If today was election day...

[HappyChristian]

Ron Paul realizes that a third party can't win at this time. However' date=' his goal is to challenge the system. He wants to bring alternative views into the light rather than Americans always getting pitched the same old stuff year after year from both parties. I don't think Paul needs to endorse anyone. People can think for themselves and there are a lot of ties between his supporters and the Libertarian Party. When I went to a rally just before the PA primaries(where he got 15% of the vote), there were people there to sign up attendees for the Libertarian Party. So I'm sure a lot of his supporters will vote Libertarian.[/quote']

I'm sure a lot of them will. No, Paul doesn't need to endorse anyone. But, see, he claims to be a champion of the Constitution (and, yes, he does follow it mostly). And some of those 3rd party candidates don't. So by encouraging his supporters to vote for one of the 4, he's in essence giving his support to those who don't support the constitution in the right way. His actions could cause us to end up with an Obama presidency. That, to me, is throwing his support to Obama.

[Guest Guest]

If he wanted to give his support to Obama, he'd endorse Obama. But he didn't. I'm sick and tired of people who think that anyone that votes third party is "supporting Obama". No, we aren't, we're supporting who we vote for...that's the whole idea of voting.

[HappyChristian]

If he wanted to give his support to Obama' date=' he'd endorse Obama. But he didn't. I'm sick and tired of people who think that anyone that votes third party is "supporting Obama". No, we aren't, we're supporting who we vote for...that's the whole idea of voting.[/quote']
Um, I didn't say that anyone who votes third party is supporting Obama...but even if I did, if that's my opinion, that's my opinion. In essence Paul is throwing his support to Obama because he won't come out and endorse a particular candidate. That's what I said - not that you or anyone else is supporting Obama by voting for someone else. I have never thought, nor have I said that someone who votes third party is wasting their vote (especially since I have voted third party before...that would be quite hypocritical of me) . Please don't read into my comments what isn't there.

[Guest Guest]

I was actually trying to address your comment of Paul not endorsing a particular candidate and Suzy's comments that are all over this forum about how she thinks a vote for a third party is a vote for Obama. I'm sorry if you thought I was referring only to your post.

[Anon]

:roll

[HappyChristian]

I was actually trying to address your comment of Paul not endorsing a particular candidate and Suzy's comments that are all over this forum about how she thinks a vote for a third party is a vote for Obama. I'm sorry if you thought I was referring only to your post.

That's fine - but it still doesn't change my opinion. :Green And Kita is entitled to hers, just as you and I are to ours....

[Samer]

Chuck Baldwin. If he's not on the ballot, I'll write in Ron Paul.

[Anon]

Seriously though...I'm honestly not trying to be a pain or anything...but its like...say we are going to elect a new pastor. (Well I guess I won't be voting! LOL).... The vote is "yes" or "no". What if somebody decides to write in "Phil Kidd" (heaven forbid) or something? What is the purpose? I mean, maybe that person feels Phil Kidd would be a great pastor for their church, but the fact is, that he is not one of the choices.

So...why write in a name in a Presidential election? I just don't understand.

[kevinmiller]

Because if you don't think anyone is qualified that is running, you choose someone you do think is qualified. That's why they allow write-ins. :smile

[trc123]

Seriously though...I'm honestly not trying to be a pain or anything...but its like...say we are going to elect a new pastor. (Well I guess I won't be voting! LOL).... The vote is "yes" or "no". What if somebody decides to write in "Phil Kidd" (heaven forbid) or something? What is the purpose? I mean, maybe that person feels Phil Kidd would be a great pastor for their church, but the fact is, that he is not one of the choices.

So...why write in a name in a Presidential election? I just don't understand.

While I agree it will in all intents and purposes have no effect to write another name in; I absolutely respect the right to do so under our laws. I served 10 1/2 years in the US Military and swore to defend our laws and the constitution; and while I may disagree on the tactic.....my hat goes off to the person who exercises their write and votes; even the write in vote!

[Anon]

Well of course its a right, my practical side just does not see the use. LOL. To me, its almost like just a statement saying "I don't agree with this election." Which I guess yeah that's what it is. But the practical result is a non-vote, really.

[Guest Guest]

:uuhm: I am thinking. I saw Chuck Norris tear apart 2 Liberals on Larry King last night. He is a born-again believer...so??? The Martial Arts man/Actor might serve our country well. We need a "real fighter" in the White House. :cool :hide


LOL...Gotcha, Kita. McCain/Palin of, course. :thumb Sorry, but I just couldn't resist. hehe.

[trc123]

Well of course its a right' date=' my practical side just does not see the use. LOL. To me, its almost like just a statement saying "I don't agree with this election." Which I guess yeah that's what it is. But the practical result is a non-vote, really.[/quote']

Well, all I can say is I'm able to agree to disagree!

Peace! TRC

[Anon]

:cool

[Guest Guest]

:uuhm: I am thinking. I saw Chuck Norris tear apart 2 Liberals on Larry King last night. He is a born-again believer...so??? The Martial Arts man/Actor might serve our country well. We need a "real fighter" in the White House. :cool :hide


LOL...Gotcha, Kita. McCain/Palin of, course. :thumb Sorry, but I just couldn't resist. hehe.