If the primary was today, who would you vote for Republican candidate?

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

Gary Johnson could wipe his ass with all those RINO retards. Johnson served New Mexico well as a true Libertarian Governor for two terms. He ran on the Libertarian ticket for President. He's what the Republicans should be running, but sadly we don't have a real Republican Party anymore. It's a bunch of centrists and big-government types. Hell, no wonder so many people voted for Mr Hopey-Changey the first time.

I still haven't heard how the "hopey-changey" thingy has worked out for all it's minions yet.

many improvements under the leadership of President Obama. It is important to remember the dire predictions of Republicans during both the 2008 and 2012 elections. The predictions were for economic disaster and federal deficits which would continue to soar out of control. Here's the link: http://hubpages.com/politics/14-Facts-About-The-Obama-Presidency-That-Mo...
And, as the author states at the end of the article, you are certainly free to pile on and state that this is all bs, but if you are not specific about how these facts are in error, your charges ring hollow.

In addition, while most of the Republicans act as demagogues on this topic and appeal to the fears of Americans, the violent crime rate is about half of what it was 25 years ago! Here's a link to those statistics: http://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in...
AND, while the greatest fall in crime was during the 8 years of the Clinton Administration, about a 1/3 drop in the violent crime rate, violent crime has dropped over 20% since Obama took office!

We have problems in America. Violent crime is still too high. Our economy suffers from unsustainable income inequality. But over the last 20 years or so, we have been far better under Democratic POTUS leadership than we have under Republicans. Ironically, this includes those most affluent Americans who invest heavily in the stock markets and have had much better results under Clinton and Obama than they had under W!

BTW -- I am still awaiting a call from my son-in-law, a card-carrying member of the NRA, or from his father, informing me about the feds confiscating their multiple weapons. No apocalypse under Obama. No "Great Recession" or worse. And the Republicans almost universally predicted America would be in disarray and economic depression by now! Hmmm...

in front of various businesses proliferating around the Toledo area in the past several months? Where are all of those illegals taking all of our jobs? One establishment I pass weekly has had a sign out for at least 4 months now. We need the workers! And, if you have a 2 or 4 year college degree in a needed field, the sky is the limit, especially if you're willing to relocate.
The economy may not be booming, but if you want a job you can get one, or maybe even two or more! Do you really think that places like McDonald's and Walmart are increasing the wages they're willing to pay out of the goodness of their hearts? They're doing so because too many of their workers have been leaving for the better jobs that are available now, which were not available during W's Great Recession. Duh!

Dale can't admit that Mr Hopey-Changey was a huge failure. As soon as Obama reached office, he appointed a number of people into his administration that assured the bankers wouldn't be punished for crashing the entire US economy.

The real practices of the previous Bush administration were simply continued. The destruction of the real middle class proceeded without letup. Militant overseas policy continued without a break.

Liberals just can't admit this. If they did, they'd have to admit by implication that despite their claims of being so highly educated, they're as easy to fool with propaganda as the Conservative base is.

So Americans obviously started to choose Republicans at the polls. The Democrats lost the House, then the Senate. Now 2/3rds of state legislatures and governorships are Republican too. And all that happened during the reign of Mr Hopey-Changey .

of course. Nothing but vacuous opinion.
No facts to refute anything in the links!
No wonder I label you Mr. Empty Glass.
Is the sky still falling, Chicken Little?

For years now you, and your conservative/libertarian fellow travelers, have been predicting economic disaster, but Obama's policies have led us into gradual improvements.
PLEASE don't allow facts to get in the way of your vacuous opinions, Chicken Little!

Election losses are understandable. I have stated ad nuseum that Republican candidates have used emotional issues to turn voters away from practical, everyday economic challenges. Republicans are great at doing this. Overall, Republicans have been better at politics than have Democrats, so they've won more elections. That does not make Republican policies effective, nor does it make Democratic policies ineffective. The links above prove that Obama's policies ARE effective!

You might be on to something, Dale. Only yesterday he told the French, ISIS has been brought under control! That doesn't look like "effective" to me!


Things are gradually getting better in Paris, as well. Most of the fires burned out this morning.

with what I posted, so you find an error Obama made about the power of a terrorist group which attacked thousands of miles away from America, over which the POTUS had no control whatsoever!

What your post does NOT do is disprove anything about how much better off the United States is now, DESPITE THE DIRE PREDICTIONS OF REPUBLICANS, CONSERVATIVES, AND LIBERTARIANS UPON OBAMA'S FIRST ELECTION, AND HIS RE-ELECTION!

And what do we get from the leading Republican candidates for POTUS in 2016? More of the trickle-down economics which plunged us into W's Great Recession. And which socio-economic group is favored by these Republican/conservative/libertarian economic proposals? The super-rich, of course! Thanks, Republicans!

It seems incredible that even today, Liberals like Dale continue to push the Big Lie that Obama has been some sort of effective President. The physical fact of his isolation (he doesn't cooperate and hasn't had a compliant Congress for almost 6 years) should be more than enough of a counterpoint to the standard Liberal lie.

What the militant Liberals are gearing up to do is vote for Queen Hillary in order to get the same sort of ineffective leftwing Presidency. And it's not even that leftwing, since Queen Hillary is part of the American Aristrocracy and she will only continue the process of destroying the middle class and attacking the Middle East.

tire of stating the same old, same old all the time?
No statistics. No facts.
You have nothing but vacuous opinions. Please, please, please...never allow facts to get in the way of those vacuous opinions, Chicken Little.

And, since your previous posting over the years on this site about the sky falling were all dead wrong, what year is it that you are now predicting the United States will fall apart? Is that 2025? I really can't remember, and I'm not going to pore over your postings to find it. Are you hoping that most of us who take a positive view of America at this site will be dead by then, so we won't be able to point out that you were wrong once again?

The sad fact of Obama's so-called Presidency is that he got the Affordable Care Act pushed through with his singular Congressional majority, and then he did nothing else of note. He's one of those non-leader Presidents who end up being an empty chair without a compliant Congressional majority to back him.

It's just amazing that you militant Liberals continue to support that mulatto moron. And yet there's a strategy there, in that your support of failed Democrat leadership only lays the groundwork for voting for another ineffective Democrat 'leader' namely Hillary Clinton.

Liberals often ask the common right-wing man why he votes for a party that doesn't serve his interests. The sentiment is wrong, but the same accusation can be applied to the lefties. Why do common lefties (not you, Dale... you're in the Golden Class, which is placed above the middle class) support the Democratic Party when that party is clearly run BY millionaires FOR millionaires? During Obama's tenure, the middle class has continued to be attacked by high taxation and low government services.

What the middle class needs to do is support a Get The Fuck Out of My Wallet Party. And as it happens, we have two of those parties ready to go: The TEA Party, and the Libertarians. Sadly the middle class is full of stone-dumb people (whom you helped indoctrinate into supporting this sad little empire, Dale) and such people don't act in their best interests at all. They only support the empire. Wildly irresponsible bank loans helped them keep ahead of the consequences of their (lack of) actions (namely hordes of worthless Blacks), but that's lost momentum. Credit allowed Americans to avoid natural consequence. As credit dries up in our general economic collapse, so to Americans have to finally face reality: Hordes of public-school dolts who have no ambition other than to collect lifelong welfare while slinging dope on the side for cash.

Half of the nation's births are now categorized as minorities. We're already dead, since the cultural cancer has metastasized. The nation is being inherited by a people who can't run anything of note. This was a nation built by White men, who had the fortitude and intelligence and moral basis to run such a beast. Sadly the inheritors have no such virtues; they're clearly incapable of running a power plant, hospital, factory, regulatory agency, etc. Anyone who's been in the hiring process as I have, can clearly see that the quality of incoming recruits only continues to drop. (Automation is a natural reaction to this.)

to fit your aka. You can negate NONE of the facts about the economic improvements under Obama. Instead you turn to the same emotional arguments Republican candidates use to appeal to the worst in humanity in order to get votes.
You are not a libertarian. We have established that. You like government intrusion into private lives, just like most who vote Republican.
You are, in fact, a typical Republican voter. You give Republicans your vote, and they do the bidding of the true "Golden Class," the super-rich, like Willard, John, and The Donald. You use the language of white supremacists, based, not upon facts, but upon skewed opinions, to justify your voting pattern, As I have often stated, overall, the Republicans have been much better at playing the political game than have the Democrats. You are a prime example of that!

BTW, Chicken Little, how's that price of gas doing lately? Almost all of the gas stations I passed today were well under the $1.99 mark. Weren't you and your fellow travelers predicting gas at $5.00 or more by now if Obama remained as POTUS?

BTW, Chicken Little, just for you, I noted that I had many African-American children among those collecting candy from me on Halloween. Not only were none of them engaged in anything which could be considered criminal activity, neither were the adults who accompanied many of them. And all of them were as polite as were the children of other ethnic and racial backgrounds, Hmmm...
I truly am sorry that your personal experiences with African-Americans have been so negative that you tend to stereotype, and ascribe those behaviors to most or all African-Americans. Those have not been my experiences.

"You are not a libertarian. We have established that. You like government intrusion into private lives, just like most who vote Republican."

When you start outright lying in your postings, it's clear evidence that I already won the argument and you can't stand it.

After all, that makes sense. For decades your horrible Liberalism and institutional position were unchallenged. You never actually had to deal with dissent.

Now out here in the Real World, your ivory tower environment no longer exists for you. You can't just shout down those who speak the truth. You can't just shame people into shutting up. I'm sure you did that many times as a teacher, given the state of the so-called education system today.

Now, keep claiming that anyone who opposes your views is a "Republican". That still works in Toledo, where Republican is the Liberal equivalent of calling somebody a Nigger. But Toledo's shrinking, and so has the influence of Liberalism. That's why the right wing gained a supermajority in the House, a simple majority in the Senate, and a 2/3 majority of dominance in state legislatures and state governorships. And it's gonna get worse for you Liberals, since we're coming to destroy your silly gun free zones and public pensions and affirmative action and illegal immigration and penchant for Islamic scum, and all that other infantile nonsense that you assaulted the nation with for decades.

Now, you're just getting boring.

true libertarian! Under the thread, "Gaswork: Documentary of the Hazards of the Oil and Gas Industry," you rail on about how important it is to have government regulation of at least the fracking part of the oil and gas industry. After I state that this is not the position of a true libertarian, you answer with your own definition of what, in your opinion, a libertarian really is, as if this is a well-known definition. In answer, I posted the following:
"GZ aka Mr. Empty Glass -- As you do so often, you write as
though you are an authority. Yet, you have no credentials, nor can you cite practical experience. I do NOT claim to be an expert on libertarianism. You do, even though your self-proclaimed expertise has no basis whatsoever.
Here is what Merriam-Webster states. I'll let the readers judge. 'Libertarian: a person who believes that people should be allowed to do and say what they want without any interference from the government.'
By this definition Chicken Little, you are not a true libertarian. You may call yourself anything you want. That doesn't mean that you're right.
You are just so emotional! And, you are so defensive!"
Hmmm...Merriam-Webster or Mr. Empty Glass...which is a more credible source?

Like I said, when you resort to outright lies, you've been cornered like a mad dog.

You Liberal radicals constantly equate right-wing ideology as being for "no government" instead of "less government". Logically those aren't the same, but you sure do try to con the public into believing they do.

A Libertarian doesn't believe there should be NO government, hence such a person doesn't logically believe there should be NO regulation. When one speaks of interference, one doesn't mean all interaction. That's stupid and wrong. Any parent knows what interference means with their children. As long as the kids are playing well together, then the parent doesn't need to step in and correct the process. That's not "interference" at all. Playing gets done, as is the right of children to do.

Interference comes about when the government is huge and applies regulations which are logically pointless except from the view of a huge government. But protecting groundwater and the public right to know, aren't interference at all. It's the proper function of government, which as a Libertarian and citizen, I know has to exist.

To sum up: I've seen rugs that lie less than you do, Dale. You're a liar.

You or Merriam-Webster?
Are all those who falsely claim to be a libertarian as emotional as you, Chicken Little?

BTW -- Gas is down below $1.70 a gallon at many places now.

The ideology that believes in no government is Anarchy. Anarchists are not confused with any right wing ideology.

Libertarians do not believe in an ideology of no government.


Merriam-Webster folks on this point.

Personally, I have never met a true libertarian who wanted much more than police and fire protection, and basic street and road maintenance. Most want us to withdraw from any military activity beyond the bare minimum to protect the United States. I have certainly never met a true libertarian who wanted any government regulation on any human/business activity as Chicken Little does.

But, look. Mr. Empty Glass may call himself anything he wants to call himself, even if he is incorrect in using this label.

I suggest you check out the Libertarian Party's national website. Especially its motto.


the GOP won the 2014 elections overwhelmingly? Remember when the Republican leaders promised a deluge of bills would be passed that President Obama would be forced to veto? The fact is that the lack of cooperation is in the hands of the Republican leaders of Congress! At last count, Obama had vetoed a total of 5 bills in his nearly 7 years in office.

Where is that blizzard of bills coming from the Republican-controlled Congress? It's nowhere in sight! The failure of leadership lies within the Republican Party, in particular with the Republicans in Congress. How many times have the Republican leaders asked Obama for a meeting about legislation, and he has flatly turned them down?
The fact is, the current Republican leadership does not want cooperation. The current Republican leadership does not want this nation moving forward, as long as there's a Democrat in the White House. They are afraid that the Democrats would get too much credit for improved times in America. The Republicans would rather win political points than improve the lives of the vast majority of Americans by cooperating with a Democratic POTUS. And, the Republicans are playing this political game extremely well! And who benefits the most? The super-rich, of course!!

the House, Paul Ryan, refers to discussing issues directly with President Obama, and compromising with Democrats on some issues to move the nation forward. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-ryan-immigration-reform_56493e6...
Apparently, Speaker Ryan does not articulate a position that compromise is the equivalent of surrender. If that is indeed true, Speaker Ryan may well have real problems with many in his own political party.
Will the new Speaker's words turn into actions to provide real leadership from the Republicans in Congress? We'll see. Talk is cheap.

Opal Covey is a better candidate for POTUS than these clowns.

Don't you mean Opal Clinton?

I think GZ and MikeyA should be investigated for Un-American activities.

The heart of Liberalism today is Fascist. Piss off a Liberal (which is very easy to do, since you only have to advocate the civil and economic rights of the individual) and he soon starts screeching about using government force to stop you.

Well pal, let me tell you: The First and Second Amendments are equally unassailable. They are absolute civil rights. You will never get them overturned by removing them from the US Constitution (or altering them). Americans may have reservations about those rights, but largely don't want to lose them for themselves, so the majority will NEVER support removal or alteration.

You really need to spend some time with a therapist.

I hear Dr. Dale is now accepting new patients. He knows anything worth knowing about psychoanalysis. How to call patients the right names, tells them how dumb they are and how smart he is, and lets them all know "you could be like me if you tried".