McCain, Obama, Baldwin, Barr, Nader: Who Gets Your Vote?

Who Will You Vote For In November?

  • John McCain

    Votes: 5 1.8%
  • Barack Obama

    Votes: 9 3.3%
  • Chuck Baldwin

    Votes: 56 20.6%
  • Bob Barr

    Votes: 110 40.4%
  • Ralph Nader

    Votes: 3 1.1%
  • Ron Paul (Write In)

    Votes: 89 32.7%

  • Total voters
    272
shoulda been a quote of dxdoug and amy.

I'm so sick of hearing about all the media hype of Obama and McCain. And I'm even sicker of coming onto the RON PAUL forums to be fed a forum about who to vote for and reading about supporters of Ron Paul voting for Obama. This whole mentality of "he can't win" makes me sick... utterly sick. I'm so outraged by this forum, and others I've visited tonight all convening on Obama like he's the new savior of this country. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

I so angry I can't even type anymore... I'm gonna go drink a few and head to bed...


I have said this for months when i noticed many RP supporters swinging for Obomba!!

Ron Paul "so called" supporters who will vote for OBOMBA are nothing but fukin sheeps fed koolaid by CNN and i hope they choke on it.....

FU OBAMA!
 
No Question.
2576515036_df3a4a2437.jpg


I don't think Barr or Baldwin have a chance. Even though I disagree with Baldwin on some points, I think he is the more honest of the two.
I suspect that Obama will win the election.
I will stand by Ron Paul, if only as a statement.

I'll call your Trooper and raise you a Rodeo!

One Ron Paul Rodeo that is... (with bigger letters & a "Ask YouTube" to boot!)
event_2176259.jpeg
event_2176258.jpeg
 
I believe the Ron Paul supporters who are switching to Obama are kids who are more interested in being trendy and moving wherever their friends go. TONES
 
No Question.
2576515036_df3a4a2437.jpg


I don't think Barr or Baldwin have a chance. Even though I disagree with Baldwin on some points, I think he is the more honest of the two.
I suspect that Obama will win the election.
I will stand by Ron Paul, if only as a statement.

I'd join you but my state doesn't have write in's...
 
Writing in Ron Paul is a waste of time. Honestly, writing the name just takes seconds away from your life.
 
Writing in Ron Paul is a waste of time. Honestly, writing the name just takes seconds away from your life.

I'll be 51. I can spare a few seconds to state my opinion.
I really don't believe that a third party vote would be anything more than a statement.
I expect Obama to win the election, but I won't vote for him. I do not want McCain to win so I certainly wouldn't vote for him.
A write in statement is the only logical choice left.
 
I'll be 51. I can spare a few seconds to state my opinion.
I really don't believe that a third party vote would be anything more than a statement.
I expect Obama to win the election, but I won't vote for him. I do not want McCain to win so I certainly wouldn't vote for him.
A write in statement is the only logical choice left.

One person writing in a name doesn't do anything. If you don't think a third party candidate stands a chance, at least you can be part of a meaningful statement by voting for them. Bob Barr may not win, but he'll get a lot of votes. Writing in Ron Paul will do nothing. It will never be mentioned. So it's not a logical choice.
 
Frankly Fuck the GOP. I don't give a fuck about those criminals anymore. They can rot in their bastard party. They are not worth saving.

It's not about "saving" the GOP. I think most of us are disgusted with what the GOP has become. Here's the deal... we have a 2 party system in this country currently, so it makes sense to me at least that we need to take back at least one of the major parties. Since the GOP at one time, used to have a good platform (ie. in-line with Ron Paul's principles), and it is VERY weak right now, it makes sense to me that we take back that particular party.

So, it's not about "saving" the GOP at all. It is about how best to go about getting our country back. The GOP is just a tool that we can use to do that.
 
Not voting, like always.
If Jesse Ventura or anyone with any semblance of a pro-freedom agenda made it onto the ballot, then I'd vote. Otherwise, I'm not wasting my time.
 
Not voting, like always.

You haven't learned a damn thing from Dr. Paul. Sad indeed.
Was his instructions to go home and not participate? I seem to remember a quite different conversation.
If you missed it, its on the forums front page.
 
Baldwin should definitely get our support should Paul not be running in General. He went out of his way to campaign for Paul and writes many things against such things as illegal immigration, NAU, Nafta superhighway, and the new world order. Do not believe those that say he is a theocrat, he understands all to well the seperation of church and state. Plus he is a true Christian like Our Founders and therefore would never use force to justify the means unless in self defense.

The founders were secularists, in large part. I'd ask you to stop propagating the "Christian Nation" myth, but it's over 200 years old at this point, so I don't have any delusions about it going away any time soon. Still, I won't pass up an opportunity to shoot it down...

In essence, "America" is defined by a single document: the Constitution. In that document you will not find the word "Christian," or "God," or anything else that could in any way be construed as an endorsement of or preference for any one religion, or for religious beliefs in general.

As to the Declaration, it is not codified into law but is referenced by the courts as a contextual document, so it deserves mention. It refers to the "Laws of Nature" and "Nature's God," which, the objective reader will admit, do not allude to Christianity nor of any organized religion, but to the philosophy of natural rights which are innate in all of us, regardless of our beliefs. When read in its entire context, this interpretation is clear. It also speaks of a "Supreme Judge" and "divine Providence," which the signers hope will view their actions approvingly. Again, these do not signify any specific religious belief. Indeed, they could just as easily have appealed to "Christ" or "Jesus" or any other specification, but they made a conscious effort not to. Even the mention of "God" is carefully preceded by "Nature's," which was not necessary unless they wanted to clearly distance themselves from any religious affiliations.

But again, the Declaration is not the "supreme Law of the Land" (the Constitution is), so even if one were to present some convoluted argument to suggest that they were in fact referring to Jesus Christ, it still wouldn't mean much at the end of the day.

I should also touch upon some other common "evidence" used by those who would declare America a "Christian Nation": the pledge of allegiance, the national motto, and the oath of office.

The Pledge was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. The original text read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

This was altered over time to read like the pledge we all know, but without "under God." At the height of 1950s Cold War hysteria, under Catholic pressure, Congress passed a law making the pledge -- with the addition of "under God" -- official. This was done to contrast America with the Soviets, who were seen as immoral atheists.

Even without the addition of "under God," the pledge should scare any libertarian-leaning American who understands the intent of the founders when they created the federation of states. "One nation, indivisible" stands in direct conflict with those intentions. You may not be surprised to learn that Bellamy was a socialist who dreamed of seeing America turned into a Marxist utopia. I find this deliciously ironic. At any rate, the pledge in no way evidences America being a "Christian Nation."

The addition was recently (and wisely) struck by the 9th circuit court as unconstitutional. This has sparked a campaign of disinformation by the religious conservative movement, who have made use of outrageous scare tactics and fallacious arguments to gain public support. Congress, displaying supreme historical ignorance, has joined them by passing into law a bill that declares the pledge shall remain "unaltered" (thus protecting the altered pledge from alteration).

The motto "In God We Trust" is another '50s Cold War relic. It had been used before, on money, but the unofficial national motto had previously been "E Pluribus Unum" (Latin: "from many, one"). A much more fitting motto which nicely alludes to the federation of states.

As to the oath of office, when we hear a public official sworn in, he/she typically finishes with "so help me God." This was not added to the official oath until after president Arthur started the tradition in 1881. But the last line is not mandatory, as that would be in direct conflict with article 6 of the constitution.

So, again, none of these things indicate America being a "Christian Nation," or that the founders intended it to be so.

Some topical quotations:

James Madison, "Father of the Constitution":

"Every new and successful example of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance."

"It was the Universal opinion of the Century preceding the last, that Civil Government could not stand without the prop of a Religious establishment, and that the Christian religion itself, would perish if not supported by a legal provision for its Clergy. The experience of Virginia conspicuously corroborates the disproof of both opinions."

Conclusion: Madison believed that extricating Christianity from government was a swell idea.

Thomas Jefferson, primary author of the Declaration of Independence:

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law. ... The common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced or knew that such a character existed. ... For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement of England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of the Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law ... This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first Christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it ... That system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians."

"I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."

"Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry."

"[Our] principles [are] founded on the immovable basis of equal right and reason."

"May it [the Declaration of Independence] be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government."

"I know that Gouverneur Morris, who claimed to be in his secrets, and believed himself to be so, has often told me that General Washington believed no more in that system [Christianity] than he did."

Conclusion: Jefferson was not Christian.

George Washington:

"I am persuaded, you will permit me to observe that the path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction. To this consideration we ought to ascribe the absence of any regulation, respecting religion, from the Magna-Charta of our country." (in response to clergymen who complained that the Constitution did not mention Jesus Christ)

"We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition ... In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man's religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States."

Conclusion: Washington believed in the separation of church and state.

Benjamin Franklin:

"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies."

"He [Reverend Whitefield] used, indeed, sometimes to pray for my conversion, but never had the satisfaction of believing that his prayers were heard." --Benjamin Franklin

Conclusion: Franklin was not Christian.

Thomas Paine, major instigator of the Revolution:

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

"There is scarcely any part of science, or anything in nature, which those imposters and blasphemers of science, called priests, as well Christians as Jews, have not, at some time or other, perverted, or sought to pervert to the purpose of superstition and falsehood."

"The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing and admits of no conclusion."

"The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind."

"The Christian system of religion is an outrage on common sense."

"The Bible is a book that has been read more, and examined less, than any book that ever existed."

Conclusion: Paine was effectively hostile towards organized religion of all kinds.

Miscellaneous:

"I never witnessed his [George Washington's] private devotions. I never inquired about them." --Martha Washington's granddaughter from a previous marriage

"The founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels, and that of the presidents who had thus far been elected [Washington through Jackson] not a one had professed a belief in Christianity...."

"Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism."

"I have diligently perused every line that Washington ever gave to the public, and I do not find one expression in which he pledges, himself as a believer in Christianity. I think anyone who will candidly do as I have done, will come to the conclusion that he was a Deist and nothing more."

--Reverend Bird Wilson

"Washington was a Deist." --Reverend James Abercrombie, in response to Reverend Bird Wilson's inquiries into Washington's religious beliefs

"The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation." --Treaty of Tripoli, passed unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams (incidentally, there are numerous Adams quotes that make it quite clear that he was strongly anti-Catholic)

...I could go on for hours, but the conclusion should be quite clear: America is not a "Christian Nation." It is a secular republic, where Christianity is the religion with the most professed adherents. Big difference.

As for Baldwin, I'll not vote CP until they remove all references to Harvey the Rabbit from their platform. It is an openly theocratic party and a disgrace to the very document it claims as its namesake. I am a big fan of "Jefferson's Wall," and consider it my duty to openly mock and ridicule any organization that would see it torn down.

I'll write-in Paul, unless he endorses Barr, in which case I'll clench my jaw and vote LP (despite this frightening tale). If Paul were to endorse Baldwin, I'd write-in Jefferson, or Buggs Bunny, or something. Staying home is not an option; we must vote, in order to be counted as participants and reduce the winning percentage of the Republicrat victor.

Peace to all die-hard supporters of the Constitution.
 
Last edited:
Nice to see Barr winning this poll, but sad to see so many Ron Paul supporters will waste their vote writing Paul in, or vote for that theocrat...
 
Nice to see Barr winning this poll, but sad to see so many Ron Paul supporters will waste their vote writing Paul in, or vote for that theocrat...

Says the guy who admitted to being willing to vote for a candidate who supports child rape :p:D
 
Back
Top