Who would we rather win? What's better for the liberty movment?

[otherone]

Obama crammed his national healthcare down our throats in term one. Term two may include things like "national weapon registration" (for our own safety of course). Do you think Willard would tinker with the second amendment? The writings on the wall, folks. The last safeguard to our Liberty is at stake here.

 

[CaptUSA]

Like others have said, the personalities don't really matter much to the liberty movement - it's the legislation passed that gets people going.

I've gone back and forth several times about which would be better for us. It's not as simple as black and white since there are so many variables.

For example, in a Romney win, does the GOP base finally start to realize that it's going to take more than your father's republican to make changes happen?
In a Romney win, is it easier for devoted adherents to liberty to get involved and make a bigger presence in their local GOP?
In an Obama win, does the GOP think they can automatically win in 2016 and therefore pick the safest candidate? That won't be Rand Paul. Would we be playing the 2012 election over again with the exact same results?

But,
In a Romney win, does he completely ruin the brand of the GOP? Do Republicans get blamed for the collapse? Would we be electing Dems for the next 20 years?
In an Obama win, do we get more and more social "conservatives" involved at the local levels? So much so that our liberty movement is drowned out?


Given the complexities, I don't think we can know. Therefore, I would suggest to you that you vote for the candidate you want to win and don't vote strategically. That way, even if your strategy is wrong, you haven't contributed to the mess. The only thing I can tell you is that you have to get involved locally. All of our wins this round happened when our people were heavily involved in their local parties. This is what we have to build on. The top of the ticket is meaningless except in the way it affects our abilities to grow inside the Republican party.

 

[moostraks]

Seeing the love for Romney here has me thinking...while there is a legitimate case to be made for Romney possibly not pushing a carbon credit type agenda upon us that we can all see in the works with Obama's second term, is it worth it to gamble what is likely a Republican push for the war with Iran? If tptb want war, would much rather see them have to use Obama, the peace president, as it is a harder media sell to the public. I think the vote is irrelevant, though, fwiw, as I think the system is controlled enough now that we see voting theater and the intended winner will be placed in power according to the agenda decided upon by those pulling the strings. Much as seeing Mitt drop out the way he did last primary time and then steam rolls to a win this time (with a few theatrical moments to make the win seem genuine). This moment in time was decided upon before even Obama was elected.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Both are losers.
not a poll option.

your poll is way too limiting.

I agree.

 

[Todd]

Both are losers.
not a poll option.

This^

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Obama crammed his national healthcare down our throats in term one. Term two may include things like "national weapon registration" (for our own safety of course). Do you think Willard would tinker with the second amendment? The writings on the wall, folks. The last safeguard to our Liberty is at stake here.

Considering Willard passed gun restrictions while governor of Massachusetts, yes.

 

[matt0611]

Obama winning is better for the movement. Will definitely be worse on the country in the short term though.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Obama winning is better for the movement. Will definitely be worse on the country in the short term though.

It will only be good for the movement if the liberty movement isn't further compromised/co-opted by the GOP.

 

[Carlybee]

It simply doesn't matter. The lie of the left right paradigm marches on. If people can't grasp the concept that either way we are screwed then perhaps we will learn from collapse.

 

[The Gold Standard]

Obama crammed his national healthcare down our throats in term one. Term two may include things like "national weapon registration" (for our own safety of course). Do you think Willard would tinker with the second amendment? The writings on the wall, folks. The last safeguard to our Liberty is at stake here.

Why wouldn't he? His record is worse on gun control than Obama's is.

 

[SDMF]

Obama/Biden

A Romney "win" would set "our" efforts back decades.

I agree totally

 

[NCGOPer_for_Paul]

My personal opinion is that if Obama wins, this will be the last Presidential election in this republic's history.

Yes, I think Obama will declare himself "Chief Executive for Life".

 

[pcosmar]

Do you think Willard would tinker with the second amendment? The writings on the wall, folks. The last safeguard to our Liberty is at stake here.

Yes, Absolutely. He is no friend at all.
Did you expect Bush to give us the Patriot Act and TSA?
Who fucking gave us "Homeland Security"? (what a Fascist idea)

 

[Cleaner44]

Obama/Biden

A Romney "win" would set "our" efforts back decades.

This says it perfectly.

 

[Elwar]

Romney winning would be like Obama winning an 8 year term.

Personally though, my plan is to take advantage of the huge sums of military spending over the next few years so a Romney win would be better for my pocketbook. But that would just be about hoarding money in preparation for the collapse.

 

[AuH20]

Romney winning would be like Obama winning an 8 year term.

Personally though, my plan is to take advantage of the huge sums of military spending over the next few years so a Romney win would be better for my pocketbook. But that would just be about hoarding money in preparation for the collapse.

Obama with a democratic house and democratic senate would be horrific compared to a Romney presidency.
Obama with a Republican controlled Congress would be preferable to a Romney presidency however.

 

[Dissent]

Obama/Biden 100%. Several reasons. only 4 more years vs potential 8 for Romney,I think Obama can do more harm in the next 4 years than Romney could in 8 years and that is a good thing because things need to get so bad the people want real change..

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

To be honest, either way it's bad news. Obama will give the GOP 4 years to further co-opt the liberty movement.

I respectfully disagree. Each and every one of those 1,460 days is one more day of headlines, one more day of incremental loss of liberty...those who are not awake to our current political reality will wake, one by one and day by day under a second Obama administration.

I further posit that all four years of his second term will more accurately mirror the first two of his first administration; balls-out socialism and bold faced totalitarianism. This could be argued as a net positive in the long run, forcing the neocon over-50-and-up crowd to take a great big chomp out of a reality sandwich.

Sure, the good Doctor will be removing himself from the Legislature, but it's safe to bet that he will not remove himself from the national conversation. By 2014, at the latest, given Dr. Paul's trajectory (relative unknown until 2007, rising prominence in national discussion between then and the 2011 primaries) men and women who share his philosophy will be far more attractive to those whose main motivation in 2012 was no more complicated than "Get that Obama out of the White House! Anyone is better than Obama!"

By 2016, these people will be so war-weary from the headlines and the unchecked awfulness that will be Obama's second administration, a McCain, Romney, or Gingrich (or Santorum) will not cut the mustard. They will be clamoring for liberty. Our greatest challenge?

Not saying "I told you so."

 

[kahless]

I hate both Obama and Romney although Ryan is the better of the four in the pack of gangsters. I don't buy this idea that Obama needs to win for Liberty to win. If Obama wins, WE LOSE. Why? The undocumented worker has already done great damage through laws and executive orders moving the "overton window" to the left. This becomes the "political norm" and if anyone wants to move it right (back), the system labels those people (us) as radicals. That window can't keep moving left. As Ron Paul says, "I don't agree with Romney on much but I like his management style. You can talk to him and he will listen without making knee jerk decisions." (paraphrasing). With Romney, we can stop that window from moving too far left and maybe just maybe get Romney to move to our side on a some issues. Heck, he might surprise us as we know the guy loves to flip flop all over the place.

I am right on this people. All one has to do it look at Europe. There is no longer a discussion about freedom and liberty from their political parties. It's all about who is going to control the big bad monster (government). What is so great about that???

Obama is a socialist at best and a commie at worst. Romney is a capitalist crony at best and a socialist at worst.

Regardless, supporting Gary Johnson 2012.

^Your post in its entirety are my sentiments exactly.

To add, the slight difference does have an impact on my bottom line. Despite my seething hatred for Romneycare and the individual state mandate, Romney is running on Ron's plank of allowing healthcare competition across state lines which is a solution to reduce premiums. His repeal and replace is of course less than ideal but I cannot afford the continuing Obamacare rate increases which are bankrupting me.

Obama has no plan to remedy the increasing premium costs. 30% last two years year, 30% this year and who knows about the next 4 years. I just cannot afford it.

 

[roho76]

I'm actually surprised by those numbers.