just face it

its the dems turn

yeah i said it

1/12/2008 1:50:07 AM

^ Maybe so. But we are talking about reactions to the debate

1/12/2008 1:51:42 AM

if you dont mind me asking who is your number 1 choice?

1/12/2008 1:54:54 AM

I honestly can't say because it wasn't an opportunity to contrast each candidates views against the others. I like Ron Paul, but I haven't gotten to really see him go up against the other guys. Right now I'm at a total loss.

1/12/2008 2:09:14 AM

^Ron Paul is the only real Constitutionalist.

That said, McCain is my #1 choice, followed by Paul and Thompson.

1/12/2008 4:16:38 AM

McCain seems to be the most moderate followed by Huckabee. Guiliani, Thompson and Romney seem to be mindless Republican drones that will spew whatever neoconservative nonsense they think the audience wants to hear at any particular time. Seriously, they all seem to be the exact same candidate with the same talking points and very little difference in policy. I only exclude Huckabee from that group because he sounds/looks like he's capable of rational thought and will not draw his potential actions straight out of the conservative playbook. McCain is the only one moderate enough to not scare away independent voters this time around. Huckabee is probably too close to evangelicals to gain any votes from outside the Republican party.

When you think about it, Paul might actually be the most electable. When it comes down to it, Republicans are likely to vote for him in the end because he's in their party. But he also has the most ability to draw voters from the other side of the aisle as well. His Libertarian approach appeals to lots of Democrats and independents and he certainly has the most integrity out of all the candidates. I have no trouble believing he will do everything he says he will do because he's been doing that his entire career. The only question is, do Republicans actually want him to be in the White House?

1/12/2008 11:02:14 AM

Quote :

"But he also has the most ability to draw voters from the other side of the aisle as well."

This is the most important fact about ron paul. Swing voters and fiscally conservative democrats will be drawn to Paul.

However, the GOP is so drunk on it's own power that it doesn't seem to care about what they claim to be about.

1/12/2008 11:47:59 AM

^^ I agree 100% with your post. I don't think the republicans want him [Ron Paul] in the white house and its so disappointing that the vast majority of voters are not getting any exposure to Ron Paul because the popular press ignores his existence for the most part.

1/12/2008 1:39:06 PM

^^ yep.

^ it's not just lack of media exposure. Paul is extremely shrill and not very "Presidential" in the way he looks and carries himself. he has a few fairly extreme views, too. I like him too, but let's be real here. He is not the most electable. He isn't particularly electable at all (regardless of whether or not he SHOULD be).


as far as labeling anyone as "most moderate", it's a much more difficult question than that. A start would be to divide them into social moderates and fiscal moderates, but even that doesn't really fully allow easy classification.

1/12/2008 1:58:09 PM

Brit Hume really stuck it to Ron Paul, didn't he? Questions about his supporters consisting of 9/11 conspiracists, and such. I forget what other ridiculous questions Paul received.

1/12/2008 3:25:34 PM

From the right side my top picks would be Guiliani & Paul. I used to like McCain more until he attached himself more and more to Bush and less and less to free thinking.

1/12/2008 5:06:29 PM

so basically guilliani cause paul has no chance in hell

1/12/2008 5:08:39 PM

^^ a lot of the stuff in there is twisted totally out of context. It's a stupid hit piece that plays well to the idiot masses who find entertainment in "reality TV" and choose a President based on buzzwords and one-liners in the silly reality-TVish "debates" early in the primary process. These people aren't astute enough to process and comprehend a nuanced position.

For example, (1) saying that the Confederate flag is viewed as an offensive symbol of racism by many people, and (2) saying that "I personally view it as a symbol of heritage"

are not statements in conflict with each other.



Likewise, the bit about gay marriage obviously just says that he's ok with civil unions and private ceremonies, but now with the gov't recognizing it as a "marriage", for whatever difference that makes. Again, there is zero conflict or double-talk there. It's just unfortunate that he wasn't better at eloquently defining his position. I'll be the first to say that eloquence and smooth talking are not his strong suits.


Falwell can kiss my ass, though. I, too, grimaced when I saw McCain burying the hatchet with that fatass old douchebag.

[Edited on January 12, 2008 at 6:10 PM. Reason : ^ haha, so far, Paul has been raking in about the same number of votes as Giuliani!]

1/12/2008 6:04:37 PM

Quote :

"McCain seems to be the most moderate followed by Huckabee."

hahaha

1/12/2008 6:13:33 PM

Quote :

"I'm really not quite sure I follow your meaning in the first sentence. Could you clarify?"

I'll vote for someone based on their own merits, not simply because they aren't someone else. Right now his appeal is based on his appearance as the un-cola of the GOP.

I'm generally not a fan of Noam Chomsky, but he gave a really good interview explaining the faults of Paul's positions.
http://www.gnn.tv/threads/28811/Noam_Chomsky_on_Ron_Paul

1/12/2008 6:18:10 PM

^^thats actually kinda true

huck is soft on immigration, foreign policy, and taxes...gave financial aid to immigrants, thought the most illegal immigrants came from pakistan, and rose taxes by like 500 million

1/12/2008 6:18:58 PM

Wow, I'm not too impressed by that Chomsky interview. He hardly said anything concrete.

1/12/2008 6:52:58 PM

To be fair it wasn't an interview about Ron Paul, the interviewer just inserted a few questions. I do wish that it was longer.

1/12/2008 6:56:22 PM

Correction to my post above:

Brit Hume wasn't the person who asked about the 9/11 supporters. However, there was a part of the debate when he was pressing the issue about taking military action against Iran, and a portion of the candidates were capitulating.

When Ron Paul raised some concerns regarding the previous candidates' somewhat threatening remarks directed towards Iran, Brit Hume attested that all the previous candidates had encouraged restraint with their previous remarks. It had a way of illegitimatizing Ron Paul's argument and led to a statement by which Mitt Romney associated Ron Paul with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

1/12/2008 7:00:21 PM

Chomsky often talks circles around his anarchist beliefs, refusing, for whatever reason, to take a firm stance.

1/12/2008 7:02:35 PM

Yeah, I honestly don't care for the guy, I just felt that he made some good points.

1/12/2008 7:12:41 PM

Quote :

"Watching the Republican candidates distance themselves from the candidate with the broadest record of defending conservative principles like limited government and personal freedom still strikes me as surreal sometimes. "

Watching grown men repeatedly launch ad hominem attacks on another candidate makes them look like whiny 5 year olds.

1/12/2008 7:15:48 PM

Well it does make for entertaining television.

1/12/2008 7:24:13 PM

of course Noam Chomsky is going to find fault with Ron Paul's ideas.

From the little I've read of Chomsky doesn't he believe more in socially constructed communities being more important than government?

I think they just have different beliefs and definitions of Libertarian.

atleast that my take. . . . . .

1/12/2008 7:27:00 PM

See, I'm a big fan of Chomsky's. But I think he does a better job of criticizing foreign policy than articulating what he wants society to become.

1/12/2008 7:56:50 PM

from what i've ever read of/about chomsky, paul and chomsy would be on opposite ends of the political spectrum

1/12/2008 8:41:28 PM

"Again, there is zero conflict or double-talk there."

I don't know, for some reason it feels like there is conflict there. He stated a position, talked to his advisors, and later in the middle of something like an agricultural question he came back to gay marriage to readdress it along more party lines and got booed for it. I tried to find a more detailed clip of it... which has a little review at the end. "did i fix it? did i fix it?"

1/13/2008 11:12:26 AM

I still don't see the double talk on that subject.

He pretty much takes the same position as me: Civil unions ok, private ceremonies ok, but gov't shouldn't recognize it as marriage (although mostly as a matter of semantics).

Actually, what I'd really like is for the gov't not to be involved in the business of marriage at any level. I don't see any reason to bring issues of law into the mix--the gov't should not look at a husband and wife (or husband and husband, wife and wife, or shemale and shemale) as anything different from 2 roommates. Anyone could have a private ceremony, take their vows, and it would be the same relationship on a personal level, without any arm of gov't in the mix. This would solve the gay marriage issue, and it would solve a myriad of family law issues (which is a completely corrupt, unfair, and ethically bankrupt system--trust me).

1/13/2008 3:45:26 PM

wait, so he doesn't support taking government out of marriage? how the fuck is that libertarian. That's plain pandering if he supports keeping gov out of civil unions but not marriage.

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 4:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/13/2008 4:25:03 PM

nobody ever claimed McCain to be a libertarian. he's just the best of the real contenders.

also, in practical terms, what you're suggesting is exactly what my position is (at least unless we can get all gov't out of both of them altogether)

1/13/2008 11:14:22 PM

I thought you were talking about paul

1/13/2008 11:19:19 PM

ah, gotcha. nah, i was talking about those hit-piece youtube clips on McCain.

also, I just heard Romney say in an interview that McCain would "continue to vote against the 'Bush tax cuts'", which is absolutely opposite of what McCain has repeatedly said.

1/14/2008 12:11:48 AM

Is it just me, or has there been a lot of harmony in TSB recently?

1/14/2008 1:45:54 AM

Is it just me, or have Chance and hooksaw stopped posting here?

1/14/2008 2:42:44 AM

^^^ I thought that McCain was fairly anti-tax cut.

1/14/2008 2:59:38 AM

I just noticed that the dems were ignoring the michigan and florida primaries because they got their delegate votes stripped for scheduling their primaries early. That's funny

1/14/2008 3:47:11 AM

^ kinda funny, coming from the party that wanted "Every vote counted" and every vote to "count"

1/14/2008 6:32:17 AM

^^^^ Chance is gone; hooksaw has mercifully been posting in moderation.


^^^ he voted against the "Bush tax cuts" initially because they refused to approve corresponding cuts in spending. He supports extending them at this point because not doing so "would amount to a tax increase."

1/14/2008 12:29:40 PM

i hope hope for the future if McCain wins the nomination.

1/14/2008 12:41:58 PM

I agree with theDuke866. It doesn't make any sense for government to give special breaks and what not to married people. Get government out of it, it becomes a purely religious institution, and single people and unmarried couples stop getting the shaft.

1/14/2008 12:56:38 PM

but who is the NEW chance?

you know he's here...

watching...

waiting...













[Edited on January 14, 2008 at 8:11 PM. Reason : ]

1/14/2008 8:08:32 PM

^^^^ Hey, Duke, can you try to stop riding my nuts? My commentary is as good or better than anything you post here.

I think the cool kids get it: You don't really care for me. Everybody gets it--enough said, okay?

1/14/2008 8:14:46 PM

[drama]

... developing ...




[Edited on January 14, 2008 at 8:17 PM. Reason : ]

1/14/2008 8:16:50 PM