Author Topic: Would you change your 2008 Repub nominee vote? (Read 2238 times)

240 is Back · « **on:** March 22, 2010, 08:33:33 PM »

If you had a chance to change your vote for the republican nominee for President in 2008, who would you vote for? Would you still support your choice of Romney, mccain or Rudy? Or would you now vote for Ron Paul?

FOX did a LOT to marginalize Ron paul in 2008. hannty wouldn't say his name without scoffing, and they excluded him from a debate yet let in Thompson who had way less votes at that point.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #1 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:37:01 PM »

I can't speak for republicans but if I could go back, I would have switched parties and voted for Ron Paul in the primary.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #2 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:43:36 PM »

Quote from: Hugo Chavez on March 22, 2010, 08:37:01 PM

I can't speak for republicans but if I could go back, I would have switched parties and voted for Ron Paul in the primary.

me too. I voted for romney in the primary.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #3 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:47:57 PM »

Quote from: 333386 on March 22, 2010, 08:43:36 PM

me too. I voted for romney in the primary.

I did support Ron Paul as much as I could, but I made the stupid mistake of believing he would run independent if he didn't win. by then it was to late and I switched my support to Obama

Yes I feel like an ass.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #4 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:48:57 PM »

Quote from: Hugo Chavez on March 22, 2010, 08:47:57 PM

I did support Ron Paul as much as I could, but I made the stupid mistake of believing he would run independent if he didn't win. by then it was to late and I switched my support to Obama Yes I feel like an ass.

We all feel like asses lately.

240 is Back · « **Reply #5 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:49:38 PM »

RP was right on the economy, and on the war.

Obama is nothing more than Bush 2 on the war, and Bush 2 on the economy.
His wars are identical, and the Stim bill was just the bailout part 2.
identical on amnesty.

Oh well... it's not like we can blame some network for single-handedly sinking Ron paul with slanted coverage of him, right?

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #6 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:59:43 PM »

I can guess the names of a few people on this board that will not be responding to this thread

tonymctones · « **Reply #7 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:03:55 PM »

I like ron paul but he honestly doesnt have a chance...he might might have a chance in 12 if the economy is still in the shitter or obama pushes amnesty through.

Its not the news stations shit on him its more that the majority of america isnt ready to hear and do things that he wants.

Tito24 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:24:06 PM »

i would have voted for Ron paul...

However, the powers that be would kill him "faster than Rush Limbaugh Finishing a script for percocet"

he wouldn't make a good puppet that is for sure.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #9 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:29:24 PM »

Quote from: MarkosChamakh on March 22, 2010, 09:24:06 PM

i would have voted for Ron paul...

However, the powers that be would kill him "faster than Rush Limbaugh Finishing a script for percocet"

he wouldn't make a good puppet that is for sure.

I would hate for that to happen but if it did, we'd have a martyr that would still effect change after he was gone. I wouldn't not vote for someone because you think they would be killed. That notion is just submissive.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #10 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:30:37 PM »

Quote from: tonymctones on March 22, 2010, 09:03:55 PM

I like ron paul but he honestly doesnt have a chance...he might might have a chance in 12 if the economy is still in the shitter or obama pushes amnesty through.

Its not the news stations shit on him its more that the majority of america isnt ready to hear and do things that he wants.

that wasn't the question huggy bear.

BM OUT · « **Reply #11 on:** March 23, 2010, 06:33:34 AM »

I voted for Paul.In fact,there wasnt one other republican I could have supported UNTIL they ran against the two commies.If the republicans nominate Romney I will once again be voting for the lesser of two evils.

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 23, 2010, 07:00:54 AM »

I voted for Ron Paul too. I think because there was so much anger with Bush and the war, a democrat was a near shoe-in and Obama was a master at campaigning and bringing out people to vote that normally aren't interested in politics.
I could say that I wish Romney was the nominee but I think Obama may have won anyway in 2008. If the election would occur in November, Romney would beat Obama IMO...and I think if they nominate Romney in 2012, he will beat Obama. There are a lot of independents & moderates who do not agree with the massive spending, progressive agenda of this administration. We will need a tough person to get us back on track economically...actually, someone like Ron Paul who really would cut spending across the board.

George Whorewell · « **Reply #13 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:15:11 AM »

John McCain then, John McCain now.

The only reason everyone is now a superlibertarian is because of the excrement that was elected into the white house. With a right of center moderate who has a ton of political credibility and experience we would be much better off.

I like Ron Paul, but I would never vote for him as President.

drkaje · « **Reply #14 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:19:54 AM »

McCain/Palin sucked then and they suck now.

Republicans would have run someone serious if they wanted the white house. Instead they ran someone who was washed up in '92 and a hitable chick with no political experience, clout or anything other than being too dumb to stop having children past a certain age and a knocked up teenage daughter to salvage some right to life votes.

George Whorewell · « **Reply #15 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:28:22 AM »

With any other feasible VP nominee, you can't seriously make the argument that a McCain presidency would have been bad for this country. Especially in light of what has gone on since the election.

I wasn't in love with Palin either. But I would have dealt with an incompetent VP, rather than an incompetent, crooked, left wing radical as P. Plus, as bad as Palin is-- Is Biden now Albert Einstein?

Lets see- An independent minded, experienced, patriotic centrist as president with a stupid and inexperienced VP. OR

A left wing lunatic with zero experience as president with an experienced and stupid VP.

Seems like a pretty obvious choice imo.

drkaje · « **Reply #16 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:35:39 AM »

Quote from: George Whorewell on March 23, 2010, 08:28:22 AM

With any other feasible VP nominee, you can't seriously make the argument that a McCain presidency would have been bad for this country. Especially in light of what has gone on since the election.

I wasn't in love with Palin either. But I would have dealt with an incompetent VP, rather than an incompetent, crooked, left wing radical as P. Plus, as bad as Palin is-- Is Biden now Albert Einstein?

Lets see- An independent minded, experienced, patriotic centrist as president with a stupid and inexperienced VP. OR

A left wing lunatic with zero experience as president with an experienced and stupid VP.

Seems like a pretty obvious choice imo.

McCain sucked ass. Sorry, I used to like the guy but he never recovered emotionally or politically (core values) from South Carolina and we all know it. Additionally, he was/is way too old and among the "left behind, whacko, Jesus is coming back to Jerusalem so we have to control the mid-east" nutcases.

The leadership knew we were spiraling towards an economic mess and didn't want to be blamed when things finally hit rock bottom.

What we need is for fiscally conservative republicans to come out of hiding.

George Whorewell · « **Reply #17 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:37:49 AM »

Sorry.

FAIL.

Reason: My aqua teen avatar totally trumps yours.

BM OUT · « **Reply #18 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:38:22 AM »

Quote from: George Whorewell on March 23, 2010, 08:15:11 AM

John McCain then, John McCain now.

The only reason everyone is now a superlibertarian is because of the excrement that was elected into the white house. With a right of center moderate who has a ton of political credibility and experience we would be much better off.

I like Ron Paul, but I would never vote for him as President.

Im not a McCain fan,when he was for amnesty,tried to ban ultimate fighting,wants stricter steroid laws,wants to control supplements,was against the Bush tax cuts and on and on it goes.Sorry,I voted for him against Obama but felt like puking as I pulled the lever.Id vote for Paul Ryan if he ran or Pence or Thune,but I want a conservative NOT a liberal pretending to be a republican.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #19 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:39:54 AM »

Quote from: George Whorewell on March 23, 2010, 08:37:49 AM

Sorry.

FAIL.

Reason: My aqua teen avatar totally trumps yours.

The fact is that no GOP candidate was going to be Obama in 2008. The timing was such that it just was not going to happen.

drkaje · « **Reply #20 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:43:47 AM »

Quote from: George Whorewell on March 23, 2010, 08:37:49 AM

Sorry.

FAIL.

Reason: My aqua teen avatar totally trumps yours.

"The innocent shall suffer - big time."

saopl · « **Reply #21 on:** March 23, 2010, 08:44:14 AM »

Ron Paul

BayGBM · « **Reply #22 on:** March 23, 2010, 09:13:36 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on March 22, 2010, 08:33:33 PM

If you had a chance to change your vote for the republican nominee for President in 2008, who would you vote for? Would you still support your choice of Romney, mccain or Rudy? Or would you now vote for Ron Paul?

FOX did a LOT to marginalize Ron paul in 2008. hannty wouldn't say his name without scoffing, and they excluded him from a debate yet let in Thompson who had way less votes at that point.

It’s not fair but looks matter. Paul looked out “mousey” to inspire others and be an effective leader; his demeanor mirrored his looks. He can be in a cabinet, serve as an advisor, or hold another appointed post but he can’t win at the presidential level.

240 is Back · « **Reply #23 on:** March 23, 2010, 09:17:37 AM »

If Ron Paul had looked like Sean Connery, he'd be president right now.

George Whorewell · « **Reply #24 on:** March 23, 2010, 09:25:07 AM »

And if 240 or Bust looked like Sean Connery, he wouldn't be known as 240 or Bust.

Billy- I think most conservatives feel the way you do. I am a little bit more center though. However, I would vote for McCain just because he is less of a polarizing character. I'm not saying the republicans should be running sissy liberals pretending to be republicans, but-- To win the election and to win the moderate vote, you need to be pragmatic. Obama is going the opposite route. Clinton was pragmatic. Reagan was pragmatic. Bush II did the same thing Obama is doing now.The country works best when some compromises are made. Having an ultra partisan hack in office is a hell of a lot worse than having a credible, compatent commander in chief that isn't winning Republican of the Year.