|
Title: Republicans, here's a question Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 21, 2009, 05:57:22 PM Look at the question. :) (You can pick up to three)
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 21, 2009, 06:05:46 PM Palin, Huckabee and Paul.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 21, 2009, 06:14:19 PM Look at the question. :) (You can pick up to three) Why three? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 21, 2009, 06:17:32 PM Look at the question. :) (You can pick up to three) Why three? Just thought it was a reasonable number. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 21, 2009, 06:23:21 PM Look at the question. :) (You can pick up to three) Why three? Just thought it was a reasonable number. All would be more reasonable. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 21, 2009, 06:25:51 PM None.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: big bad fab on August 21, 2009, 06:43:22 PM Paul, Palin
All the other may "change" once in office, even Huckabee, Gary Johnson, Rick Santorum, Jim DeMint, etc Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on August 21, 2009, 07:08:08 PM Since I was a registered pubbie and the thread has few responses......Palin, Santorum, Cantor.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: paul718 on August 21, 2009, 07:25:59 PM Since I was a registered pubbie and the thread has few responses......Palin, Santorum, Cantor. Why don't you like Cantor? I voted Palin, Santorum, and Huckabee. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on August 21, 2009, 07:40:00 PM Since I was a registered pubbie and the thread has few responses......Palin, Santorum, Cantor. Why don't you like Cantor? I voted Palin, Santorum, and Huckabee. You know, Paul, I think it's perception. He reminds me of my yorkie....barks her head off but runs and hides if she's looked at. I also don't view him as trustworthy or filled with any ideas or goals. He reminds me of a used car dealer ;) I wish I could have voted for more than 3 though.....lol. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: DownWithTheLeft on August 21, 2009, 08:03:52 PM None, these are some of the only people I'd vote for
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Vepres on August 21, 2009, 08:16:32 PM Palin, Jindal, and Paul
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: RIP Robert H Bork on August 21, 2009, 08:16:50 PM Romney, Palin and Giuliani, although that would be my answer if the question was asking who would make me vote third party.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: nhmagic on August 21, 2009, 08:23:29 PM Charlie Crist
Gary Johnson Tim Pawlenty Crist and Pawlenty are rabid liberals who would show their true colors given electoral power. Republicans in congress will vote for their programs and it will be Bush all over again. With Obama they have someone to oppose at least. I suspect that with Romney and Huckabee too - but I will reserve judgement. We need an absolute hard-line conservative that would repeal Obamacare fully should it be enacted. Isn't Gary Johnson the wacky guy from New Mexico? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 21, 2009, 08:44:22 PM Isn't Gary Johnson the wacky guy from New Mexico? Yup, that's the one. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 21, 2009, 08:53:08 PM Crist and Pawlenty are rabid liberals who would show their true colors given electoral power. Republicans in congress will vote for their programs and it will be Bush all over again. Do you read what you type? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: fezzyfestoon on August 21, 2009, 08:57:22 PM Huckabee, Palin, and Gingrich in particular, but most of the members of Congress would turn me off.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: paul718 on August 21, 2009, 09:30:25 PM Charlie Crist Gary Johnson Tim Pawlenty Crist and Pawlenty are rabid liberals who would show their true colors given electoral power. How is Pawlenty a liberal? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 21, 2009, 09:33:28 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: fezzyfestoon on August 21, 2009, 09:39:38 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 21, 2009, 09:42:18 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 21, 2009, 09:45:07 PM If there is anybody on this list I don't like it would only drive me to vote third party. I would vote for a Lame horse before I would vote for Obama.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 21, 2009, 09:49:42 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 21, 2009, 09:52:40 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: fezzyfestoon on August 21, 2009, 10:25:12 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. Hahaha, yeah that's it... Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: paul718 on August 21, 2009, 10:42:29 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. Someone like Santorum, Palin, or DeMint is unelectable. If we nominated one of them, the only purpose they would serve is to reinforce the stereotype that Republicans are simple-minded. The way I look at it, I agreed with George W. Bush on a lot of issues, but came out feeling extremely dissatisfied with his presidency. Obama is not a Socialist or a Marxist. He's a Keynesian. I disagree with him on most issues, but can at least trust his ability to reason. I cannot trust the aforementioned to govern with a level head and not be an embarassment. And I don't know where this "racist" charge comes from, but I believe it's unfounded and hurts the GOP's ability to engage in any honest opposition. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Alexander Hamilton on August 22, 2009, 08:24:02 AM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. Someone like Santorum, Palin, or DeMint is unelectable. If we nominated one of them, the only purpose they would serve is to reinforce the stereotype that Republicans are simple-minded. The way I look at it, I agreed with George W. Bush on a lot of issues, but came out feeling extremely dissatisfied with his presidency. Obama is not a Socialist or a Marxist. He's a Keynesian. I disagree with him on most issues, but can at least trust his ability to reason. I cannot trust the aforementioned to govern with a level head and not be an embarassment. And I don't know where this "racist" charge comes from, but I believe it's unfounded and hurts the GOP's ability to engage in any honest opposition. Obama isn't Keynesian. Keynes would never support a healthcare take over. Keynes wanted to use government spending to balance the free market, not control it. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: President Mitt on August 22, 2009, 08:24:12 AM Romney, Santorum, and Paul I all around hate Romney. I do not think that Santorum is a very strong leader. As a senator, he did not do what he said he would do. He said one thing to the people of Pennsylvania and did another in the halls of congress. I would have supported and cast my ballot for Bob Casey Jr in 2006 if I were a Pennsylvania voter as a protest vote against Santorum. And, Paul is not loyal to the GOP. Ah, yes, I remember you posting Anti-Mormon Bigotry a few threads back. My vote: Obama/Biden Who'd win: Obama Biden He'd probably get around 300 EV's, and 51% of the popular vote. Anyways, Palin, Huck, and Barbour. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Zarn on August 22, 2009, 09:52:43 AM No one would make me vote for Obama. No one.
There are people who would make me vote third party or for Obi-Wan Kenobi (at least we know his allegiance is to the republic). Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: pogo stick on August 22, 2009, 10:51:17 AM Ron Paul
Other : Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chaffee, Chuck Hagel, Tom Ridge Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: DownWithTheLeft on August 22, 2009, 10:54:30 AM No one would make me vote for Obama. No one. There are people who would make me vote third party or for Obi-Wan Kenobi (at least we know his allegiance is to the republic). Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: paul718 on August 22, 2009, 10:56:08 AM Ron Paul Other : Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chaffee, Chuck Hagel, Tom Ridge What's your problem with Ridge? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: pogo stick on August 22, 2009, 10:59:18 AM Ron Paul Other : Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chaffee, Chuck Hagel, Tom Ridge What's your problem with Ridge? I like Ridge, but I highly doubt he'd be a good President. And Ridge is pretty conservative (except on Abortion) Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 22, 2009, 11:12:52 AM So I guess the assumption of this poll is that the options of voting third-party/write-in or just staying home no longer exist? I would never vote for Obama but I wouldn't vote Republican either if it was someone like Giuliani/Romney/Huckabee on the ballot.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 22, 2009, 11:51:06 AM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. It's clear you don't understand Marxism or socialism, and that's fine (though I can call you an idiot for it), but racist? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 22, 2009, 11:53:58 AM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. It's clear you don't understand Marxism or socialism, and that's fine (though I can call you an idiot for it), but racist? It was hyperbole. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 22, 2009, 11:56:05 AM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. It's clear you don't understand Marxism or socialism, and that's fine (though I can call you an idiot for it), but racist? It was hyperbole. Not at all clever. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Rowan on August 22, 2009, 12:10:57 PM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. It's clear you don't understand Marxism or socialism, and that's fine (though I can call you an idiot for it), but racist? It was hyperbole. Not at all clever. And the fact that he said "White folks greed runs a world in need." Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: MasterJedi on August 22, 2009, 12:39:52 PM The only one that would immediatly do it is Ron Paul. Others I don't like but I could probably force myself to vote for them if I had to since I don't want to vote for Obama.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Vepres on August 22, 2009, 03:02:28 PM I don't see how economic conservative couldn't like Gingrich. He has lots of new ideas despite being a 90s politician and he is actually an intellectual, rare in modern politics.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: nhmagic on August 22, 2009, 03:48:19 PM I don't see how economic conservative couldn't like Gingrich. He has lots of new ideas despite being a 90s politician and he is actually an intellectual, rare in modern politics. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Psychic Octopus on August 22, 2009, 04:02:13 PM Meh. None of those people could make me vote for Obama, I'd probably either stay home or vote third party if someone like Palin was nominated.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 22, 2009, 04:57:01 PM I don't see how economic conservative couldn't like Gingrich. He has lots of new ideas despite being a 90s politician and he is actually an intellectual, rare in modern politics. The base holds that commercial against him? Sheesh. Gingrich is very smart, but he still seems to have a bit of a stigma from the 90s. He was going to run in 2008 if he raised $25 million, but he fell deathly short of that. I'd probably support Newt over Obama unless my stock portfolio is double or triple what it is now by 2012, and my taxes are at the same level to boot. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Psychic Octopus on August 22, 2009, 05:04:24 PM Gingrich is an intellectual who came too late with a load of baggage to boot. He should of ran for GA statewide office, (Governor, perhaps) changed his image and been a sucessful governor, and then ran in 2008 or 2012. *sigh*
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 22, 2009, 05:47:47 PM Gingrich is an intellectual who came too late with a load of baggage to boot. He should of ran for GA statewide office, (Governor, perhaps) changed his image and been a sucessful governor, and then ran in 2008 or 2012. *sigh* His favorables were far too low for him to run for Governor when he was booted from the House. He really had no other options but to disappear for a few years and then reemerge as he did. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 22, 2009, 06:02:34 PM I don't see how economic conservative couldn't like Gingrich. He has lots of new ideas despite being a 90s politician and he is actually an intellectual, rare in modern politics. I wouldn't consider him that. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: WillK on August 26, 2009, 11:13:41 AM And we all know 95% of the Republicans here would end up pulling the lever for the Republican once they got into the voting booth anyway, so this thread is pointless. So then the 5% of us who aren't blind partisans will post. So you'd vote for the guy that you disagree with about everything, all because your candidate didn't win the primary. Talk about being a sore loser. Who said he disagrees with Obama about everything? He's a Republican, so naturally he would agree with the Republican candidate more than the far-left radical borderline Marxist/Socialist/Racist in the White House. It's clear you don't understand Marxism or socialism, and that's fine (though I can call you an idiot for it), but racist? It was hyperbole. Not at all clever. And the fact that he said "White folks greed runs a world in need." He was describing what Jeremiah Wright said in a sermon. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: tmthforu94 on August 26, 2009, 02:35:55 PM Mike Huckabee.
That's the only one on the list. Of course, there are some "other" Republicans I wouldn't vote for. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: President Mitt on August 26, 2009, 07:50:52 PM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson?
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 26, 2009, 09:50:38 PM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 27, 2009, 10:49:28 AM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers on August 27, 2009, 11:10:38 AM Newt Gingrich, Jeb Bush for obvious reasons, and Sarah Palin. They didn't fulfill what they set out to do during their turn in office, but want to use the Presidency to fulfill that, and I don't think that is what the presidency is for.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: paul718 on August 27, 2009, 11:36:41 AM Newt Gingrich, Jeb Bush for obvious reasons, and Sarah Palin. They didn't fulfill what they set out to do during their turn in office, but want to use the Presidency to fulfill that, and I don't think that is what the presidency is for. Can you expound on that? What did they "set out to do" in their last positions? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Farage on August 27, 2009, 12:37:31 PM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 27, 2009, 12:55:11 PM he's pro-drugs and totally anti-conservative Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: rebeltarian on September 01, 2009, 11:12:20 PM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Being "pro-drugs" is actually a conservative position. The War on Drugs and other sorts of prohibition have a long track record of failure and wasted money. Conservatism is supposed to be logical, anti-corruption and economically efficient. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: nhmagic on September 02, 2009, 01:05:14 AM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Being "pro-drugs" is actually a conservative position. The War on Drugs and other sorts of prohibition have a long track record of failure and wasted money. Conservatism is supposed to be logical, anti-corruption and economically efficient. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: SenatorShadowLands on September 02, 2009, 06:21:44 PM Paul could at least be relied upon to be an economic conservative and I'd really have to hold my nose to vote for Mittens. Otherwise it doesn't matter to me.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: pogo stick on September 02, 2009, 06:29:51 PM Paul could at least be relied upon to be an economic conservative and I'd really have to hold my nose to vote for Mittens. Otherwise it doesn't matter to me. I have a question, How is it possible to get a +9.00 Fiscal score and maintain a social score over +5.00? Just asking. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: SenatorShadowLands on September 02, 2009, 06:59:53 PM Paul could at least be relied upon to be an economic conservative and I'd really have to hold my nose to vote for Mittens. Otherwise it doesn't matter to me. I have a question, How is it possible to get a +9.00 Fiscal score and maintain a social score over +5.00? Just asking. Beats me, that's how it came out on PM (which labeled me as a "reactionist" up in the top right hand corner of the matrix), I took a different survey that made my economics over 9 yet my social was 4.8 so that other survey would agree with you, PM seems to be in a different world from that survey however. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 02, 2009, 07:05:41 PM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Being "pro-drugs" is actually a conservative position. The War on Drugs and other sorts of prohibition have a long track record of failure and wasted money. Conservatism is supposed to be logical, anti-corruption and economically efficient. That doesn't make any sense. Whenever something is stupid, opposing it is conservative? Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: zclark1994 on September 02, 2009, 07:52:54 PM This poll doesn't really carry any significance because it's like asking Clinton voters if obama's the nominee will you vote for McCain. A majority said they would either not vote or vote for McCain, and then they voted for Obama. The truth, the majority of republicans probably won't vote for Obama no matter who the nominee is. That may not be true for moderate republicans or independents, but for the majority of the party, it's a fact.
Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: rebeltarian on September 03, 2009, 12:34:56 AM What is everybody's beef with Gary Johnson? He's weird. He's to Ron Paulish, right? Being "pro-drugs" is actually a conservative position. The War on Drugs and other sorts of prohibition have a long track record of failure and wasted money. Conservatism is supposed to be logical, anti-corruption and economically efficient. That doesn't make any sense. Whenever something is stupid, opposing it is conservative? Whenever something is more idealistic than realistic, opposing it is conservative. Title: Re: Republicans, here's a question Post by: RIP Robert H Bork on September 03, 2009, 10:51:29 AM This poll doesn't really carry any significance because it's like asking Clinton voters if obama's the nominee will you vote for McCain. A majority said they would either not vote or vote for McCain, and then they voted for Obama. The truth, the majority of republicans probably won't vote for Obama no matter who the nominee is. |