What do you deem a “legitimate” candidate, Zeb?
And I agree…there is no question that the Right will vote in 2012…and I predict that it will be in record numbers.
Mufasa
I’m blind, Zeb!
Legitimate=Being able to beat The President.
Again…I think that the Presidency is the GOP’s to lose, not for Obama to win.
Mufasa
The 2A thing definitely gives me pause, as that’s a hot button issue for me personally.
But maybe ZEB is right, maybe in the real world his particular stance on gun rights wouldn’t make much of a difference.
Hey, Irish…I might be being dense today, but I read this a few times and still am not sure of your meaning…
“…To people like me, guns isn’t just ‘covered by the second amendment’…”
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
To people like you he’d be unstoppable.
To people like me, guns isn’t just “covered by the second amendment”
[/quote]
I don’t know what this means.
I’m not sure of Christie’s stance on firearms. I’ve not seen where he’s pursued more gun restrictions (I haven’t looked). If that’s the case, that would certainly be a showstopper. Was just at a gun show today…
My point is if he never touched the issue, he’d be fine.
That’s actually my point with all of them. I say to any candidate- “Stick to budgets, stupid”. The social bullshit is just that.
re: “To people like you…” RACIST!
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’ve noticed that most who will stand by Obama no matter what revert back to blaming Bush. It would be funny if it were not so pathetic.
But it’s not just his die hard supporters it’s Obama himself who has blamed Bush on occasion. We basically hire a man to do a job and when he fails he blames his predecessor.
The man deserves to be fired.[/quote]
I’ve been wrong in the past a LOT of times, Zeb…but it is my impression that the President will NOT win re-election.
But the facts are there, and its not Obama Boot licking:
-
The economy,especially housing, was taking a free-fall in late 2008, and
-
While Europe was showing signs of trouble, it was not in the mess it is now.
I’m open to know what Bush, McCain, Romney, Cain, Christie or ANYONE would have done…and “Let it all fail and let the “market” take care of it” sounds nice and Libertarian…it simply wasn’t an option and is not one now.
Mufasa
[/quote]
I will tell you some things that they would not have done. They would not have pushed a ridiculous health care act that put further unsustainable burdens on employers, you know, the ones who actually do create jobs. They would not have gone into overdrive in pushing for class warfare at every turn. And, they most certainly would have not have driven socialist policy in the face of its unmitigated failure.
And BTW, how is that “continue to prop it up and prohibit the free markets from taking care of it” working out for you? Yeah, we should do more of that.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’ve noticed that most who will stand by Obama no matter what revert back to blaming Bush. It would be funny if it were not so pathetic.
But it’s not just his die hard supporters it’s Obama himself who has blamed Bush on occasion. We basically hire a man to do a job and when he fails he blames his predecessor.
The man deserves to be fired.[/quote]
I’ve been wrong in the past a LOT of times, Zeb…but it is my impression that the President will NOT win re-election.
But the facts are there, and its not Obama Boot licking:
-
The economy,especially housing, was taking a free-fall in late 2008, and
-
While Europe was showing signs of trouble, it was not in the mess it is now.
I’m open to know what Bush, McCain, Romney, Cain, Christie or ANYONE would have done…and “Let it all fail and let the “market” take care of it” sounds nice and Libertarian…it simply wasn’t an option and is not one now.
Mufasa
[/quote]
But my friend there was only ONE man promising hope and change. And if I were running the GOP nominee’s campaign I would use those words directly against him.
“Do you feel that Obama did what he said and brought hope and change?” If not then vote for______________________
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I’m blind, Zeb!
Legitimate=Being able to beat The President.
Again…I think that the Presidency is the GOP’s to lose, not for Obama to win.
Mufasa[/quote]
I know you don’t like hearing this Mufasa but the biggest problem that any GOP nominee will face is a hostile media. Other than FOX of course which leans republican. The mainstream media will is probably good for giving Obama about 3% give or take. That means that GOP nominee will have to beat him by 4% or so to actually win it (which will be a 1% win).
If the press does what it did for Obama the first time around that is. If they decide to play it down the middle Obama will lose no question. But the chances of that happening are probably as rare as me waking up on Monday morning and not having to go to work.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’ve noticed that most who will stand by Obama no matter what revert back to blaming Bush. It would be funny if it were not so pathetic.
But it’s not just his die hard supporters it’s Obama himself who has blamed Bush on occasion. We basically hire a man to do a job and when he fails he blames his predecessor.
The man deserves to be fired.[/quote]
I’ve been wrong in the past a LOT of times, Zeb…but it is my impression that the President will NOT win re-election.
But the facts are there, and its not Obama Boot licking:
-
The economy,especially housing, was taking a free-fall in late 2008, and
-
While Europe was showing signs of trouble, it was not in the mess it is now.
I’m open to know what Bush, McCain, Romney, Cain, Christie or ANYONE would have done…and “Let it all fail and let the “market” take care of it” sounds nice and Libertarian…it simply wasn’t an option and is not one now.
Mufasa
[/quote]
I will tell you some things that they would not have done. They would not have pushed a ridiculous health care act that put further unsustainable burdens on employers, you know, the ones who actually do create jobs. They would not have gone into overdrive in pushing for class warfare at every turn. And, they most certainly would have not have driven socialist policy in the face of its unmitigated failure.
And BTW, how is that “continue to prop it up and prohibit the free markets from taking care of it” working out for you? Yeah, we should do more of that.
[/quote]
My cousin is a teacher and naturally part of the powerful teachers union. And we debate quite frequently on Obama’s record. And there is one thing that is able to silence her and that is this; Obama had two full years of both a democrat house and senate he could have literally done anything that he wanted. And what did he do? Did he fix the economy? No. He passed national health care!
End of debate.
It was not a priority for him. And she knows better than to bring up the economic stimulus package as that was crap to begin with and loaded with giveaways to political partners and friends, it did nothing.
The man is an utter failure when it comes to the economy and if the republicans nominate a reasonably good candidate and he runs a really good campaign Obama will be ousted even with the help of the main stream liberal media. But those are two big “ifs.” It’s not unlike the republicans to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory - - See 1996 Bob Dole and of course John McCain in 2008. Two presidential candidates destined for failure.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
To people like you he’d be unstoppable.
To people like me, guns isn’t just “covered by the second amendment”
[/quote]
I don’t know what this means.
I’m not sure of Christie’s stance on firearms. I’ve not seen where he’s pursued more gun restrictions (I haven’t looked). If that’s the case, that would certainly be a showstopper. Was just at a gun show today…
My point is if he never touched the issue, he’d be fine.
That’s actually my point with all of them. I say to any candidate- “Stick to budgets, stupid”. The social bullshit is just that.
re: “To people like you…” RACIST![/quote]
hahha no I believe I misunderstood you.
But inevitably every candidate must take some position on those issues to placate the flyover parts so I imagine he couldn’t get away with it…
(FTR I agree with you.)
And I think you are just “hedging your bets”, Zeb.
Whatever advantage the “MSLM” may give the President will most likely be overcome by what I feel will be record turnout from the Right.
In addition:
-
Swing States he won the last time are in jeopardy.
-
He is in jeopardy of losing a significant number of independents that voted for him the last time and
-
The economy is still struggling.
The young are too fickle to predict as voters; but it’s doubtful that they will be a “fired up” as they were in 2008, which favors the GOP.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
And I think you are just “hedging your bets”, Zeb.
Whatever advantage the “MSLM” may give the President will most likely be overcome by what I feel will be record turnout from the Right.
In addition:
-
Swing States he won the last time are in jeopardy.
-
He is in jeopardy of losing a significant number of independents that voted for him the last time and
-
The economy is still struggling.
The young are too fickle to predict as voters; but it’s doubtful that they will be a “fired up” as they were in 2008, which favors the GOP.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree with most of what you’ve said. The momentum could be in the republicans favor. However, all of that changes if:
1- The wrong man gets the nomination. For example, if Herman Cain does not implode with dumb comments, (which he will) and gets the nomination he WILL NOT defeat Obama. He is at heart a lack luster candidate that I think has good ideas, but not nearly the charisma to stand next to Obama and look good. Nor does he have the experience speaking daily before large crowds. He (like Perry) shoots from the hip far too much. And the press will take him down…eventually.
2- Even if the right person does get the nomination and runs a lackluster McCain style campaign with a mistake of the day. He WILL NOT defeat Obama.
What the press does to help Obama is exploit the GOP nominee’s mistakes on the front page and at the top of the hour. And they continue to make Obama look like the only logical choice. This is where he appears on the front cover of Mens Fitness magazines (McCain had no such opportunity). And gets the rest of the free press ride.
So, yes you could be right about the turn out but other things have to line up as well. And any incumbent has a distinct advantage because they can manipulate world affairs to a certain degree. And with Obama’s Chicago roots he will be out in front of that one big time.
Obama is still the odds on favorite to win reelection, but only by the slightest of margins if the economy stays in the dumps. It will all come down to the campaign and of course who the republicans pick.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… he’s a NJ Republican - which means he’s not a psychotic jesus freak, he doesn’t say much about abortion, he doesn’t say much about gays, and he’s not huge on gun rights (might stem from the fact that he was also the state attorney), and he’s never said shit about illegals…
[/quote]
And therin lies his big problem, FI…he will “have” to take a stand on/address these issues IF he expects to get his party’s nomination (IF he runs…)
Again…despite people at events getting on their knees begging him to run; I just don’t think that he has either the temperament OR “beliefs” to ever get the GOP nomination.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree. I think if you told him to hold a prayer party for rain, he wouldn’t know what to do with you, and if you told him open carry everywhere, he’d remind you what he did for a living.
I like the guy. I’ve met him a few times, I’ve seen him speak probably a dozen times, and sat across tables from him. He’s a no-bullshit type - which works very well in New Jersey, but would come across as just disrespectful and irritable to everyone else in the nation. Kind of like how I do.
And of course, I’d rather have him stay here because I honestly like him as the governor.[/quote]
As far as prayer, who cares. Some people believe some don’t. As long as he isn’t preventing people from praying I don’t think many would care.
As far as guns, as a gun owner, I can tell you I would vote against him on this issue alone his previous job be damned.
I think most people appreciate “no bullshit”. Bush certainly didn’t put up with shit whether or not you liked his politics. That attitude works well here too, assuming beliefs are in line. Chicago may take issue but who knows.
Frank discussion or “Straight Shooting” with a voting record to back it up is exactly what Americans of all stripes want, assuming again political beliefs are in line. New Jersey isn’t special. I know you and BG like to think so but it’s just a dirty city.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… he’s a NJ Republican - which means he’s not a psychotic jesus freak, he doesn’t say much about abortion, he doesn’t say much about gays, and he’s not huge on gun rights (might stem from the fact that he was also the state attorney), and he’s never said shit about illegals…
[/quote]
And therin lies his big problem, FI…he will “have” to take a stand on/address these issues IF he expects to get his party’s nomination (IF he runs…)
Again…despite people at events getting on their knees begging him to run; I just don’t think that he has either the temperament OR “beliefs” to ever get the GOP nomination.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree. I think if you told him to hold a prayer party for rain, he wouldn’t know what to do with you, and if you told him open carry everywhere, he’d remind you what he did for a living.
I like the guy. I’ve met him a few times, I’ve seen him speak probably a dozen times, and sat across tables from him. He’s a no-bullshit type - which works very well in New Jersey, but would come across as just disrespectful and irritable to everyone else in the nation. Kind of like how I do.
And of course, I’d rather have him stay here because I honestly like him as the governor.[/quote]
As far as prayer, who cares. Some people believe some don’t. As long as he isn’t preventing people from praying I don’t think many would care.
As far as guns, as a gun owner, I can tell you I would vote against him on this issue alone his previous job be damned.
I think most people appreciate “no bullshit”. Bush certainly didn’t put up with shit whether or not you liked his politics. That attitude works well here too, assuming beliefs are in line. Chicago may take issue but who knows.
Frank discussion or “Straight Shooting” with a voting record to back it up is exactly what Americans of all stripes want, assuming again political beliefs are in line. New Jersey isn’t special. I know you and BG like to think so but it’s just a dirty city.
[/quote]
Guns, religion, and the rest mean almost nothing to me this time around. We need someone who can get us out of this mess. And I want to vote for a person based almost on that one thing alone. If we were all hiring a CEO to get our company to produce again would we care if he or she were for or against guns? A Christian or an atheist?
If something were to happen to you (God forbid) and you were rushed to the hospital would you ask the doctor if he was a Christian before he tried to save your life? Well, that’s just about how we should all be thinking during the next Presidential race.
Honestly, if more of you really understood how much trouble this economy is in right now you wouldn’t be worried about losing your guns (not going to happen under any of the nominees). We are just about 5 years from the breaking point unless something positive happens. Bush racked up the debt, but Obama beat him by about 4-1.
Honestly, I don’t care about much else this time around. We simply need to defeat Obama and put someone in that office who knows what the hell they’re doing relative to the economy. AND…I think many people are thinking this very same way.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… he’s a NJ Republican - which means he’s not a psychotic jesus freak, he doesn’t say much about abortion, he doesn’t say much about gays, and he’s not huge on gun rights (might stem from the fact that he was also the state attorney), and he’s never said shit about illegals…
[/quote]
And therin lies his big problem, FI…he will “have” to take a stand on/address these issues IF he expects to get his party’s nomination (IF he runs…)
Again…despite people at events getting on their knees begging him to run; I just don’t think that he has either the temperament OR “beliefs” to ever get the GOP nomination.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree. I think if you told him to hold a prayer party for rain, he wouldn’t know what to do with you, and if you told him open carry everywhere, he’d remind you what he did for a living.
I like the guy. I’ve met him a few times, I’ve seen him speak probably a dozen times, and sat across tables from him. He’s a no-bullshit type - which works very well in New Jersey, but would come across as just disrespectful and irritable to everyone else in the nation. Kind of like how I do.
And of course, I’d rather have him stay here because I honestly like him as the governor.[/quote]
As far as prayer, who cares. Some people believe some don’t. As long as he isn’t preventing people from praying I don’t think many would care.
As far as guns, as a gun owner, I can tell you I would vote against him on this issue alone his previous job be damned.
I think most people appreciate “no bullshit”. Bush certainly didn’t put up with shit whether or not you liked his politics. That attitude works well here too, assuming beliefs are in line. Chicago may take issue but who knows.
Frank discussion or “Straight Shooting” with a voting record to back it up is exactly what Americans of all stripes want, assuming again political beliefs are in line. New Jersey isn’t special. I know you and BG like to think so but it’s just a dirty city.
[/quote]
Yea. You say that now because you’re not sure what he stands for. When he comes out with his typical attitude against some Republican strong point - guns for instance - you’ll be crying and moaning that he’s such a dickhead just like a lot of people do in this state.
And if the one issue you’ll base your vote around this time around is fucking gun rights, then you’re a dolt. There’s a couple things that are just a bit more important this time. I think. Maybe.
(I agree with Zeb twice in two days, the apocalypse is coming.)
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… he’s a NJ Republican - which means he’s not a psychotic jesus freak, he doesn’t say much about abortion, he doesn’t say much about gays, and he’s not huge on gun rights (might stem from the fact that he was also the state attorney), and he’s never said shit about illegals…
[/quote]
And therin lies his big problem, FI…he will “have” to take a stand on/address these issues IF he expects to get his party’s nomination (IF he runs…)
Again…despite people at events getting on their knees begging him to run; I just don’t think that he has either the temperament OR “beliefs” to ever get the GOP nomination.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree. I think if you told him to hold a prayer party for rain, he wouldn’t know what to do with you, and if you told him open carry everywhere, he’d remind you what he did for a living.
I like the guy. I’ve met him a few times, I’ve seen him speak probably a dozen times, and sat across tables from him. He’s a no-bullshit type - which works very well in New Jersey, but would come across as just disrespectful and irritable to everyone else in the nation. Kind of like how I do.
And of course, I’d rather have him stay here because I honestly like him as the governor.[/quote]
As far as prayer, who cares. Some people believe some don’t. As long as he isn’t preventing people from praying I don’t think many would care.
As far as guns, as a gun owner, I can tell you I would vote against him on this issue alone his previous job be damned.
I think most people appreciate “no bullshit”. Bush certainly didn’t put up with shit whether or not you liked his politics. That attitude works well here too, assuming beliefs are in line. Chicago may take issue but who knows.
Frank discussion or “Straight Shooting” with a voting record to back it up is exactly what Americans of all stripes want, assuming again political beliefs are in line. New Jersey isn’t special. I know you and BG like to think so but it’s just a dirty city.
[/quote]
Yea. You say that now because you’re not sure what he stands for. When he comes out with his typical attitude against some Republican strong point - guns for instance - you’ll be crying and moaning that he’s such a dickhead just like a lot of people do in this state.
And if the one issue you’ll base your vote around this time around is fucking gun rights, then you’re a dolt. There’s a couple things that are just a bit more important this time. I think. Maybe.
(I agree with Zeb twice in two days, the apocalypse is coming.)[/quote]
Wow Irish this is just freakin weird!
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Yea. You say that now because you’re not sure what he stands for. When he comes out with his typical attitude against some Republican strong point - guns for instance - you’ll be crying and moaning that he’s such a dickhead just like a lot of people do in this state.
And if the one issue you’ll base your vote around this time around is fucking gun rights, then you’re a dolt. There’s a couple things that are just a bit more important this time. I think. Maybe.
(I agree with Zeb twice in two days, the apocalypse is coming.)[/quote]
I don’t know, the gun issue ranks right up there for me and a majority of the people I know. Zeb, I will remind you of a paraphrase, those who are willing to give up some freedom for some security deserve neither.
So why I say it is important has more to do with the fact that if he is willing to strip you of your rights to do what he thinks is right, how is that any better. and to top it off to leave you without a strong means of defending your family and property if the mess cannot be fixed and society does get worse.
No.
Anyone who believes they need to take away your right to bear arms, has no clue what is needed to really fix this economy.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… he’s a NJ Republican - which means he’s not a psychotic jesus freak, he doesn’t say much about abortion, he doesn’t say much about gays, and he’s not huge on gun rights (might stem from the fact that he was also the state attorney), and he’s never said shit about illegals…
[/quote]
And therin lies his big problem, FI…he will “have” to take a stand on/address these issues IF he expects to get his party’s nomination (IF he runs…)
Again…despite people at events getting on their knees begging him to run; I just don’t think that he has either the temperament OR “beliefs” to ever get the GOP nomination.
Mufasa [/quote]
I agree. I think if you told him to hold a prayer party for rain, he wouldn’t know what to do with you, and if you told him open carry everywhere, he’d remind you what he did for a living.
I like the guy. I’ve met him a few times, I’ve seen him speak probably a dozen times, and sat across tables from him. He’s a no-bullshit type - which works very well in New Jersey, but would come across as just disrespectful and irritable to everyone else in the nation. Kind of like how I do.
And of course, I’d rather have him stay here because I honestly like him as the governor.[/quote]
As far as prayer, who cares. Some people believe some don’t. As long as he isn’t preventing people from praying I don’t think many would care.
As far as guns, as a gun owner, I can tell you I would vote against him on this issue alone his previous job be damned.
I think most people appreciate “no bullshit”. Bush certainly didn’t put up with shit whether or not you liked his politics. That attitude works well here too, assuming beliefs are in line. Chicago may take issue but who knows.
Frank discussion or “Straight Shooting” with a voting record to back it up is exactly what Americans of all stripes want, assuming again political beliefs are in line. New Jersey isn’t special. I know you and BG like to think so but it’s just a dirty city.
[/quote]
Yea. You say that now because you’re not sure what he stands for. When he comes out with his typical attitude against some Republican strong point - guns for instance - you’ll be crying and moaning that he’s such a dickhead just like a lot of people do in this state.
And if the one issue you’ll base your vote around this time around is fucking gun rights, then you’re a dolt. There’s a couple things that are just a bit more important this time. I think. Maybe.
(I agree with Zeb twice in two days, the apocalypse is coming.)[/quote]
Everybody appreciates straight forward talk. It has nothing to do with political leanings. I may not like his politics, as stated, but I appreciate frank honesty. People hated Bush for his politics. Wacko conspiracy nuts aside, no one can fault him for blunt honesty.
I would not vote for Christie based on his politics, though I respect him for his straight shooting approach. I don’t know how to make it simpler.
Addressing your second point, I will be frank, call it attention whoring if you want but I’m using my situation (the voter seeking representation) to make a point.
I will not vote for a guy to run my country who disregards the 2nd amendment of the very constitution that makes us who we are, even if he has some magical plan to use government influence to fix private sector issues.
In fact I take issue with any president who tries to meddle in private affairs. It is not the governments job to play robinhood to and general CEO of our countries corporations. Big government is not an acceptable solution.
Frankly, I think this recession is overplayed too. The additional 5% unemployment on top of the usual is pretty small fry in the grand scheme of things. We don’t need a president to babysit $35k annual dumbasses taking out $300k ARM loans or companies who can’t compete, such as GM. It is simply not governments job and shouldn’t be a part of any democratic loving Americans voting agenda.
Support of our constitution however, should.
Call it attention whoring if you want but I’m making a point.
Frankly I dig the economic down cycle. I had to adjust. I left a sweet job that was beginning to look dead end due to some economic cooling off and I completely switched industries, became my own man, put it two years of solid stress but came through. I could have waited for the exit ticket, gotten on welfare or someshit and bitched about the economy but I knew better. There is money out there, you have to be flexible sometimes in life, jobs included.
These days I am shopping rental properties. Always a goal and I can buy them now at 15-20% discounts. Rent has stayed the same which means I’m literally earning 20% over what I would have in a normal market. Huge. I love it. As selfish as it is I like how shit is so cheap right now, gasoline aside.
The market will adjust, hopefully a downtrend in pricing long term. It would be great to see inflation retreat for the first time, ever. Gov’t will just fuck that up. We are discussing two seperate entities. Let the private sector be the private sector and the president fucking better support the constitution. All of it.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Yea. You say that now because you’re not sure what he stands for. When he comes out with his typical attitude against some Republican strong point - guns for instance - you’ll be crying and moaning that he’s such a dickhead just like a lot of people do in this state.
And if the one issue you’ll base your vote around this time around is fucking gun rights, then you’re a dolt. There’s a couple things that are just a bit more important this time. I think. Maybe.
(I agree with Zeb twice in two days, the apocalypse is coming.)[/quote]
I don’t know, the gun issue ranks right up there for me and a majority of the people I know. Zeb, I will remind you of a paraphrase, those who are willing to give up some freedom for some security deserve neither.
So why I say it is important has more to do with the fact that if he is willing to strip you of your rights to do what he thinks is right, how is that any better. and to top it off to leave you without a strong means of defending your family and property if the mess cannot be fixed and society does get worse.
No.
Anyone who believes they need to take away your right to bear arms, has no clue what is needed to really fix this economy. [/quote]
I think you are so transfixed on that one issue that it might color your view. As I said no one is taking away your gun rights. There is no nominee who can or even wants to do that. Therefore, let’s get someone in that office who, unlike Obama, actually understand how to turn this country around economically. And if that doesn’t happen we better hang on tightly to our guns because I have a feeling we’re going to need them to find food.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I think you are so transfixed on that one issue that it might color your view. As I said no one is taking away your gun rights. There is no nominee who can or even wants to do that. Therefore, let’s get someone in that office who, unlike Obama, actually understand how to turn this country around economically. And if that doesn’t happen we better hang on tightly to our guns because I have a feeling we’re going to need them to find food.[/quote]
Although I disagree with you about putting someone else in office - I will be voting for Obama - I do agree that fixing on ONE issue, ESPECIALLY a bullshit social issue that, in all likelihood, is not going to sway one or the other, is foolish.
I didn’t vote for Christie but I would in the next election. He’s not pro-choice, I am, but I think he’s got some understanding of what to do to keep property taxes from absolutely skyrocketing in this state as they have.
Christie’s been in office for a couple years now, and guess what changed with abortion, and gun rights, and all that other crap?
Absolutely nothing.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I think you are so transfixed on that one issue that it might color your view. As I said no one is taking away your gun rights. There is no nominee who can or even wants to do that. Therefore, let’s get someone in that office who, unlike Obama, actually understand how to turn this country around economically. And if that doesn’t happen we better hang on tightly to our guns because I have a feeling we’re going to need them to find food.[/quote]
Although I disagree with you about putting someone else in office - I will be voting for Obama - I do agree that fixing on ONE issue, ESPECIALLY a bullshit social issue that, in all likelihood, is not going to sway one or the other, is foolish.
I didn’t vote for Christie but I would in the next election. He’s not pro-choice, I am, but I think he’s got some understanding of what to do to keep property taxes from absolutely skyrocketing in this state as they have.
Christie’s been in office for a couple years now, and guess what changed with abortion, and gun rights, and all that other crap?
Absolutely nothing.
[/quote]
Exactly my point. These are side bar issues that do not deserve more than a passing glance. We have certain gun rights and there is no candidate running (that I know of) who is trying to take our guns. Let’s keep the focus on the economy and elect someone who actually understands how it works and bring some prosperity back to this nation – Things are really bad right now for a lot of people.