Sell me on your candidate.

[Wisconsin+17]

With the TX primary out, tell me how I should vote.

Current ballot preference - Write - in Herman Cain.

TX Ballot:

Ron Paul   
 Newt Gingrich     
 John Davis 
 Rick Santorum   
 Charles 'Buddy' Roemer
 Jon Huntsman   
 Mitt Romney
 Michele Bachmann     

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

His vetoes on abortion regulations make him unacceptable to me.

Current preferences:

Cain
Santorum
Bachmann
Perry
Gingrich
Davis
Roemer
Huntsman
Romney

[Wisconsin+17]

Because I'm a practicing Catholic.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Women get themselves knocked up? Is that even possible?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I usually score anywhere from -.5 to -2 depending on the time of day.

Political compass is a terrible test.

"Always support my country right or wrong." Strongly disagree.
"No one chooses his country of birth" Disagree
"Our race has many superior qualities" Strongly disagree
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" Disagree
"Military interaction that defies international law is sometimes justified" Strongly disagree
"Worrying fusion of information and entertainment" Disagree

See where this is going? I'm already -5 on the first page.

Abortion should always be illegal (strong agree)
All authority should be questioned (agree)
Eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth (strong disagree)
School classroom attendence compulsory (disagree)
same kind (strong disagree)
spanking (agree)
secrets from parents (agree)
children discipline (agree)
marijuana possession (strong disagree)
finding jobs (disagree)
disability reproduction (strong disagree)
savage civilizations (strong disagree)
troubled (strong disagree)
first gen immigrants (disagree)

[Wisconsin+17]

1. individual autonomy vs collective security - usually agree (not critical)
2. government should punish outsourcing - usually disagree (not critical)
3. faith based organizations - agree
4. we should increase foreign aid - disagree
5. we should increase funding for education - usually disagree
6. heterosexual marriage - agree (x) this is a crucial issue for me
7. free trade hurts more than helps - disagree
8. we should reduce the number of government programs substantially - agree (x) this is a crucial issue
9. abortion should be illegal or heavily restricted - agree (x)
10. museums - disagree.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Strongly disagree with his drug policy, and I believe the military should not be cut before unconstitutional domestic agencies are cut, and I strongly disagree with his policies on marriage.

Fiscally though, Paul and I have quite a few similarities. He's closer than Santorum, fwiw.

[Wisconsin+17]

What's throwing the test off is that I'm strongly libertarian on certain questions.

Government regulation of radio and television - strong disagree. That should be the obligation of individual parents, not the government.

Violating individual rights to fight terrorism - strong disagree. I don't believe the Patriot act is a violation of individual rights.

Death Penalty, Strong disagree, and I support reducing the difficulty of legal immigration (but not amnesty).

So I can oppose abortion, gay marriage, dope and support faith based institutions and still score as a libertarian.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I have, and that fails to take into account demographic effects lowering the proportion of young men in both the Netherlands and Portugal. Yes, the crime rate is down, but other jurisdictions without this policy in the west have also seen across the board reductions in the overall crime rate as a ratio of the population.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quite false. Mitt Romney's actions have been entirely consistant. His words have not. He's willing to say whatever he believes will get him elected.

As for his nominees, he has a 6 to 1 ratio of nominating liberals over conservatives.

Romney losing will benefit conservatives because we'll be rid of the Mittbot.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the choice is enemy fire or friendly fire, I chose enemy fire.

If Mitt thinks we're going to come over and support him after he's been shooting at us, he's got another think coming. At least I can toss grenades at Obama without hitting our own team.

[Wisconsin+17]

Drug trafficking is harmful to people and neighbourhoods where it occurs. 

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Given the choice between a pro abortion candidate for the democrats and a pro abortion candidate for the republicans, I much prefer having a pro abortion candidate for the democrats.

Does it really need to be explained to you why? Obama can be defeated with zero collateral damage to team conservative.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure how I get Obama out by voting for someone with the exact same positions in.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mitt Romney is pro abortion in his actions as governor of Massachusetts in implementing both public funding for it and forcing the people of Massachusetts to pay for it. I'm aware that Mitt Romney is saying he'd eliminate planned parenthood, but before that he was saying he was the rational one on the women's rights issue. He'll say whatever he believes helps him for political expediency.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because he didn't do so in MA.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I should ask of you the same question. Why are you so determined to win on technicalities, but lose on points? Nominating Romney, even in the event that he does win is an enormous loss. It does us no good to remove Obama if we are installing someone who believes in the exact same things.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, there is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are arguing I should vote for Mitt and see what I get? No thanks. I'll go get a hamburger from the Mickey D's. At least I know what I'll be getting.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The harms of drug trafficking are intrinsic not extrinsic.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm speaking specifically of drug trafficking. In many different communities it's one of the most productive economic activities in terms of actually earning money. This will persist after legalization because there will always be people without the permits and choosing to reject government intervention. Just like there are people who make and sell moonshine today.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's not what legalization is showing. Quite the opposite. Demand increases substantially with legalization. Selling it without a permit is a quick buck.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not so. Demand increases substantially with legalization.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And the majority of us who are not Republican party from MA are very displeased with Romney as the nominee.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, and Roe is bad law.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which means backing a candidate who is going to support and select pro life justices. That's why we've been backing Santorum all this time. We don't trust Romney to nominate solid prolife justices given his pitiful track record in MA.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Absolutely. Mitt has a 6:1 odds of nominating a liberal over a conservative. Given the average number of supreme court selections in a term, that gives him net odds of exactly zero over Obama.

Ergo, even if Santorum has less a chance of winning the nomination, we are maximizing our chances of seeing a conservative justice nominated by supporting Santorum over Romney. It's a perfectly rational decision given all these premisses.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mitt Romney did support a bill requiring folks in Massachusetts to purchase health care coverage which includes abortion services. On the important issues of today he is pro abortion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's the first intelligent question you've asked. Prolife means that one believes that the unborn child is a person from conception onwards. That's it, no more or no less. Romney does not believe this, ergo he is pro abortion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And 50 percent of the country believes they are prochoice because they are aborting 'tissue'. Show them fetal ultrasound and that number drops.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As I outlined already, supporting someone who believes what I do is eminently rational. Supporting someone that 'may' believe what I do (who probably doesn't, otherwise I'd already support them), is completely irrational.

Your best argument for me supporting romney is that I don't really know what he believes, and neither do you. That to me is frankly, astonishing. All you are doing here is reinforcing my decision to go third party.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nonsense, If everyone did as I did, we would see a prolife nominee to the presidency.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is actually unconstitutional due to the 14th amendment privileges and immunities clause, which reserves this to the federal government.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Completely false. It's an objective decision, and also one which can only be done on the federal level. Again, refer to the 14th Amendment as to why, when they struck down Dred Scott.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Even more than adultery, which he's only done twice.

[Wisconsin+17]

That won't actually end the war on drugs, it will simply shift to attacking unlicensed sellers and distributors.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What empirical evidence to support your position have you provided?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Saying "Things are good in Netherlands" isn't empirical evidence.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One, no, they don't. Prosecution of independent sellers is a significant revenue stream, and given the constraints on goverment, all revenue is a big deal.

Two, regulation of the distribution of controlled substances is a constitutional power of the federal government. It's that pesky constitution again.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No it's not. Legally the standard at present is set at birth, and yes, it's in the 14th amendment, and yes, it's a power of the federal government, via the privilieges and immunities. I suggest you take the time to look up the clause before arguing that it's subjective. No, it's a very clear and objective standard.

The argument is over which objective standard should be used, conception or birth. Prolifers argue for conception, pro abortion people argue for birth. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Roe is terrible law. There is no consitutional basis for a trimester framework to personhood.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, if Roe could establish abortion, then the removal of Roe would not entail a constitutional amendment. I am in favor of establishing a constitutional basis for personhood of the unborn, but removing Roe would be the first step towards this.
 

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What's the odds of Santorum winning in 2016 and appointing prolife judges. Keeping the field clear is more beneficial than 8 years of Romney, because Romney's record is so poor. Thus, any option to Romney other than Obama is a superior option.