul agree to some extent about the wars. President Obama doesn't believe in torture, neither does Ron Paul. President Obama wants to close Gitmo and so does Ron Paul and John McCain and John Huntsman, I might add.

Now where they differ, and Ron Paul hasn't been completely clear on this, is how to execute the war on terror and sending foreign aid to some of our allies, which has always been a staple of good diplomacy.

Look, the idea that America with all of it's vast military resources and diplomatic clout around the globe will completely stay out other countries business is foolish thinking and probably not in our long term interests when it comes to a range of issues. If our intervention in Libya can keep the price of oil from spiking globally and keep inflation in check here at home, then I'm all for a measured response and a judicious use of our military capability.

I just heard on the news that some of the troops coming home from Iraq will not be here long because they will be headed to Afganistan.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

So what hasn't he done that he said he would? And give me specifics.

Here is a list of 56 for a start.