48 votes

"Taking Votes Away"

Ron Paul, GJ, etc..."taking votes away"...from Romney, from Obama.

They are NOT Romney and Obamas votes to give!

We must break this mindset that votes BELONG to somebody. Votes do NOT belong to anybody! I am sick of hearing MSM and voters say that we are "taking votes away" from anybody!

If they insist on saying that, we must insist that if anything, VOTES WERE TAKEN AWAY FROM RON PAUL, OUR DELEGATES, AND THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED THOSE DELEGATES.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

not my president

won't comply and if they get in our face to much , drag em out.

No one has to give their votes.

If I go the the store and their produce is rotten. I just dont; spend my money.

Well the whole idea of the modern Presidency is rotten.

One would need to go back to John Quincy Adams to find an intellect capable of being President.

That means we have a stupid idea of what a President is to be.

I don't consent by vote to the Presidency as it is.

Free includes debt-free!

I agree, voting for anyone

I agree, voting for anyone but Ron is taking away votes from Ron.

Seems painfully simple :(

I agree with you 100%!

They cheated and have been for a long time.

GOP incumbents better hope and pray RP supporters vote.

One of the big reasons so many polls are showing GOP incumbents in so so much trouble is the public is totally turned off to Romney. While I hope most RP supporters who eventually turn to Gary Johnson will vote straight Libertarian, I am pretty certain most will vote for GOP incumbents.

Since 2004

I have strictly voted my conscience and will continue to do so. I have some issues with Gary so will be writing in Paul. I am happy to say that I have not voted for a tyranny candidate since 2000 and am all the happier for it.

What is your goal?

With all due respect sir, if your goal is to look in the mirror on election day and be satisfied that you voted for the right guy, then writing in RP will achieve that end. But if your goal is to change things by sending a message, then a vote for GJ would be the more prudent move. Write ins won't show up anywhere in the vote tallies. Thus, that action is guaranteed to have zero effect on our country. But by voting for GJ you will add your vote to numbers that WILL be counted and seen by the GOP and the media. While that is no guarantee to create change, you at least have a chance, which is better than no chance at all.

I'm with you in that RP is a better candidate than GJ. But if the GOP is confronted with GJ numbers that make them recognize that they need to accept us or lose -or- the Libertarian Party numbers are up so significantly that the general populace realizes that there actually is a 3rd party that isn't a "throwaway" vote, then that's accomplishing something.

Of course, a GJ vote may achieve neither of these ends. But at least there is a chance. The choice is yours. It's all about what you're trying to achieve.

GJ is GOP

GJ is a set up by the GOP. They really don't care if GJ gets 1% or 16%. They fully intend to lose this election and GJ is part of that machine. GOP likes being a small party with major party power. Why deal with 21 seats on a committee when two of you can do it, not worry about the other 19? GJ will rejoin the GOP when he's done being a red herring. To think the GOP cares about GJ is crazy.

GJ was a lifelong Republican until 2011.

He joined the Libertarian Party late 2011. Since about May 2012 or so he he finally heard of Menger, Mises and Rothbard.

His idea of libertarian is the beltway libertarians of Reason Magazine.

A definition of a libertarian is someone who can attend a Walter Block's lecture about Defending the Undefendable without their head exploding from internal contradictions.

Free includes debt-free!

what the heck are you talking about?

do you just pull this kind of crap out of your ass? you constantly make statements that have no basis in reality.

one thing about DP is that people usually demand proof of statements...especially ones that are as looney as yours.

i think people must be so used to you saying crazy stuff that they just figure it's a waste of time to try to get you to back up your craziness with any facts.

try thinking before you post. or take your medication.

i could care less if some people decide they want to vote for GJ, i'll write in Ron Paul, but i don't go around making up stuff to try to get people to do what i think is right.

And these are the people that

And these are the people that you're working with and for. Uh, good call. You know, you don't do much to help your cause around here.

You mean your cause

I did what I needed to do to become a delegate and help Ron Paul win the nomination, that uncluded a two year committment on a GOP committee and that affirds me the opportunity to fight for liberty in my county and my state. It is the best opportunity I have and have already had success in keeping Laura's Law (putting people before a judge, not a doctor to have4 them put away berfore the commit a crime). If that's not good enough for you, TOUGH.

What have YOU done?

As for Romney, it's NOT about Romney. There isn't a candidate I can vote for so I'm voting to empower Ron paul Republicans becasue I am one, THANKS TO RON PAUL.

What have I done? I was also

What have I done? I was also a delegate to help Ron Paul win the nomination and we did a hell of a job in my state. You think that by voting for Romney you're empowering Ron Paul Republicans? And when I said YOUR cause I meant YOUR cause, not mine. As you may or may not have noticed, the vast majority here disagree with you. My cause is to advance the movement. And I'm a Ron Paul Republican as well, because, let's face it, he's a Libertarian. (Lifetime member as a matter of fact)

That's why Restoring the Republic is so important

In a Republic, where freedom is upheld in a Bill of Rights and Constitution, a person is afforded the liberty to be themselves dispite the "vast majority". The "vast majority" is important to Democracy as it rules by the "vast majority", that would do away with independent thinkers as myself, who dare to stand alone dispite the "vast majority".

Ever noting that lemmings jump off a cliff as a "vast majority", or notice on Daily Paul how a "vast Majority" supported Atty Richard Gilbert to nowhere? The "vast Majority" is also know as "Sheep", for the fear to stand alone and go against the "vast majority".

Like Ron Paul I WAS a Libertarian, I left the party and have no intentions in returning. I have found my place on a county central committee in the GOP where I am afforded the opportunity to represent thousands of Republicans, who KNOW I campaigned as a Ron Paul Republican, and expect, and hope, that I will stand against the "vast majority" where I live, seeking a democratic means to put people like me, and Ron Paul, away for not being with the "vast majority".

It appears to me, that most of the "vast majority" care more about being a collective and applying democratic FORCE here on Daily Paul than standing alone and fighting for their freedom and the freedom of people like me who are not, never have been, and never will be part of the "vast majority".

And now you know what I think of the "vast majority".

The "movement" will end by January seeking another opportunity to be a road side attraction waving signs and yelling to the wind. It's not liberating anyone, anything, chaning laws, protecting freedom or getting anyone elected who can. One against the "vast majority" suck.

What I find amusing about

What I find amusing about you, granger, is the gop didn't even have to brainwash you, you brainwashed yourself. And please, stop saying you are a Ron Paul supporter when you are voting for willard. Did they buy you knee pads or did you have to furnish your own?

Formerly rprevolutionist

You're voting Obama

Ron Paul isn't on the ballot and I'm now a Republican and I'm going to keep that seat to get Rand in and delegates for him. I don't care if you don't like it. Apparently you like Obama.

Self-righteous, delusional,

Self-righteous, delusional, and insulting, the Granger's go to move.

Because I'm "self-righteous"

You mean because I do not seek or need your approval that I am self righteous? What collective low esteeme you must.

If I'm delusional, let it be, because I am happy, and my life is good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhNrqc6yvTU

No, you're self-righteous

No, you're self-righteous because you match the exact definition of self-righteous.

Self-righteousness (also called sanctimoniousness, sententiousness, a holier-than-thou attitudes) is a feeling of (usually) smug moral superiority derived from a sense that one's beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person.

OK

I have a wonderful feeling that my life is filled with exceptional people who are talented, gifted, inteligent, beautiful and happy.

I don't feel or think that makes me better than the adverage person, just different.

I wouldn't waste my time and life on someone I thought they thought they were better than me. Why would you?

Isn't that OK

She has put herself on the line, right or wrong.

Whose to say one can't GOP for Liberty, or Libertarian for Liberty or DEM for Liberty or Independent for Liberty. Man in the street for Liberty. Or the Farmer outstanding in his field, for Liberty.

The key question is the same: "What is the role of government?"

Free includes debt-free!

I don't consider a vote for

I don't consider a vote for Romney a vote for liberty.

I don't consider a vote for the modern American Executive

a vote for liberty.

No of can be sure of what we are doing and given our place in time and space whether better choice might be made.

These Campaigns for Liberty (not the organization) but the idea everyone moving in the direction of liberty is purposeful if not productive. But who can tell? I can only say that way is not for me.

Free includes debt-free!

So what do you propose we do?

So what do you propose we do?

I think your nym says it all.

"Stray".

Except for moving towards liberty at every importunity, I would be leery of telling another. How could I know.

Besides, It's rather a full time job keeping myself on track.

The Constitution mentions the Law of Nations Article I Sec 8.1
http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/vattel/

Apparently this was popular at the Constitutional Convention. So much so it was included in the ratified text.

For me the answer is more study. What are my Rights? Can the Township violate these rights with impunity.

Oh, I won't be voting for President. I do not consent to the modern Presidency. It far exceeds its Constitutional limits.

Free includes debt-free!

I can appreciate that. Thank

I can appreciate that. Thank you.