EPTRepublican nominations - Page 538
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
| ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 10 2012 14:54 Defacer wrote: I love how this thread has turned into, "Let's flex our socio-political-economic backgrounds until a Republican says something stupid." Which invariably happens every other day given the current candidates, which is unfortunate, because I'd really hoped for a decent Republican candidate, who is actually for small government and for reigning in spending, but isn't also completely insane or out of touch. The best is Ron Paul, and he's only the best because he's half bonkers. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
I swear Santorum is lifting lines straight out of Obama's State of the Union. It bends the facts quite a bit, but it's convincing. Unlike Romney, Santorum actually comes off as ... a leader? | ||
|
Pillage
United States804 Posts
On March 10 2012 15:17 Defacer wrote: Have you guys seen this yet? I swear Santorum is lifting line straight out of Obama's State of the Union. It bends the facts quite a bit, but it's convincing. Unlike Romney, Santorum actually comes off as ... a leader? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg6grCd98HM As a conservative, I'm honestly totally lost on what to think of this guy. He doesn't seem stupid other than when he starts talking about social issues. I'm not sure if he's just pandering to the bible belt to make him more appealing than romney, and playing off a key weakness of romney as a candidate, or if he's actually that stupid. He honestly doesn't come off as stupid to me when you look at his educational achievements, but his abrasive speeches about his social beliefs drives the moderates away. IMO he's pandering hard to the conservative baseline, because he knows that romney is so wishy-washy on things that makes him a hard man for many conservatives to like. Plus his mormon faith doesn't sit well with the evangelicals either, so that's the nail in the coffin there. I'm really curious to see what he does if he wins the nomination, if he carries the whole south and even a handful states in the midwest I could actually see it happening. I'm not sure if he can talk his way out of what he's said before though, as there are plenty of soundbites to give the liberal ad makers ammunition for 2 election cycles. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
That video, whilst largely based on falsehoods, is surprisingly well put together. It is by-the-books, but probably as good as by-the-books can get. He doesn't seem to linger on the social issues very much, which is a must if he wants to have any chance. | ||
|
Focuspants
Canada780 Posts
On March 10 2012 17:37 Pillage wrote: As a conservative, I'm honestly totally lost on what to think of this guy. He doesn't seem stupid other than when he starts talking about social issues. I'm not sure if he's just pandering to the bible belt to make him more appealing than romney, and playing off a key weakness of romney as a candidate, or if he's actually that stupid. He honestly doesn't come off as stupid to me when you look at his educational achievements, but his abrasive speeches about his social beliefs drives the moderates away. IMO he's pandering hard to the conservative baseline, because he knows that romney is so wishy-washy on things that makes him a hard man for many conservatives to like. Plus his mormon faith doesn't sit well with the evangelicals either, so that's the nail in the coffin there. I'm really curious to see what he does if he wins the nomination, if he carries the whole south and even a handful states in the midwest I could actually see it happening. I'm not sure if he can talk his way out of what he's said before though, as there are plenty of soundbites to give the liberal ad makers ammunition for 2 election cycles. There have been multiple interviews with people close to him that confirm he actually lives by his social policies, and that he 100% believes he is right about them. I dont trust religious fundamentalists, period. They could have 500 good ideas, but you just know they are going to act on their convictions, since they live their life for their faith. His soical policies will ruin him. If they dont, I fear for the shit youll have to go through with him at the helm. I dont get why people complain about Romney being "wishy-washy". The modern republican party is so crazy, that an all around sane candidate stands no chance. If he doesnt lie, youre going to end up with Santorum or Gingrich, which is just unimaginable. If anything Romney is doing you guys a favour, because as bad as he sounds now, everyone knows he'll move toward more sane positions during the actual election. Oh, and lollll about "eye-ran". Why is it no republican candidate, nor George Bush and his possey can pronounce Iran or Iraq properly? It just makes them sound stupid. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8540 Posts
On March 10 2012 17:44 zalz wrote: I am not a Santorum fan, not in the slightest, but it sure seems his campaign has stepped it up a notch. That video, whilst largely based on falsehoods, is surprisingly well put together. It is by-the-books, but probably as good as by-the-books can get. He doesn't seem to linger on the social issues very much, which is a must if he wants to have any chance. Agree fully with you. Christey Mc Sweatervest has got some nice people that do his PR at last - after all his craziness going viral this one is actually well made. Though in the long run, it won´t help him(hopefully...) //edit: sorry I have to give credit to where I got Christey MC Sweatervest from, he´s friggin left wing but he damn sure is a good comedian. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8540 Posts
On March 10 2012 18:00 sc2superfan101 wrote: man Santorum gets really blasted in this thread. it always makes me feel so wierd posting in here knowing i'm probably the only one that kind of wants him to win the nomination. Hm well that indeed is unfortunate - maybe you can elaborate on why you think he is best for the job. Because many in here definitely (including me) said why he is not - at least in the year 2012. And sry if you already did - but this thread makes it hard to keep up with everyones posts and opinions. | ||
|
Pillage
United States804 Posts
There have been multiple interviews with people close to him that confirm he actually lives by his social policies, and that he 100% believes he is right about them. I dont trust religious fundamentalists, period. They could have 500 good ideas, but you just know they are going to act on their convictions, since they live their life for their faith. His soical policies will ruin him. If they dont, I fear for the shit youll have to go through with him at the helm. Even if he adheres strongly to these convictions of his there's no way he'll ever change anything like that. They tried to do what he wants in Mississippi, a state you'd probably consider backwards, and it failed by a good margin. http://gothamist.com/2011/11/09/mississippi_rejects_anti-abortion_p.php What he expects here fundamentally will not happen. You can count on that. I'm not worried about it one bit. I dont get why people complain about Romney being "wishy-washy". The modern republican party is so crazy, that an all around sane candidate stands no chance. If he doesnt lie, youre going to end up with Santorum or Gingrich, which is just unimaginable. If anything Romney is doing you guys a favour, because as bad as he sounds now, everyone knows he'll move toward more sane positions during the actual election Romney seems too indecisive to a lot of people on important issues such as heathcare + economics. He doesn't have that leadership trait where he stands up for what he believes in, because frankly he flips and flops like no other politician I've ever seen. His debate strategies have been only deflecting the candidates other questions and tiptoeing around the difficult ones that the moderators ask. He needs to define himself stronger to have a chance at beating Obama, otherwise he'll just run circles around him in the debates. As much as I disagree with Obama's polices, he is not a stupid dude, he's very intelligent in terms of knowledge and people skills, He has more charisma than Romney. Oh, and lollll about "eye-ran". Why is it no republican candidate, nor George Bush and his possey can pronounce Iran or Iraq properly? It just makes them sound stupid. Why nitpick? There are bigger fish to fry, and besides its not like the guy is incomprehensible. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23248 Posts
I expect my president to hurdle a bar placed a bit higher than not being "incomprehensible". As for Santorum and his radical social beliefs... I think one of the main issues is that a significant amount of Santorum supporters believe the story of Genesis literally. Yet they consider any discussion about the validity of that belief an assault on their faith, but then decry political correctness... I personally would like to see the principles of hardcore social conservatism debated on the national stage and I don't think there are many people who could do it better than Santorum. | ||
|
Pillage
United States804 Posts
On March 10 2012 18:39 GreenHorizons wrote: Why nitpick? Because we are not talking about our mother-in-law or the color our wife wants to paint the bathroom... We are picking the gawdang leader of the FREE WORLD(at least economically)! I expect my president to hurdle a bar placed a bit higher than not being "incomprehensible". As for Santorum and his radical social beliefs... I think one of the main issues is that a significant amount of Santorum supporters believe the story of Genesis literally. Yet they consider any discussion about the validity of that belief an assault on their faith, but then decry political correctness... I personally would like to see the principles of hardcore social conservatism debated on the national stage and I don't think there are many people who could do it better than Santorum. You missed my point. I'd rather discuss things like you've mentioned, rather than how someone pronounces a word that has multiple pronunciations depending on languages, dialects, etc | ||
|
Fiercegore
United States294 Posts
On March 10 2012 18:39 GreenHorizons wrote: Why nitpick? Because we are not talking about our mother-in-law or the color our wife wants to paint the bathroom... We are picking the gawdang leader of the FREE WORLD(at least economically)! I expect my president to hurdle a bar placed a bit higher than not being "incomprehensible". As for Santorum and his radical social beliefs... I think one of the main issues is that a significant amount of Santorum supporters believe the story of Genesis literally. Yet they consider any discussion about the validity of that belief an assault on their faith, but then decry political correctness... I personally would like to see the principles of hardcore social conservatism debated on the national stage and I don't think there are many people who could do it better than Santorum. I for one would also like to know that my doctor could pronounce chemotherapy right if I'm under his or her care. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
It all begins with Barack Obama. His election was a couple of months after my 18th birthday, and being a young, stupid, idealist, I was convinced that it was the most important political moment of the last 70,000 years. I actually look back and laugh when I think about telling my family, in all the earnestness only a teenager could muster, that if McCain lost I was going to march on Washington DC with nothing but a week's food and protest in front of the White House. I live in Southern California, so you can be well aware of how likely that was to happen, and how horrible an idea it actually was. But I was full of fire and convinced I was invincible and I was 100% going to do it. In the back of my head, and in my heart, I think I always knew Barack was going to get elected. I gave every reason why he wouldn't: too liberal, too radical, America isn't that stupid (forgive me, I was young and quite intolerant), God wouldn't let it happen (I told you I was young), etc. But I wasn't a complete fool, and I was well aware of how bad a candidate McCain actually was, or, rather, how bad the campaign he was running was. I didn't want to believe that Obama would win, so I didn't, but I knew that he would. I can't explain it much better than that. So election day was surprising in some ways, but also seemed like it had already happened in others. I remember sitting in my garage with my brothers, smoking a cigarette and talking about the end of the world. I laugh about it now, but I was seriously upset at the time. Time passed and I grew up a little bit and realized that Barack Obama wasn't the end of the world, and that America wasn't stupid; I was. I was stupid to believe that it's stupid to vote for Obama, and I was doubly stupid for thinking that America would end because Barack was elected. I never liked "crying wolf", and I am somewhat ashamed that I took part in it. However, I still did not like Obama, and was very upset with both Democrats and Republicans for what I saw as a betrayal. Everything the guy did seemed specifically designed to irk me, and I am sad to say that I started to hate him and everyone who supported him. I was quite rude to anyone that I knew voted for him, and at every scandal or misstep by him, I would mercilessly play the "I told you so..." card. Honestly, I didn't give him much of a chance, and there is a lot of times that I was way too willing to let partisanship rule me. But the fact remained that I did not like his policies and I did not like almost anything he did. There is a saying that we can get used to anything, any bad taste or smell or feeling will eventually become normality. I am glad that to a certain extent that was true, because I was kind of an asshole back in those days. But eventually I became used to the idea that he was our President, and that he wasn't going away any time soon. This helped me start to accept him and his supporters, and Republicans who I saw as failures, a lot more. Acceptance lead to understanding, and I would like to think that it led to a better, more rational, me. Nowadays, I don't even dislike Obama, and I am much more polite in my arguments with people who supported him. What does this have to do with Santorum though? Well, as much as I try to understand Obama, I still think his Presidency has been, in large part, a disaster. Being a conserative since 2009 has not been easy, let me tell you. Every other day I would turn on the news and see yet another thing that flew in the face of everything that I percieve to be right and good and rational. I firmly believe that Americans need another President as soon as they can get one, and that that President has to be a strong conservative. To be honest, I'm not all that preferential as to who it actually is, as long as they are conservative and aren't insane. But that is the problem: I may not be preferential, but the rest of the nation seems to be very preferential. As it stands there are five men who are running for President. All of them (yes, even Obama) have their strengths and pros. And the Lord knows that they all have their weaknesses and cons. As much as I like the guy, I don't think Ron Paul has a shot. I think he is relatively honest, definitely has conviction, and his economic/domestic policy is almost out of this world with how much I like it. I have doubts about his foriegn policy, but I would be willing to ignore that. Unfortunately, the rest of the party doesn't seem to feel the same way, and as much as it may hurt us in the long run, we are not going to nominate Paul. For a while it looked like Gingrich might be a good candidate and have a serious shot, but that seems to have turned sour, and to be honest, I had a lot of doubts about Gingrich anyway. I will maintain, however, that Gingrich is the most intelligent person running. He is kind of a dick, and doesn't seem to understand that, but the man is smart as hell, like him or not. That leaves Santorum and Romney. Romney has a lot of appeal. He is level-headed to an extent, he attracts more moderates than anyone else on the ticket (or so it seems), he's got a "Presidential demeanor" and he is palatable to everyone. The problem with that is that he is also palatable to no one. It seems like a paradox, and maybe it is, but that's how it looks. He attracts more moderate parts of the party and the country, but he turns conservatives off and they don't seem all that happy with him. His involvement and ideas about healthcare are a big problem with a lot of people. I see how tough a spot he was in when he was governer, and I see why he is reluctant to denounce the system with his name on it, but a lot of people are not. Santorum though, he attracts a lot of conservative support. He is generic, and he's got his own skeletons, but the man is definitely a conservative, or at least, he looks and sounds like one. But he seems to drive moderates and independents crazy. I don't mind his ideas about social policy, and I absolutely sympathize with him on them. I'm a social conservative and probably will be until the day I die. If it is social conservatism, you can probably be safe in betting that I agree with it. I know that's a can of worms in almost any debate in almost any forum, and believe me, I have heard all the arguments as to why it's wrong. Maybe it's because I'm dumb, or maybe it's because I'm blind, shit, maybe it's because I'm an intolerant son of a bitch. But whatever it is, I feel social conservatism to my very bones. Blame my parents for raising me on a healthy diet of Rush Limbaugh (fun fact, on the way home from the hospital after being born, Rush was playing in the car) and Fox News and William F. Buckley Jr. So I am in a tough spot here: Santorum appeals to my idealistic, conservative side, Romney appeals to my more realistic side. I am afraid that Romney will turn off the base of the party, but gain moderate support. I am afraid Santorum will fire up the base, but turn off moderates and independents. But I'm still a young buck full of fire and I am still an idealistic fool in a lot of ways, so it's hard for my realistic side to win out in that battle. I would like to think that the majority of the country falls more in line with Santorum and me than with Obama, but I don't know. I'm a conservative in a liberal world in a lot of ways, so my perspective is doubly skewed. None of the people running are the best, and I'm not very happy with the field at all. But then again, if Lincoln, Reagan and Calvin fucking Coolidge were running I would still probably bitch that all the Republican candidates are just Obama-lite and wish we had a better field. i applaud you if you made it through that, as it was not very heavy on facts, figures, numbers, or even specific policies. but that's how it goes with me, and for a large part of conservatives, i believe. we see Romney as another McCain (which is ironic, because he was the anti-McCain in the last election). we see Santorum as a true conservative, and a lot of us have been waiting a long time, a lifetime for the younger ones, for a true conservative to run. i think a lot of it might be spite, we see Obama as a "true liberal" and we think to ouselves: well why can't we have ours then? they got theirs, they always seem to get theirs, when is our turn? when do our views get a chance? maybe we're shooting ourselves in the foot, but damn it all, we've played the McCain game and we see where that leads. hopefully ya'll understand where we are coming from a bit better. probably not, because we're a strange breed. trust that our hearts are usually in the right place though. we aren't neo-nazi, white hood wearing, mysoginists that pine for a return to "the good old days". we're just disillusioned and feel like we've been marginalized and we want some relief. holy fuck that was long... i'm going to bed. | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
| ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
I understand that people don't agree with Obama. But if he didn't get a second term in would be a real shame. It's obvious to the international community that he may be one of the brightest and talented leaders in world right now. I just hope Americans don't wake up one day hearing about how President Santorum sent 40,000 more troops to Iran and realize they took Obama for granted. | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
On March 10 2012 23:02 Defacer wrote: Sometimes I wish Americans could live abroad for a few years and just follow American politics, from the outside looking in. On the same note, I wish I could live in the states a couple of years and be exposed to your media. I have no idea how you siphon through whatever bullshit these politicians are throwing at you these days. I understand that people don't agree with Obama. But if he didn't get a second term in would be a real shame. It's obvious to the international community that he may be one of the brightest and talented leaders in world right now. I just hope Americans don't wake up one day hearing about how President Santorum sent 40,000 more troops to Iran and realize they took Obama for granted. Funny, I've heard the live abroad, and look within line more than a dozen times. Jesse Ventura was the last I think use that term. Out of all the people who have used that phrase, you might be the only one who said it stumping for Obama. I more than 'don't agree'. The shame is people who evidently at this late hour still believe in hope and change(from him). Sc2Superfan, when you approach middle -age, you've heard all the BS before from multiple candidates, you tend to not end up falling in to the candidates 'pillow talk' and the internet wasn't accesible like when I was 18 and 1000 points of light were shining thru my living room. Obama failed you, and democrats, and anyone who voted on his 08 campaign that isn't a insider. Whistleblower, Gitmo, Perpetual Warfare. At least his stazi brown shirts are not fully fuctional yet. Good ole lame duck shenanigans to come... | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On March 10 2012 12:47 EternaLLegacy wrote: If university level, you mean sit through keynesian indoctrination sessions, no. If you mean do I have more knowledge of economics than reading an intro micro book, then yes. I've read a LOT of economics outside a classroom. Man, State, and Economy by Murray Rothbard Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises Socialism by Hayek Chaos Theory by Bob Murphy and many, many more. I'm also somewhat familiar with Austro-Virginian economics, but my formal reading on the material is cursory. My experiences with macroeconomics as its taught in universities is by reading through textbooks of fellow students who've taken those courses. I can say without a doubt that they are an embarrassment and do not base the models and equations on axiomatic principles. Ok, so you have not studied economics and methodological individualism at university - that's all I wanted to know. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
I'd love to vote Republican, I really would. I can't vote for someone who's trying to turn this country into a theocracy, though. I don't even mind religion that much when it's just lip service. If it was useful to me I'd probably be all for it, but it's just going to hamper me because religion is going to tank our economy if people ever actually start to do their crazy shit. The only person Republicans are forwarding that wouldn't do that is Ron Paul, and as much as I would support him, no one else will because they realize how fucking nuts he is (he's nuts, I supported him because he would let the states decide on pretty much anything. Those of us in the West or Northeast could laugh as the South burned itself to ashes, and then move to Europe/Canada if it ever began to actually affect us) Win or lose, politics in this country has become idiotic. I used to have national pride, but people kept showing how stupid they truly were and I started caring less, and less, and less. It has come to the point that if I have to move, I don't think I'll care entirely. Hopefully another country will see the US burning and become what the US should have been. Is it too much to ask for a secular society that has a decent tax rate, and freedoms? I'm not willing to trade my freedoms for security. I don't want to move to England with the cameras on every street corner (yes I'm generalizing parts of London to the whole country). Is there no country smart enough to realize that all it would take to bring in all the wealthy, educated masses would be having the freedoms USA pretends to have, and be secular? If there is such a country, please inform me of it. Canada is tempting, but I hear the internet is shitty there. To sum: 1) I'm ok with sending the poor to fight for me (You have it down pat USA, I'm not saying we don't. It gives them a second chance since they fucked up when trying to get an education and it keeps them from becoming criminals) 2) I'm not ok with gays being suppressed/any suppression for that matter (I find being gay disgusting. In spite of this I support them fully because when I sit down and think about it, I'm sure they find the idea of being with a member of the opposite sex equally disgusting. Beyond that, it's bad economically because the truly gifted, suppressed people will just leave.) 3) I'm not ok with having the government sacrifice my personal liberties for security (tsa, progressive invasion of rights) 4) Tax rate that will provide for a fantastic education system so I don't have to worry about ignorants running around rioting and the like converting to whatever hokey pokey religions they like (there's a reason there's no real scientists in religion, no one who truly believes beyond lip service is that smart), a police force that is there for response, not monitoring, and a good infrastructure. (From what I can tell 40% seems to be a decent figure, I'm probably wrong.) So I tried, my dear old party who I am still registered as because I'm too lazy to go become yet another independent, I really did. I hate my life sometimes. I hope I don't ever become THAT apathetic towards the US (I still want to serve in the military as an officer because I feel it's my duty to the country that raised me.) I think he's even self-contradictory a little bit but I can't pinpoint where :/ Edit: This was sparked b/c I told him I voted for Santorum and he responded with this before I could tell him I only did it b/c I wanted the party to burn so it could be rebuilt... | ||
|
DamnCats
United States1472 Posts
as it was not very heavy on facts, figures, numbers, or even specific policies. but that's how it goes with me, and for a large part of conservatives, i believe. sc2superfan = stephen colbert? Best post in this thread. | ||
| ||
