Moronika
The community forum of ThreeStooges.net

2012 Presidential Election Part 2

metaldams · 123 · 21441

Poll

Who will you vote for in November?

Barack Obama (Democrat)
4 (21.1%)
Mitt Romney (Republican)
9 (47.4%)
Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
3 (15.8%)
Virgil Goode (Constitution)
0 (0%)
Jill Stein (Green)
0 (0%)
Write in a Stooge (Please say which Stooge)
3 (15.8%)
Undecided
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 17

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline metaldams

OK, now that Romney has been officially coronated and all the primaries are done, let's do this again...who will you be voting for in November?  Oh, and if you're not familiar with any of the names below Mitt Romney, you're on the Internet, do some research.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline falsealarms

I'm not an Obama supporter (I'm not attached to anyone) but it kind of feels like an Obama win is inevitable. Maybe I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem like there will be a lot of drama on election day. I just don't sense a lot of momentum behind Romney. I'm not sure who I'm voting for, just sure who I'm not.


Offline Lefty

Moe for President, Larry for Vice President, Curly for Speaker of the House, Shemp for Toastmaster General, Joe for Secretary of Offense, and Curly-Joe for Secretary of the Inferior.  And they'll still do a better job than the 537 lunkheads in D.C. now.


Offline JazzBill

I live in Illinois, It don't matter who I vote for, Obama will carry Illinois. I think Ted Healy is a good choice.
"When in Chicago call Stockyards 1234, Ask for Ruby".


Offline metaldams

I live in Illinois, It don't matter who I vote for, Obama will carry Illinois. I think Ted Healy is a good choice.

I live in Delaware, and if I were voting to influence a race, my vote would not matter because I'm in a very blue state.  I'll put it to you this way - when I was in high school, I attended a speech during class hours held in my school's auditorium by Joe Biden.  I can drive five minutes from my house and point to a house Joe Biden used to live in.  A friend of mine danced with Joe Biden's daughter once.  In other words, what you are geographically to Barack Obama I am to Joe Biden.

I'm voting on my principle, and I support Gary Johnson, his chances of winning be damned.  The guy was a two term governor of New Mexico and when he was through the state was in a billion dollar surplus.  Sign me up, please.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline metaldams

.........however, if something were to happen to Gary Johnson between now and November, I would proudly endorse the Dent/Sitka ticket.
- Doug Sarnecky


xraffle

  • Guest
I will vote for whoever will improve the economy. That's all I want.


Offline JazzBill

I will vote for whoever will improve the economy. That's all I want.

When you figure out who that is let me know, I'll vote for him too.  :(
"When in Chicago call Stockyards 1234, Ask for Ruby".


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
I will vote for whoever will improve the economy. That's all I want.

Then vote for Gary Johnson the Libertarian; they have a hardline stance on government spending and if elected would curb it significantly. In order to fix the economy we have to stop spending so much money. The question is which programs do you think Johnson would cut? That's why you do research. The Green and Constitution parties are opposite sides of the same coin (Green is very left and Constitution is very right; in fact the Green Party is a bunch of wanna-do-good socialist hippies while the Constitution Party are advocates of an American Theocracy) so neither of those candidates will be getting my vote. To simplify the third parties; one is far left, one far right and one is centrist. I strongly urge anyone voting not to vote Democan or Republicrat this or any other election.
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


xraffle

  • Guest
I strongly urge anyone voting not to vote Democan or Republicrat this or any other election.

I'm neither of those. I'm a pedestrian. :D

Seriously, I used to be a Democrat, but then changed to no party. I'm completely disgusted with both Democrats and Republicans, to be honest. I'll do research on Gary Johnson. From what you said, he sounds like the proper candidate to vote for. Sadly though, I have a feeling Obama is going to win again.


Offline metaldams

I'm neither of those. I'm a pedestrian. :D

Seriously, I used to be a Democrat, but then changed to no party. I'm completely disgusted with both Democrats and Republicans, to be honest. I'll do research on Gary Johnson. From what you said, he sounds like the proper candidate to vote for. Sadly though, I have a feeling Obama is going to win again.

Gary's website is garyjohnson2012.com and there's plenty of youtube footage on him.  For pure speeches, his recent speech at the P.A.U.L. Festival was excellent, and there's a couple of 45 minute interviews worth seraching for, also, there's the segment he did with John Stossel.  It's nice to hear you're open to checking him out, X.  It amazes me how many people mention to me they're not sold on either of the two main candidates yet look at me like I have two heads when I mention voting third party.  We're brainwashed into thinking third party is a "wasted vote," but if enough people who are pissed off with the two party system would take the time to do research and think outside the box, we'd have much healthier debate in this country.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline metaldams


Offline falsealarms

Some interesting thoughts on the conventions from "The Resident" :



Offline falsealarms

Oh, and I suggest everybody try this.

www.isidewith.com

I get Mitt Romney with Gary Johnson not far behind. Obama is a distant fourth.


Offline metaldams

I get Mitt Romney with Gary Johnson not far behind. Obama is a distant fourth.

Gary Johnson 97%
Virgil Goode 73%
Mitt Romney 71%
Rocky Anderson 37%
Jill Stein 30%
Barack Obama 16%

PS:  Though he's no longer on the ballot, I took this a few days ago when Ron Paul was still eligible, and he was tied with Gary Johnson, also getting 97% for me.

PPS:  I'm assuming my 71% Romney is the current model.  I wonder how I would've scored with past versions?
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline ILMM

I get Mitt Romney with Gary Johnson not far behind. Obama is a distant fourth.


Same with me. Romney 96% Johnson 79% Goode 72% Obama 21% Anderson (?) 1%
Stein 0%  ;D Sorta what I expected, although I thought Romney would score a little lower.
"That must be Nick Barker.... he's disguised as a black banana."-Shemp


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
That's an odd little survey; I got Johnson at 92%, Stein 73%, Obama and Goode 62%, Anderson 61% and Romney 44%. I went back, giving more detailed answers when called for but not changing the gist of my answers (clicking on the other answers option) and got Johnson 94%, Stein 54%, Obama 43%,  Anderson 30%, Romney 24% and Goode 18%.
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
Gary Johnson 97%
Virgil Goode 73%
Mitt Romney 71%
Rocky Anderson 37%
Jill Stein 30%
Barack Obama 16%

PS:  Though he's no longer on the ballot, I took this a few days ago when Ron Paul was still eligible, and he was tied with Gary Johnson, also getting 97% for me.

PPS:  I'm assuming my 71% Romney is the current model.  I wonder how I would've scored with past versions?

Just by comparing lineups I can guess we probably disagree on social issues (after Johnson our list varies significantly). Since this is a political thread I have a question; how many of you actually voted in favor of Super PACs and if so could you please explain to me why giant corporations are people and should be given rights that individuals have?

Edit: I have been clicking on the candidates and I'm not sure about the overall accuracy. For instance, on the abortion question I answered "pro choice, I don't agree with it but it's not my right or the government's right to ban abortion" and the quiz has me and Rocky Anderson at odds because he just said "pro choice". Just because if I were a woman I would choose to unleash my demon seed onto the unsuspecting populace doesn't mean I am any less pro choice than someone who says "pro choice, get one abortion get your next one 50% off". Both examples are still pro choice. It is the individual woman's right to choose what to do with her own body and a group of mostly men who will never have to make that choice (and women who are past the birthing phases of their lives) should have no fucking right to tell them otherwise. Also, I noticed many of the issues that Anderson and I do agree on I marked as "most important" (get rid of the PATRIOT Act, legalize drugs, no to Super PACs). I don't agree with some of the conclusions this quiz makes (I would vote Anderson over Obama, in fact were I forced to vote the only way I would vote Obama is if it were between him, Romney and Goode).
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


Offline metaldams

Just by comparing lineups I can guess we probably disagree on social issues (after Johnson our list varies significantly). Since this is a political thread I have a question; how many of you actually voted in favor of Super PACs and if so could you please explain to me why giant corporations are people and should be given rights that individuals have?

Edit: I have been clicking on the candidates and I'm not sure about the overall accuracy. For instance, on the abortion question I answered "pro choice, I don't agree with it but it's not my right or the government's right to ban abortion" and the quiz has me and Rocky Anderson at odds because he just said "pro choice". Just because if I were a woman I would choose to unleash my demon seed onto the unsuspecting populace doesn't mean I am any less pro choice than someone who says "pro choice, get one abortion get your next one 50% off". Both examples are still pro choice. It is the individual woman's right to choose what to do with her own body and a group of mostly men who will never have to make that choice (and women who are past the birthing phases of their lives) should have no fucking right to tell them otherwise. Also, I noticed many of the issues that Anderson and I do agree on I marked as "most important" (get rid of the PATRIOT Act, legalize drugs, no to Super PACs). I don't agree with some of the conclusions this quiz makes (I would vote Anderson over Obama, in fact were I forced to vote the only way I would vote Obama is if it were between him, Romney and Goode).

OK, here we go:

SUPER PAC:  While I am not a personal fan of Super Pacs, I'm even less of a fan of telling a politician where they can get their money from, whether it be individual's or corporations, so I support having Super Pacs legal.  However, I am also for transparency. I think the public has the right to see where politicians get their money from so they can make an informed decision.  Let the voters make Super Pacs an issue if they choose, not the government.  I like Jesse Ventura's idea the best, and that's having all politicians where a NASCAR style suit showing who all their biggest donors are.

ABORTION:  While I am voting for Gary Johnson, this is one of the few issues I disagree with him on, I am pro-life unless if having the baby can physically harm the mother.  I don't view it it as a women's rights issue, because that only takes the mother and not the child into consideration.  If the mother can't care for the child, there's always adoption agencies that will give the child to couples who can't naturally have children, and to prove I am not a 100% social conservative but an independent thinker, couples who naturally can't have children, in addition to sterile hetero couples, includes same sex couples. 

Overall, going by rhetoric, I would definitely be Republican more than Democrat.  I am all for fiscal conservatism and am far from a socialist, but the problem with Republicans in my view is they don't practice what they preach.  Romney can throw all the stuff about jobs, business, and balancing the budget all he wants, but I've yet to hear him talk about cutting a program, monetary policy, or the federal reserve.  Gary Johnson and Ron Paul do talk about these things, so they have my support.  I would also like to see how Romney proposes to balance the budget yet grow the military intervention we have throughout the world, it simply does not add up.  Go on Romney's website and look at his foreign policy, he has specific plans for several countries and territories throughout the world, and it's even greater than what's going on right now.

The irony is, and I just learned this recently, is that Republicans used to be the peace party!
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
OK, here we go:

SUPER PAC:  While I am not a personal fan of Super Pacs, I'm even less of a fan of telling a politician where they can get their money from, whether it be individual's or corporations, so I support having Super Pacs legal.  However, I am also for transparency. I think the public has the right to see where politicians get their money from so they can make an informed decision.  Let the voters make Super Pacs an issue if they choose, not the government.  I like Jesse Ventura's idea the best, and that's having all politicians where a NASCAR style suit showing who all their biggest donors are.

ABORTION:  While I am voting for Gary Johnson, this is one of the few issues I disagree with him on, I am pro-life unless if having the baby can physically harm the mother.  I don't view it it as a women's rights issue, because that only takes the mother and not the child into consideration.  If the mother can't care for the child, there's always adoption agencies that will give the child to couples who can't naturally have children, and to prove I am not a 100% social conservative but an independent thinker, couples who naturally can't have children, in addition to sterile hetero couples, includes same sex couples. 

Overall, going by rhetoric, I would definitely be Republican more than Democrat.  I am all for fiscal conservatism and am far from a socialist, but the problem with Republicans in my view is they don't practice what they preach.  Romney can throw all the stuff about jobs, business, and balancing the budget all he wants, but I've yet to hear him talk about cutting a program, monetary policy, or the federal reserve.  Gary Johnson and Ron Paul do talk about these things, so they have my support.  I would also like to see how Romney proposes to balance the budget yet grow the military intervention we have throughout the world, it simply does not add up.  Go on Romney's website and look at his foreign policy, he has specific plans for several countries and territories throughout the world, and it's even greater than what's going on right now.

The irony is, and I just learned this recently, is that Republicans used to be the peace party!

They were also the party that brought about abolitionism, go figure!

On Super PACS, they give businesses and corporations the same status as individuals from a voting perspective and can easily influence votes. Super PACS, lobbyists and all that shit should be outlawed because it corrupts the system. We need campaign finance reform because these politicians are too damned corruptible. I would also limit personal contributions to no more than the cost of a paint job from Earl Shibe back in the day ($99.99).

As for the "big scary A word people don't like to talk about", when is your Conception Day? I'll mark it on my calendar and send you a present. :p
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


xraffle

  • Guest
ABORTION:  While I am voting for Gary Johnson, this is one of the few issues I disagree with him on, I am pro-life unless if having the baby can physically harm the mother.  I don't view it it as a women's rights issue, because that only takes the mother and not the child into consideration.  If the mother can't care for the child, there's always adoption agencies that will give the child to couples who can't naturally have children, and to prove I am not a 100% social conservative but an independent thinker, couples who naturally can't have children, in addition to sterile hetero couples, includes same sex couples. 

I agree 100%.


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
It's not a baby until it is born. The zygote isn't taken into consideration because it is not an independently life sustaining person. Using an analogy, is a box of cake mix and eggs, whatever else you may want/need on it a cake? No, of course it's not a cake until you bake it. If the cake is baking and you decide for whatever reason that you don't want cake you have the option of ceasing baking and throwing away the remnants that would have been a cake. Are you going to force me to eat a cake I don't want? What if I accidentally dropped rat poison in the cake and didn't figure it out until I was 2/3 of the way through baking it? Should I be forced to finish baking and then eat the cake? Maybe since I don't want it I can have a bake sale and sell the cake to someone else. Abortion is similar, but of course on a more life-altering scale. The "ingredients" (sperm, eggs and whatnot) are baking (gestating) and it's not a cake (baby) yet. Abortion is never an easy decision that anyone is chomping at the bit to make and I for one am glad I'll never have to make it, but women should be allowed to make that decision no matter what the three of us think. Oh yeah, it's so easy for three swinging dicks such as ourselves to say "abortion is wrong" or "abortion is right" or whatever, and it is an interesting topic to discuss BUT all in all our opinions are meaningless. It's like that South Park episode where Stan's father guessed a Wheel of Fortune puzzle with the word "niggers" and Stan went to school the next day to apologize to Token saying he knew how Token felt and was told "no you don't". The Supreme Court agreed with me back in the 70's, it is the woman's right to choose.

The adoption hypothesis sounds good, but unfortunately not everyone who can't have children wants them. Then there are other things to factor: most prospective adopters want babies or small children and most want them white as snow. It is very hard for children to be adopted. As for Gary Johnson he is actually more conservative on abortion than the party line.
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


xraffle

  • Guest
But a living thing is being formed and WILL become a baby. I'm not trying to tell women to keep the baby and go through a life sentence. But there are many alternatives to abortion. There's birth control and like Doug said, adoption. A cake will not turn into a living thing, but a fetus will.


Offline shemps#1

  • Pothead, Libertarian, Administrator, Resident Crank and Baron of Greymatter
  • Global Moderator
  • Chowderhead
  • ******
  • Hatchet Man
But a living thing is being formed and WILL become a baby. I'm not trying to tell women to keep the baby and go through a life sentence. But there are many alternatives to abortion. There's birth control and like Doug said, adoption. A cake will not turn into a living thing, but a fetus will.

My point is whether or not it will "turn into a living thing" is irrelevant. It isn't living while gestating and there shouldn't be implied rights to non-living things. That's heading down a slippery slope.
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish." - Unknown


Offline ILMM

It's not a baby until it is born. The zygote isn't taken into consideration because it is not an independently life sustaining person. Using an analogy, is a box of cake mix and eggs, whatever else you may want/need on it a cake? No, of course it's not a cake until you bake it. If the cake is baking and you decide for whatever reason that you don't want cake you have the option of ceasing baking and throwing away the remnants that would have been a cake. Are you going to force me to eat a cake I don't want? What if I accidentally dropped rat poison in the cake and didn't figure it out until I was 2/3 of the way through baking it? Should I be forced to finish baking and then eat the cake? Maybe since I don't want it I can have a bake sale and sell the cake to someone else. Abortion is similar, but of course on a more life-altering scale. The "ingredients" (sperm, eggs and whatnot) are baking (gestating) and it's not a cake (baby) yet. Abortion is never an easy decision that anyone is chomping at the bit to make and I for one am glad I'll never have to make it, but women should be allowed to make that decision no matter what the three of us think. Oh yeah, it's so easy for three swinging dicks such as ourselves to say "abortion is wrong" or "abortion is right" or whatever, and it is an interesting topic to discuss BUT all in all our opinions are meaningless. It's like that South Park episode where Stan's father guessed a Wheel of Fortune puzzle with the word "niggers" and Stan went to school the next day to apologize to Token saying he knew how Token felt and was told "no you don't". The Supreme Court agreed with me back in the 70's, it is the woman's right to choose.

The adoption hypothesis sounds good, but unfortunately not everyone who can't have children wants them. Then there are other things to factor: most prospective adopters want babies or small children and most want them white as snow. It is very hard for children to be adopted. As for Gary Johnson he is actually more conservative on abortion than the party line.


A new born baby isn't independently life sustaining either. It can't feed itself, change itself,
move itself, or clean itself. It is just as dependent on others as when it was in the womb. When does it become a person? And what about premature birth? A "cake" can come out of the "oven"
weeks to soon for whatever reason and still live and grow if properly cared for.
     
"That must be Nick Barker.... he's disguised as a black banana."-Shemp