The Mental Militia Forums

General Interest => General Discussion => Topic started by: Claire on January 28, 2008, 12:19:35 pm

Title: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Claire on January 28, 2008, 12:19:35 pm
Radley Balko's latest Monday Morning Poll (http://www.theagitator.com/2008/01/28/monday-morning-poll-7/) asks for readers' second choices (after Ron Paul) for president. (Or your "least worst" choice, as Balko puts it.)

I was surprised to see that the poll results pretty much duplicated my own view on each of the current candidates. I'm not voting for any of them (not Paul, either, though I've donated and put out signs for him). But at the time I took the poll, my second-choice guy was running away with it and my bottom three choices were ... rivaling with each other to bottom out. (After wrestling with the question of who is most loathsome -- Hillary, Guiliani, or Huckabee -- I finally concluded that the dimwit theocrat "FairTaxer" Huckabee would be far worse than a pair of corrupt cynics.) The rest of the candidates fell approximately in the order I'd choose them if you stuck a gun in my ear and told me I had to.

Just wondering how the poll results mirror your own second choices.

And yes, as you might expect, a lot of commentors (http://www.theagitator.com/2008/01/28/monday-morning-poll-7/#comments) say that among this crop of houseplants and toxic waste emitters there really is no second choice.

Claire

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Leonidas the Younger on January 28, 2008, 01:00:12 pm
I really don't see a second choice.

And while I still support Paul, I have learned a number of things from his run ..

Oh boy. Just, "wow" ..

Anyway, whatever. La ti dah.

How are you, Claire? Been a while, hope all is well. The biggest news in my life is I've decided to take the plunge ..

DAH DAH DAH ..

Thats right, Leo is getting .. a drivers license.

:P

I figure I can do more for freedom with wheels than without, and the hassle of not having one is more than I care for at this time.

Still feel like I'm giving in, though ..

-- Leonidas
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: spatter on January 28, 2008, 01:26:58 pm
Obama.

At least he's not advocating mandatory health insurance...and he's a bit more of a populist than an authoritarian.  And he smokes...or did until very recently.

He's also got a hell of a speechwriter (and is apparently quite good himself). 

The comparisons to JFK disturb me...I worry about him.

Spatter
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Tahn L. on January 28, 2008, 01:35:43 pm
"Non of the above" would have to be my choice, as I have quit voting for the lesser of the evils. Only Ron Paul made me come out of my shell.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: NuclearDruid on January 28, 2008, 01:43:52 pm
I'm with Tahn. I don't have a problem voting third party. I voted Green during the last Gubernatorial election because the only difference between a Chicago Republican and a Chicago Democrat is which side of the Daley machine they are married into.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Scarmiglione' on January 28, 2008, 01:44:36 pm
None of the above. 

Not him either.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: RagnarDanneskjold on January 28, 2008, 01:45:13 pm
If not Paul, then Paulsen (http://www.paulsen.com/pat/)

Quote
JAN-22-DETROIT, MI - Even deceased, presidential candidate Pat Paulsen managed to garner more votes than Democratic candidate Kucinich in several precincts of Michigan’s January 15th primary.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Bill St. Clair on January 28, 2008, 01:51:23 pm
There are no other choices. I will vote for Dr. Paul in the primary on Super Tuesday. Then, unless by some miracle he is the Republican candidate in November, I will sit out the election. NONE of the other candidates qualifies as dog catcher. And the best thing to do with most of them would be to try them for treason, and, if convicted by a jury of their peers, hang them at dawn the next day, televised worldwide as how America deals with tyrants.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Resurgam on January 28, 2008, 03:15:00 pm
I will be writing in "Jefferson Davis (http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/)" if Paul does not get the nomination.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: HippieSurvivalist on January 28, 2008, 03:18:31 pm
I probably shouldn't be replying, since RP is not my first (or even my 8th) choice for president. Having said that, I hope to vote for Obama in the general election--he's an outsider (moreso than the Clintons, at least) who might effect real change in how our government works.

HippieSurvivalist
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Basil Fishbone on January 28, 2008, 03:46:08 pm
Assuming I don't vote for the LP nominee, I've been telling people I may vote for Hillary.

If Hillary was doing what George Bush has been doing, in terms of implementing a totalitarian fascist police state, all the "conservative"  Republicans would be up in arms, perhaps literally.  Bush, they give a free pass to, 'cause he's a Republican, don't you know.

If we are going to have a dictatorship, let's make it obvious.  Then maybe we can get some resolution.

Basil
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Claire on January 28, 2008, 03:48:18 pm
There are no other choices.

Okay, let me put it another way. Think not in terms of whom you'd vote for but ... if you knew for sure that you were going to spend the next four years seeing one of Radley's candidates every time you turned on your TV ... knew you were going to hear his/her state of the union addresses parsed endlessly as if they were messages from God ... knew you were going to have to live with the foreign and domestic policy consequences of Candidate X ...

... which in Radley's poll would be your "least-worst" choice? Which one would make you gag least often?

My "least-worst" choice would be Obama. At least he's not some broken-down old political workhorse. At least he's not singing the same old political song. At least he's eloquent (and after 20 years of presidents who sounded like half-trained monkeys, that's saying something.) And yes, at least he's not advocating total socialized medicine. And he actually does seem to see other points of view besides his own and those of all the standard political hacks.

And HippieSurvivalist ... of course you can answer, too. I ASS-U-ME that most here lean Paulish (even if we're not voters, even if we disagree with him on beaucoup issues, as I do). But don't let that stop you.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Tahn L. on January 28, 2008, 03:57:45 pm
Well, Since you "put it thus", I don't know if I should go with Obama, because of the reasons you stated Claire, or go with Hillary for the excellent reasons stated by Basil.  Toss Up.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Bill St. Clair on January 28, 2008, 04:56:55 pm
Gee, Claire, it's hard to pick between death by hanging and death by firing squad. I choose life!
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: padre29 on January 28, 2008, 06:22:53 pm


Nary a one of them, Obama is a AWB type, the process is like some sort of machine that is out of control and producing faulty products..time after time after time....
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Kregener on January 28, 2008, 09:04:47 pm
I will write in Ron Paul, as I have TWICE in the past.

1992 in the Bush v.1/Clinton dog-n-pony show
1996 in the Clinton/Dole idiocy

I did not...."vote"....in the 2000 or the 2004 propaganda hootenannies, and would not be doing so now if Ron paul was not in it.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: da gooch on January 28, 2008, 09:43:08 pm
"Non of the above" would have to be my choice, as I have quit voting for the lesser of the evils. Only Ron Paul made me come out of my shell.

I'm with Tahn. I don't have a problem voting third party. I voted Green during the last Gubernatorial election because the only difference between a Chicago Republican and a Chicago Democrat is which side of the Daley machine they are married into.

Ditto

I'll vote for or write in Ron Paul and then quit wasting my energy on the whole useless system.
Although Pat Paulsen and Yosemite Sam both epitomize the "leave me alone" platform fairly well.

"The ship is sinking and the question is = should we bail with a strainer spoon or a sieve ? Hmm ....
L. Capitan"

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: khagler on January 28, 2008, 10:45:51 pm
I won't advocate initiation of force, and so I won't vote for a candidate who would initiate force or advocate initiating force. Therefore, I'm not planning on voting for any of the candidates I know of--including Ron Paul. (People who are pregnant and don't want to be, are born in another country, or whose parents were born in another country are still people.)
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Bennie on January 29, 2008, 02:13:14 am
Quit voting after '96. I got a voter card last month so I can vote for Paul and will do so in the primary. Unless he is the chosen one by the republicans, or goes 3rd party, then I will shred the voter card.

There is no second choice for me. 
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Claire on January 29, 2008, 06:57:43 am
The question was never "Who would you vote for?"

The question is, "Since you're going to get stuck with some damn president whether you want one or not, which of the current runners makes you gag the least?"
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Bill St. Clair on January 29, 2008, 07:45:05 am
OK. I'll bite. Obama is the only guy whose voice doesn't cause me serious mental distress. If Hitlary gets elected, and I ever see her on my television, I may need to buy a new television. Fortunately, it doesn't look likely that Hitler on the Hudson (Giuliani) is going to get the republican nod. He would pose a similar threat to my television. I'd actually prefer Bill Clinton again to all of them. You can't trust a word that comes out of his mouth, but boy is he a joy to listen to. Satan's good like that, too, I've heard.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: MamaLiberty on January 29, 2008, 08:51:03 am
None, zilch, nada, no way....

My Open Letter To Ron Paul Supporters: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/08/01/07/editor.htm
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Tahn L. on January 29, 2008, 09:46:41 am
Pardon my misunderstanding of the question Claire.

 If the Republicans could control Congress, I would agree with you, Obama would be the one.

Since its looks like the Democrats will remain, I would prefer a Republican President. Let's see, who is the least evil of the Repubs, well let's see, er, how about, no, Romney ? , oh jeez, this is too hard.

Really, "the best" would be a republican Congress with Obama President, but it is not going to happen, probably.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Apple on January 29, 2008, 09:51:46 am
If Hitlary gets elected, and I ever see her on my television, I may need to buy a new television.

Why even bother? Do you need it that much?

The question was never "Who would you vote for?"
The question is, "Since you're going to get stuck with some damn president whether you want one or not, which of the current runners makes you gag the least?"

The answer, at least by some, seems to be, "I don't even want to think about it."

As for me, well, I won't be voting, not even for Ron Paul. Even though the US government projects it power far across its borders, interfering with the lives of billions, and spying on even more, they won't allow us to vote. Oh well.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Joel on January 29, 2008, 10:05:34 am
The question was never "Who would you vote for?"

The question is, "Since you're going to get stuck with some damn president whether you want one or not, which of the current runners makes you gag the least?"

Oh, all right. :laugh:  Just so it's understood this is not an endorsement.  In my opinion, stated elsewhere, anyone who runs for any important elected position of power should be killed in his sleep on general principles, regardless of prior performance, political affiliation or promises.

But since, as you say, there is going to be a president, and his/her name will definitely not be Paul or NOTA...I would find the least gag-inducing candidate to be...Oh, god.

This is hard.  Bear with me, I will force the words out through my fingers.

I'm tempted to say Hillary, simply because I've always found her so much fun to hate and - as Basil already pointed out - she's the best chance for some congressional gridlock.  But the thought of eight years listening to that shrill, hectoring monotone is just too much horror to contemplate, so no.

McCain?  Guiliani?  No frickin' way.  And the rest of the pack is such a bunch of undistinguished nobodies there's virtually nothing to choose between them.  So I guess the very least offensive of the bunch - which is not repeat not the same as "most desirable", right? - would be...

Sigh.  Obama.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Plinker-MS on January 29, 2008, 01:13:21 pm
IMHO - the "second choice" would be....  whomever chooses Ron Paul for a running mate.

It could happen.

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Vydunas on January 29, 2008, 01:33:28 pm
RP in the primary, RP or (if not) whatever guy gets the LP nod in November.

But if you're talking rooting for a horse rather than influencing public policy, I'm rooting for Obama, if for no better reason than to put an end to the BS about "a black man can't become President".

I've been trying to get Mrs. V to switch parties and vote for RP, who really is her favorite candidate, but she's decided that her job is to stay Democrat and vote against Hillary by voting for Obama.  The Kennedy endorsement made that harder though.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: velojym on January 29, 2008, 05:32:48 pm
I'll toss a vote to Paul, but I'm less and less hopeful as time passes.
The only thing really keeping me going right now is that Zoe needs me... but she was sold into slavery
decades ago already.

So... otherwise, why bother?

(rhetorical question... I'm not in the mood for a lecture)
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: da gooch on January 29, 2008, 08:50:16 pm
I'm still sticking to Ron Paul, Pat Paulsen or Yosemite Sam.
NOTA is not a bad option either. 
I see only one name I would actually vote for and that is Ron Paul.
{IF he winds up second banana on some other persons ticket I MIGHT consider that ticket.}

I have no second choice or least offensive choice ....
Quote
" .... which of the current runners makes you gag the least?"
None of them. [Or ALL of them depending on your view point ....]





edited to add additional comment on None of them ....
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: madengr on January 29, 2008, 09:23:21 pm
RP in caucus.

Either RP write-in or LP for the main election.  I really wish RP would run as an independent if he does not win the nomination.

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Lazarus Long on January 30, 2008, 11:48:03 am
Anytime I've voted for anyone, I've regretted it. I no longer vote, more for practical reasons - i.e. privacy - than anything else, although I do sympathise with those who don't vote on principle, saying it's essentially giving one's stamp of approval to aggressors.

Y'all nearly have me convinced to vote for Obama, since in my mind it would be primarily a vote against all the others.

I've been heard to say that if that Jezebel woman ends up on the ballot, I'll go and vote for anybody else, purely to vote against her.

If RP makes it onto the ballot in any way, shape, or form, I'll vote for him. He isn't perfect, but he'd be different.

If he wins, I expect those who really hold all the strings will have him JFK'ed in a matter of days if not hours.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: bobcat on January 30, 2008, 12:21:37 pm
Dr. Paul is my FIRST choice and could be my SECOND choice. 

If RP does not get the Rep nod, I may sit out the election, but likely not.  Especially if Hitlery gets the dem nod, I will vote AGAINST her in the most effective way I can.  She would be HELL on wheels in the White House and I believe the most dangerous to freedom.  She's a friggin communist.  How much more of a statist is there?  She and Billie don't give a rat's petunia about the Constitution.  It's ALL about power for them.

Will the most effective vote be a Republicrat?  Dunno, too soon to tell.

Or will the most effective vote be an independent one of some sort?  Dunno, too soon to tell.  It is quite conceivable that RP, if he should choose to run independent, that he could actually win.  Wouldn't THAT be something! :mellow:

I know an awful lot of registered Republicans that are totally pissed off with the party due to; 1) Spending like drunken sailors, 2) Doing little to nothing about securing the borders, 3) Going waaaaaay overboard on all the internal security crap (Patriot act, Real ID, etc.) including creating DHS and TSA out of thin air.  4) Taxes and the Fed Tax Code are completely out of control with no relief in sight.  These folks are looking to RP.  Even some Pastor acquaintances are on the RP train.

So, if RP does not get the Rep nod, an Independent run could be fruitful, especially if McCain gets the nod, IMAO.  That's my second choice.  Anything else is a vote against Hitlery.

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Apple on July 16, 2008, 12:48:17 pm
Bump.

Wondering how you all feel about this now that 6 months have passed and the race is down to 2. :ph34r:
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Lazarus Long on July 16, 2008, 04:28:00 pm
Hell, nope
I won't vote
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Slaphappy on July 16, 2008, 06:05:15 pm
I was actually torn between Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo in the early stages of the primary season.  Since neither of them made the cut, I shifted to Ron Paul.  So my track record isn't looking too good.

Unless Bob Barr can really get a groundswell of support I'm stuck voting for the old guy.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Dare2BFree on July 16, 2008, 06:31:20 pm
Hell, nope
I won't vote

Hell.... I wasn't going to vote before
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: slidemansailor on July 16, 2008, 06:34:14 pm
I'll vote Libertarian just to show them that someone who can bother going to the polls isn't buying the crap they are shoveling.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Aviator on July 16, 2008, 10:59:44 pm
The idea of Che Obama in the White House with possibly a filibuster-proof dhimmirat majority in the Congress should put chills up any thinking person's spine.  This guy is a disciple of Saul Alinsky and has been indoctrinated by marxists and muslims all his life.  I saw this in World Net Daily: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=69784 .  At least with McCain we should have a healthy degree of gridlock.  There is a reason Ron Paul works with the pubbies; he has no place with the other party and you have to win power to be able to implement an agenda.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: mutti on July 17, 2008, 08:06:06 am
Aviator - for those who are not tempted to go here, I hope you don't mind if I put this quote from the article up:

Quote
The stunning comments from Democrat Sen. Barack Obama that the United States needs a "civilian national security force" that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the half-trillion dollar United States Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force have mysteriously disappeared from published transcripts of the speech.

or how about this one from Joseph Farah?

Quote
"If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?" Farah wrote. "I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

or Obama -

Quote
"I am running for president, right now, because of what Dr. King called the fierce urgency of now. This moment is too important to sit on the sidelines."

First of all, the guy needs to decide if he is Kennedy or Dr. King or whomever - he obviously has no substance himself.
Second of all, I just get the heaby jebes when I listen to him talk.
Third of all, McCain doesn't seem much better.

Good gracious - what is one to do.....

Alot of thought will go behind my vote. It may not make a difference to the outcome, but it will to my personal conscious.

Mutti
(off to see if anymore chicks have hatched)
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: gridboy on July 17, 2008, 08:39:15 am

I may write in Mary Ruwart.

gridboy
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Bedwere on July 17, 2008, 10:55:14 am
Be very weary of anyone who wants to be like MLK, since MLK was a scumbag communist. I also like the way he claimed to be a Reverend even though the night he died he was drunk and with many white whores.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: spatter on July 17, 2008, 02:38:40 pm
Quote
At least with McCain we should have a healthy degree of gridlock.

Gridlock is almost always good...

Spatter
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: DHodges on July 17, 2008, 02:48:33 pm
I'll vote Libertarian just to show them that someone who can bother going to the polls isn't buying the crap they are shoveling.
Yeah, no way I could vote for either of the main two candidates.

Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: DHodges on July 17, 2008, 02:53:04 pm
Quote from: Obama
The stunning comments from Democrat Sen. Barack Obama that the United States needs a "civilian national security force" that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the half-trillion dollar United States Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force have mysteriously disappeared from published transcripts of the speech.

For a second there I thought he was talking about the civilian militia assumed to exist in the Second Amendment - but he is anti-gun.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Dare2BFree on July 17, 2008, 02:53:30 pm
Be very weary of anyone who wants to be like MLK, since MLK was a scumbag communist. I also like the way he claimed to be a Reverend even though the night he died he was drunk and with many white whores.

Were you there?
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: Apple on July 17, 2008, 03:46:45 pm
Amazing. Pure censorship. And they do it out in the open, unashamed. They don't seem to care. What does that mean?

Handlers to Obama: "You *di*t! You weren't supposed to say that until after the elections! We see you're gonna be as much trouble as Bush was... Sigh..."

Quote
At least with McCain we should have a healthy degree of gridlock.
Gridlock is almost always good...
Spatter

Yeah, just look at the gridlock we have today. Blocked additional funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars... Telecoms immunity bill fizzled out in congress... Oh, wait.
Title: Re: Paul supporters: Second choices?
Post by: spatter on July 17, 2008, 06:54:46 pm
Quote
Blocked additional funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars... Telecoms immunity bill fizzled out in congress... Oh, wait.

Note that I said almost.  It would be nice to get bipartisan support to repeal about 10,000 pieces of current legislation...

Spatter