McCain backs Obama's call for 'stand your ground' review

[mikegideon]

I doubt the House will go to the Dems, and I still think the Senate will change hands. I haven't seen anything that

would make me change my mind on that, yet.

 

I have high hopes myself. Economy still in the tank, the Obamacare disaster, the war on guns, and all of the scandals. Can't help but chip away at their seats. I hope it's a blood bath, like their last war on guns.

[JAB]

It frustrates me to see people on here who think that if a candidate doesn't match their way of thinking 100% of the time then they aren't going to vote for them. They are defacto holding a freak'n politician to a higher standard than they do their own spouses.

 

It frustrates me to see people anywhere who will vote for a candidate who doesn't really match their way of thinking, at all - and expect others to do the same - simply because that candidate has an 'R' or a 'D' by their name.  They are not holding the candidate to as high a standard as they would their freakin' dog.

Edited August 6, 2013 by JAB

[Jonnin]

Mccain has, in the last couple of years, proven to be just as bad as obama.  Which means he is worse, because if he had won, people would be blaming the conservatives for the mess made by a democrat who ran as a conservative.  At least with obama, the blame falls where it belongs.  I think mccain agrees with obama about 85% of the time.

[RobertNashville]

It frustrates me to see people anywhere who will vote for a candidate who doesn't really match their way of thinking, at all - and expect others to do the same - simply because that candidate has an 'R' or a 'D' by their name.  They are not holding the candidate to as high as standard as they would their freakin' dog.

So...what...we should vote for the America-hating, socialist because the Republican candidate isn't enough of "this" or enough of "that"?

 

Or maybe we should vote the Green party or one of the other meaningless third parties that, even all combined, never garner more than abut 1% of the vote?

 

Given the choices presented in all the presidential elections I've voted in (11 in all); I don't regret a single vote I cast even though in all of those elections I voted for the Republican candidate (whether he won or not).  There wasn't any doubt in my mind then or now that the Republican candidate in each of those elections was a far better choice than his Democratic opposition; even knowing that the Republican candidate was often far from perfect.
 

At the end of the day, if I don't vote for a candidate who doesn't match my way of thinking then I'll never vote because the only candidate who will match my way of thinking is ME and I'm not running.

Edited August 6, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Yep. If the R candidate is a louse, I vote libertarian. Been voting libertarian a long time almost always, like clockwork every time. The few, the proud... :)

[RobertNashville]

Yep. If the R candidate is a louse, I vote libertarian. Been voting libertarian a long time almost always, like clockwork every time. The few, the proud... :)

How's that worked out for you so far?  Doesn't seem like it's helped anything but maybe I"m missing something. :shrug:

[JAB]

How's that worked out for you so far?  Doesn't seem like it's helped anything but maybe I"m missing something. :shrug:

 

Probably about as well as always voting 'R' has worked out for you and has likely helped things just about as much.

Edited August 6, 2013 by JAB

[Guest Lester Weevils]

How's that worked out for you so far?  Doesn't seem like it's helped anything but maybe I"m missing something. :shrug:

 

I haven't voted for any RINOs or progressives, so it ain't my fault and I have a clear conscience on my votes. :) Well, I did get fooled and vote Bush Jr the second time around, but at the time was deluded that Bush Jr was the lesser evil compared to Kerry. But that was also a mistake, because if we had Kerry in 2004, we would most likely have had some kind of R president in 2008, and any president Obama, maybe some year, but not in 2008 anyway. If I'd been smart and voting strategically would have voted for Kerry in 2004 though he is more an asshat than even the typical presidential candidate.

[RobertNashville]

Probably about as well as always voting 'R' has worked out for you and has likely helped things just about as much.

So in other words,neither way works to elect anyone worthwhile?  That seems to be the logical conclusion.

 

In any case, I think working within the Republican party and trying to electing the best candidate that can win has a better chance of electing a worthy candidate than to vote for someone who cannot win.  :shrug:

Edited August 6, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Guest 6.8 AR]

How's that worked out for you so far?  Doesn't seem like it's helped anything but maybe I"m missing something. :shrug:

If it's any consolation, I may be joining Lester in his quest if we get stuck with another loser.

 

I heard Uncle Phil sum things up today in the car. "The last time I knew where I stood with a president was in 1980.

Gone downhill ever since," or something to that effect. After looking back and thinking about it, I was only thankful

Gore and Kerry lost. It wasn't because Bush won. I am not retracting anything I said about Bush, but he could have

been less a "compassionate" kind of guy and more of a conservative.

 

The Republican Party has gone too far to the left in recent years, and needs to be replaced. If the Tea Party would

become a mainstream party I would already be gone. I've had enough of the compromises and Barbara Streisand

coming from them. The good conservatives are too outnumbered to be of much benefit, but only can hold spots

for the time being.

 

On another note, if Graham gets beat in his primary, I wonder if McCain will pull an Ahhhlen Specter?

[E4 No More]

It frustrates me to see people anywhere who will vote for a candidate who doesn't really match their way of thinking, at all - and expect others to do the same - simply because that candidate has an 'R' or a 'D' by their name.  They are not holding the candidate to as high a standard as they would their freakin' dog.

I should have added that IMHO said people have no right to complain about Obama because they got exactly what they defacto "voted" for.

[E4 No More]

So...what...we should vote for the America-hating, socialist because the Republican candidate isn't enough of "this" or enough of "that"?

 

Or maybe we should vote the Green party or one of the other meaningless third parties that, even all combined, never garner more than abut 1% of the vote?

 

Given the choices presented in all the presidential elections I've voted in (11 in all); I don't regret a single vote I cast even though in all of those elections I voted for the Republican candidate (whether he won or not).  There wasn't any doubt in my mind then or now that the Republican candidate in each of those elections was a far better choice than his Democratic opposition; even knowing that the Republican candidate was often far from perfect.
 

At the end of the day, if I don't vote for a candidate who doesn't match my way of thinking then I'll never vote because the only candidate who will match my way of thinking is ME and I'm not running.

^^^This!!!

[RobertNashville]

The Republican Party has gone too far to the left in recent years, and needs to be replaced. If the Tea Party would

become a mainstream party I would already be gone. I've had enough of the compromises and Barbara Streisand

coming from them.

They Republican party may well become nothing more than a completely meaningless distinction from the Democratic party but the only hope I see is for the Tea Party movement to infiltrate the Republicans and seize control of it. If they can't do that...if the current power brokers (the Rockefeller Republicans) retain control then it's over.

 

At that point, if they try to create an actual political party out of the movement to run against Democrats and Republicans in races then it will likely become just another inconsequential "also ran" party like the Libertarians and Greens and all the rest are.

[mikegideon]

The perfect politician is like sasquatch. We keep looking for him, but he probably doesn't exist. On the other hand, bad politicians are common as mud. You can use your vote to help avoid the worst. Or, you can help the worst in your continued search of a mythical creature.

[JAB]

I should have added that IMHO said people have no right to complain about Obama because they got exactly what they defacto "voted" for.

 

And IMHO that argument is a bunch of hogwash.  I voted and it was not for Obama.  All that 'defacto' mumbo-jumbo is just a line of bull that the BIg Two use to try to keep people 'in line' and voting for one or the other side of the plug nickel.

[mikegideon]

And IMHO that argument is a bunch of hogwash.  I voted and it was not for Obama.  All that 'defacto' mumbo-jumbo is just a line of bull that the BIg Two use to try to keep people 'in line' and voting for one or the other side of the plug nickel.

 

No. It's plain old arithmetic. Of course the big two use it.

[E4 No More]

And IMHO that argument is a bunch of hogwash.  I voted and it was not for Obama.  All that 'defacto' mumbo-jumbo is just a line of bull that the BIg Two use to try to keep people 'in line' and voting for one or the other side of the plug nickel.

You calling it hogwash doesn't make it so. Get a viable third party and then there's something else to discuss.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

You calling it hogwash doesn't make it so. Get a viable third party and then there's something else to discuss.

 

Republicans were not a viable party until circa 1860. People have to vote for a party before it is "viable". Maybe some time or t'other enough people will tire of the shell game and vote outside the two. If the tea party started its own organization, then it would have to jump the hurdle of putting candidates in most of the contests. Lotsa work. Libertarians been doing that for decades. Are libertarians so "out to lunch" that voting for a RINO makes more sense to a Tea Partier, than joining and voting Libertarian?

[Chucktshoes]

You calling it hogwash doesn't make it so. Get a viable third party and then there's something else to discuss.

There's the rub. As long as folks believe the garbage about "wasting your vote" and "it's a defacto vote for x" they won't quit voting for the total and complete bags of shit that the R and D parties put up. No matter how likely or unlikely the candidate who receives your vote is to win, the only time you waste a vote is when you vote for someone you don't really support or believe in because "as bad as he is, at least he isn't the other guy." The last time I held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils it was for John McCain because he wasn't Obama. I was left with a bad taste in my mouth and still got Obama. Never again will I vote against someone. Even if I can't avoid having a shitty president hell bent on destroying this country (either intentionally like Obama or unintentionally like I believe McCain and Romney would have done because they just wouldn't have been able to help themselves) I can at least have a clear conscience as the Democrats AND Republicans finish the job knowing that I didn't help either party in their work.

[E4 No More]

The fact remains that it is the centrist voters who tend to determine who's elected, and right now they are leaning towards the left because the right is dysfunctional and spend their time name-calling anyone who lines up with the centrists a RINO. Think about it.

[Chucktshoes]

The fact remains that it is the centrist voters who tend to determine who's elected, and right now they are leaning towards the left because the right is dysfunctional and spend their time name-calling anyone who lines up with the centrists a RINO. Think about it.

If I considered myself part of the right that might bother me, but I'm not and it doesn't. I posted an image here before that sums up my view that the left/right paradigm most of the population buys into is a suckers game no matter which side you end up on. Both sides are full of authoritarian statists who think it's perfectly acceptable to use the government's guns to steal money from the people and force them to live their lives in a manner of which they approve. You will find me standing outside that cage calling both parties out for being the agents of collectivism that they are. Edited August 7, 2013 by Chucktshoes

[E4 No More]

If I considered myself part of the right that might bother me, but I'm not and it doesn't. I posted an image here before that sums up my view that the left/right paradigm most of the population buys into is a suckers game no matter which side you end up on. Both sides are full of authoritarian statists who think it's perfectly acceptable to use the government's guns to steal money from the people and force them to live their lives in a manner of which they approve. You will find me standing outside that cage calling both parties out for being the agents of collectivism that they are.

I don't dispute that at all. The point that I was alluding to is that the only viable 3rd party right now would be a centrist party, but it seems that most centrists are too disengaged in the process to form up something like that. That leaves reforming the left/right from the inside as others have suggested.

[mikegideon]

There's the rub. As long as folks believe the garbage about "wasting your vote" and "it's a defacto vote for x" they won't quit voting for the total and complete bags of #### that the R and D parties put up. No matter how likely or unlikely the candidate who receives your vote is to win, the only time you waste a vote is when you vote for someone you don't really support or believe in because "as bad as he is, at least he isn't the other guy." The last time I held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils it was for John McCain because he wasn't Obama. I was left with a bad taste in my mouth and still got Obama. Never again will I vote against someone. Even if I can't avoid having a ####ty president hell bent on destroying this country (either intentionally like Obama or unintentionally like I believe McCain and Romney would have done because they just wouldn't have been able to help themselves) I can at least have a clear conscience as the Democrats AND Republicans finish the job knowing that I didn't help either party in their work.

 

Yep. Statists. I prefer to keep my guns as long as they're in power too. They ain't exactly the same. The Dems want to repeal the second. I would vote for Rand Paul in a heartbeat, if it wasn't only you, me, and a handful of other crazy sumbiitches. Letting or helping the Democrats win ANYTHING is against one of my fundamental rights.

[JAB]

You calling it hogwash doesn't make it so. Get a viable third party and then there's something else to discuss.

 

And you saying that my vote for candidate x is a vote for candidate y doesn't make such an illogical argument 'so', either.  Funny thing is, I have had Demuplicans tell me that my vote for a third party is a 'defacto' vote for the Republicrats and Republicrats tell me that my vote for a third party is a 'defacto' vote for the Dempublicans.  Cool - I guess that means by voting third party I am actually voting twice!  Or maybe it just means that worn out, old meme is nonsense.

 

What many refuse to grasp is that some of us haven't wanted the recent Republican candidates to win any more than we have wanted the recent Democrats to win.  If we accepted the argument that the liberal progressive from Arizona named McCain or the liberal progressive from Massachusetts name Romney would really do a better job than the liberal progressive from Kenya named Obama then the argument might hold water.  However, once you get past the platitudes and campaign lies, some of us truly don't see them as being, functionally, all that different.  So, telling us that we have to vote for Romney/McCain/a mentally deficient aardvark because, 'at least he isn't the Democrat' is akin to telling us we should choose to be eaten alive by sharks because that would be vastly preferable to being eaten alive by piranha.  It is a false choice and, as I see the one as no better than the other, I'll choose to at least try to grab for the life raft, even if there is pretty much no chance of getting aboard.

Edited August 7, 2013 by JAB

[JAB]

Yep. Statists. I prefer to keep my guns as long as they're in power too. They ain't exactly the same. The Dems want to repeal the second. I would vote for Rand Paul in a heartbeat, if it wasn't only you, me, and a handful of other crazy sumbiitches. Letting or helping the Democrats win ANYTHING is against one of my fundamental rights.

 

Yeah, because the Republicans in the TN House, Senate and Governor's office have proven to be soooo supportive of our firearms rights since gaining control.  Heck, the way they have completely let us down on firearms rights issues after blaming the Democrats for a lack of progress in that area for so long was pretty much the final straw in my deciding that they aren't any different from the Dems.  Think about it - we saw more progress under Bredesen and Naifeh (castle doctrine laws, stand your ground laws, etc.) than we have since the Republicans got more control.  Much like professional wrestling, I think a lot of their 'conflicts' are staged to get the fans (voters) fired up for the next pay per view event (aka 'election) while, in reality, they are patting each other on the back in the dressing room and laughing at how gullible we all are.

Edited August 7, 2013 by JAB