Voting question

[akorn22]

Ok so this question isn;t very original, but i'm curious.

What political party are you, and which person from the opposite party would you vote for if u HAD to vote the other way.

For instance, i am a republican, and a democrat I would vote for if i had to would be Joe Lieberman


YOur turn

[The Sir]

Democrat.

I don't know, Colin Powell maybe

[PennState11]

Democrat, John McCain

[shagman]

Independent and Colin Powell for sure

[Teller]

Republican, Lieberman; or when he runs, Evan Bayh.

[AsburySkinsFan]

For instance, i am a republican, and a democrat I would vote for if i had to would be Joe Lieberman

Joe Lieberman is no longer a democrat he is now an Independent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman

I am of no political affiliation, and no that doesn't mean I'm an Independent, it means that I can't stomach the whole process and so I'm boycotting for my own health, sanity, and integrity. Sure that means someone else chooses for me, but then that happens anyways when the candidates are selected to run. I refuse to participate in voting for the person with the best ad campaign and the best public relations team. About the only thing I vote for is school board and local small town and county stuff, because the national stuff is a joke.

And for those who say, "If you don't vote you can't complain." I'll just ask, "Since when is the 1st Amendment conditional upon voting in the political process?"

As of yet I have not found a candidate that would make me change my position, if the time comes when that candidate appears I may change my mind, but knowing how the system works probably not.

[dreamingwolf]

Im voting for Bush from here on out, I dont care if hes on the ballot or not. He pisses off the manginas so bad that he will forever get my vote.

[Mr. S]

hmm, leftist independant, but I wouldn't mind voting for John Warner or McCain.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

While I'm an independent, I tend to vote Republican almost exclusively.

In the past, I would have said Joe Leiberman. Unfortunately Joe lost his soul when he threw out his values by accepting the position as John Kerry's VP candidate; so I'm not sure that I actually know of a Democrat out there that I would actually vote for.

[PokerPacker]

i'm a libertarian and would never EVER vote authoritarian.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i'm a libertarian and would never EVER vote authoritarian.

Packer, you're 17 (or at least that's what your profile indicates); so I'm not sure how you can say what you would or wouldn't do in a voting booth, since you've never actually been there.

Oh, and as someone else who actually votes their conscience/values rather than who is "least bad", let me tell you something.... be prepared for your candidate to lose the VAST MAJORITY of the time; if there's even one you can find to vote for to begin with.

[mjah]

In the past, I would have said Joe Leiberman. Unfortunately Joe lost his soul when he threw out his values by accepting the position as John Kerry's VP candidate
Joe Lieberman, ladies and gentlemen:

http://www.meaus.com/04-edwards-and-kerry.JPEG

[The Sir]

Joe Lieberman, ladies and gentlemen:

http://www.meaus.com/04-edwards-and-kerry.JPEG

Lol :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[PokerPacker]

Packer, you're 17 (or at least that's what your profile indicates); so I'm not sure how you can say what you would or wouldn't do in a voting booth, since you've never actually been there.

Oh, and as someone else who actually votes their conscience/values rather than who is "least bad", let me tell you something.... be prepared for your candidate to lose the VAST MAJORITY of the time; if there's even one you can find to vote for to begin with.
i may be only 17, but i will not vote for someone who is going to dictate how i live my life everywhere i go. democrats want to control one half of my life, and republicans want to control the other half. but no way in hell am i giving up both halves.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Joe Lieberman, ladies and gentlemen:

My apologies. I meant to indicate that Leiberman was Al Gore's VP candidate. Actually that's probably even worse than being Kerry's VP candidate.

[Prosperity]

libertarian: Barack Obama

[SkinsOrlando]

Repub, Lieberman would get my vote.

Mass I think you meant that Lieberman was Gore's Vp candidate.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i may be only 17, but i will not vote for someone who is going to dictate how i live my life everywhere i go. democrats want to control one half of my life, and republicans want to control the other half. but no way in hell am i giving up both halves.

That's fine. Just realize that you're going to vote almost exclusively for LOSING candidates. So long as you can live with that, you'll be fine.

[PokerPacker]

That's fine. Just realize that you're going to vote almost exclusively for LOSING candidates. So long as you can live with that, you'll be fine.
i'd rather vote for a losing candidate that i support than a winning candidate that i don't support. what's the point of voting if you're not voting for who you want?

that said, that doesn't mean i won't vote ever Republican or Democrat. some of the Republicans/Democrats are pretty close to libertarian values and i would feel safe voting for them.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i'd rather vote for a losing candidate that i support than a winning candidate that i don't support. what's the point of voting if you're not voting for who you want?

I totally agree with that philosophy, Packer. Our difference of opinion comes in what we believe is a candidate worth supporting. We've discussed that previously and I think we've agreed to disagree on it.


that said, that doesn't mean i won't vote ever Republican or Democrat. some of the Republicans/Democrats are pretty close to libertarian values and i would feel safe voting for them.

That may work for your philosophy, seeing as it's more "middle of the road"; but it doesn't work for me very often since my philosophy is much more polarized than yours. It's pretty rare for me to find a Democrat who has anything even close to a Conservative philosophy. Hell, it's getting tough to find Republicans who are actually Conservative at this point. I'm to a point where I often can't vote for any candidate in a particular election.

[redskins2redskins]

Joe Lieberman is no longer a democrat he is now an Independent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman



Love your Sig,good game.

Democrat/Independent I'd most likely vote for John McCain or Colin Powell.

[Lloyds' Mongolian Beef]

I'm not really either but for the sake of it i'll say I'm a democrat and i would vote for McCain(cliche huh?). If I'm feeling rightish I would say Obama. I like both of them because they are centerists, IMO. Both also seem to have solid character/integrity.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Joe Lieberman, ladies and gentlemen:


http://www.meaus.com/04-edwards-and-kerry.JPEG
LOL! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
http://pr4y.free.fr/images/otcho_pwned_by_pr4y_roxor.jpg

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Lieberman used to be about as close to a Conservative as the Democrat party had. Unfortunately he flushed the beliefs he's claimed to hold so dear down the toilet in order to be the Vice Presidential candidate. So far as I'm concerned, at that point in time I lost all respect for him as a person and as a politician.

[Tarhog]

Lieberman used to be about as close to a Conservative as the Democrat party had. Unfortunately he flushed the beliefs he's claimed to hold so dear down the toilet in order to be the Vice Presidential candidate. So far as I'm concerned, at that point in time I lost all respect for him as a person and as a politician.

I think thats a little unfair. Lieberman has had Bush's back on the Iraq effort, a position that has cost him dearly in terms of having a future in his own party. He's done it because he believed it was the right thing to do. I'm a conservative republican, and I have a great deal of respect for Joe Lieberman. I believe he'll do what he thinks is the right thing every time.

Would I vote for him? Probably not. But I wouldn't say its an impossibility.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Oh, and as someone else who actually votes their conscience/values rather than who is "least bad", let me tell you something.... be prepared for your candidate to lose the VAST MAJORITY of the time; if there's even one you can find to vote for to begin with.
So abandon your conscience in order to be on the winning team? Yeah, that sounds like a good plan. Sorry, but I'd rather vote for the right person and have that person loose than vote for the wrong one and have them win. Just so you know I did that in 2000 and 2004 and I won't do it again.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I'm not really either but for the sake of it i'll say I'm a democrat and i would vote for McCain(cliche huh?). If I'm feeling rightish I would say Obama. I like both of them because they are centerists, IMO. Both also seem to have solid character/integrity.

Kind of an intersting post there. On the Democrat side, your choice is a guy (McCain) who really hasn't been a Republican in years. That one makes some sense. McCain is really a Dem in Repub. clothing. He has been for years.

As a Republican, your choice is somebody who holds (so far as I've seen), not a single position in common with the Republicans, and nothing in common at all with the concept of Conservatism. That one doesn't make any sense at all.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I think thats a little unfair. Lieberman has had Bush's back on the Iraq effort, a position that has cost him dearly in terms of having a future in his own party. He's done it because he believed it was the right thing to do. I'm a conservative republican, and I have a great deal of respect for Joe Lieberman. I believe he'll do what he thinks is the right thing every time.

Unfortunately, Joe had already lost my respect by the time that he started supporting President Bush and the war effort. I grew up in CT, so I have a pretty good idea of what Joe was really all about. I had a fair amount of respect for him until he threw his entire belief system and values away to sign on to the Gore ticket.

Unfortunately, Joe has already shown me once that he'll throw his beliefs away to attempt and advance his career. That's a career killer in my mind.


Would I vote for him? Probably not. But I wouldn't say its an impossibility.

That's fine. That's part of the difference between us, Tarhog. I live with a "one strike and you're out" philosophical concept. He's gotten his one strike

[REDSKYNYRD]

Libertarian, until the state of NC told me they didn't recognize the party and labeled me as an independant. I vote for the person not the party. These days, career politicians have taken over. Our voting system is flawed, the one with the most money behind them usually wins.

I'm sick of the Democrats and Republicans. We own nothing anymore, everything is leased from fedaral, state and local Government. High taxes, fees, licenses, sky high insurance and medical... are all by design to keep you under control and big government in control of every aspect of your life. Meanwhile, big government continues its blatant, rampant. mafioso type corruption.

We have been invaded in large by Mexico. The Democrats and Republicans have done nothing but allow these ILLEGAL invaders to take free reign of our hospitals, schools, local infrastucture...all at our expense. These folks even get a free pass at breaking our immigration laws...I'll stop here becauce I'm getting hot and I'm sure someone will disagree.

[PokerPacker]

I totally agree with that philosophy, Packer. Our difference of opinion comes in what we believe is a candidate worth supporting. We've discussed that previously and I think we've agreed to disagree on it.



That may work for your philosophy, seeing as it's more "middle of the road"; but it doesn't work for me very often since my philosophy is much more polarized than yours. It's pretty rare for me to find a Democrat who has anything even close to a Conservative philosophy. Hell, it's getting tough to find Republicans who are actually Conservative at this point. I'm to a point where I often can't vote for any candidate in a particular election.
i understand what you're saying. a liberal to a conservative is like a libertarian to an authoritarian.
and about Republicans not being conservative, that is also becoming very true. they are pushing towards authoritarianism which makes me very nervous.

[Skinsfan1311]

Though I'm technically "Independent" I vote mainly republican.

I did not register as a Republican so that I can avoid having my mail-box full of junk-mail.....

[AsburySkinsFan]

That's fine. That's part of the difference between us, Tarhog. I live with a "one strike and you're out" philosophical concept. He's gotten his one strike

You must have VERY short baseball games.
But then you can't read this because you're ignoring me.......or are you.........

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i understand what you're saying. a liberal to a conservative is like a libertarian to an authoritarian.

That's pretty true. Personally, I consider Liberalism a much greater concern than Authoritarinism, but that's a personal thing I get the feeling you'd disagree with.


and about Republicans not being conservative, that is also becoming very true. they are pushing towards authoritarianism which makes me very nervous.

Actually, I'd suggest to you that the Republican party as a whole is becoming much more Liberal than it is Authoritarian. I understand why you would get the idea that they're becoming more Authoritarian; but in fact what's happened is simply a movement from the totally Liberal scale of the Clinton years to a slighty Conservative position originally promoted then disregarded by the Bush administration. Then again, in most circumstances, I'd probably prefer Authoritarianism over Liberalism/Libertarianism.

[PokerPacker]

That's pretty true. Personally, I consider Liberalism a much greater concern than Authoritarinism, but that's a personal thing I get the feeling you'd disagree with.
as i would expect from you because you are a conservative. i don't mean that as a slight, its just becuase the two concepts are polar opposites.



Actually, I'd suggest to you that the Republican party as a whole is becoming much more Liberal than it is Authoritarian. I understand why you would get the idea that they're becoming more Authoritarian; but in fact what's happened is simply a movement from the totally Liberal scale of the Clinton years to a slighty Conservative position originally promoted then disregarded by the Bush administration. Then again, in most circumstances, I'd probably prefer Authoritarianism over Liberalism/Libertarianism.
i guess that may be. i've been looking at the bush administration as a representative of Republicanism.

i see things in terms of Fiscal and Social. when you say Republicans are going liberal, do you mean they are becoming Fiscally liberal, Socially liberal, or both?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i guess that may be. i've been looking at the bush administration as a representative of Republicanism.

As a representative of Republicanism, the Bush administration is a fairly decent example. As a representation of Conservatism, the Bush administration and the Republican party as a whole are terrible examples. The entire party has been walking towards the Center/Left since Ronald Reagan left office; and they've made some serious progress in that respect in the last 18 years.


i see things in terms of Fiscal and Social. when you say Republicans are going liberal, do you mean they are becoming Fiscally liberal, Socially liberal, or both?

Let's get something straight right now.... there is no such thing as a Fiscal Conservative anywhere at any level of government these days. There aren't even many who can/will make the slightest claim to have any interest in that philosophy and there haven't been for nearly a century.

On the Social front, the Republican party talks a moderately decent game; but DOES next to nothing. The make great hay telling us gun owners how much they're on our side, but President Bush was set to sign an extension of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban; one of the worst gun control measures since the 1930's; had it reached his desk. They utterly failed to push forward more than a token few social reforms in their six years in total control of the government. The members of the House were better than the Senators and POTUS, but even that was a minimally supportive group.

Hell, I'd suggest that there are more members here at ES than there are TRUE Conservatives left in this country at this time; and most of us are not members of the Republican Party.

[PokerPacker]

As a representative of Republicanism, the Bush administration is a fairly decent example. As a representation of Conservatism, the Bush administration and the Republican party as a whole are terrible examples. The entire party has been walking towards the Center/Left since Ronald Reagan left office; and they've made some serious progress in that respect in the last 18 years.



Let's get something straight right now.... there is no such thing as a Fiscal Conservative anywhere at any level of government these days. There aren't even many who can/will make the slightest claim to have any interest in that philosophy and there haven't been for nearly a century.

On the Social front, the Republican party talks a moderately decent game; but DOES next to nothing. The make great hay telling us gun owners how much they're on our side, but President Bush was set to sign an extension of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban; one of the worst gun control measures since the 1930's; had it reached his desk. They utterly failed to push forward more than a token few social reforms in their six years in total control of the government. The members of the House were better than the Senators and POTUS, but even that was a minimally supportive group.

Hell, I'd suggest that there are more members here at ES than there are TRUE Conservatives left in this country at this time; and most of us are not members of the Republican Party.
i think i understand. they are becoming (quite swiftly) fiscally liberal and they don't back up their social agenda that they claim to support.

while we both agree that their fiscal policies are too liberal, thier social policies are where we differ. you are looking for them to gain more control socially (which is the true conservative view) and they haven't been doing it for you. i, on the other hand, would like them to have less social involvment (which is why i'm a libertarian and not a conservative.) so i'd say that right about now, they are socially moderate.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

i think i understand. they are becoming (quite swiftly) fiscally liberal and they don't back up their social agenda that they claim to support.

while we both agree that their fiscal policies are too liberal, thier social policies are where we differ. you are looking for them to gain more control socially (which is the true conservative view) and they haven't been doing it for you. i, on the other hand, would like them to have less social involvment (which is why i'm a libertarian and not a conservative.) so i'd say that right about now, they are socially moderate.

They've been fiscally Liberal for decades. Ronald Reagan basically FORCED them to do the things he wanted to, whether they liked it or not. Outside of that eight year period, there hasn't been anything even remotely similar to a Fiscal Conservative in goverment in my parent's lifetimes.

The Social policy issues are what REALLY gets me steamed. These douchebags expect everybody to pay attention to what they say and not what they do. Unfortunately all too often the mind-numbed American public does just that. If these people are going to claim to be social Conservatives, they better get off their lazy, stinking, worthless ASSES and start actually LIVING, and LEGISLATING that way. They claim to be social Conservatives, but live and legislate like the Liberals they truly are; because there is no such thing as a Moderate.... that's a keyword for a Liberal too gutless to admit what they really are.

[Darth Tater]

Authoritarianism is the greatest threat but authoritarians who hate me are worse. I have a big problem voting Republicrat...maybe Ron Paul. Don't know any Demipubs I'd vote for.

[Midnight Judges]

Giuliani although he has precisely a 0% chance to win a Republican primary.
Colin Powell
Chuck Hagel
Lindsey Grahm
John Warner

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Giuliani although he has precisely a 0% chance to win a Republican primary.
Colin Powell
Chuck Hagel
Lindsey Grahm
John Warner
I second that entire list right there. I would also add Lincoln Chafee from Rhode Island but he lost his seat in Nov. so I'm not sure he would count.

John McCain used to be, by far, my favorite republican but he's really jumped the shark IMO. He is currently in the process of selling his soul to the neocons and his "Straight Talk Express" is all but dead. I think he's doing it to gurantee his GOP nomination for 08 and it's a shame. In 2000, before I really followed politics and the like, I would have definitely voted for him over Gore if he had won the nomination instead of Bush. I think Bush actually following the McCain Doctrine of escalating the war in Iraq by sending more troops is going to wind up really hurting McCain in 08.