Wendy Davis tells Democrats she’s in

[Younggun]

But why would you not vote for the candidate that's good, not just better than crap?


Just something to think about. And I don't believe any independents or tea party republicans will gain traction for a presidential bid as long as we accept the status que. Cruz may be changing that though. He has definatly done what I put him there for.

 

[CrazedJava]

But why would you not vote for the candidate that's good, not just better than crap?


Just something to think about. And I don't believe any independents or tea party republicans will gain traction for a presidential bid as long as we accept the status que. Cruz may be changing that though. He has definatly done what I put him there for.

Because by the time the primaries got to Texas, McCain and Romney were pretty much it in the last two elections. So I voted for the person I thought was best for the job. Gary Johnson, Mitt Romney, or Barack Obama. I knew Gary Johnson didn't have a chance and Hades and really I voted AGAINST Obama, not for Romney. I wanted the person who, if not good, would at least do the minimal harm to the country.

I do support Cruz and will support others like him when the opportunity comes. Like I said, it is not an either/or proposition.

 

[inceptor]

It's not an either or proposition. We can support and start promoting the Ted Cruz's while blocking another Obama/Hillary by taking what we can get.

It's the Republican faithful who primary in the McCain's and Romney's and then they stay home because that candidate is not good enough.

It doesn't make sense to complain about how horrible Obama is and then turn around and say you can't vote in a Romney even though you acknowledge he wouldn't have been as bad.

I agree. I haven't seen a decent politician in a long time. It is a choice between the lesser of two evils.

That being said, I remember when Reagan was running for office. My thought at the time was who really wants an actor for pres? Few, if any, new what a great pres he would make.

So the choices are bad and worse. You refuse to vote for bad because you don't like part of his position. Or you vote for a 3rd party candidate as a protest. Then worse candidate gets in. Then you complain about the worse candidate when he wins. smh

 

[txbikerman]

I agree. I haven't seen a decent politician in a long time. It is a choice between the lesser of two evils.

That being said, I remember when Reagan was running for office. My thought at the time was who really wants an actor for pres? Few, if any, new what a great pres he would make.

So the choices are bad and worse. You refuse to vote for bad because you don't like part of his position. Or you vote for a 3rd party candidate as a protest. Then worse candidate gets in. Then you complain about the worse candidate when he wins. smh

So true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[1slow01Z71]

There are good points to both sides of the argument. My question to the people who are pro "vote for the lesser of two evils" how do you get better quality candidates if the message isnt sent that mediocre moderates isnt what we want?

After the last couple years of watching what mccain has done I'm not convinced hes any better than obama so as of now I'm of the mindset that I will no longer votw for the lesser of two evils. I truly hope that Paul or Cruz are able to mount a goos presidential bid so I can get behind them. I will not vote for christie over hillary, I'll sit my ass at the house. Cruz or Paul are on the ballot, I'll early vote and spread the word to as many people as possible to get either of them more votes. The moderate republicans thaf are being nominated within one shade of the color wheel of the liberal dems that are being elected. Either one screws us true conservatives and I'm tired of it as are many others as seen by the voter turnout. Romneys healthcare was the framework for obamacare for fuc! sake and you want me to believe he would've been that much better?

 

[BG1960]

There are good points to both sides of the argument. My question to the people who are pro "vote for the lesser of two evils" how do you get better quality candidates if the message isnt sent that mediocre moderates isnt what we want?

After the last couple years of watching what mccain has done I'm not convinced hes any better than obama so as of now I'm of the mindset that I will no longer votw for the lesser of two evils. I truly hope that Paul or Cruz are able to mount a goos presidential bid so I can get behind them. I will not vote for christie over hillary, I'll sit my ass at the house. Cruz or Paul are on the ballot, I'll early vote and spread the word to as many people as possible to get either of them more votes. The moderate republicans thaf are being nominated within one shade of the color wheel of the liberal dems that are being elected. Either one screws us true conservatives and I'm tired of it as are many others as seen by the voter turnout. Romneys healthcare was the framework for obamacare for fuc! sake and you want me to believe he would've been that much better?

this. There is one benefit I want to explore by not voting for the lesser of two evils in the next election, I will be able to hold my head up and know I didn't vote for a weasley POS like McCain.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

It's not an either or proposition. We can support and start promoting the Ted Cruz's while blocking another Obama/Hillary by taking what we can get.

It's the Republican faithful who primary in the McCain's and Romney's and then they stay home because that candidate is not good enough.

It doesn't make sense to complain about how horrible Obama is and then turn around and say you can't vote in a Romney even though you acknowledge he wouldn't have been as bad.

YOU certainly GET IT! Sadly too many don't. No shortage of fools who come on and BRAG about NOT voting because they did not like 'cain or Rom, yea, how is Obama working out for you then. Of course they always belch and fart about will BUSH did gave us the Patriot Act, the follow that up with Reagan the great satan because he gave us more gun control...so lets not vote anymore...

 

[Younggun]

Who said NOT to vote.

I say start voting for third party candidates who actually support the constitution instead of following the flock mentality of accepting crap because that's what the GOP offered.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

Who said NOT to vote.

I say start voting for third party candidates who actually support the constitution instead of following the flock mentality of accepting crap because that's what the GOP offered.

More folks than I thought there would be on this forum and on other forums. You were around I am sure leading up to the election and there was no shortage of those who refused to vote for Rom or 'cain, right here...

 

[Younggun]

Refusing to vote Romney/McCain does not mean refusing to vote, though looking back I see someone just posted they would sit at home soooo....

 

[Ole Cowboy]

There is no shortage of non voters and never voters. All one has to do is look at the polling data. We have access to individual voting records going back many years. I've had access myself and can enter your name or address and pull up who and what party you voted for etc. The data is costly, but I did some work for the GOP on data mining and was amazed at what info is available on individuals....

 

[Younggun]

No need for me, I will tell you.

Prior to the last presidential election I had never voted. Last election I voted Romney, also voted for Cruz and a couple tea part candidates in other state elections. As far as local elections I voted by party for the most part because I couldn't keep up with everybody.


After voting for someone I didn't like anything about in an effort to keep Obama out and losing anyways I realized that if we continue this method we will get more of the same. A left leaning republican who the dems will not back and the conservatives will not come out for.

The GOP is trying to win moderate dems over with no success while ignoring its base. It is also going to need a new image because the progressives have pretty much destroyed the one the GOP has and the GOP has alienated it's base so it has little left to go on other than "we are better than that guy".

Hopefully The support Cruz has gained will sink on to their thick skulls and they will figure out that the good ole boys club is coming to an end. The only way this will happen though, is if we support the candidates that represent those values. They have to know that a moderate democrat will not get our vote or they will keep giving us moderate democrats.

 

[CrazedJava]

Who said NOT to vote.

I say start voting for third party candidates who actually support the constitution instead of following the flock mentality of accepting crap because that's what the GOP offered.

That's nice in theory and I used to be Liberatarian. I've pretty much gone from Democrat, to Republican, to Liberatarian, to full on Independent. I just give up on parties.

That said, I also realize that right now there is no viable third party. Better to change a party from the inside, like what the Tea Party has been doing to the Republicans.

 

[inceptor]

Under Jimmy Carter gas prices went through the roof and we had gas rationing. Mortgage rates hit 19% at one point. Carter told the people to get used to it, this is not going away. People took a chance on a GOP actor and what a difference it made. He wasn't perfect by a long shot but he did clean up the economy. If people took the attitude that Reagan wasn't ideal and refused to vote, we could have had to deal with that situation much longer than needed.

Many talk about voting for Cruz. I did too. Did you know then that Cruz would be this good or did you really vote against Dewhurst like I did?

By not voting or voting 3rd party, obamacare is the law of the land. McCain would have been worse? By not voting or voting 3rd party we now have a 2A fight on our hands and growing socialism in this country. But at least we don't have a Mormon in the Whitehouse.

So Hillary will probably be elected next time and we won't want whatever weeny that is running against her because of whatever reason.

Well at least those who opted out or opted to make a statement can say they didn't vote for her when we lose more of our rights.

 

[itchin]

I agree with a lot of your points. But what does being Mormon have to do with anything?

 

[1slow01Z71]

In my example I cited an extreme. I don't believe Chirs Christie has what it takes to be a national candidate but if he was fielded as the GOP candidate then you bet your hind end I wouldn't vote for him. Hes basically a democrat with a red tie on. Now someone a little less moderate like say Jeb Bush, Id vote for him over Hillary, not because I like Jeb but hes further right than Christie and the horror of having Hillary as a president is enough to scare me into voting for dang near anyone else. My larger point is SOMEHOW word has to get to the GOP that they need to field a candidate that plays to their original base, you know, us gun clinging, freedom loving folk. McCain and Romney weren't even close, thus the terrible voter turnout. Right or wrong the GOP needs to get with their constituents and field a worthwhile candidate instead of someone slightly right of center on a good day.

 

[CrazedJava]

Many talk about voting for Cruz. I did too. Did you know then that Cruz would be this good or did you really vote against Dewhurst like I did?

I voted FOR Cruz but only because Dewhurst was such a slimebag during the campaign.

 

[cbigclarke]

I voted FOR Cruz but only because Dewhurst was such a slimebag during the campaign.

Dewhurst is a big government progressive. We should reject these type people at any, and all cost

 

[Dash Riprock]

In my example I cited an extreme. I don't believe Chirs Christie has what it takes to be a national candidate but if he was fielded as the GOP candidate then you bet your hind end I wouldn't vote for him. Hes basically a democrat with a red tie on. Now someone a little less moderate like say Jeb Bush, Id vote for him over Hillary, not because I like Jeb but hes further right than Christie and the horror of having Hillary as a president is enough to scare me into voting for dang near anyone else. My larger point is SOMEHOW word has to get to the GOP that they need to field a candidate that plays to their original base, you know, us gun clinging, freedom loving folk. McCain and Romney weren't even close, thus the terrible voter turnout. Right or wrong the GOP needs to get with their constituents and field a worthwhile candidate instead of someone slightly right of center on a good day.

Good points, and I don't necessarily disagree, but you also have to consider that to win the presidency, the nominee has to appeal to a decent number of retirees in Florida, union workers in Ohio and Pennsylvania, government contract workers in Virginia, and farmers in Iowa, etc. A legitimate hard-right candidate preaching a limited government message doesn't appeal to those folks. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but it just is. And to have any hope of winning the presidency, the GOP pretty much has to sweep every one of those states and more because electorally, the Democrats are nearly halfway there with New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California. That's why they keep nominating these half-assed guys like McCain and Romney, they're trying to appeal to Florida. Romney in fact won that demographic for the most part - he lost because the base stayed home. It's arguable that a more conservative candidate would have done any better, as most likely he or she would not have attracted the so-called "independents" that Romney did.

Personally, I think the GOP should essentially forget about the presidency for a while and focus on keeping and expanding its power in the House and making gains in the Senate. The electoral math is too hard and it's killing itself trying to be all things to enough people. Nominate a hard core conservative and let the chips fall where they may. He or she will likely lose but at least you'd have a consistent message to send for your other races.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

Under Jimmy Carter gas prices went through the roof and we had gas rationing. Mortgage rates hit 19% at one point. Carter told the people to get used to it, this is not going away. People took a chance on a GOP actor and what a difference it made. He wasn't perfect by a long shot but he did clean up the economy. If people took the attitude that Reagan wasn't ideal and refused to vote, we could have had to deal with that situation much longer than needed.

Many talk about voting for Cruz. I did too. Did you know then that Cruz would be this good or did you really vote against Dewhurst like I did?

By not voting or voting 3rd party, obamacare is the law of the land. McCain would have been worse? By not voting or voting 3rd party we now have a 2A fight on our hands and growing socialism in this country. But at least we don't have a Mormon in the Whitehouse.

So Hillary will probably be elected next time and we won't want whatever weeny that is running against her because of whatever reason.

Well at least those who opted out or opted to make a statement can say they didn't vote for her when we lose more of our rights.

Great points, albeit you are a little low on the mortgage rates as they hit 21%.

Yea don't like 'cain and not gonna vote for a Mormon and LOOK where it got us...a Marxist, socialist. So let look forward to the Hillary and her running mate MeShell Obama, think we got probs now...

I am on several forums and there is NO shortage of wannabe conservatives and wannabe 2nd Amend RKBA supporters they did not vote or went 3rd party...ANYONE on here old enough to know why Clinton won????????? Ross Perot!!!!