Who will you vote for in November?

[ronpaulhawaii]

NOBP for me.

I can see logic in almost all choices. I do find the people who think Mitt has a chance as being overly optimistic.

Here is a screenshot from the Election Forecast Blog which has O's chances of winning @77.3% vs M's 22.7%

 

[truthsaga]

Johnson - I don't want my ballot voided. Say what you want about Johnson, but a vote for a candidate talking about the drug war and audit the fed is 100% better than the other two talking about how they can better manage authority.

 

[specsaregood]

Not to draw this into an argument (though I likely will) but words are cheap. If I believed politicians with a long history of voting/governing one way but now say they "know better, and will do it differently" were being genuine...I'd be voting for Romney.

I'm not so extreme as to hold a few bad past votes against someone indefinitely, but he has quite the track record of bad civil liberties votes. I'm not aware of anything since that time which points to a genuine reversal of opinion.

If you have information regarding actions (not words) of Mr. Goode in the last several years that highlights a genuine conversion, honestly I'm all ears and would love to see it. I was just looking into Goode this past weekend hoping he might be a viable--or even palatable--alternative to Gary Johnson but came to the conclusion that he was not. If you can convince me otherwise, I'd be thrilled. Like I said right now I'm planning on a write-in for Ron Paul but in MI it likely won't count, so I'd like somewhere to place a protest vote that doesn't violate my principles either.

But are you voting for a 3rd party candidate because you actually expect them to win? Or because you support the message they are pushing during this campaign cycle?
if it is the former, then by all means hold his past against him (hell he used to be a democrat!). but if it is the latter, then his past is irrelevent as his platform/message is very close to pauls on the major issues. and better than johnson on war and military presence.

 

[Darguth]

But are you voting for a 3rd party candidate because you actually expect them to win? Or because you support the message they are pushing during this campaign cycle?
if it is the former, then by all means hold his past against him (hell he used to be a democrat!). but if it is the latter, then his past is irrelevent as his platform/message is very close to pauls on the major issues. and better than johnson on the war.

I see the validity in that view, but I would state that the value of the message a candidate is pushing during the campaign cycle is tied to the conviction of the candidate in that message. The message is not only distorted but becomes much more prone to attack if delivered by an insincere candidate (or one easily perceived as insincere).

 

[sailingaway]

I see the validity in that view, but I would state that the value of the message a candidate is pushing during the campaign cycle is tied to the conviction of the candidate in that message. The message is not only distorted but becomes much more prone to attack if delivered by an insincere candidate (or one easily perceived as insincere).

Actually, one of the reasons I am writing in Ron rather than voting for someone who mouths the right words, today, is to show that mouthing the words at election time doesn't cut it with me. That goes to ALL of the other candidates, so I am writing Ron in. But that is just my personal point of view.

 

[specsaregood]

I see the validity in that view, but I would state that the value of the message a candidate is pushing during the campaign cycle is tied to the conviction of the candidate in that message. The message is not only distorted but becomes much more prone to attack if delivered by an insincere candidate (or one easily perceived as insincere).

fair enough, but i would add that the only way we will reverse course is if we make it acceptable for conservatives to reverse their position on "humanitarian wars", the NDAA and patriot act. Having such a conservative promoting that message is one way of changing minds. so what makes Goode open to attack, also makes him a better spokesman for people looking for any excuse to change sides and become anti-war and pro constitution.

 

[CaptUSA]

NOBP for me.

I can see logic in almost all choices. I do find the people who think Mitt has a chance as being overly optimistic.

NOBP for me too.

I'm inclined to believe Mitt has little chance as well, until I think about Obama's chances. I don't know of anyone who didn't vote for him last time that is planning on voting for him this time. So that means he will get about the same number of votes at best. But then I also think there may be many of his supporters from last time that have become tired and disillusioned and may not vote. This makes me think Mitt might have a chance.

 

[Brett85]

Yea, Republicans appointed grrrrreat judges, didn't they... They gave us "corporations are people, too". If it weren't for the so-called liberal judges in the Supreme Court panel, our liberties would go down the tubes a lot faster than they have. The only person who would pick GOOD judges would be Ron Paul. Lacking that, I'd rather take my chances with the Democratic appointments which tend to be more liberty-friendly.

That's why I always say that there's far more liberals who post here than conservatives.

 

[TCE]

In several states, it would be better to vote for Goode, who is on the ballot, versus Writing-In Ron Paul, where the vote isn't even counted. I'm not a Johnson supporter nor will I likely ever be, but writing in a name that won't be counted is wasting my time and leaving it blank makes even less sense. I may as well vote for someone who is on the ballot and thus my vote will be counted.

DeMint: Republican Presidents have been responsible for many more "mistakes" regarding the Supreme Court than the Democrats. They can't seem to get it right. Earl Warren, one of the most liberal justices in history, was appointed by Eisenhower. William J. Brennan was appointed by Eisenhower. John Paul Stevens, President Ford. Sandra Day O'Connor turned out to be a moderate, Reagan. David Souter, President H.W. Bush. John Roberts, President W. Bush.

Even if you think Romney's intentions are pure, which I can assure you they are not, statistically speaking, he will screw up once and appoint a liberal by accident. Of all the Republican Presidents for the last 55 years, only Nixon did not mess up and one can argue that at least two of his nominees were not as conservative as he thought they'd be. At the end of the day, Romney is a moderate, and he will appoint moderates to the federal judiciary.

 

[hrdman2luv]

Gary Johnson........ For the sole purpose of my vote actually being read. Even if it is an electronic voting machine( which is what reads paper ballots)....... And for setting up for 2014 and 2016. I support Ron Paul. But I support the Liberty movement even more.

 

[tuggy24g]

People I am with all of you all in trying to get Ron Paul's name out there to be voted on. Why can't we take this passion we have and vote for someone who might not be perfect that is actually on the ballot. Ron Paul is done for this election cycle. Ron Paul has to file to be a write in candidate. If he did that I would vote for him. Leave the guy alone until he decides to to run if he so chooses. Ron Paul said he is taking a break and not running third party. Ron Paul knows the support is there if he did run. Ron Paul just is not going to run and that is it. Let the man be and lets work on show the Republicans a thing or two. Cast your vote for Gary Johnson. I would rather vote Ron Paul in November then anything, but I do not want my voice unheard. Gary Johnson is in all 50 states (as of now) . Gary Johnson is not perfect and has a few thing I do not like, but he is my protest vote. The Republicans want him off some swing states. So would it not make sense to vote for him and boost him up this November to show the Republicans a thing or two. Show them the votes you could of gotten. Use your vote as a protest vote and tell the Republicans to go f them self.

 

[hrdman2luv]

This says it all for me.

 

[DavidK]

Writing in Paul, Johnson is way too liberal for me.

 

[Paul4Prez]

Gary Johnson. I wrote in Ron Paul in 2008, but there was no acceptable alternative then.
Johnson is the most qualified candidate the LP has ever run, and frankly, he has a better record in office than Obama or Romney.
The Fair Tax idea is dumb, but it may earn him some additional support from that crowd.
He's not perfect, but I'm confident that he would move the govt in the right direction.

 

[JK/SEA]

WIRP

 

[LibertyRevolution]

Writing in Paul will get us nothing, HE IS NOT RUNNING!!!!
Voting for Johnson is at least a chance of getting some of our views to the public..
All you willing to write in Ron Paul are wasting your votes that would be better spent giving the LP numbers towards being a viable 3rd party.

But hey, if you NOBP people want to waste your vote and split the liberty movement voter block.. go right ahead.
But just remember, you are just as much an enemy to liberty as Romney voter in my book.
USE YOUR VOTE TO GIVE THE LIBERTY MOVEMENT ANOTHER VOICE!!!!
We cannot just work from within the GOP.. This needs to be mutli-angle attack..

Far as fair tax goes.. I ok with that idea.
I like the idea of a consumption based tax over an income based tax.
I can choose to not consume, I cannot choose to not have income...

 

[specsaregood]

But hey, if you NOBP people want to waste your vote and split the liberty movement voter block.. go right ahead.
But just remember, you are just as much an enemy to liberty as Romney voter in my book.

LOL, the Johnson supporters have become caricatures of the GOP's view of Ron Paul supporters.

 

[RabbitMan]

I'm campaigning for the State GOP, but my views at this point align more with the Libertarian Party Nationally, and so I will vote accordingly. As Rand so eloquently said, "The Republican Party is an empty vessel unless we imbue it with values." I plan to imbue my defunct local GOP with some excellent values, and I hope you do as well.

But Johnson stands a decent chance of getting the Libertarian party past the 5% threshold if people who align with him actually vote for him. That opens up public funding, inclusion in debates, and in general a more open political process. Make a difference this election, please don't just do a protest vote.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

As I stated in a previous thread, I refuse to vote for a watered-down libertarian like Johnson who will do nothing but bring in more watered-down individuals into the LP and destroy everything that the party should have stood for: principles.

 

[hrdman2luv]

As I stated in a previous thread, I refuse to vote for a watered-down libertarian like Johnson who will do nothing but bring in more watered-down individuals into the LP and destroy everything that the party should have stood for: principles.

Ok, so you're not going to bring principles into the LP. We got it. I hope the RNC welcomes your principles. There's not since in fighting or getting upset about any of this. No man is an island.