Discussion: Marc Scaringi or Sam Rohrer

[CaptUSA]

I could see supporting the lesser of two goods for practical reasons, but I refuse to hold my nose and vote for someone who publicly claims to stand closer to Santorum than Paul. That settles it for me.

But Scaringi was a Santorum staffer. You have to vote your conscience, but I hope you'd look at the big picture and not just the coattails their trying to ride.

Personally, I'd take either of them. I listened to them both and like both of their stances. I think they are both in the liberty camp. No - I know they are.

So then, it becomes a question of which one is better suited for this position. In my judgment, it's Rohrer. He's got a better chance of winning this time. I'm not trying to convince anyone because either choice is a good one. But it would be nice if we wouldn't split our vote. That'll give us Smith - which will give us Casey.

 

[pahs1994]

Rohrer has the best shot at winning the primary. i will be voting for him. Scaringi is better but Roherer is also better than anyone in office in this state and he can actually win.

 

[Shane Harris]

But Scaringi was a Santorum staffer. You have to vote your conscience, but I hope you'd look at the big picture and not just the coattails their trying to ride.

Personally, I'd take either of them. I listened to them both and like both of their stances. I think they are both in the liberty camp. No - I know they are.

So then, it becomes a question of which one is better suited for this position. In my judgment, it's Rohrer. He's got a better chance of winning this time. I'm not trying to convince anyone because either choice is a good one. But it would be nice if we wouldn't split our vote. That'll give us Smith - which will give us Casey.

He has explained being his staffer and where he differs on the issues. Plus thats different than who you would vote for. He didnt have the opportunity to work in Paul's office. Or maybe he's changed views since then, but either way it is extremely revealing (in my opinion) that Rohrer stated Santorum. Very disturbing. He couldve declined to answer but essentially endorsed Santorum over Paul. That is NOT a way to get my vote. All that does is prove to me that all his limited government talk and constitutional conservative rhetoric is nothing more than Tea Party pandering and when push comes to shove he sits on the side of the Neoconservatives on Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties and Drug Policy.

 

[Shane Harris]

So based on everything I've seen in this thread I presume it is safe to say that all you Rohrer people would be voting for DeMint in this Presidential Election over Paul had he entered, because he wouldve had a much higher chance of winning than Paul. DeMint is definitely better than Obama, and probably would have been leading Paul in the polls. I assume then all of you Sam people would have suggested piling onto DeMint in order to not split the "Libertarian" vote?

 

[tuggy24g]

Could not of said it better my self ^

 

[jeremiah89]

I'm strongly leaning toward voting for Scaringi now. I can sympathize with the Rohrer people on here, since he might have a higher chance of winning, but it's been one little small thing after another that's made me not comfortable voting for him. I was willing to let the Cain and Bachmann endorsements slide, because you can't really help who endorses you, obviously. But when he then says he's closer to Santorum, that's all him. I'd probably vote for him over Casey in the general election, but I'm a little hesitant to vote for him in the primary.

 

[tbone717]

So based on everything I've seen in this thread I presume it is safe to say that all you Rohrer people would be voting for DeMint in this Presidential Election over Paul had he entered, because he wouldve had a much higher chance of winning than Paul. DeMint is definitely better than Obama, and probably would have been leading Paul in the polls. I assume then all of you Sam people would have suggested piling onto DeMint in order to not split the "Libertarian" vote?

For me it is about advancing an agenda of principles that I stand for, not any one man. So if DeMint would have been a viable candidate and he campaigned on advancing an agenda I stand for then I may have supported him. I am not such an absolutist, that I would donate & volunteer my time for a man who I agree with 99% of the time and has no chance of winning, while refusing to support a man I agree with 95% of the time that can win.

 

[tbone717]

Rohrer's Voting Integrity Checklist

http://www.rohrerforsenate.org/blog/?p=698

Good stuff here

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Two man race between Smith and Rohrer. Looks like Scaringi is still a 1% candidate.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

So based on everything I've seen in this thread I presume it is safe to say that all you Rohrer people would be voting for DeMint in this Presidential Election over Paul had he entered, because he wouldve had a much higher chance of winning than Paul. DeMint is definitely better than Obama, and probably would have been leading Paul in the polls. I assume then all of you Sam people would have suggested piling onto DeMint in order to not split the "Libertarian" vote?

That is an interesting scenario. It depends how much DeMint came out against the FED during the primaries.

I'd vastly prefer DeMint over Goldman sachs Romney.

 

[SchleckBros]

Yikes.

 

[Shane Harris]

For me it is about advancing an agenda of principles that I stand for, not any one man. So if DeMint would have been a viable candidate and he campaigned on advancing an agenda I stand for then I may have supported him. I am not such an absolutist, that I would donate & volunteer my time for a man who I agree with 99% of the time and has no chance of winning, while refusing to support a man I agree with 95% of the time that can win.

I wouldn't say its 99% versus 95%. To me its more like 99% versus 65%.

 

[tbone717]

Two man race between Smith and Rohrer. Looks like Scaringi is still a 1% candidate.

I saw that too. Hopefully, Scaringi can use this experience and some base he may have picked up for a future contest. I think he is in CD-15, he could challenge Dent for the nomination in 2014.

 

[tbone717]

I wouldn't say its 99% versus 95%. To me its more like 99% versus 65%.

Are we talking about Rohrer or DeMint being 65%? Either way it all depends upon what issues are of the most importance for yourself. For me economic issues, particularly the Fed take the highest priority.

 

[69360]

Yikes.

I couldn't help but laugh that Smith who was a democrat for 40 years ran a smear ad against Welch for voting for Obama.

 

[HigherVision]

[video=vimeo;40173231]http://vimeo.com/40173231[/video]

Hope this settles it. @7:30 The candidates are asked to select the presidential candidate that most resembles their views. Scaringi identifies Paul. Rohrer identifies Santorum. Anyone who needs a reason not to vote for Rohrer look no further. And anyone who still thinks Rohrer is a libertarian needs to have their head examined.

If he said Paul it would make us all feel good but it would also probably cause him to lose because most republicans don't support Ron Paul. I don't think his views really do resemble Santorum that much. Just the fact that he wants to make the Congress declare war before getting into any, that's a huge difference from Santorum. Or what about Rohrer's saying that we need sound money and to legalize gold and silver as legal tender vs. Santorum's statement "We need a little inflation".

 

[HigherVision]

Yikes.

Who f'ng cares about a pay raise? That's such a small amount of money compared to everything else even if true. The fact that that's all the guy can say about him says a lot I think. We'd save so much money and grow so much more prosperous with Rohrer's policies, I'd say that the tiny amount of money that would equal to when divided among everyone is a worthwhile investment if that's really the case.

 

[Scott_in_PA]

Who f'ng cares about a pay raise? That's such a small amount of money compared to everything else even if true. The fact that that's all the guy can say about him says a lot I think. We'd save so much money and grow so much more prosperous with Rohrer's policies, I'd say that the tiny amount of money that would equal to when divided among everyone is a worthwhile investment if that's really the case.

Fwiw I talked with his campaign people today, well a few hours ago, and they say he was told that a property tax bill would get a vote if he voted for the Pay raise deal. The bill never got to the floor and they say that is his only mistake and he learned from it. I need to look into his voting record but I'm told he has 150,000 good votes, and 1 bad vote. He seems to be the only one with a chance to beat Welch now. How many democrats does the RNC think they can endorse and feed us.

 

[Jingles]

Watch these two videos and tell me how Scaringi is not the guy we should be voting for...

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Scaringi is better, but unless you want to vote for a 1% candidate he is not a good choice.

Yeah, a vote for Scaringi isn't technically a vote for Tom Smith, but it effectively is.

I will be disappointed if Rohrer does not get it. People that supports Fed audits, competing currencies, declarations of war, repealing the patriot act, social security opt outs etc. are hard to come by.

I would have to say that Rohrer is almost as good as Rand Paul based on his state positions.