Presidential Election: 2012

  • Thread starter Omnis
  • 3,780 comments
  • 157,107 views
I think Romney took the cake, after Newt declared he wants to have a moonbase.

After seeing the debates, and even with the little speaktime he got ,Ron Paul should run for office. He has some silly ideas but so does every other candidate.
 
Last edited:
I heard about Gingrich's moon plan. Sounds like Top Gear logic, "Ambitious, but rubbish".
 
I couldn't bring myself to take a presidential candidate seriously when they are proposing a moon based within 4-8 years from led by a country with billions in debt. Not to mention establishing a moon base would break the international Outer Space Treaty.
 
Ambitious candidate is ambitious. But fails.

Trolling candidate with double standards is trolling candidate with double standards.

Ron Paul would give the Republicans some credibility with people who aren't traditional, bible bashing conservatives. That's my opinion anyway.

I thought this was funny; Good guy candidate

18rb.jpg
 
I couldn't bring myself to take a presidential candidate seriously when they are proposing a moon based within 4-8 years from led by a country with billions in debt. Not to mention establishing a moon base would break the international Outer Space Treaty.

I believe when Gingrich referred to a moon base in 4-8 years, he was referring to a private sector organization doing such, not NASA.
 
I believe when Gingrich referred to a moon base in 4-8 years, he was referring to a private sector organization doing such, not NASA.

He still offered incentives for these private companies, along with support from NASA. So in short, the American public would end up paying for it.

Plus we don't even have a vehicle that can transport people into space, let along construction supplies and equipment. There is no way the private industry could develop something in 4-8 years. They are still having issues getting rockets to work.
 
Umm... it's a joke about how everyone calls Ron the "crazy old uncle" and how it's the other candidates have crazy ideas?
 
I know. Crazy Uncle Paul with his "Let the states and their people decide their own laws".

Absolute madness. It's like backdoor democracy (!)
 
Umm... it's a joke about how everyone calls Ron the "crazy old uncle" and how it's the other candidates have crazy ideas?

Ow... :lol:

If they keep this up, maybe Ron gets the votes in the next primary. If they are sane enough.
 
Hey, I know, let's ban premarital sex altogether to protect us all from STDs caught as a consequence bad decision making. Please protect me from myself. I'm just too stupid to know how to make smart decisions.

It's a good thing Rick Santorum isn't a GTP member or a lurker. :scared:
 
I'm very late to the Republican race, as I don't usually pay too much attention to that side (Not a Democrat either). Maybe someone can catch me up?

Out of all of the remaining candidates, which ones have ideas that they could actually implement in short order if they get elected? What would they be?
 
Don't even take this summary with a grain of salt because it is true, sadly. This is basically all you need to know about the candidates.

Mitt Romney: Generally agreed upon as being the front-runner. He's pretty. He has an attractive wife. He has five sons who look exactly like him. His healthcare plan in Massachusetts was the blueprint for Obamacare, he's a serial flip-flopper so much so that jokes have been made on stage, he hates Muslims, and he wants to go to war with Iran.

Newt Gingrich: Lying, cheating, thieving bastard of a man who is currently on his third wife (he left his second wife after she was diagnosed with cancer). He has an intimidating persona, and uses this to convince the public that a correct person is wrong, and that he is the correct one. He almost never is the correct one. He loves sweeping generalizations and scare-tactics. Hates Muslims. Wants to build an American base on the moon by the end of his second-term as President (he has said this officially).

Rick Santorum: Religious zealot. Wants to go to war with Iran, Syria, and everybody else who maintains a laughably weak military. Hates Muslims and gay people.

Ron Paul: The most thorough understanding of economics of basically any person in modern times, thorough understanding of and Originalist interpretation of the Constitution, his Constitutionalist political philosophy has been unwavering for 30 years and he has never been bribed or swayed for political gain, he has refused to accept his Congressional retirement pension because he believes elected officials shouldn't be entitled so such benefits, he has a very thorough plan on how to cut $1 trillion dollars from the budget within the first year of his Presidency, and would finance these cuts in part by cutting all foreign aid to enemies and allies alike and also bringing home our troops from around the world and shutting down military bases that we don't actually need, which is most of them. He believes in capitalism, free markets, Austrian-theory economics, free trade and travel with countries around the world, and diplomacy. He believes in a strong military but thinks war should only be used as a last resort, and wars should be declared officially and won decisively. He does not hate Muslims; he believes in religious freedom as is protected by the Constitution. He does not hate gays; he thinks everybody should be able to wed anyone they want, except that marriage should not be a government institution as it is now, but a function of local churches and organizations where the idea of marriage originated in the first place.
 
Can't tell if ... or just ...

Nothing wrong with taking an active interest in, *gasp*, politics (!)
 
It's funny because I've done all of those things at one point or another. I have 10 of those pocket Constitutions laying around here somewhere. I must find out who this girl is and wife her. :lol:

EDIT: Good call Famine.

Also, after posting that vid on my FB, I was informed that I actually know the girl in it. Wasn't expecting that.
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you would vote for either Gingrich, Romney, or Santorum, assuming Paul doesn't get the nomination?
 
Also, after posting that vid on my FB, I was informed that I actually know the girl in it. Wasn't expecting that.

You should definitely go round and proposition her then. Your common interests are boundless!
 
Looks like Ron Paul has gained some traction after the last debate:




And Keef, here is another woman for you to Internet stalk, but she's married.





Now on to President Obama. It has been claimed by some that he keeps his promises.

Here is one:



"If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period. No one will take it away, no matter what."

Apparently "no matter what" does not apply to religious organizations.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-01-29/catholic-birth-control-protest/52874660/1

NEW ORLEANS – From Maine to Phoenix to southern Louisiana, Catholic churches across the USA this weekend echoed with scorn for a new federal rule requiring faith-based employers to include birth control and other reproductive services in their health care coverage.

Dozens of priests took the rare step of reading letters from the pulpit urging parishioners to reach out to Washington and oppose the new rule, enacted earlier this month.

The rule requires nearly all employers to provide their employees access to health insurance that covers artificial contraception, sterilization services and the "morning after" birth control pill.

The mandate exempts churches but applies to Catholic universities, Catholic-based charities and Baptists, Methodists and other denominations.

For a guy that keeps his promises that seems very out of character. But as your average politician goes, this sounds pretty par for the course.
 
Umm... it's a joke about how everyone calls Ron the "crazy old uncle" and how it's the other candidates have crazy ideas?
Newt's moon station will cost money; Ron Paul's ideas would sacrifice the US's future. It is clear who is crazier.
 
Dapper
Ron Paul's ideas would sacrifice the US's future.
Yes, letting individuals be individuals is so very dangerous. Expecting the stupid masses to be responsible for themselves is crazy talk. We must make everyone behave like happy automatons with the exact same wealth, workload, and values. Now, if we can just compromise on whether we tell them who they can have sex with or what they can eat. Whatever we decide on, it should clearly be based on which corporations and special interest groups are paying us the most. And cost should not be a factor, even if we don't have the money.

[/sarcasm]
 
Newt's moon station will cost money; Ron Paul's ideas would sacrifice the US's future. It is clear who is crazier.

Joining in the last two comments; How would pumping billions into a moon base not sacrifice the US' future? The States just doesn't have that money nor the capability to get that done by the end of this decade. It's absolute lunar-cy.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention the whole "Why?" part of the equation.



Far be it from me to belittle the achievements of America's space program, but "building a moonbase" doesn't seem like it would be too far up people's lists of "important things that should be done" at the moment.
 
I'm almost 100% convinced that Gingrich is just hardcore trolling the entire country for a laugh. Is he smart enough to do that?
 
Back