Whatever a conservative SCOTUS has done is feeble and temporary yet a liberal SCOTUS would be ironclad and forever. Really? That's just poor logic.
Whoever attempts to kill the Constitution knows they are pushing the reset button.
I'm not scared.
Assuming Romney wins, there will be two liberal elitists facing off against each other. Both globalists, both backed by Goldman Sachs, both support bailouts to their Establishment cronies. I don't understand why anyone thinks Romney's nominees are going to be remotely in line with the constitution.
The Powers That Be are going to remain the same no matter which NWO puppet takes the stage.
This kind of sucks, this is my first year voting. Instead of voting for someone I want, I will just be voting against someone I don't want.
That was my initial thought on this. I still havent made up my mind, but I will most likely be voting for Paul. Ive wanted Paul in since I first heard of him. Its just the thought of seeing our current POTUS get reelected has me all flustered. I cant stand the very thought of it. I seems like a dilemma of settling for instant mediocracy or suffering another 4 years in hopes for an overall greater good. And looking at it that way, I will suffer 4 more years under the reign of BHO if it means a better life for my future children and grand children.
I know the focus is on POTUS and I'm not trying to minimize it although I would encourage everyone to really spend some time researching and talking with your local representatives as well.
Check out the other thread where Virginia is saying eat FED on NDAA indefinitely holding US citizens.
It's clear we won't get change that's top down. It's gonna need to be bottoms up.
The problem is it will only get worse for them (us all) if the current NWO stooge is elected. The gamble is if M. R. will just stagnate the current slide into the abyss until we can possibly get a REAL conservative candidate in office. We didn't get here quickly or efficiently and the fix won't be either. We have to do what we can where we can to find and elect that people that can and will fix it. It will take time, but every step in the right direction is positive. No war (and this IS a war) goes according to plan every step of the way. The Progressives new this and proceeded steadily the whole way. We have to understand this as well and work with it. The alternative is continuing the fall.
The Tea Party is still working and can help bring candidates into Congress that can help to hold a Repub. Pres'. feet to the fire. So we also need to focus heavily on the Congress if we want to keep our Republic in tact.
That was my initial thought on this. I still havent made up my mind, but I will most likely be voting for Paul.
That would be a kick in the crotch for Unions
Please provide data for this assumption (hint, you won't find it as it doesn't exist).
So, in other words, kinda like kissing your sister...
Which is still better than kissing your brother! And voting for Obama is a little like getting....well, something else from your brother--and without your consent!
...It's a shame that the party doesn't realize how important it is to put forward a candidate who can also capture the independent voters.
I actually did the math 4 years ago because I got tired of listening to comments like the OP about how "third party" voters cost the R's the election. I presented the numbers showing that O would have won even if ALL the other voters rallied together for one candidate. All I heard after that was crickets.Just like 2008, this year's moderate candidate will lose by more than the margin of people who flee to the 3rd parties or do write-ins.
It's a shame that the party doesn't realize how important it is to put forward a candidate who can also capture the independent voters. Romney, a watered down version of Obama, isn't exactly an independent voter's dream candidate and isn't going to much to capture the dissatisfied dem's who are on the fence about voting outside their party.