A sampling of American voters (lesser of two evils or excited?)

#26
#26
Until we have a candidate who is truly "The Best Man (or Woman) for the Job" we will continue to vote for the person least likely to screw us over more than the last guy did. Until a candidate has the stones to stand up and quit worrying about hurting somebody's feelings because what he says is true, lesser of 2 evils will be the status quo. And it's sad people, very sad. This country is in a downward spiral of morality, self control, self respect, and dignity. We have taken political correctness to an extreme that is destroying our country. We have generations of families on welfare. Not because they can't fend for themselves, but because we allow them to be lazy with no incentive to better themselves. Our government continues (no matter what party is in the oval office) to try to spend our way into prosperity. Knowing it doesn't work. And no, we can't give the citizens everything for free and simply tax the rich to pay for it. Eventually those rich will be unable to provide and who is going to replace them? Nobody because who wants to work hard and become wealthy if the government is going to tax you to death to pay for the lazy? That is how socialism works. The government is expected to provide everything (basically) for the people and pay for it by taking all the wealth of the country. That worked out pretty good for the USSR huh? Wasn't it Stalin (not sure) who said they would take us without firing a shot? Well guess what folks, we are getting closer to it every day and with every election.
 
#27
#27
MG1968 said:
have you considered that maybe I'm hoping for the "rare exception" once again?
Click to expand...

You probably are "hoping" for that. I still think that you are reaching... reaching for anything that will give you a reason to vote FOR McCain, as opposed to AGAINST Obama.
 
#28
#28
Rasputin_Vol said:
You probably are "hoping" for that. I still think that you are reaching... reaching for anything that will give you a reason to vote FOR McCain, as opposed to AGAINST Obama.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he's an intelligent person that is able to weigh the pros and cons of each candidate and make a choice. Your amateur psychoanalysis of his motivations is condescending.
 
#29
#29
McCain and Obama =

dogcrap.jpg
 
#30
#30
This is the kind of stuff that happens when there's no incumbent running.

For the life of me I never understand why Democrats nominate liberals and Republicans nominate old people.
 
#31
#31
GAVol said:
I'm sure he's an intelligent person that is able to weigh the pros and cons of each candidate and make a choice. Your amateur psychoanalysis of his motivations is condescending.
Click to expand...

I never intended to condescend or insult him. I just have an issue with his logic on this particular point. I have no personal axe to grind with him. He is just symbolic of the type of electorate we have here in this country. We settle for the lesser of two evils, and quite often, we are voting against someone else as opposed to voting for someone. Even the dems do it. They campaigned on the "anybody but Bush" strategy in 2004, as opposed to finding a reason to vote for John Kerry. It's not amateur pshychoanalysis. It's just the nature of what we have become.
 
#32
#32
superdave1984 said:
Until we have a candidate who is truly "The Best Man (or Woman) for the Job" we will continue to vote for the person least likely to screw us over more than the last guy did. Until a candidate has the stones to stand up and quit worrying about hurting somebody's feelings because what he says is true, lesser of 2 evils will be the status quo. And it's sad people, very sad. This country is in a downward spiral of morality, self control, self respect, and dignity. We have taken political correctness to an extreme that is destroying our country. We have generations of families on welfare. Not because they can't fend for themselves, but because we allow them to be lazy with no incentive to better themselves. Our government continues (no matter what party is in the oval office) to try to spend our way into prosperity. Knowing it doesn't work. And no, we can't give the citizens everything for free and simply tax the rich to pay for it. Eventually those rich will be unable to provide and who is going to replace them? Nobody because who wants to work hard and become wealthy if the government is going to tax you to death to pay for the lazy? That is how socialism works. The government is expected to provide everything (basically) for the people and pay for it by taking all the wealth of the country. That worked out pretty good for the USSR huh? Wasn't it Stalin (not sure) who said they would take us without firing a shot? Well guess what folks, we are getting closer to it every day and with every election.
Click to expand...

Yeah, electing people like Heath Shuler and Patrick Murphey is about to plunge this country into the depths of socialism.
 
#33
#33
Rasputin_Vol said:
I never intended to condescend or insult him. I just have an issue with his logic on this particular point. I have no personal axe to grind with him. He is just symbolic of the type of electorate we have here in this country. We settle for the lesser of two evils, and quite often, we are voting against someone else as opposed to voting for someone. Even the dems do it. They campaigned on the "anybody but Bush" strategy in 2004, as opposed to finding a reason to vote for John Kerry. It's not amateur pshychoanalysis. It's just the nature of what we have become.[/QUOTE]

Isn't that kind of vague?
Click to expand...
 
#34
#34
superdave1984 said:
Until we have a candidate who is truly "The Best Man (or Woman) for the Job" we will continue to vote for the person least likely to screw us over more than the last guy did. Until a candidate has the stones to stand up and quit worrying about hurting somebody's feelings because what he says is true, lesser of 2 evils will be the status quo. And it's sad people, very sad. This country is in a downward spiral of morality, self control, self respect, and dignity. We have taken political correctness to an extreme that is destroying our country. We have generations of families on welfare. Not because they can't fend for themselves, but because we allow them to be lazy with no incentive to better themselves. Our government continues (no matter what party is in the oval office) to try to spend our way into prosperity. Knowing it doesn't work. And no, we can't give the citizens everything for free and simply tax the rich to pay for it. Eventually those rich will be unable to provide and who is going to replace them? Nobody because who wants to work hard and become wealthy if the government is going to tax you to death to pay for the lazy? That is how socialism works. The government is expected to provide everything (basically) for the people and pay for it by taking all the wealth of the country. That worked out pretty good for the USSR huh? Wasn't it Stalin (not sure) who said they would take us without firing a shot? Well guess what folks, we are getting closer to it every day and with every election.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul, Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter were the most conservative of the group of GOP candidates and they couldn't get a sniff because all they wanted to do was campaign as conservatives.
 
Last edited:
#36
#36
Rasputin_Vol said:
Ron Paul, Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter were the most conservative of the group of GOP candidates and they couldn't get a sniff because all the wanted to do was campaign as conservatives.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with you as far as them being more conservative, but Tancredo and Hunter weren't able to capture the imagination and inspire anyone and while Ron Paul was able to garner some vocal support, I think the general public just found him to be too flaky.

I just think you need to be careful when your guy loses and you assume it's because the electorate is too dense to get it.
 
#37
#37
GAVol said:
I'm sure he's an intelligent person that is able to weigh the pros and cons of each candidate and make a choice. Your amateur psychoanalysis of his motivations is condescending.
Click to expand...

I wish everyone felt that way about the group of us that support Obama.
 
#38
#38
GAVol said:
I'll agree with you as far as them being more conservative, but Tancredo and Hunter weren't able to capture the imagination and inspire anyone and while Ron Paul was able to garner some vocal support, I think the general public just found him to be too flaky.

I just think you need to be careful when your guy loses and you assume it's because the electorate is too dense to get it.
Click to expand...

Ras isn't the only Ron Paul supporter like that. I won't say all, but a lot of them I have met have a very sneering and condenscending attitude, and get extremely ticked if you point out any flaw he has. Guess it's that us vs. the world mentality or something.
 
#40
#40
emainvol said:
The problem is, and I will admit this, a good deal of people who support Obama have no idea why.
Click to expand...

True, that tends to happen when people want change from current leadership. When democrats out stay their welcome then you will have people voting for the republican without any idea why.
 
#42
#42
GAVol said:
I'll agree with you as far as them being more conservative, but Tancredo and Hunter weren't able to capture the imagination and inspire anyone and while Ron Paul was able to garner some vocal support, I think the general public just found him to be too flaky.

I just think you need to be careful when your guy loses and you assume it's because the electorate is too dense to get it.
Click to expand...

There is that element in my belief, if I'm honest with myself, I suppose. I didn't intend for it to come off as condescending. But what annoys me is the point you made about Tancredo and Hunter not able "to capture the imagination and inspire anyone". I'm sorry, but what does being a big rah-rah charismatic person have to do with running the greatest country in the free world? And the whole foundation of conservativism is the idea of self-determination, independence, and soveriegnty. Why should people that believe in self-determination need to be inspired to do something? Isn't that oxymoronic? An independent, self-motivated person needing encouragement or charismatic influence from a politician?

Seems like too many conservatives are looking for the next Reagan or a GOP version of Bill Clinton. Charisma, charm, and all of that other trash means nothing to me. All I care about is the message. These guys had a message and no charisma... which is fine with me. But in the televison, instant gratification age, that doesn't sell (not even with republicans, apparently).

That is the source of my frustration and in a sense, a reason why I may come off as condescending. Sorry if I offended anyone.
 
#43
#43
I do understand what you are saying. It's frustrating when qualified people can't get out of single digits because of the beauty pageant element and perceived electability.

I just take the tact that if you aren't winning elections, it's your fault that the voters didn't buy into you; not the other way around.
 
Last edited:
#45
#45
Rasputin_Vol said:
You probably are "hoping" for that. I still think that you are reaching... reaching for anything that will give you a reason to vote FOR McCain, as opposed to AGAINST Obama.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't vote for Obama if I had a gun to my head. I think the country can better survive 4 or 8 years of McCain than it could 4 years of Obama. If you're waiting for me to say, "you're right, Ron Paul was our best hope" forget it, it's not going to happen, because he wasn't our best hope. Paul is out there among the lunatic fringe with Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones. His claim that the US brought 9-11 on itself is reason enough for Paul to never be seriously considered Presidential material.

American Thinker: The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi Supporters
 
#49
#49
so your support for Ron Paul was purely based on politics? there was no aspect of "kindred spirits" involved? Most people will vote for a candidate that they can relate to.
 
#50
#50
MG1968 said:
so your support for Ron Paul was purely based on politics? there was no aspect of "kindred spirits" involved? Most people will vote for a candidate that they can relate to.
Click to expand...
Kindred spirits? Nah... his message was unique in that it was conservative, yet I can honestly say that he didn't have an ounce of charisma in his body.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top