2016 Election - Your Picks? (Mine Is Rand Paul)

Tictac

Banned
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
3,689
Reaction score
1,256
Location
North America, probably an airport
I do not like Trump. Nor did I like Perot. Either on would likely be/have been a lousy President.

But I laud the rise of third party candidates for the change they can force on our two-party duopoly that amounts to no more than a conspiracy of DC against citizens, voters and taxpayers.

Perot's gaining a not-small part of the popular vote gave us a deficit reduction President - a Democrat - Bill Clinton. I knew that Perot had no chance of winning the Presidency. Yet I voted for him on this basis.

I do hope for a third party challenger that might siphon votes from Democrats so that they too wake up and 'smell the coffee'.

National politicians can ignore a lot of things. What they cannot ignore is a large upwelling of popular votes that clearly indicates that a single issue candidate signals to the powers that be. It's about all voters can do to blunt the DC mentality.

Sic semper.
 

Poonani Maker

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
4,407
Reaction score
928
Tenacity said:
Of course not, and most of the worse areas of the country are controlled (and have been controlled) by Democrats for decades. Yet, Democrats keep blaming their failures on Republicans. How can a Republican have caused the failure when they were not even in office?

You have people in Baltimore right now talking about those "evil Republicans" but Democrats are in control of the City and the State.

It's like I said, nothing about black people as a whole today makes any fvcking sense. But of course, I'm a coon for thinking with logic.
They Have caused the "failure" because they are the "controlled" opposition. They NEVER actually Oppose liberals. For decades, a "Republican," a conservative, has Only been in the seat he's in, because he considers anything the liberal says as worth listening to, and when the liberals "accept" a particular conservative, the conservative jumps for joy that the liberal finally approves of him (into their circle). Neo-conservatives (Neo-Cons) are simply former liberals who changed to conservative when the word Liberal was being totally discredited in the 90s. They are wolves in sheeps clothing.

So the conservative of today is there ONLY for a Paycheck, call em "Paycheck" Conservatives. You get shunned or excluded from position or debate if you ask the HARD questions, or you point out the truth. Conservatives go along with the liberals because it pays well, for a lifetime. THESE PEOPLE are WORSE than Liberals. Traitors have a place reserved in Hell for them, the worst part of Hell, the 10th Circle of Hell (from Dante's Inferno), where it is not hot hot hot, but Freezing COLD.
 

Mike32ct

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
8,100
Reaction score
4,709
Location
Eastern Time Zone where it's always really late
Poonani Maker said:
They Have caused the "failure" because they are the "controlled" opposition. They NEVER actually Oppose liberals. For decades, a "Republican," a conservative, has Only been in the seat he's in, because he considers anything the liberal says as worth listening to, and when the liberals "accept" a particular conservative, the conservative jumps for joy that the liberal finally approves of him (into their circle). Neo-conservatives (Neo-Cons) are simply former liberals who changed to conservative when the word Liberal was being totally discredited in the 90s. They are wolves in sheeps clothing.

So the conservative of today is there ONLY for a Paycheck, call em "Paycheck" Conservatives. You get shunned or excluded from position or debate if you ask the HARD questions, or you point out the truth. Conservatives go along with the liberals because it pays well, for a lifetime. THESE PEOPLE are WORSE than Liberals. Traitors have a place reserved in Hell for them, the worst part of Hell, the 10th Circle of Hell (from Dante's Inferno), where it is not hot hot hot, but Freezing COLD.
Very true. While I lean heavily to the right, I have slightly more respect for a real liberal than a fake conservative. At least the real liberal is following their beliefs and that of their supporters. The fake conservative is a sellout who baits and switches his supporters.

To my fellow right-ists, I don't care who you vote for, but at least try to pick who you think is the closest thing to a real conservative. In other words, try to pick somebody with the least "RINO" tendencies lol.
 

Tenacity

Banned
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
3,926
Reaction score
2,194
Rand Paul I think is excellent and you guys make great points about RINOs. The thing going forward in terms of the Office of President however, is that we need to focus on BALANCE.

A Solid Republican Wants: Lower taxes, lower regulations, increased military, more promotion of free market control and lower government control/involvement.

A Solid Democrat Wants: Higher taxes on "the rich," more regulations on "the rich," decreased military, and a promotion of government/private partnerships with government taking more of a bigger role in the economy.

What we have had for the last 16 years with GW Bush and Obama, is a combination of the BEST OF BOTH worlds which has increased the National Debt. What do I mean?

- Both have promoted massive tax cuts. GW Bush put the Bush Tax Cuts in place and Obama kept the vast majority of them in place.

- While at the same time, both of them increased domestic spending in Education, Healthcare, Welfare, etc.

- While at the same time, both of them increased military spending and created more wars.

You can't DO every damn thing. You can't cut taxes and increase spending, using this insane Art Laffer theory of "tax cuts always pay for themselves."

If Tenacity were running for President, here are some of the main things I would do:

* Freeze the current tax rates in place for the next 5 years UNLESS we have a National Emergency (such as a major war, economic meltdown, etc.) . There will be no increases or decreases to the tax code, no changes on it, etc. on both the personal side and corporate side.

* I would seek to decrease Government Spending in as many areas as possible such as the huge Military Industrial Complex, such as trying to promote private companies to replace the Government in certain domestic areas, I would scale back on Obamacare by not totally eliminating it but changing its structure so we can afford it, etc.

* I would reform Social Security from the Ponzi Scheme that it is today, to something that more resembles an actual Retirement Account. The Ponzi Scheme is going to run out when you have this further economic divide between the HAVES and HAVE NOTS coming up due to changes in the economy such as globalization and automation, so it's best to start planning for this "reduction of payers into Social Security" right now.

* I would push that Americans understand the changing Economy and stop majoring in stupid things that have no marketplace value. I would push Colleges to either innovate their systems by embracing online education and competency based education to reduce costs, OR, they will lose their Title IV. No more insane tuition increases will be tolerated.

* I would create regulations that make sense and ENFORCE THEM. Too big to fail is still present today, which means what the hell was the point of all of the rah rah when nothing has changed? We can have another Great Recession tomorrow.

* I would promote good and healthy eating through the tax code. I would increase sales taxes on processed foods like fast food, restaurants, etc., and look to provide a tax benefit to those who maintain a healthy lifestyle during the year.

* I would promote updating the Family Court laws, which are destroying families. I would promote updating the Welfare laws, which are destroying families.

* I would create a "Black Agenda" that would focus on Character, Values, Education and Economic Progression. I would strive to increase the Character of Black people across the board, especially in the Ghetto, as being poor is not excuse for poor character. While at the same time, I would promote more business investment into ghettos using the tax code in terms of tax credits, etc., while increasing police within the area so their investments are protected.

* In addition to measures to restore families, penalties will be handed out to Fathers who are low income and continue to make children they can't afford. Same for Mothers. Right now, when a Mother has 1 child she can't afford she gets assistance, then she goes out and has 4 more, still getting assistance. All the while, the kids are suffering by coming into a world with a significantly low amount of resources, making it harder for them to ever "achieve". I would put HUGE penalties on irresponsible behavior surrounding the Birth of a Child.

....these is just a sample list
 

Tictac

Banned
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
3,689
Reaction score
1,256
Location
North America, probably an airport
Neither party is doing what they say they are. A change in the White House or in Congress merely changes which donor base gets greased with favors, taxpayer dollars and what appears to be unlimited debt (which is nothing more than future taxpayer dollars).

Both parties use overwhelming federal intrusiveness, complexity and power to sometimes ideological and mostly personal aggrandizement and at the expense of citizens and taxpayers.
 

DFW71

Banned
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
45
Reaction score
4
None are to the right on economics, tough on crime, and to the left on moral issues. The libertarian candidate could end up closer, but doesn't have a real chance. Who will be least objectionable? No idea now.
 
Top