So the tea party is wounded and Chris Christie is the face of (R)

[Gman]

They should be earning every vote by sticking to conservative values and stop trying to be democrat lite in order to appease everyone.

Amen. I'd also add that they should embrace the candidates that believe in a federal government as defined by the Constitution, not treat them as hostile.

One of the things that bothers me about the Libertarian Party are those affiliated whose most important issue seems to be the legalization of pot. Leave it at personal freedom and you have my attention. Start making it look like a bunch of pot-heads looking to promote their drug of choice, and I'm out.

Until the Republican party crashes, burns, and something rises from the ashes, voting Libertarian as a protest vote is throwing your vote away and letting the radicals on the other side win.

[generalmeow]

but "libertarians" like GM don't help fight Obamanism either, they just accelerate the decline.

Which is exactly what I want. That doesn't insult me or make me think twice about it. I'm glad you can see that's what I'm doing.

The only thing voting Republican is going to do is slow down the transition to socialism, which is exactly what we don't want. If it happens fast, people will reject it. If it happens slow, people will accept it. That's the scariest scenario, isn't it? That we turn socialist, and people accept it? That's what voting Republican is going to get us. It puts the brakes on just enough to allow people time to adjust to the negative changes.

My number one preference is for Libertarians to be in charge. My second preference is for democrats to get everything they want, so people get so infuriated with this bullshit that they boil over. Having republicans in charge is not a preference at all. I vote Libertarian because with one vote I get my first two preferences.

[generalmeow]

Think about why that's a stupid "did you stop beating your wife" question. Come on...you can do it. Let me give you a hint. It has to do with growth, expansion, etc. It's never gonna happen. I agree that gov't has too much control where they shouldn't, I agree that some republicans are partially to blame for that, and I agree that gov't spends way too much money on things they shouldn't be involved in and spending money on. But to make a blanket statement that there should be no gov't expansion and spending should never increase is as ignorant as thinking the libertarian party is the answer to our prayers.

The budget deficit was erased and we had a budget surplus when republicans were in charge of the house and senate from roughly 1998 to 2001. There were a lot of factors that went into that, of course, but it was at least partially due to fiscal restraint by republicans regarding gov't spending. You will NEVER get that with democrats. You will NEVER get that with a divided legislature. At least with republicans in charge we have a chance to get smaller gov't and less spending. You will NEVER get that with libertarians because the general population may be stupid but they're not stupid enough to vote for libertarians in large numbers. Thank God.

As to the other part of your question you'll have to define "government scope" a little better.

Now it's your turn to play that game:

Name one year when libertarians have been in charge...

Oh, wait. You can't. Because they're a fringe party and get a fraction of the vote because rational, intelligent people don't vote for them because libertarians live in a fantasy world.

Even the savior of the libertarians, Ron Paul, didn't have the stones to run as a libertarian.

You can continue to hump the libertarian leg all you want. You'll also continue to be irrelevant in the political world...just like libertarians.

Alright, you keep voting Republican. Glad it's working out for you. I'm surprised that it is based on the position our country is in today, but just keep doing what you're doing if you like it.

[Great-Kazoo]

The R's should counter attack ANY and EVERY time some D spouts off mis-truths and blatant lies. While i voted for Romney, his lack of aggressiveness put him that much farther behind the 8 ball. He wanted to be Mr. Nice guy. Yes he tried to focus on facts, however the MSM and social media savvy by the d's over shadowed his [weak] message. I mentioned it once or twice, on this and other boards. Another reason the R's lost, is serious conservatives believed Romney was not conservative enough. Based on the people telling me i believe what they said. They are not some "talking head" but folks who were on Reagan's, and Bush 1 & 2's team.

On the flip side i don't really give a shit who is sleeping with who. When a R says queers are going to hell, then get busted for a "wide stance", or supplying a male masseuse with meth for sexual encounters, that credibility has gone in the crapper.

Stick to fiscal issues, taxes, the economy, what a boondoggle O care is. That gets peoples attention, and votes.

STOP pandering to ILLEGAL'S, Christe came out for Amnesty and what did that get him hispanic vote wise? 1% uptick that's it, no 10-02-30% increase 1%. hell a 5% increase among hispanics might start gathering steam, but 1% in a seriously entrenched (ILLEGAL), Hispanic state.

[Bailey Guns]

Oh. So much for arguing your side. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you don't want to discuss it any further. People like you are part of the problem...not the solution. Especially with extremely ignorant statements like:

My second preference is for democrats to get everything they want, so people get so infuriated with this bullshit that they boil over. Having republicans in charge is not a preference at all.

That's one of the most stupid things I've ever heard of. So basically you want the country in such a state of decline it'll take generations to recover. Yeah...that's a good plan.

[generalmeow]

Oh. So much for arguing your side. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you don't want to discuss it any further. People like you are part of the problem...not the solution. Especially with extremely ignorant statements like:



That's one of the most stupid things I've ever heard of. So basically you want the country in such a state of decline it'll take generations to recover. Yeah...that's a good plan.

And you want the same exact thing, except permanent. Can't you see that? Not only will we go to a bad place, people will have no choice but to accept it.

[Great-Kazoo]

Oh. So much for arguing your side. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you don't want to discuss it any further. People like you are part of the problem...not the solution. Especially with extremely ignorant statements like:



That's one of the most stupid things I've ever heard of. So basically you want the country in such a state of decline it'll take generations to recover. Yeah...that's a good plan.

perhaps NYNCO hijacked his account. Even he's not jumping in to this one (YET)

[generalmeow]

Oh. So much for arguing your side. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you don't want to discuss it any further.

You didn't give me an example. You talked out your ass grasping at straws trying to prove something you know isn't true. Republicans spend and increase the size and scope of government as much as Democrats.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

The only people who have a more utopian, idealistic view of what the world should be than democrats are libertarians. And they're more annoying. It's not even worth attempting to argue with the libertarians here any longer because they live in a dream world where logic, reason and facts don't exist.

Yes. This in spades.
I've said this on here before, but while I think libertarian principals are how we should be run in general (although prefer conservatism for myself), I will never identify with that party because of all the goofballs. It is like the party of children, and that is saying something considering current political behaviour.

STOP pandering to ILLEGAL'S, Christe came out for Amnesty and what did that get him hispanic vote wise? 1% uptick that's it, no 10-02-30% increase 1%. hell a 5% increase among hispanics might start gathering steam, but 1% in a seriously entrenched (ILLEGAL), Hispanic state.

Don't kid yourself. Both parties want amnesty, some more than others. It is *likely* to be more beneficial to the D, but it is the ONLY way to keep the ponzi scheme that is SS and CMS running. They'll [all] vote for it to kick that can down the road for the next generation. Which truly is deplorable.

[generalmeow]

It is like the party of children, and that is saying something considering current political behaviour.

That's funny, because I would consider being ignorant of what the people are voting for you are actually doing to your future to be more childish. Because it's something a child would do. An adult would reject it. So the people who reject the two party system are the adults, and everyone else is the children.

If you know they're going to fleece you, and you still vote for them, you are a child. If you don't know they're going to fleece you, you are child. If you insult the people who know they're going to fleece you, and don't vote for them, you are a child.