Discussion: Marc Scaringi or Sam Rohrer

[Shane Harris]

As per his website, foreign policy is not mentioned. Neither is monetary policy. Neither are civil liberties. In my opinion if candidates aren't willing to call out the Patriot Act or the Iraq War while campaigning then they are showing that they are too afraid to go against their Party and the establishment, regardless of what they might believe. If these major issues aren't even mentioned on his website then they must not be high priorities for him. His website reads like a typical Demint Republican who might give libertarians some winks every now and then but when push comes to shove will stand in line with his Party. Is he really against foreign aid or is he only against foreign aid to countries who aren't Israel. He says he supports the 10th amendment like most Rs but never mentions certain issues which would show he is actually consistent on it.

 

[tbone717]

As per his website, foreign policy is not mentioned. Neither is monetary policy. Neither are civil liberties. In my opinion if candidates aren't willing to call out the Patriot Act or the Iraq War while campaigning then they are showing that they are too afraid to go against their Party and the establishment, regardless of what they might believe. If these major issues aren't even mentioned on his website then they must not be high priorities for him. His website reads like a typical Demint Republican who might give libertarians some winks every now and then but when push comes to shove will stand in line with his Party. Is he really against foreign aid or is he only against foreign aid to countries who aren't Israel. He says he supports the 10th amendment like most Rs but never mentions certain issues which would show he is actually consistent on it.

Then listen to the interview. He is very clear on these issues. If you become an activist for a candidate simply because of what is on their website then I don't know what can be said.

Perhaps though, his website he is trying to reach a broader cross section of voter and not simply trying to appeal to one segment of the electorate. That is why I research candidates fully before committing time & money to their campaign. If you look back on my posts on the subject over the last week or so you will see a transition in my support from being on the fence between the two (though leaning Scaringi) to now being fully behind Rohrer and hopefully will be able to persuade a few hundred people or so that I interact with on a regular basis to vote for him.

 

[Shane Harris]

I'd definitely vote for him in the general, but I'm not donating to him (or scaringi) mostly because I am broke. I understand the logic of voting for Rohrer I just don't quite trust him to be really any different. He's been in politics a while and he knows what to say now just like all those other "tea party" candidates did in 2010. And how many are actually voting the way they campaigned? Rand Paul? Mike Lee? I'm just very wary of these so-called libertarian republicans who are so quick to fall in line with the Santorums of the Party.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

I'd definitely vote for him in the general, but I'm not donating to him (or scaringi) mostly because I am broke. I understand the logic of voting for Rohrer I just don't quite trust him to be really any different. He's been in politics a while and he knows what to say now just like all those other "tea party" candidates did in 2010. And how many are actually voting the way they campaigned? Rand Paul? Mike Lee? I'm just very wary of these so-called libertarian republicans who are so quick to fall in line with the Santorums of the Party.

Most of the Tea Party senators have stuck by their ideas, but their ideas were not completely libertarian from the start.

I would trust Roher to stick to his guns which are decidedly Constitutionalist, unless he proves otherwise.

 

[tbone717]

I'd definitely vote for him in the general, but I'm not donating to him (or scaringi) mostly because I am broke. I understand the logic of voting for Rohrer I just don't quite trust him to be really any different. He's been in politics a while and he knows what to say now just like all those other "tea party" candidates did in 2010. And how many are actually voting the way they campaigned? Rand Paul? Mike Lee? I'm just very wary of these so-called libertarian republicans who are so quick to fall in line with the Santorums of the Party.

Rand and Lee have an excellent voting record. I don't agree with them 100% of the time, but then again I don't agree with anyone 100% of the time, including Ron Paul. So I am more than happy with someone who votes the way I believe 90% of the time, and Rand and Lee are both well within that. To paraphrase what Georgia Avenger said earlier, if you are looking for purity you will have to wait a very long time to have success (if ever). One needs to look no farther than the 40 year failure known as the Libertarian Party to see that.

As far as trust. I give everyone a shot at being true to their word. If they go against their word, then when they are up for reelection, I will work my butt off against them.

 

[Shane Harris]

fair enough

 

[tbone717]

fair enough

Don't get me wrong Shane, I am not saying who you personally should vote for - that's your call of course. I am urging the folks that will bang out 1000 phone calls and knock on a few hundred doors between now and the primary to focus their efforts on the one that is winnable rather than the one that may be preferable, because like I said there is very little if any fundamental difference between the two.

My biggest nightmare is that Rohrer loses to Welch by 1 point and then we realize that by splitting our efforts up and were the cause of the loss.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Sam's facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rohrer-for-Senate/305392546155520

 

[Shane Harris]

Don't get me wrong Shane, I am not saying who you personally should vote for - that's your call of course. I am urging the folks that will bang out 1000 phone calls and knock on a few hundred doors between now and the primary to focus their efforts on the one that is winnable rather than the one that may be preferable, because like I said there is very little if any fundamental difference between the two.

My biggest nightmare is that Rohrer loses to Welch by 1 point and then we realize that by splitting our efforts up and were the cause of the loss.

Agreed. It just really irritates me to support someone who I can't picture voting for Ron Paul or supporting him publicly, like Scaringi has.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

From a photo Rohrer was tagged in.

"I took this picture a few years back at a student liberty forum at Drexel University. Two great Americans discussing the issues of the day. Sam and Judge Andrew Napolitano."

 

[tbone717]

Agreed. It just really irritates me to support someone who I can't picture voting for Ron Paul or supporting him publicly, like Scaringi has.

With the available candidates I don't see Rohrer personally voting for any of the others. And regarding endorsing, no one else in PA with any name recognition has made a formal endorsement of Paul. Even State Sen Mike Folmer, who endorsed in 08, hasn't this year. And Folmer, in my opinion, is about as pure as anyone could ever expect.

My guess is that a lot of guys are just staying out of this race because it has been so fluid.

 

[EdQ]

It is a matter of realism. The primary is in less than seven weeks and the guy has no name recognition, no money and little if any organization. Rohrer has all of the above and even has a phone from home program in place.

BTW what policy position of Rohrer's do you think is fundamentally different than Scaringi's? When you compare the two, I see little if any difference philosophically. The only difference that I can see is superficial as Scaringi's website is designed to attract the RP supporters by using the right buzzwords, where Rohrer's has a more broad based appeal.

Scaringi is absolutely opposed to the war on drugs, the wars, war with Iran, and he is in favor of serious monetary policy reform. Rohrer is also against the separation of church and state.

 

[tbone717]

Rohrer is also against the separation of church and state.

Quote? Source?

 

[tuggy24g]

So did we come to a definitive decision?

 

[Pennsylvania]

Scaringi

 

[tbone717]

So did we come to a definitive decision?

I have. I am supporting and volunteering for Rohrer. Both are great candidates, but Rohrer has a far better organization, financing and name recognition state wide. Based on that, and his stances on the issues it is a no-brainer for me. He is going to be here in my town doing a meet and greet and I already have a lot of people from my local area coming out for it.

 

[jeremiah89]

I'm still torn between the two, but given that Rohrer seems to have more name recognition at this point, I feel like it might be better to vote for him. I saw an old friend posted about him on Facebook. I'm pretty sure she's not a Paul supporter, but she's heavily involved with her local Tea Party. Seems like he could have a pretty broad appeal.

I've thought about voting Scaringi in the primary and then possibly Rohrer in the general if he makes it, but I feel like if too many people do that, we end up splitting the vote, and there's no possible way for either of them to win. And there's very little wrong with Rohrer, really. I was listening to some of the Conservative Declaration talk shows that someone posted a link to in here, and they basically referred to him as the Pennsylvanian Ron Paul, because he's so consistent.

So, for now at least, I plan to vote for Rohrer.

 

[tbone717]

I'm still torn between the two, but given that Rohrer seems to have more name recognition at this point, I feel like it might be better to vote for him. I saw an old friend posted about him on Facebook. I'm pretty sure she's not a Paul supporter, but she's heavily involved with her local Tea Party. Seems like he could have a pretty broad appeal.

I've thought about voting Scaringi in the primary and then possibly Rohrer in the general if he makes it, but I feel like if too many people do that, we end up splitting the vote, and there's no possible way for either of them to win. And there's very little wrong with Rohrer, really. I was listening to some of the Conservative Declaration talk shows that someone posted a link to in here, and they basically referred to him as the Pennsylvanian Ron Paul, because he's so consistent.

So, for now at least, I plan to vote for Rohrer.

You are right about Rohrer having broader appeal. He has successfully been able to market libertarian principles in a way that resonates with the average voter. Additionally, I think Rohrer has a better shot in the general over Scaringi and even over Welch. If we are able to get the Senate seat for Rohrer in Nov it will be a huge victory. To think that PA would have Toomey and Rohrer as Senators vs Specter and Casey that we had just a few short years ago would be monumental. Especially for a state like PA which tends to lean to the center left because of Philly and Pittsburgh.

And I would encourage you and others not only to vote for him, but to work for him. One vote is great but 100's of votes is even better.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...ig-in-pa-sen-rohrer-strongest-republican.html

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]