If hypothetically, I were able to run for congress right now, would I have your vote?

[Christian Liberty]

Just a "for fun" thread:)

[Christian Liberty]

BTW: I voted "Yes" more so I could see the results than anything else.

[eduardo89]

Considering your anti-Cruz rhetoric, I'd probably vote against you. Not because I like Cruz, I do, but because it shows you'd probably be unable to pass a single pro-liberty measure in Congress if you consider someone who agrees with us 90% of the time evil and an enemy.

[bolil]

Yes. Even if you couldn't "get much done" you could at least a little from keeping much from getting done. Don't take that badly, Ron Paul didn't "get much passed."

[eduardo89]

Care to explain your vote Casey?

[CaseyJones]

he would not win run for local build a brand

[jkob]

You are not eligible yet to be a US Representative. You have to be 25.

[Christian Liberty]

Yes. Even if you couldn't "get much done" you could at least a little from keeping much from getting done. Don't take that badly, Ron Paul didn't "get much passed."

I don't take it badly. This was a purely hypothetical thread. For better or worse, I couldn't do what Rand Paul is doing. Assuming he is "playing the game" I get that someone has to do it, but I can't I can't really lie and I wouldn't want to either.

If I were to ever run it would be more of a "Tell the truth and leave it to God" kind of thing.


he would not win run for local build a brand

I'm only 18, I can't actually run for congress ATM. Purely hypothetical thread.

[CaseyJones]

18 is old enough for many local and state offices :)

[JK/SEA]

where's the ' fuck no' option...?

j/k...

[fr33]

I voted yes but I have to admit that I think you're an 18 year old who is inexperienced in the "real" world. Not because of your expressed opinions, which I tend to agree with, but because I see some immaturity that I too had at your age.

[MichaelDavis]

Considering your anti-Cruz rhetoric, I'd probably vote against you. Not because I like Cruz, I do, but because it shows you'd probably be unable to pass a single pro-liberty measure in Congress if you consider someone who agrees with us 90% of the time evil and an enemy.

You can support two liberty candidates, even if they don't like each other. FreedomFanatic is better than any Old Guard candidate, so he would have my vote. I personally love Ted Cruz for the same reasons, even if he isn't considered "pure" by RPF standards.

[eduardo89]

You can support two liberty candidates, even if they don't like each other. FreedomFanatic is better than any Old Guard candidate, so he would have my vote. I personally love Ted Cruz for the same reasons, even if he isn't considered "pure" by RPF standards.

I voted probably not in the hope that another liberty candidate would run in the same race as FF. Obviously I'd take him over a Democrat or run of the milk GOP, but I'd rather a liberty candidate willing to work with people we don't necessarily always see eye-to-eye with, like Ted Cruz who I agree with probably 98% of the time. Instead FF calls him evil and the enemy. That is not how we get things done, Ron Paul always talked about keeping things civil and building coalitions with people we don't always agree with. Calling someone like Ted Cruz evil kills any chance at progress.

[Brett85]

I vote for libertarians as long as they're pro life, so yes. And I consider anyone to be pro life who at least supports overturning Roe v. Wade and banning abortion at the state level.

[klamath]

Since you ask, no. You lack of life experience shows heavily in your posting. You think a lot about things but draw too many of your conclusions from books and reading but no real world practical experience.

[JK/SEA]

Since you ask, no. You lack of life experience shows heavily in your posting. You think a lot about things but draw too many of your conclusions from books and reading but no real world practical experience.


personnally, i think your statement is irrelevant due to the fact that the idiots we have now are...well...idiots..

pretty sure our young friend would hold his own...heck, all he's gotta do is hang with Amash...or Rand.

[Uriah]

No. You don't live in my congressional district.

[Christian Liberty]

I voted probably not in the hope that another liberty candidate would run in the same race as FF. Obviously I'd take him over a Democrat or run of the milk GOP, but I'd rather a liberty candidate willing to work with people we don't necessarily always see eye-to-eye with, like Ted Cruz who I agree with probably 98% of the time. Instead FF calls him evil and the enemy. That is not how we get things done, Ron Paul always talked about keeping things civil and building coalitions with people we don't always agree with. Calling someone like Ted Cruz evil kills any chance at progress.

I'd still work with him on issues that we agreed on, I'd just never endorse him. And yeah, in real life my rhetoric is a little different than on the internet, although I didn't actually expect you to know that.


Since you ask, no. You lack of life experience shows heavily in your posting. You think a lot about things but draw too many of your conclusions from books and reading but no real world practical experience.

Oh, that's cool. Don't worry about telling it to me straight.

No. You don't live in my congressional district.

Irrelevant:p

[heavenlyboy34]

Maybe if you mature over the next several years and I'm in a voting mood, I'd consider voting for ya OP.

[supermario21]

Of course. I hope your floor speeches would be good lol

[AuH20]

I would, but you need some polish bro.

[eduardo89]

If the ballot were Danke or you, I'd vote for Danke.

If the ballot were Smart3 or you, I'd vote for you in a heartbeat.

[Brett85]

I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

[CaseyJones]

I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

I would vote for you

[eduardo89]

I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

I'd vote for you. I think I agree with you on 95% of issues.

[Christian Liberty]

If the ballot were Danke or you, I'd vote for Danke.

If the ballot were Smart3 or you, I'd vote for you in a heartbeat.

I don't know who Danke is, but yeah, almost anyone would be better than Smart(alec)3.


I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

Considering way more than that would vote for Rand, there would be a lot of stupid people.

You're not quite as libertarian as I am (At least IMO) but you're way more so than Rand Paul, and not that far off from Ron. If I had to guess, I'd say you're probably somewhere between Justin Amash and Ron Paul. Which is pretty darn close in the liberty department.

The libertines and radically "pro-choice" would of course vote no.

[Brett85]

I You're not quite as libertarian as I am (At least IMO) but you're way more so than Rand Paul, and not that far off from Ron. If I had to guess, I'd say you're probably somewhere between Justin Amash and Ron Paul. Which is pretty darn close in the liberty department.

The libertines and radically "pro-choice" would of course vote no.

Yeah, I consider myself to be in between Ron and Rand on the issues. I'm more openly libertarian than Amash on some issues, such as ending the war on drugs, but I imagine that's primarily because he's a politician and has to be more careful about how he expresses some of his beliefs.

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, I consider myself to be in between Ron and Rand on the issues. I'm more openly libertarian than Amash on some issues, such as ending the war on drugs, but I imagine that's primarily because he's a politician and has to be more careful about how he expresses some of his beliefs.

Of course. Heck, Ron doesn't get up there and say "I'd legalize heroin" either, although its easy to figure out in his case:p

I'd probably just say "10th amendment" or something similar with regard to drugs as well. No need to focus the campaign exclusively on that. Of course, not being a politician, I can currently say whatever I want:p

[Brett85]

Of course. Heck, Ron doesn't get up there and say "I'd legalize heroin" either, although its easy to figure out in his case:p

I'd probably just say "10th amendment" or something similar with regard to drugs as well. No need to focus the campaign exclusively on that. Of course, not being a politician, I can currently say whatever I want:p

Yeah, if I were running for federal office, I would just make the case that it should be a state issue. If I were running for state office, it would be hard to avoid that issue. I would probably just have to moderate my views a bit and just advocate marijuana legalization, since that's the only drug that actually has a chance to be legalized anyway.

[specsaregood]

I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

I'd be a yes vote for you.

[CaseyJones]

TradCon you should think about running for something, start local go the Massie route

[Brett85]

TradCon you should think about running for something, start local go the Massie route

Yeah, maybe sometime in the future.

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, if I were running for federal office, I would just make the case that it should be a state issue. If I were running for state office, it would be hard to avoid that issue. I would probably just have to moderate my views a bit and just advocate marijuana legalization, since that's the only drug that actually has a chance to be legalized anyway.

At the state level I'd advocate for freedom period. I wouldn't even bother trying to sugarcoat it at that point. I wouldn't obsessively focus on the topic, but I'd explain how supply and demand work, and how taking away freedom is a slippery slope.

Heck... I live in NYS, maybe Republicans are desperate enough to let someone like me try:p

[TaftFan]

Not until you lay off the energy drinks.

[Christian Liberty]

Not until you lay off the energy drinks.

I don't drink energy drinks, so I guess I have your vote?:p

[Christian Liberty]

Shameless, egotistical bump:p

[Cutlerzzz]

Yes. I would also vote for TraditionalConservative.

[eduardo89]

If it makes you feel any better about having 4 no votes and 4 probably no's, if I made the same thread I'd probably have a 99% no result.

[CaseyJones]

If it makes you feel any better about having 4 no votes and 4 probably no's, if I made the same thread I'd probably have a 99% no result.

I would donate to your opponent and send them some of your posts from here

[eduardo89]

I would donate to your opponent and send them some of your posts from here

Yeah, opposition research on me would yield quite a few gems.

Good thing most Mexicans don't speak English and I'll be running on a party list instead of a single seat constituency.

[Christian Liberty]

If it makes you feel any better about having 4 no votes and 4 probably no's, if I made the same thread I'd probably have a 99% no result.

I don't feel bad:p

[supermario21]

Thinking about getting involved in my county GOP as a precinct committeeman...worth taking the plunge? Our county GOP is pretty weak as we're located in a blue county in Ohio. Anyone know what they actually do?

[Christian Liberty]

If it makes you feel any better about having 4 no votes and 4 probably no's, if I made the same thread I'd probably have a 99% no result.

I don't feel bad:p

Depending on what exactly your foreign policy is, I might vote for you. I'd need you to clarify the specifics of where you differ from Ron Paul.

[eduardo89]

I don't feel bad:p

Depending on what exactly your foreign policy is, I might vote for you. I'd need you to clarify the specifics of where you differ from Ron Paul.

I differ with Ron Paul on a few things regarding foreign policy:

I don't necessarily consider sanctions an act of war and I do believe Congress has the Constitutional authority to enact them.
I agree, to a certain extent, with the War Powers Act. I do believe Congress has the authority to pass such a law.
I don't necessarily consider all foreign aid to be bad and I certainly don't believe it to be unconstitutional (basically share Justin Amash's view)
I don't think that every single base overseas should be shut down, I think there are some bases that serve strategic interests, especially in protecting economic interests. For example, I think it was a huge mistake for the US to cede the Panama Canal Zone territory to Panama.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

[Christian Liberty]

I differ with Ron Paul on a few things regarding foreign policy:

I don't necessarily consider sanctions an act of war and I do believe Congress has the Constitutional authority to enact them.
I agree, to a certain extent, with the War Powers Act. I do believe Congress has the authority to pass such a law.
I don't necessarily consider all foreign aid to be bad and I certainly don't believe it to be unconstitutional (basically share Justin Amash's view)
I don't think that every single base overseas should be shut down, I think there are some bases that serve strategic interests, especially in protecting economic interests. For example, I think it was a huge mistake for the US to cede the Panama Canal Zone territory to Panama.

I don't know what the War Powers Act is, have to look it up.

Other than that, I could probably vote for you, although I don't like your view on foreign aid (Does Justin Amash ever agree with that? I didn't know that). I do agree with you that sanctons aren't an act of war but I still believe they're wrong.

With that list, I'd probably be a "Yes" assuming your social policies aren't more radically conservative than I am under the impression that they are.

[eduardo89]

I don't know what the War Powers Act is, have to look it up.

Other than that, I could probably vote for you, although I don't like your view on foreign aid (Does Justin Amash ever agree with that? I didn't know that). I do agree with you that sanctons aren't an act of war but I still believe they're wrong.

Justin Amash on foreign aid:


I have reconsidered my support for any bill like H.R. 4133, as it pertains to ANY country, in the future.

I recognize that there is a lot of misinformation about this bill. It does only one genuinely substantive thing: It extends an existing line of credit for about three more years. This is not additional funding and certainly not "unlimited aid."

I also disagree with commenters who believe that foreign MILITARY aid and alliances are unconstitutional. If the U.S. government concludes that they are beneficial to OUR defense, then they certainly are constitutional as a Necessary and Proper correlate of Congress's power to raise and support Armies. This has been the view in our country from the Founders on.

However, as a policy matter, I believe that the U.S. should not extend credit (or aid) to another country on an ongoing basis through legislation. It's time for the U.S. to stop acting as a bank to the rest of the world. After all, with Congress and the President refusing to make any substantial changes to our spending policies, our government simply doesn't have any money to lend.

https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/399961023376643



With that list, I'd probably be a "Yes" assuming your social policies aren't more radically conservative than I am under the impression that they are.

I don't know...I think I'm more radically conservative than you. I oppose abortion in every single case and I oppose any government recognition of homosexual 'marriage' or the promotion of the homosexual lifestyle as tolerable or in any way okay.

[69360]

Just a "for fun" thread:)

no


I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

yes

[oyarde]

Well , I will advise, probably you should not run until you are elig. and, even then , probably not , unless I am still alive to counsel you. You would need me on your staff and you would have to listen to win ..... could be problematic though, by that time I may not wish for any taxable income .... Now , if Specs would run , he should make me Ch. of staff, and just let me know when he needs some info on something, I would be willing to do it for, a few years....

[compromise]

I probably would not support you. Smart3 seems to be a GJ "libertarian" but he's supportive of Cruz and other conservatives with liberty leanings so I'd go with him over you. I think I'd take you over JCDenton though. I'm still not convinced you're electable.


I should make a poll like this, since I like polls so much. I imagine 80-90% of the responses would be "no."

I consider you very electable and would strongly support you if you did run.

I would also campaign for and donate to Eduardo, but I don't know if he's eligible in the US.

If I ever ran for Congress, I would never mention I was running here on this account to avoid my opponents digging stuff up. I think political candidates are allowed socks on here.

[eduardo89]

I would also campaign for and donate to Eduardo, but I don't know if he's eligible in the US.

A little photoshopping can easily change that.

[compromise]

I think either Spoa or Taftfan should run for one of the open House seats in GA. Both can appeal to a general GOP crowd and are willing to work with the existing liberty delegation in Congress.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Thinking about getting involved in my county GOP as a precinct committeeman...worth taking the plunge? Our county GOP is pretty weak as we're located in a blue county in Ohio. Anyone know what they actually do?

Voter registration drives, community events, publicity for the candidates on the ballot, canvassing, fundraising, etc. You are essentially the face of the GOP for your precinct and are responsible for getting as many people out to the polls to support the ticket as possible. I have done it for many, many years and have enjoyed the work immensely.

[jmdrake]

Just a "for fun" thread:)

Sure. Why not? I probably wouldn't donate unless I thought you had a shot at winning, but I'd vote for you. There are a handful of people here that are so statist on a selective level that I could not vote for them even if it meant voting for an establishment republican or democrat, but that's the exception not the rule. Most RPFers would get my vote even if we disagreed on certain issues.

[Christian Liberty]

I don't know...I think I'm more radically conservative than you. I oppose abortion in every single case and I oppose any government recognition of homosexual 'marriage' or the promotion of the homosexual lifestyle as tolerable or in any way okay.

I knew you were more conservative than me, I said as long as you weren't way more conservative socially than I thought you were. If you supported a Santorum-esque Federal War on Porn I probably couldn't vote for you for a Federal level office, ditto if you supported the War on Drugs.

I differ with Ron Paul on a few things regarding foreign policy:

I don't necessarily consider sanctions an act of war and I do believe Congress has the Constitutional authority to enact them.
I agree, to a certain extent, with the War Powers Act. I do believe Congress has the authority to pass such a law.
I don't necessarily consider all foreign aid to be bad and I certainly don't believe it to be unconstitutional (basically share Justin Amash's view)
I don't think that every single base overseas should be shut down, I think there are some bases that serve strategic interests, especially in protecting economic interests. For example, I think it was a huge mistake for the US to cede the Panama Canal Zone territory to Panama.[/QUOTE]


I probably would not support you. Smart3 seems to be a GJ "libertarian" but he's supportive of Cruz and other conservatives with liberty leanings so I'd go with him over you. I think I'd take you over JCDenton though. I'm still not convinced you're electable.



I consider you very electable and would strongly support you if you did run.

I would also campaign for and donate to Eduardo, but I don't know if he's eligible in the US.

If I ever ran for Congress, I would never mention I was running here on this account to avoid my opponents digging stuff up. I think political candidates are allowed socks on here.


Sure. Why not? I probably wouldn't donate unless I thought you had a shot at winning, but I'd vote for you. There are a handful of people here that are so statist on a selective level that I could not vote for them even if it meant voting for an establishment republican or democrat, but that's the exception not the rule. Most RPFers would get my vote even if we disagreed on certain issues.

Cool!:)

[asurfaholic]

No, just cuz.

That was fun

[The Free Hornet]

I don't know who Danke is, but yeah, almost anyone would be better than Smart(alec)3.

Insulting potential voters is an unforced error. Since you gave us more choices, I'll vote for Danke or Smart3.

[Christian Liberty]

Insulting potential voters is an unforced error. Since you gave us more choices, I'll vote for Danke or Smart3.

This isn't a for-real thread, obviously, seeing as most of you wouldn't end up in the same congressional district as me anyway.

[Christian Liberty]

Insulting potential voters is an unforced error. Since you gave us more choices, I'll vote for Danke or Smart3.

This isn't a for-real thread, obviously, seeing as most of you wouldn't end up in the same congressional district as me anyway.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure at least half the no votes are personal.

[PSYOP]

No, because you're apologist to the apartheid state of Israel.

[Christian Liberty]

No, because you're apologist to the apartheid state of Israel.

Evidence? I hardly even discuss Israel on here or anywhere else.

[jj-]

In the heart of a busy metropolis, skyscrapers are a vivid reminder of the
constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God

HAHAHAHAHAHA

[The Free Hornet]

Oh, and I'm pretty sure at least half the no votes are personal.

Of course it's personal! When you wish the death penalty upon millions of people, who do you think you're killing? (It's people.)

If you were an army of one fighting statism at least that would be respectable even if deplorable. But you repeatedly defend and advocate your own brand of vigilante "justice" often aimed at non-state actors.

How else do I judge you?

If you ever do run for office - and frankly I hope you do - please maintain anonymity so that your comments here and elsewhere aren't used against you.

[compromise]

No, because you're apologist to the apartheid state of Israel.

I'm both an apologist for the apartheid state of Israel and for the former apartheid state of South Africa.

Unfortunately, FF is not, he seems to be against all alliances.

[Christian Liberty]

Of course it's personal! When you wish the death penalty upon millions of people, who do you think you're killing? (It's people.)

I meant personal dislike for me, personally, rather than my policies.

That said, I don't wish for millions of people to be executed. That's slander.


If you were an army of one fighting statism at least that would be respectable even if deplorable. But you repeatedly defend and advocate your own brand of vigilante "justice" often aimed at non-state actors.


Who cares who the murderers are? Of course, the state-backed ones are the most dangerous, but still.


If you ever do run for office - and frankly I hope you do - please maintain anonymity so that your comments here and elsewhere aren't used against you.

I may someday, and yeah, I wouldn't connect it with this account.


I'm both an apologist for the apartheid state of Israel and for the former apartheid state of South Africa.

Unfortunately, FF is not, he seems to be against all alliances.

Why is that unfortunate?

[eduardo89]

I'm both an apologist for the apartheid state of Israel and for the former apartheid state of South Africa.

Unfortunately, FF is not, he seems to be against all alliances.

I do not support Israel, but I do think that South Africa (whites, blacks, and colored), was better off under white rule.

[Christian Liberty]

I do not support Israel, but I do think that South Africa (whites, blacks, and colored), was better off under white rule.

And yet you still have the avatar.

[osan]

Just a "for fun" thread:)

No, for one major reason. While your heart seems to be in the right place, your understanding of freedom appears to need some work - you just have not been alive long enough to have the requisite knowledge to do the best that can be done - which in most cases is NOTHING.

You need more living experience and education. In another 10 or 15 years - who knows?

[Christian Liberty]

No, for one major reason. While your heart seems to be in the right place, your understanding of freedom appears to need some work - you just have not been alive long enough to have the requisite knowledge to do the best that can be done - which in most cases is NOTHING.

You need more living experience and education. In another 10 or 15 years - who knows?

I don't disagree with you, for the record.

[eduardo89]

And yet you still have the avatar.

And yet you still don't understand sarcasm.

[Christian Liberty]

And yet you still don't understand sarcasm.

I'm not neurotypical, deal with it:p

[Brett85]

You must be doing something right if "The Free Hornet" is against you.

[eduardo89]

You must be doing something right if "The Free Hornet" is against you.

But something horribly wrong if angelatc and CaptLouAlbano are against you.

[Christian Liberty]

You must be doing something right if "The Free Hornet" is against you.

Apparently I've got a lot of people against me:p

[Paulbot99]

Judging from your signature, I'd vote for you, libertarian and minarchist being important phrases if you liveu p to them.

[osan]

I do not support Israel, but I do think that South Africa (whites, blacks, and colored), was better off under white rule.

Wow, finally you write something with which I am in agreement. Good on you for that - SA is heading possibly toward a genocide-like event. This is finding ZERO traction in the MSM, that is for sure, but white SAs attempts to seek political asylum are heading for the frantic. A close friend is trying to get his SA friends into the USA because they are shitting with fear that they are to be murdered at the hands of their black countrymen, who have so skillfully managed to drive that once thriving nation to the brink of reversion to a stone-age existence. Let them have it, I say, because when all the whites are either murdered or otherwise gone, what remains will rapidly fall to the entropy so common to the people there. Where will they be when all the SA corporations up and leave? They will starve. If they are that poisoned with bitterness and hatred, they deserve the ignominious end they will thereby reap.

I remember when that naive fop Bob Marley sang those lyrics about Africans having liberated Zimbabwe. Uh huh. Look at it - from a nominally functional nation to calamitous shit hole, courtesy of the great and invincible black African freedom fighter... and meddling globalist hands. Behold, the "liberated" Rwanda and their glorious 100 day war that left well over 800,000 people butchered mostly by machete and hundreds of thousands more with no hands.

How about Nigeria's "kill and go"? Someone pisses off an "official" and helicopters show up, everyone in the village is murdered, and the helicopters leave, usually in well under 20 minutes - their trademark. Kill. Go.

How about Congo and the civil war they had in those parts with the lunatic Lawrence Cabila (sp???) who the US liberal MSM absolutely praised as a great saint. He turned out to be just another mass murdering black African stooge, pulled off the shelf to do what such characters always do with sleep-inducing predictability. I will never forget how, to the very limited extent they covered those events, the US MSM was sucking his black missile with such dedication and affection. They fell oddly silent when the truth of what a monster he was started to surface - sort of the way Obama, Sharpton, and Jackson go suddenly, uncharacteristically, and otherwise inexplicably quiet when blacks slaughter whites or even other blacks.

Perhaps affairs in Zaire are more palatable. How about Liberia's lovely little celebration of mutual love and respect for each others' blackness?
My friend and colleague at Bell Labs was from Liberia and most of his family were there at that time and he was in a state of perpetual pant-soiling nerves for his siblings and parents and friends because things were so hairy over there in those days.

All this and so much more, courtesy of the black African who some would have you believe are the most gentle and community oriented people in the world. Anyone who reads any of the first-hand historical accounts and researches of men such as Sir Richard Burton will know that the black Africans, on the average were, and apparently remain, the most mindlessly violent and singularly vicious breed on the planet. Nobody can compare with them in certain respects. So much for the happy-go-lucky primal jungle dweller who takes care of his community. Oh yes, they surely do take care of each other as anyone with willing eyes can see. They rob and murder and rape and pillage each other to make men like Mao and Stalin weep tears of bitter envy in their respective corners of Hell.

Oh yes, it's all a big happy party over there, the USA being so obviously mean and evil to its wonderful population of black African descended citizens. <rolling eyes violently>

[eduardo89]

I remember when that naive fop Bob Marley sang those lyrics about Africans having liberated Zimbabwe. Uh huh. Look at it - from a nominally functional nation to calamitous shit hole, courtesy of the great and invincible black African freedom fighter... and meddling globalist hands. Behold, the "liberated" Rwanda and their glorious 100 day war that left well over 800,000 people butchered mostly by machete and hundreds of thousands more with no hands.

Rhodesia used to be a net exporter of grains and meat! Now Zimbabweans starve to death...South Africa is heading right on that path.

I have two friends who both were both and raised in Zimbabwe. One one, one black. They both owned large farms, which were profitable, and employed about a hundred people each. The one friend's family farm was expropriated, subdivided and given to people who don't have the fainted clue about farming and ranching. The farm is about 90% abandoned right now. The family fled to Germany. The black friend also left Zimbabwe because his family could not run the farm anymore. Political instability, no credit, the only one who could buy his product was the government at rock bottom prices, extremely dangerous...so they also left Zimbabwe for the UK. They're the lucky ones...

People of all races will suffer (more than they already have) once South Africa finally falls to the marxist savages who were the only 'winners' from the end of apartheid.

[Brett85]

But something horribly wrong if angelatc and CaptLouAlbano are against you.

It's kind of amazing how many differences there are between different members here, even though we all basically support the same candidates.

[Christian Liberty]

It's kind of amazing how many differences there are between different members here, even though we all basically support the same candidates.

I don't know about the other poster, but CaptLou is ridiculously moderate. If he didn't think I was too extreme, I'd wonder if I was doing something wrong. Of course, he picks on Ron Paul plenty as well so I'm in good company.

[asurfaholic]

This isn't a for-real thread, obviously

Oh, and I'm pretty sure at least half the no votes are personal.

My vote was just for fun, I'd vote for you

Edit: depending on who you're up against of course.

[eduardo89]

I don't know about the other poster, but CaptLou is ridiculously moderate. If he didn't think I was too extreme, I'd wonder if I was doing something wrong. Of course, he picks on Ron Paul plenty as well so I'm in good company.

I wouldn't call him 'ridiculously moderate' at all. He's very conservative and he knows what's needed to win elections, unlike the vast majority of libertarians.

[luctor-et-emergo]

I voted 'No' as I cannot vote. So that's an easy choice.

[Brett85]

I don't know about the other poster, but CaptLou is ridiculously moderate. If he didn't think I was too extreme, I'd wonder if I was doing something wrong. Of course, he picks on Ron Paul plenty as well so I'm in good company.

Yeah, and then there are quite a few members who basically think that libertarianism is equivalent to social liberalism.

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, and then there are quite a few members who basically think that libertarianism is equivalent to social liberalism.

I'm not sure I'm doing anything wrong after all:p

[eduardo89]

Yeah, and then there are quite a few members who basically think that libertarianism is equivalent to social liberalism.

Libertarianism the word has been co-opted by libertines.

[Christian Liberty]

Libertarianism the word has been co-opted by libertines.

In some cases, yes.

[TheTexan]

Sure, except I dont vote

[Christian Liberty]

My vote was just for fun, I'd vote for you

Edit: depending on who you're up against of course.

Its cool. I voted for Lindsey Graham in that primary thread as a joke since I didn't know who else I was supporting at the time, and I was in a ridiculously bad mood:p

[kcchiefs6465]

Libertarianism the word has been co-opted by libertines.
Conservatism, the word, has been co-opted by Zionist warmongers.

I don't even want to get into what republicanism now means. ;)

[Christian Liberty]

Conservatism, the word, has been co-opted by Zionist warmongers.

I don't even want to get into what republicanism now means. ;)

Also correct.

In reality libertarianism is to conservatism what communism is to socialism, IMO.

But real conservatism is so radically different than what we're used to, most libertarians and conservatives would probably object to that comparison.

[Brett85]

Conservatism, the word, has been co-opted by warmongers.

Fixed.

[kcchiefs6465]

Fixed.
What, precisely, was wrong with 'Zionist?'

Are "conservatives" (modern definition, of course) not infatuated with Israel's everlasting security even if and when that compromises our own security? (economic security as well as security in the sense of us being attacked)

[Christian Liberty]

I'm still waiting for PSYOP to tell me when I defended Israel, and in what fashion...

To clarify my stance:

I do not believe an attack on Israel is an attack on the United States

I do not believe an attack by Israel is an attack by the United States

I don't support ANY entangling alliances.

I don't support foreign aid, anywhere, whether to Israel or to anyone else.

For me to comment further on Israel when my own country is this screwed up would be a waste of my time and everyone else's.

They can do what they want, without our help.

I guess that makes me a "Zionist" defending the "Apartheid State" :rolleyes:

[Henry Rogue]

I would vote for HB34, because anybody that stingy with rep has got to be stingy with tax dollars.

[eduardo89]

I would vote for HB34, because anybody that stingy with rep has got to be stingy with tax dollars.

Yeah but he's overgenerous with his hugz.

[Henry Rogue]

Yeah but he's overgenerous with his hugz.
Yes, I have received some hugz. Maybe RPF should keep score of those above our avatars. :)

[2young2vote]

I would need to see video of you. Integrity is just as important as values and I can't judge integrity from forum posts.

[The Free Hornet]

That said, I don't wish for millions of people to be executed. That's slander.

You've called for the execution of abortionists (which as we both know are primarily mothers).


Late term and early term abortion are both equally murder, IMO. Using RU-438 is just as serious as partial birth abortion to me.

...

I maintain that anyone who has an abortion without any sort of mitigating factor should be sentenced to death. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?421947-What-is-your-position-on-abortion&p=5137810&viewfull=1#post5137810)

Stop lying, stop trolling the board, why not start over with a new persona if you can't remember you own damn positions.

[Christian Liberty]

You've called for the execution of abortionists (which as we both know are primarily mothers).



Stop lying, stop trolling the board, why not start over with a new persona if you can't remember you own damn positions.

I seriously doubt it would still be "millions" under a government that did indeed have a death penalty for such things. And even then, I seriously doubt all of them could ever be caught, tried, and convicted. Remember that I'm opposed to any kind of police state measures to enforce these kinds of things, and I do believe strongly that its better to let a hundred guilty men (women?) go than to imprison or execute one innocent.

[LibertyEagle]

I don't know about the other poster, but CaptLou is ridiculously moderate. If he didn't think I was too extreme, I'd wonder if I was doing something wrong. Of course, he picks on Ron Paul plenty as well so I'm in good company.

ROFL. CaptLou isn't moderate at all. Moderates advocate big government, big spending and interventionism for any reason whatsoever. CaptLou is none of those.

[Christian Liberty]

ROFL. CaptLou isn't moderate at all. Moderates advocate big government, big spending and interventionism for any reason whatsoever. CaptLou is none of those.

Maybe its just his style. Although, I meant "moderate" by the liberty movement's standards, not compared to the general population, obviously.

[kcchiefs6465]

I seriously doubt it would still be "millions" under a government that did indeed have a death penalty for such things. And even then, I seriously doubt all of them could ever be caught, tried, and convicted. Remember that I'm opposed to any kind of police state measures to enforce these kinds of things, and I do believe strongly that its better to let a hundred guilty men (women?) go than to imprison or execute one innocent.
You would logically be against the death penalty then.

Advocating for the death penalty, you are going to get some wrong. Even with DNA and other evidence. That can easily be planted by someone who dislikes you or the police. Confessions are coerced often. People have admitted to many things only to be exonerated. Come to find out 13 hours of straight interrogating and beating with promises of the cop being your buddy who will have your back has led to it.

There have been some pretty shocking exonerations. I remember specifically but can't remember the exact details of a young child, eight or so years old, saying her uncle is the one who raped her. Her family was killed as I recall. The uncle convicted and spent some 15-20 years in prison all the while proclaiming his innocence. He was exonerated when DNA later linked a sex offender to the case. Eye witnesses are notoriously not reliable.

My views are evolving on this.

[Christian Liberty]

You would logically be against the death penalty then.

Advocating for the death penalty, you are going to get some wrong. Even with DNA and other evidence. That can easily be planted by someone who dislikes you or the police. Confessions are coerced often. People have admitted to many things only to be exonerated. Come to find out 13 hours of straight interrogating and beating with promises of the cop being your buddy who will have your back has led to it.

There have been some pretty shocking exonerations. I remember specifically but can't remember the exact details of a young child, eight or so years old, saying her uncle is the one who raped her. Her family was killed as I recall. The uncle convicted and spent some 15-20 years in prison all the while proclaiming his innocence. He was exonerated when DNA later linked a sex offender to the case. Eye witnesses are notoriously not reliable.

My views are evolving on this.

I'd need something like 99.99% certainty to feel comfortable with the death penalty. With the understanding that the judge could get charged with manslaughter if he is wrong (Which I believe should be punished by exile to a specified city for a decade or more*). That said, the reality that there will always be a small chance of error isn't something you can avoid, IMO.

*I'd have the same view for any manslaughter case. I also oppose any FEDERAL death penalty. I only support the death penalty being done by the states.

[oyarde]

Yes, I have received some hugz. Maybe RPF should keep score of those above our avatars. :)

I would be willing to serve on your staff Henry.

[bolil]

I'd need something like 99.99% certainty to feel comfortable with the death penalty. With the understanding that the judge could get charged with manslaughter if he is wrong (Which I believe should be punished by exile to a specified city for a decade or more*). That said, the reality that there will always be a small chance of error isn't something you can avoid, IMO.

*I'd have the same view for any manslaughter case. I also oppose any FEDERAL death penalty. I only support the death penalty being done by the states.

I can't accept that anymore, the idea of an innocent person being put to death does bad things when it enters my mind. I'd see ten murderers go free if it meant the eleventh, innocent, isn't murdered.

I do think 100% certainty is, or will soon be, possible with the advance of brain mapping and monitoring.

[Christian Liberty]

I can't accept that anymore, the idea of an innocent person being put to death does bad things when it enters my mind. I'd see ten murderers go free if it meant the eleventh, innocent, isn't murdered.

I totally agree, but 100% certainty isn't impossible. I support the reasonable doubt standard. With an even higher threshold for capital punishment.


I do think 100% certainty is, or will soon be, possible with the advance of brain mapping and monitoring.

That honestly scares me more than the off chance that an innocent person might be executed. Although I don't know the details of those technologies.

[bolil]

I totally agree, but 100% certainty isn't impossible. I support the reasonable doubt standard. With an even higher threshold for capital punishment.



That honestly scares me more than the off chance that an innocent person might be executed. Although I don't know the details of those technologies.

It wouldn't change anything about the fourth amendment, so in a just America probable cause would first need to be established. Its not like they would be scanning the fuck out of everyone, well, shit yes they would.

I guess I get stuck in my utopia sometimes.

[TheGrinch]

Since you ask, no. You lack of life experience shows heavily in your posting. You think a lot about things but draw too many of your conclusions from books and reading but no real world practical experience.

This. At times I feel like I'm talking to an older crowd with all the intelligent things people have to say here, but I'm also often reminded how young and naive some are about how the real world works. I was the same idealistic way when I was in college.

Plus he multiquotes way too damn much. Maybe helpful with the female demographic, but would probably be a turnoff to the no-nonsense male voters.

[fr33]

Plus he multiquotes way too damn much.

This annoys me more than anything. Bad forum etiquette. Make a new post to respond to each quote.

[TheGrinch]

This annoys me more than anything. Bad forum etiquette. Make a new post to respond to each quote.

See, turning off the male voters already...

[compromise]

Rhodesia used to be a net exporter of grains and meat! Now Zimbabweans starve to death...South Africa is heading right on that path.

I have two friends who both were both and raised in Zimbabwe. One one, one black. They both owned large farms, which were profitable, and employed about a hundred people each. The one friend's family farm was expropriated, subdivided and given to people who don't have the fainted clue about farming and ranching. The farm is about 90% abandoned right now. The family fled to Germany. The black friend also left Zimbabwe because his family could not run the farm anymore. Political instability, no credit, the only one who could buy his product was the government at rock bottom prices, extremely dangerous...so they also left Zimbabwe for the UK. They're the lucky ones...

People of all races will suffer (more than they already have) once South Africa finally falls to the marxist savages who were the only 'winners' from the end of apartheid.

The "Marxist savages" will be the winners from the end of Israel too.

People on here love to call Israel "national socialist" or "socialist", but compared to what the PLO have in mind, they're not that bad.

[Henry Rogue]

I would be willing to serve on your staff Henry. I would put you in charge of the Treasury. You could show those clowns how to save.

[Tywysog Cymru]

I'd vote for FreedomFanatic and even donate money to his campaign.

He doesn't support Israel, I've known him for years on other forums, and I can assure you that he's with Ron Paul on this.

[Christian Liberty]

Bump.

[compromise]

Bump.

Given your Aspergers, how willing would you be to do phone and field canvassing?

I can help out with campaign literature:
http://i44.tinypic.com/25878sg.jpg

[Christian Liberty]

Given your Aspergers, how willing would you be to do phone and field canvassing?


Don't think that would bother me:p



I can help out with campaign literature:
http://i44.tinypic.com/25878sg.jpg

Yeah, I wouldn't say that in an actual campaign;)

[compromise]

Don't think that would bother me:p



Yeah, I wouldn't say that in an actual campaign;)

At this point, I don't trust you not to. You really have very little control over what you say and so the media will tear you apart if you were to ever run.

http://i40.tinypic.com/30lfcqf.jpg

[Christian Liberty]

At this point, I don't trust you not to. You really have very little control over what you say and so the media will tear you apart if you were to ever run.

http://i40.tinypic.com/30lfcqf.jpg

The post in question was probably the worst post that I've ever made to the forums, bar none. But I didn't actually say that.

You'd be surprised at how I say things in real life, my personality is a little different than it is on the internet. That said, I'm probably not electable even in real life:p

[Contumacious]

“there is no greater threat to US security than Iran,” _



Just a "for fun" thread:)

WTF

Just so you know, I voted AGAINST you.......twice.

.

[Contumacious]

At this point, I don't trust you not to. You really have very little control over what you say and so the media will tear you apart if you were to ever run.

http://i40.tinypic.com/30lfcqf.jpg

Tim McVeigh would have NEVER supported Nidal.

He saw what went on in Waco (circa 1993) and how the narcotized populace turned their collective heads the other way so that they wouldn't have to get involved. I understand his frustration but disagree that killing innocent people was the answer.

.

[Christian Liberty]

WTF

Just so you know, I voted AGAINST you.......twice.

.

OK, you misunderstood my point of that quote. I guess I need to clarify it. My point is to show that Ted Cruz isn't really a liberty candidate. I don't agree with Ted Cruz at all.

I guess a :rolleyes: right under the quote wasn't enough to show that I do NOT agree with it.

[eduardo89]

The post in question was probably the worst post that I've ever made to the forums, bar none. But I didn't actually say that.

You'd be surprised at how I say things in real life, my personality is a little different than it is on the internet. That said, I'm probably not electable even in real life:p

Haven't you been temp banned twice now for advocating violence? You've also said you wish President Rand would send for Tom Cotton executed.

[Christian Liberty]

Haven't you been temp banned twice now for advocating violence? You've also said you wish President Rand would send for Tom Cotton executed.

Once, and I also don't think I said that.

[compromise]

Once, and I also don't think I said that.

Didn't you just make a post where you said you wanted Obama killed?

[Christian Liberty]

Didn't you just make a post where you said you wanted Obama killed?

I said I wouldn't cry for him. And that his death would be justified

If you disagree with that, you aren't much of a libertarian. Unless you're a total pacifist, which you aren't seeing as how you agree with Rand on foreign policy.

I didn't say I "wanted" anything.

[Contumacious]

OK, you misunderstood my point of that quote. I guess I need to clarify it. My point is to show that Ted Cruz isn't really a liberty candidate. I don't agree with Ted Cruz at all.

I guess a :rolleyes: right under the quote wasn't enough to show that I do NOT agree with it.

I see , I stand corrected.

.

[Christian Liberty]

I see , I stand corrected.

.

No problem. I THINK my sig is clear now.

[compromise]

Every decent person knows Obama deserves to die, or is just woefully ignorant, one or the other. I'd rather it be done constitutionally, (Impeachment, trial, execution) but since we all know that that won't happen anyway, I'd just shrug my shoulders, say justice was done, and go on with my life. I wouldn't shed one tear for him.

The reason Obama deserves to die is because he's a mass murderer, not because he hasn't "supported Israel" enough.

I completely don't advocate that, but it honestly wouldn't bother me in the slightest. As I said, its what he deserves. They'll get no tears from me. And if I were on the jury for the assassination, it would be an 11-1 vote.

You would vote for his assassination, believe he deserves to die and want Obama to be "constitutionally executed".

[Christian Liberty]

You would vote for his assassination, believe he deserves to die and want Obama to be "constitutionally executed".

Only an absolute hater of liberty would disagree with what I actually said.

ESPECIALLY on this forum, of all places. You don't have the excuse of blissful ignorance.

[Occam's Banana]

Only an absolute hater of liberty would disagree with what I actually said.

ESPECIALLY on this forum, of all places. You don't have the excuse of blissful ignorance.

I disagree with what you actually said. I disagree with it absolutely and categorically.

And you have to be an absolute hypocrite to say that someone "deserves to die because he's a mass murderer" while simultaneously supporting and advocating something (namely, the death penalty) which WILL invevitably and inescapably result in the execution of an arbitrary number of innocents.

You don't get to be an advocate for implementing a policy that will result in the murder of innocents while condemning others (such as Obama) for implementing policies that result in the murder of innocents (and then add insult to illogic by calling people "absolute haters of liberty" because they disagree with your AND Obama's murderous policies).

[green73]

I wouldn't vote for FF for a number of reasons, namely because voting endorses an inherently corrupt system, but most especially because he's young, ignorant, loudmouthed, and a bit twisted.

And do we really want assburgers in office?

[Occam's Banana]

Voted "no" BTW. We already have far too many bloodthirsty politicians who are eager to declaim about how badly they want to see the deaths of people they deem to "deserve it" (for whatever reason) ...

[gwax23]

Yes Definitely. We agree it seems on all issues, you would have my vote and I would volunteer to help your hypothetical campaign.