15 votes

Poll: Who Is Our Best Hope for 2016?

Who Is Our Best Hope for 2016?

Here's a link to the poll: http://www.ronpaul.com/2012-11-09/poll-who-is-our-best-hope-...

Feel free to post your responses here as well. You can vote for up to 5 people on that page, my choices were:

1. Ron Paul
2. Andrew Napolitano
3. Rand Paul
4. Peter Schiff
5. Gary Johnson



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Your DAMN selves!

Until you get that, you will continue to be a slave ideological and otherwise, to powers outside of yourself, to people who are looking out for their OWN best interests ahead of YOURS!

The founders believed that each man was his OWN state! We won't take a minute out of our day to not comply with anything... Because we think we have too much to lose and are the exception, to everybody else. Well that is what THEY thought too, and they lost everything.

If we don't hang together, we will hang separately. I am not willing to take that chance. It seems the majority of people DO! You do not need to be a genius to figure this out...

What is your point?

We are libertarian leaning and tend to be individualistic.

But I don't understand what you are trying to say.

How in the heck did Marco

How in the heck did Marco Rubio garner 9%? That guy is just another Paul Ryan fake conservative manipulated by TPTB.

And Paul Ryan?

Just because he says he likes Ayn Rand?

How did HE make the list, and Chris Christie at 7%?

Rand Paul / Ron Paul 2016!

Andrew Napolitano - Would make an OK VP.

Peter Schiff - Pro-abortion / Anti-life - JUST SAY NO!

Gary Johnson - Pro-abortion / Anti-life - HELL NO!

.

state issue with Johnson

same as with Ron Paul.

Rand is not inspiring and has other baggage.

I've never heard of anyone

I've never heard of anyone being pro-abortion. That's like the people who call Ron Paul an isolationist. It is a blatant lack of intellectual honesty and an errant substitution of non-synonymous terms.

Ok what is the politically correct term?

Is it anti-life? Don't we all love life?

Why not call it like it is. Pro-choice sounds like you are all for choosing what you want to do for a living, what you want to eat for dinner, what dress to wear.

Honestly, this is about whether you support abortions or you don't. Stop trying to put a pretty name on it so you can pretend its not about what it's really about. You support peoples right to abort their babies. Fine. Stand by it then. Quit hiding with misleading phrases born of propaganda.

It's like they call the health care bill "Affordable Care Act" Affordable? who can afford it? Care? What kind of care are you going to get and for how long?

Why don't we call it what it really is. Tax and control bill. We are going to link the IRS to your bank account and tax you till your sick. Then we will control just what kind of health care you get.

So stop with your politically correct terms and own up to what you believe.

You don't need a politically

You don't need a politically correct term. You need an ACCURATE term. "Pro-abortion" would mean that you want and seek to have babies aborted. That is absurd.

If you think that a fertilized egg or a blastocyst is a human life due the same protections as one outside the womb that can respire on its own, I can understand that. Given developmental stages, spontaneous abortion rates, and the way humans actually react to losing a fetus in its early stages of pregnancy, I don't see it that way. Then, when I compare the 'rights' of a blastocyst to the rights of an autonomous living and breathing human, I do not see them as equal. MANY other people in this nation don't either. I also don't see an agreement coming anytime soon.

Pro-life and Pro-choice are not terms I came up with, nor are they terms I care for. I am not advocating their use. However, they are nearly universally recognized by both groups. I'm telling you that the term "pro-abortion" is both wrong and idiotic. Incidentally, carrying an unplanned or unwanted fetus to term is a choice, too.

Alright here is another flawed argument

So you are telling me that something is not equal under the law because it is different?

So grandma on a respirator.
So my premature new born.

Call it whatever you will, life at any stage isn't always ideal.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

I would not argue a

I would not argue a difference between your submissions, nor would most of the electorate. A blastocyst or other unformed fetus, however, there's not going to be an agreement there...

The flaw in your argument is that you presented choices that don't cover the entire spectrum of the issue.

kugerrand & Ruger

Smith & wesson

Bump

Bump

If Ventura runs for POTUS in

If Ventura runs for POTUS in 2016, he will NOT receive my vote nor support. Of others on the list, I'd support mainly Peter Schiff as he has a sharp wit with intelligence as long as Peter was willing to leave the issue of abortion and other social issues to the states. I might support Rand although I think he should stay in the US Congress. Other potentially viable candidates weren't on the list so the results are naturally biased.

What's your beef with Jesse?

What's your beef with Jesse?

Jessy may be OK out there among the masses spreading liberty but

lately he has been sounding bitter and hot headed. He tends to lean democratic at times. He's like sand paper. He's passionately anti religion which will alienate....oh I don't know...the majority of Republicans. He's pro-abortion. Sometimes you can hear him defend democrats. Nah! we can do better. He's to polarizing and that might be fine for a talk show but its not good for running for president.

There is no such thing as PRO

There is no such thing as PRO ABORTION! Stop saying that. It's like calling Ron Paul an isolationist.

Also, Jesse is not accurately described as anti-religion. He is not a religious man, but he rails mostly against the religious lobby and big religion in bed with the government. He also rails against the religious groups imposing their will upon others.

I agree, though, that he defends the democrats a little bit more than I think he should. I disagree that he is "too polarizing," because there is hardly a way to polarize our politics more than the dems and repubs already have. I understand what you're saying, though, as he is a controversial figure.

Do you support the right to

Do you support the right to an abortion? Then you are PRO-abortion. Do you support the right to life for all? Then you are PRO-life. Do you oppose the right to an abortion? Then you are ANTI-abortion. Do you oppose the right to life for all? Then you can be rightly tagged ANTI-life. If you do not support the right to life for all humans, then you cannot call yourself pro-life. Regardless of whether you believe a child is a child at conception or not, we can all agree that a child is a child at birth. So no matter what you call a baby at conception, you are denying it life at birth, and therefore are opposed to life for some. You are ANTI-life.

Do you support the right to

Do you support the right to ingest heroin? Then you are pro-drugs. Do you support the right for two grown men to have intercourse? Then you are pro-gay sex. Obviously there is a gaping logical hole in these if/then statements. Your argument needs some work.

I can't help it if you can't own up to what you yourself believe

You want abortions legal? Fine. But own up to it without arguing semantics. It only makes you look weak

Ah, your last resort

Ah, your last resort argument. I believe abortion should be legal at the state level.. If you prohibit it, just like drugs, you will not see the number of abortions go down very much and will likely see unintended consequences that you will consider to be equally (or more) loathsome. You will empower the worst criminals and will probably cause more deaths, not fewer.

Overturn Roe v. Wade because the federal government doesn't have that authority, but don't blame me for your failure to convince over half of Americans that the life of a young fetus requires the same protections as one outside the womb. The drug laws don't work because a sizable portion of Americans don't agree with it. It will be the same if abortion is illegal.

Ron Paul 2016. Its Never Too Late!

With Judge Napolitano for Vice President.
Peter Schiff as Secretary of Treasury.
Jesse Ventura as Secretary of Defense.

I like that lineup.

I like that lineup.