Author Topic: 2008 elections: I don't care enough to care about why I don't care. (Read 1369 times)

Questor · « **on:** January 08, 2008, 05:34:49 AM »

I'm usually quite interested in upcoming elections, particularly presidential and senate elections. This time I really don't care. The Republican candidates look like a group of guys that would make good Democrat candidates and the Democrats are so far to the left that it's hard to believe that lineup exists.

Got a call last night from the Republican party and told them to call me back in 4 years and that, no, I don't care that Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota is about to be defeated in a race against Al Franken.

My objection is that if the party doesn't represent my values then I won't even bother voting with that party even though the Democrats represent a worse choice. The message to the Republicans is to shape up and get some candidates I can support.

It really astounds me that east coast liberals like Romney and Giulliani are top contenders for the Republican candidate. It astounds me more that John McCane is a major candidate too-- after he worked so hard to abridge the first amendment with the McCane-Feingold act.

Maybe what the Republican party needs is a presidential term of gun banning, tax raising, socialized medicine, and attacking the country's source of wealth to come to its senses.

Dee · « **Reply #1 on:** January 08, 2008, 06:39:17 AM »

Much of what you have said is true, and I suppose APATHY is prevalent in Minnesota, which would explain how a devout Muslim could get elected to the Congress from that state.
Almost all of what you say about the Republican and the Democrat is TRUE, and to say differently would be unrealistic, HOWEVER. Sitting on one's haunches and howling at the moon, accomplishes nothing other than disturbing the neighbors, and starting the dogs to barking.
Why not vote Constitutionalists Party when available, and Libertarian when available? This would seem to me a better alternative than laying down and giving up, which is what you will be doing if you do not vote.

You LAST STATEMENT, is laughable if you think about it as "YOU" will be the one whom gets your guns banned, your taxes raised, socialized medicine rammed down your throat, and you personal wealth given to the rich. The only thing you will teach the politicians whether they be Republican or Democrat, is that YOU WILL GIVE UP, if they will just KEEP IT UP.
Do something constructive. Vote Independent, and send a message to these clowns. Get up off the ground, and stand up for what's right. JMO

Heavy C · « **Reply #2 on:** January 08, 2008, 02:51:40 PM »

Try as I may I can't get excited about Dr. Paul for President. I've actually come back to this option a couple of times and the man just does not come across as a leader. What good are one's ideas if one cannot rally support behind them.

magooch · « **Reply #3 on:** January 09, 2008, 03:55:22 AM »

Well, if we're allowed to fantasize, I'm still hoping that the front-runners on the Republican side muddy each other up enough that people take a good look at Dunkin Hunter. Oh I'm sure he isn't perfect, but he sure looks good to me.

Heavy C · « **Reply #4 on:** January 09, 2008, 04:05:03 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on January 09, 2008, 02:06:19 AM

Quote from: Heavy C on January 08, 2008, 02:51:40 PM
Try as I may I can't get excited about Dr. Paul for President. I've actually come back to this option a couple of times and the man just does not come across as a leader. What good are one's ideas if one cannot rally support behind them.
.
RP probably is the only guy that is offering real solutions to our problems concerning monetary, fiscal, border,The Republic, our rights, our sovereignty and place in the family of nations. All the the other candidates will, in one way or another, continue the European-North American Union Israeli New World Order pact with decline of the dollar, debt, trashing the Constitution, fascism, elitism, and the whole patho-corptocracy thing. It's ashame so put your chains on.

But yeah! Dr.Paul does not have the looks of Mit R, the voice of Thompson, the doublespeak of Hilllary or Obama, or oldtime religion of Huckabee, the hair of Edwards, etc.
He certainly is no Patrick Henry.....just might be a certain honesty in him though. I mean following the constitution is a very radical thing you know!

....TM7

Let's see...looks, voice, doublespeak, religion, and hair. Either you skipped class the day they covered qualities of leadership or your definition of leadership is twisted. He seems genuine enough and I do like the idea of following the constituion - that's what it's there for. It is because of his radical ideas that will require strong leadership and so far I haven't seen it.

Heavy C · « **Reply #5 on:** January 09, 2008, 05:30:29 AM »

I couldn't agree with you more. However, whether he has a brass set the size of grapefruits it doesn't matter if you can't get people to follow.

Questor · « **Reply #6 on:** January 09, 2008, 09:28:51 AM »

In case anybody's interested, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul each got fewer votes in the first two primaries than the write-in candidates. They are no more credible now as candidates than Pat Paulson was when he used to run for president.

dukkillr · « **Reply #7 on:** January 09, 2008, 10:10:23 AM »

Quote from: Questor on January 09, 2008, 09:28:51 AM

In case anybody's interested, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul each got fewer votes in the first two primaries than the write-in candidates. They are no more credible now as candidates than Pat Paulson was when he used to run for president.

Wow, that's completely, utterly, horribly, (intentionally?) wrong. Please don't believe the above post. Ron Paul got 10% in Iowa (more than triple that of Giuliani) and 8% in NH (8 times that of FredThompson). In neither state did the write ins approach 2%. I'm not a fanatic of Ron Paul, I just don't want people to believe something that's categorically false.

Fred M · « **Reply #8 on:** January 09, 2008, 05:41:22 PM »

I am a Canadian and far a way from your election. I simply can not understand the American people that follow the likes of Obama a Muslim, the same people that flew planes into the world trade center.

The Clinton woman what credibility does she have, did you not have enough
of the Clintons the last time. Me of course I don't understand how it is
possible for something like this to happen.

We Canadians very much depend on the US and most of us like you as a
neighbor. But we shake in our pants when something bad happens in the US.

If this Obama/ Clinton senaraio is not stopped we all going to be in bad shape.

Matt · « **Reply #9 on:** January 09, 2008, 09:34:20 PM »

Quote from: Heavy C on January 09, 2008, 04:05:03 AM

Let's see...looks, voice, doublespeak, religion, and hair. Either you skipped class the day they covered qualities of leadership or your definition of leadership is twisted. He seems genuine enough and I do like the idea of following the constituion - that's what it's there for. It is because of his radical ideas that will require strong leadership and so far I haven't seen it.

I keep hearing people call him a "Fringe Candidate" with radical ideas.......

Let's see:
Personal Liberty,
Sound Money/No Inflation Without Representation,
Government by the people, not corporations,
No War!
Right to Privacy,
Innocent until proven guilty...........

Gee, those are really radical and controversial...!

Dee · « **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2008, 02:37:21 AM »

FredM, ya'lls rights are disappearing faster than a lawyer at a hanging. Your government allows Muslims to migrate into your country UNCHECKED, and many come DOWN HERE, FROM THERE.
They (the government) have taken your handguns for the most part, preachers are going to jail for preaching the gospel, and your socialized medicine seems to be a dismal failure. It would seem to me that SOCIALISM has ALREADY ARRIVED in Canada.
I as one American do not "shake in my pants" as I watch this happen in Canada, I "shake my head", and wonder why you guys don't put a stop to all that non-sense, that has ALREADY HAPPENED in YOUR COUNTRY. I have not heard of one single protest up there, regarding these issues.

Seems to me YOU GUYS, are already in bad shape. Your government is running rough shod over ya'll with little or no resistance.

Fred M · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2008, 06:54:03 AM »

Dee.
Hopefully the next election will bring some changes, if Steven Harper gets in with a majority.

If the liberals(commies) get in again god help us.

Heavy C · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2008, 11:19:58 AM »

Quote from: Matt on January 09, 2008, 09:34:20 PM

Quote from: Heavy C on January 09, 2008, 04:05:03 AM
Let's see...looks, voice, doublespeak, religion, and hair. Either you skipped class the day they covered qualities of leadership or your definition of leadership is twisted. He seems genuine enough and I do like the idea of following the constituion - that's what it's there for. It is because of his radical ideas that will require strong leadership and so far I haven't seen it.

I keep hearing people call him a "Fringe Candidate" with radical ideas.......

Let's see:
Personal Liberty,
Sound Money/No Inflation Without Representation,
Government by the people, not corporations,
No War!
Right to Privacy,
Innocent until proven guilty...........

Gee, those are really radical and controversial...!

No, you're right those are not radical ideas. What I should have said was his radical approach.

Dee · « **Reply #13 on:** January 10, 2008, 12:06:57 PM »

Quote from: Fred M on January 10, 2008, 06:54:03 AM

Dee.
Hopefully the next election will bring some changes, if Steven Harper gets in with a majority.

If the liberals(commies) get in again god help us.

Fred I think the problem in both Canada, and the U.S. is APATHY! Fewer folks hunt, and therefore fewer care about firearms. MORE folks are interested in sports, and instant gratification, and can get it off video games and TV. Today's kids couldn't start a camp fire if their life depended on it, and it someday indeed, may depend on it.
Adults can't even change a flat tire, or check their own oil.
The computer age is robbing us of common sense, and creating dependency on some one on a TV screen telling them what to do. I personally don't think it can be stopped. JMO

deltecs · « **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2008, 01:07:40 PM »

The problem as cited here is not attributed to the correct place. The problem lies with not teaching our children to hunt, not teaching our children how to change a flat or check the oil, impressing on our children that sports are more important than education, survival skills, and high moral values. I totally agree that the cause is APATHY, but not the tube, computer games, or telecommunications technology. The problem is parents who do not have control over the activities of their children and not enforcement of core moral values. The problem is voters who are ignorant of candidates positions and who conveniently ignore historical facts to vote emotionally. All the cars, sports balls, monitors, computers, firearms, and other materialistic items listed as the cause and effect of our country's problems, are just tools. We as individuals and people collectively are the root problem.

thxmrgarand · « **Reply #15 on:** January 10, 2008, 01:10:51 PM »

The presidential election today is no more encouraging to me than it seems to be to others on GBO. However, it does matter who is elected, and the current make-up of the US Supreme Court and the resulting realistic hope we can have that the Court will accurately portray the Second Amendment in the DC case is the best example of why it matters. If President G.W. Bush had lost to Al Gore, the Court would be much more predictable today on this particular case and it would mean trouble for us. Of the people who might realistically be elected this time, Huckabee seems to be the best on gun rights in my opinion. However, even if gun owners want to do nothing but vote in this presidential election, there are races for Congress that matter, and every gun owner needs to be engaged in working hard for pro-gun candidates. There are also races at the state level, and because of periodic redistricting and many other issues, state level elections also matter to gun owners. Immediately after the enactment of the 1968 Gun Control Act, almost 40 years ago, everyone I knew would have bet that by this time we would no longer be able to own and use firearms. Yet we have concealed carry in almost all states, many states have the so-called castle-law, and some of the media openly tells our side of the story. Gun owners need to stay in the fight. We need to let candidates know that we are watching, that gun rights matter very much, that the Second Amendment means exactly what it says, and that we are willing to work hard for candidates if they understand guns and are trustworthy. Thanks for your time. This is a fateful year!

Dee · « **Reply #16 on:** January 10, 2008, 01:22:15 PM »

Quote from: deltecs on January 10, 2008, 01:07:40 PM

The problem as cited here is not attributed to the correct place. The problem lies with not teaching our children to hunt, not teaching our children how to change a flat or check the oil, impressing on our children that sports are more important than education, survival skills, and high moral values. I totally agree that the cause is APATHY, but not the tube, computer games, or telecommunications technology. The problem is parents who do not have control over the activities of their children and not enforcement of core moral values. The problem is voters who are ignorant of candidates positions and who conveniently ignore historical facts to vote emotionally. All the cars, sports balls, monitors, computers, firearms, and other materialistic items listed as the cause and effect of our country's problems, are just tools. We as individuals and people collectively are the root problem.

deltecs while I agree with EVERYTHING you say here, I basically said the same thing. It was assumed (yea, I know about that word) that the PARENTS are the ones buying the toys (computer games ect) for the children, and so on. Our technology has isolated us from reality. Is it our fault? Of course it is. But the observation is so totally encompassing it is hard to know where to start. The public at large is deaf to the fact. Agreed?

deltecs · « **Reply #17 on:** January 10, 2008, 01:36:44 PM »

Absolutely. It was not my intent to point a finger at anyone. I was merely attempting to indicate our habit of blaming something else for our own faults and shortcomings. Yes, I agree that even when children are taught the ways of their parents, it doesn't mean that the children will follow those teachings. But it does mean that parents have taken the time to show caring and demonstrate standards necessary to be good parents. A high school education for their children was of foremost priority where I was raised by almost everyone I knew. This was to ensure their children had opportunities that they did not and to be better able to cope in a changing society. The same applies today. Without proper parenting and role models, there will be raised a generation of incompetents (should I say another generation) unable to make an informed decision or use of common sense.

Dee · « **Reply #18 on:** January 12, 2008, 08:02:03 AM »

A high school education is part of the problem now days deltecs. They teach sex, perverted history, and hey, you might be gay! Give it a try, and see if it works for ya.
Our GOVENMENT CONTROLLED public school system has become a propaganda mechanism for our children.

deltecs · « **Reply #19 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:17:55 AM »

Most of the posts I've read here on this topic indicate honorable and ethical opinions. However, I must point out that elected officials do and have made changes in our lives for better or worse and that includes all elections like school boards. I'd like to quote something from the Declaration on Independence that has direct bearing on just this topic.

Quote

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

So any APATHY regarding not voting for candidates because they do not meet all our individual convictions is just plain wrong. It is not only our right to vote, it is our individual duty. We've been complaining of government conspiracy, voter fraud, media bias, excessive taxes, government refusal to enforce immigration laws, privacy invasion, and infringement of our 2 nd Amendment fundamental right and many more. The Declaration of Independence in this sentence mandates that we as individuals, who have the right and ability to make changes, also have the RESPONSIBILITY to make these changes. Anyone who doesn't vote, that has this right and responsibility, is guilty of complacency and fails in his duty as a citizen and man (woman) of honor. Every ballot has a place for write in, so a person can still vote. Don't vote, shut up and eat the **** deserved.

Heavy C · « **Reply #20 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:26:11 AM »

Well said Deltecs!!!

Dee · « **Reply #21 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:46:48 AM »

Plain and Simple deltecs. Good post.

deltecs · « **Reply #22 on:** January 13, 2008, 04:41:37 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on January 13, 2008, 02:28:39 AM

The problem, or Catch 22, is when the election process is a) not transparent and b) the current crop of candidates don't offer any real solutions and are just more of the same. Hence Questor's dilemma---voting thereby just perpetuates the same old problems and status quo. Really when voter turnout drops to 20% of the populace no official will have majority backing in any sense- - -then they better watch out.
What is needed is a "none of the above" selection, less media influence steering the voting process, and transparent fraud proof elections. "None of the above" means go back and find another candidate and policies we can live with. Elected officials should also be signatories of the Constitution and not just oath takers. Than maybe there might be huge voter turnouts, and less of the divide and conquer techniques employed by the politiboro.

...TM7

There is definitely no need for none of the above. You don't like a candidate, write one in you do. If he gets enough votes, he's the winner in the election. 2. There is no need to sign a paper upholding the Constitution. You take an oath of office to uphold it. If you don't, you get impeached. If the officials in the impeachment proceedings do not return a guilty verdict, you vote them out.
The process as it exists is workable if we do our part. The problem is we do not do our part.

Dee · « **Reply #23 on:** January 13, 2008, 04:44:57 AM »

I find it amazing that so many on both sides CONTINUE to REFUSE, to look at one particular candidate that has NEVER voted for ANY THING, other than the Constitutional, Bill of Rights stand point, on "ALL ISSUES", and yet these same commenters' further invoke that NONE have a viable candidate.
That the news media is TRYING TO INFLUENCE CANDIDATE CHOICE, is an obvious "OBSERVATION". Else why is one candidate whom continually WINS debates (according to the people watching) CONTINUALLY ignored by both the press and the complaining voter? It would seem these complainers of having no viable candidate, would look at the voting record, and what this candidate is saying, and realize, that you are either FOR the Constitution and Bill of Rights or you are AGAINST them.
If in fact you are FOR these two Documents, then how could you be AGAINST this candidate. His voting record speaks for itself, and his speech fits his voting record.
I do not see the reason for confusion. If he has no chance, it is because folks REFUSE to take the time to check out his RECORD, and REFUSE TO COMMIT to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and opt for the much easier method of just COMPLAINING. I say, we as the voter, go for the "lesser of two evils" because it is a "lack of commitment" on we, the voters part, to get behind a man (candidate) that isn't PRETTY ON CAMERA. JMO

alsaqr · « **Reply #24 on:** January 13, 2008, 06:39:18 AM »

"My objection is that if the party doesn't represent my values then I won't even bother voting with that party even though the Democrats represent a worse choice. The message to the Republicans is to shape up and get some candidates I can support.

It really astounds me that east coast liberals like Romney and Giulliani are top contenders for the Republican candidate. It astounds me more that John McCane is a major candidate too-- after he worked so hard to abridge the first amendment with the McCane-Feingold act."

Good post, Questor.

This long time Republican is no longer going to support the "lesser of two evils." Ain't drinking the Kool Aid any more. Am not going to vote for any anti-gunner like McCain, Romney or Rudy Baby. Looks like I'll be writing in the names of some local neer-do-wells . Maybe if the Republicans lose one big time they will wake up to the fact that their constituents matter. They never learned anything in 1992 when gun owners stayed at home and George Bush lost it big time after stabbing us in the back.

Dee · « **Reply #25 on:** January 13, 2008, 07:14:38 AM »

TM7, with out trying to sound like a Ron Paul "fanatic" which I am not I have a question for every one DISREGARDING HIS CHANCES OF WINNING THE NOMONATION.
He IS a PURE CONSTITUTIONALIST. He IS a PURE BILL OF RIGHTS BELIEVER. He HAS voted PRO CONSTITUTION on ALL of his votes in Congress. He HAS voted 100% BILL OF RIGHTS on all his votes in Congress. He HAS voted PRO STATES RIGHTS on ALL of his votes in Congress. He HAS voted 100% 2nd AMMENDMENT on ALL his votes in Congress.
All of this DOCUMENTED FACT. What could be better for the self-proclaimed CONSERVATIVE?
No he ain't Pretty on TV, but He DOES WHAT HE SAYS HE'LL DO. I just don't seen much negative in him as a candidate, but I see a lot of people here IGNORING FACTS, and all the while wailing away that we don't have a candidate, when we do, if we would get off our asses and READ.
There are a lot of people out there that are starting to see this, and I don't understand how a bunch of so called pro-gunners are missing this. Yes there are some goof balls supporting him, but in my opinion there are some goof balls still backing Bush when the man has SHOWED HIS COLORS, when it comes to homeland security, and his IGNORING the will of the people on the issue, and others, and ARE IGNORING the Patriot Act which HE (BUSH) WANTS TO MAKE "PERMANENT! Have some of you guys not read the Patriot Act?

Graybeard · « **Reply #26 on:** January 13, 2008, 07:41:31 AM »

George W. Bush to my eyes is a traitor to this nation and as such should be impeached from office and tried for treason. He has ignored his oath of office and is actively working to subvert the US Constitution and to end the US as a nation and supplant it with a new nation composed of the current nations of the US, Canada and Mexico. He is not fit to remain in office and cannot be trusted with the welfare of this nation.

deltecs · « **Reply #27 on:** January 13, 2008, 12:22:36 PM »

It is still unfortunate that people demand to make more law or more investigations simply to assuage their consciences, especially when in doubt. When these people are informed by investigative authority and refuse to admit legal procedure, what does one do then? Have another investigation until the outcome satisfies the questioner or until we get a government that satisfies him alone to the detriment of others. You want a ballot with the title of none of the others. Why don't you or we write it on the ballot then. We don't want government influence, so to cure our apathy or get none of the above on the ballot without voter petition, we enact another needless law to include none of the above. You want none of the above on the ballot, get enough petitions to include it as a candidate. Oh well, if we cannot get enough petitions, we can always waste some more government money in investigating the petition signatures and claim voter fraud. Just write in none of the above. And stop wasteful political investigations merely for political gain.