Would Huckabee Make You Vote Democrat?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Here’s what you do if both parties offer up candidates that you can’t consciously vote for:

Just vote for whomever you were planning to vote for anyway. I am voting for Paul if I have to write him it. For me its not about party affiliations but rather who I think will make the most effective changes.

If I voted for one of the nominated party candidates other than Paul then I am still voting for someone I don’t want; so I figure, NO GUTS NO GLORY.[/quote]

Exactly my point.

50x

22

[quote]Sloth wrote:
50x wrote:
If you don’t vote, your opinion doesn’t matter. Why, because it wasn’t impotant enough for you to express it in a way were peaple have to listen ie voting.

I take a different route to express my opinion. Mine is to participate in lowering voter turnout even further. A demonstration that many of us are simply not motivated by the direction either pary wants to take this country.

The Republican party can no longer rely on my “lesser of two evils” vote. I held my nose and voted Bush, twice. And that earned me jack. I’m simply not going to contort myself and my beliefs to cast an anti-Democrat nominee vote.
[/quote]

You guys finally realizing why I wasn’t the only conservative to cast a protest vote for the Democrats in '06?

I could maybe hold my nose and vote for Huckabee, there’s a lot wrong with him, but he’s light years more conservative than Rudy and Romney. Wouldn’t vote for those two if they were running against Marion Barry. I’d vote for McCain more or less happily, he’s right on the big things.

But I think Paul may well run as a third party candidate. I had the chance to meet him a couple weeks ago (benefit of living in NH) and he wouldn’t admit to it, but he did say he was hoping the GOP nominee, if it isn’t him, would be someone who’s close to his positions. Fat chance of that.

23

Here’s what you do if both parties offer up candidates that you can’t consciously vote for:

Just vote for whomever you were planning to vote for anyway. I am voting for Paul if I have to write him it. For me its not about party affiliations but rather who I think will make the most effective changes.

If I voted for one of the nominated party candidates other than Paul then I am still voting for someone I don’t want; so I figure, NO GUTS NO GLORY.

24

He can suck my dick.

25

You’d need to be standing much closer to him.

26

This is why I can’t stand 2 party politics. On one side you have Huckabee, and on the other side you have… well not much better.

I’ve never thrown my vote either way (as in partisan), since that often seems to be voting against the candidate you don’t want rather than for the candidate you do want. I’d rather vote 3rd party.

27

Apparently you don’t need a fiscally conservative platform in Iowa. You just need to sound like a preacher. Hell, I think Huck could have been promoting a platform to the left of Hillary, and he still would’ve won the Christian Republican vote. Ugh.

28

Ron Paul had better be in 6th ahead of McCain by the time all the votes are turned in. 86% reporting at the moment.

Approx. 16,000 votes left to be turned in, which means that RP could still win because he trails Thompson/McCain by 3k.

29

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Ron Paul had better be in 6th ahead of McCain by the time all the votes are turned in. 86% reporting at the moment.

Approx. 16,000 votes left to be turned in, which means that RP could still win because he trails Thompson/McCain by 3k.[/quote]

I believe Ron Paul is currently in 5th place rather than 6th as stated above. It’s extremely likely he’ll maintain his 10% of the vote tally for the rest of the process. Under the circumstances, his position is quite respectable and even surprising in some respects. In fact I believe Ron Paul exceeded his poll average by 40%.

30

I think the Iowa caucus results were a little misleading, in that it disallowed absentee voting, thereby excluding whole classes of people who will likely be voting in the general election: the elderly, the infirm, restaurant employees and hospital staff on the late shift, and most importantly, active-duty armed forces personnel.

Were these people’s votes counted, I have a feeling this caucus may have turned out a little differently.

No matter. If Huckleberry wins the nomination, no way will I be voting for him… nor for any Democrat either. I’ll write in Ron Paul’s name on my ballot, and hope that you, Sloth, will do the same.

31

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I think the Iowa caucus results were a little misleading, in that it disallowed absentee voting, thereby excluding whole classes of people who will likely be voting in the general election: the elderly, the infirm, restaurant employees and hospital staff on the late shift, and most importantly, active-duty armed forces personnel. [/quote]

I believe absentee votes were allowed - a news item referred to the fact that a number of Florida folks were submitting their absentee ballots to participate in the caucus.

Not entirely sure - but worth a double check.

32

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
50x wrote:
If you don’t vote, your opinion doesn’t matter. Why, because it wasn’t impotant enough for you to express it in a way were peaple have to listen ie voting.

I take a different route to express my opinion. Mine is to participate in lowering voter turnout even further. A demonstration that many of us are simply not motivated by the direction either pary wants to take this country.

The Republican party can no longer rely on my “lesser of two evils” vote. I held my nose and voted Bush, twice. And that earned me jack. I’m simply not going to contort myself and my beliefs to cast an anti-Democrat nominee vote.

You guys finally realizing why I wasn’t the only conservative to cast a protest vote for the Democrats in '06?

I could maybe hold my nose and vote for Huckabee, there’s a lot wrong with him, but he’s light years more conservative than Rudy and Romney. Wouldn’t vote for those two if they were running against Marion Barry. I’d vote for McCain more or less happily, he’s right on the big things.

But I think Paul may well run as a third party candidate. I had the chance to meet him a couple weeks ago (benefit of living in NH) and he wouldn’t admit to it, but he did say he was hoping the GOP nominee, if it isn’t him, would be someone who’s close to his positions. Fat chance of that.[/quote]

Mr. Independent:

You voted straight democratic. Look where that has landed us.

If you want to PROTEST vote, write in a loon like paul.

DON’T SADDLE US WITH MORE dEMOCRATS.

I find it sad that everyone here wants to “punish” Republicans. Yet, democrats become the automatic beneficiary.

Are you not paying attention to the current Congress?

They are MUCH WORSE. They think your protest votes mean they are doing a fine job.

Write in loon paul. DON’T VOTE dEMOCRAT.

JeffR

33

I wanted to give a loud and hearty “F… YOU!!” to anyone on here who voted for huckabee in Iowa.

Your myopia could end up landing a democrat in the White House.

I wish we could jettison the far right from the Republican party.

huckabee has exactly ZERO cross over appeal. Some of his positions reek of religious fanaticism.

These are the sterotypes that are holding back the Republican party.

If you don’t like Rudy, at least, vote for Thompson.

JeffR

34

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I think the Iowa caucus results were a little misleading, in that it disallowed absentee voting, thereby excluding whole classes of people who will likely be voting in the general election: the elderly, the infirm, restaurant employees and hospital staff on the late shift, and most importantly, active-duty armed forces personnel.

Were these people’s votes counted, I have a feeling this caucus may have turned out a little differently.

No matter. If Huckleberry wins the nomination, no way will I be voting for him… nor for any Democrat either. I’ll write in Ron Paul’s name on my ballot, and hope that you, Sloth, will do the same.[/quote]

We’ll see how NH goes. If he doesn’t place any higher, maybe he’ll go independent. If he does, I’ll continue to support him. But, in the meantime, I plan to change my registration from Republican to independent.

35

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Not entirely sure - but worth a double check.
[/quote]

Because of how Republican caucuses work – a straw poll vote – there are no absentee ballots. Primary states such as NH do allow them and I have read some reports of military members already casting their ballots to make sure their vote is counted. Every state party affiliation has different rules.

36

This country has gone from bad to worse since Perot was not elected. I thought there was no chance for redemption as things only got worse and worse. Until Mr, Paul stepped to the plate. We only need him to hit one out of the park.

Unfortunately, those fat cat media types are doing there best to ensure he cannot get into the ball park. He is not a whacko or looney or any of that other crap that is bantered around when his name is mentioned.

Instead of listening to the talking fools from some news outlet, why don’t you do yourself a favor and go to his website and make up your own mind. You just might be surprised that your views of what a traditional american should believe fall right in line with his.

37

[quote]deadleg wrote:
This country has gone from bad to worse since Perot was not elected. I thought there was no chance for redemption as things only got worse and worse. Until Mr, Paul stepped to the plate. We only need him to hit one out of the park.

Unfortunately, those fat cat media types are doing there best to ensure he cannot get into the ball park. He is not a whacko or looney or any of that other crap that is bantered around when his name is mentioned.

Instead of listening to the talking fools from some news outlet, why don’t you do yourself a favor and go to his website and make up your own mind. You just might be surprised that your views of what a traditional american should believe fall right in line with his. [/quote]

Instead of a big conspiracy, has it ever crossed your mind that both perot and ron paul are both ego-maniacs that will say anything (often factually incorrect) in order to get elected?

The simplest answer is usually the right one.

In summary, both are loons.

JeffR

38

According to the pundits, the results of of the Iowa Republican caucus comes down to two factors: God; Corn.

Guess which candidate these two issues match most favorably with…

hint: it ain’t Giuliani.

39

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
According to the pundits, the results of of the Iowa Republican caucus comes down to two factors: God; Corn.

Guess which candidate these two issues match most favorably with…

hint: it ain’t Giuliani.[/quote]

If you mean which candidate throws his religion in your face, I’d agree.

However, I’m hoping that other states have better priorities.

Things like crime, immigration, electability, and national defense.

Hint: That’s Rudy.

JeffR

40

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Instead of a big conspiracy, has it ever crossed your mind that [/quote] both perot and ron paul are both ego-maniacs that will say anything (often factually incorrect) in order to get elected? [quote]

The simplest answer is usually the right one.

In summary, both are loons.

JeffR
[/quote]

This is the same reason why Giuliani turns so many people off.