If you were a voter in Virginia today, who would you vote for? [Archive]

compromise

11-05-2013, 10:15 AM

Absolutely Sarvis. I'm in near complete agreement with the platform on his website, he has a highly respectable background (engineer, math degree from harvard, graduate economics degree), and getting him 10% opens the door to Libertarian ballot access.

You know an economics degree from Harvard isn't a good thing from a libertarian perspective, right?

Sarvis says he is not a libertarian on economics, which as Cuccinelli says, is what a libertarian is about. He also endorses a mileage tax.

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 10:16 AM

He also endorses a mileage tax.

And a sales tax on services.

Christian Liberty

11-05-2013, 10:18 AM

Who's Eric Peters?

LewRockwell.com writer who lives in Virginia. Rock solid.

He lives around the area my wife did when we met. Never met him, but read his Lew Rockwell stuff.

I've never met him either, but as you say, the stuff he writes is solid.

Icymudpuppy

11-05-2013, 10:20 AM

Although I think Cuccinelli is deeply flawed, I think Sarvis is worse... I am not a Virginian, so it doesn't matter, but I would vote for Cuccinelli in this election.

compromise

11-05-2013, 10:22 AM

And a sales tax on services.

He's also "hesistant" to reduce taxes in Virginia, was unsure when he was asked how he would reduce spending and wanted to expand Virginia's Medicare program. He ran for state Senate in 2010 as a Huntsman/Giuliani-style liberal Republican.

erowe1

11-05-2013, 10:22 AM

I'm glad to see the strong showing for Cuccinelli.

The one disappointment I have is how few people are committed to not voting.

matt0611

11-05-2013, 10:26 AM

Although I think Cuccinelli is deeply flawed, I think Sarvis is worse... I am not a Virginian, so it doesn't matter, but I would vote for Cuccinelli in this election.

This.

I'd vote for Cuccinelli.

helmuth_hubener

11-05-2013, 10:45 AM

I do not think any of them support the things I do. They do not stand for what I believe in. I would not choose to vote for any of them.

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 10:49 AM

He's also "hesistant" to reduce taxes in Virginia, was unsure when he was asked how he would reduce spending and wanted to expand Virginia's Medicare program. He ran for state Senate in 2010 as a Huntsman/Giuliani-style liberal Republican.

Did anyone else vie for the LP nomination for governor, or was he nominated by default?

BuddyRey

11-05-2013, 10:53 AM

Every time I think I've made my mind up, I go on Wikipedia or the candidates' own issue pages and see something else that makes me waffle. Really, Cuccinelli seems like a sleazy career-politician, and whatever "libertarian cred" he has must have missed my inbox. I like and trust Sardis a lot more, even though it would only be a protest vote.

Seriously, I hate this choice...the GOP needs to do a *lot* better next time to keep me on board.

helmuth_hubener

11-05-2013, 10:54 AM

Did anyone else vie for the LP nomination for governor, or was he nominated by default?
By default. He was the only one who wanted to do it. It's a small party, CaptLou.

compromise

11-05-2013, 10:56 AM

Did anyone else vie for the LP nomination for governor, or was he nominated by default?

Default I think. The LP don't usually contest the Virginia gubernatorial race.

MichaelDavis

11-05-2013, 11:14 AM

If you were a voter in Virginia today, who would you vote for in the gubernatorial election?

I'd go with Cuccinelli personally, with Jackson for Lt. Governor and Obenshain for AG.

Those sound like good choices to me.

Contumacious

11-05-2013, 11:25 AM

If you were a voter in Virginia today, who would you vote for in the gubernatorial election?

I'd go with Cuccinelli personally, with Jackson for Lt. Governor and Obenshain for AG.

More than likely for Mr Sarvis.

http://cloudfront-media.reason.com/mc/2013_11/SarvisRobert_RobertSarvis.jpg?h=250&w=250

.

chudrockz

11-05-2013, 11:31 AM

Terry McAuliffe thanks you.

I really dislike this argument:

"Vote for this person you dislike, because otherwise this other person that you hate will win instead!"

Last November when I voted, I didn't like "either" candidate in two races. In one race I wrote in "Satan" and in the other I wrote in "Beelzebub." I felt great about it.

Nic

11-05-2013, 11:35 AM

I'm voting for Cucinnelli today. Hearing him and Ron Paul speak last night solidified the feeling that I'm making the right decision.

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 11:36 AM

Last November when I voted, I didn't like "either" candidate in two races. In one race I wrote in "Satan" and in the other I wrote in "Beelzebub." I felt great about it.

Good because, you know, voting is all about feelings. :rolleyes:

FrankRep

11-05-2013, 11:44 AM

I really dislike this argument:

"Vote for this person you dislike, because otherwise this other person that you hate will win instead!"

Last November when I voted, I didn't like "either" candidate in two races. In one race I wrote in "Satan" and in the other I wrote in "Beelzebub." I felt great about it.

You may dislike it, but it's the cold hard reality of the situation.

kcchiefs6465

11-05-2013, 12:00 PM

Good because, you know, voting is all about feelings. :rolleyes:
I hear ya.

Clearly Beelzebub is better than Satan. Abstaining from voting between the two is irresponsible and unpatriotic. One could even make the argument that if you didn't vote for Beelzebub, then you are responsible for the actions of Satan. Of course if you did vote for Beelzebub, you are partly responsible, at least morally, for his actions (but let's not get caught up in what ought be written off as semantics). It isn't about feelings, you know. One's conscience might suffer if it were. One's democratic duty is something that only ought be outweighed by one's patriotic zeal. This is America, after all -- Where at least we know we're free. As free as choosing between A and B will allow; but freedom is relative, you know? For the greater good I shall ignore any and all evidence that the cards are stacked. School told me to and your convictions reaffirm these seated feelings. Remind me to buy you a beer next Independence Day. You are so damn smart (and enlightened) that I myself had an epiphany. No joke, I now have the urge to stamp my hand, zealously decry third world lands, eat freedom fries and dogs with liberty cabbage, and bugle myself to hell... all the while, of course, while subconsciously reciting the pledge of allegiance to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner.

georgiaboy

11-05-2013, 12:06 PM

for whom would you vote
for whom would you vote
for whom would you vote

grammar bump

Cuccinelli by a mile.

Christian Liberty

11-05-2013, 12:10 PM

You may dislike it, but it's the cold hard reality of the situation.

TeamRed FTW? Really?

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 12:12 PM

TeamRed FTW? Really?

Does it really need to be explained to you how representative government works and how numbers are essential to it all?

chudrockz

11-05-2013, 12:29 PM

You may dislike it, but it's the cold hard reality of the situation.

I don't deny "the reality" at all, I merely bristle at the "lesser of two evils" argument. That's what people said about Romney. I wrote in Ron Paul. If I strongly dislike Romney, and I REALLY strongly dislike Obama, there's nothing to be gained by voting for Romney.

chudrockz

11-05-2013, 12:31 PM

Does it really need to be explained to you how representative government works and how numbers are essential to it all?

Right. It's ultra critical that we ensure that there are HIGHER NUMBERS of Rs than Ds. It doesn't matter if those Rs vote and behave just like Ds. It's all about the numbers!

enhanced_deficit

11-05-2013, 12:39 PM

I have heard of party with name "Liberty Party" for a while but almost everything I have learnt about Libertarian principles and their application to US domestic/foreign policies is attributed to Ron Paul and his supporters. I would support anyone Ron Paul supports, any purity tests stop there. Consider it "gratitude blowback" for all he has done for America so far. He is one of handful people in US politics I respect.. and he tops that list by a mile.

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 12:42 PM

Right. It's ultra critical that we ensure that there are HIGHER NUMBERS of Rs than Ds. It doesn't matter if those Rs vote and behave just like Ds. It's all about the numbers!

Your ignorance is astounding. All libertarian and libertarian leaning elected officials are within the GOP at the federal level. And I would venture to guess the same is at the state level (with some exceptions). As we build our numbers within the various legislative bodies, we need to have GOP control of a body in order for any of our guys to have a realistic effect. Since incumbent reelection nationwide is extremely high, getting even the worst Republican in office is beneficial to our cause since we need the numbers when we do have ideological control of a state (or Congress as well).

You could have a legislative body filled with Ron Paul's but they won't be able to accomplish shit if they are in the minority.

So yes, "go Team Red" because all of the guys that I have supported over the years are on that team. Does that mean every Republican is a good one? Not at all, but their numbers are beneficial to what we are working towards.

kahless

11-05-2013, 12:44 PM

Truly unbelievable that 7 people that post here would vote for Sarvis. The fing guy that wants to track your mileage with a GPS mandated in every car. The guy is insane and even Ron Paul who never calls anyone out says it would be insane to vote for him.

I can see if you have a problem with Cuccinelli not voting, but Sarvis, really?????

Do people not realize by not voting for Cuccinelli you are effectively giving it to that Communist McAuliffe.

thoughtomator

11-05-2013, 12:52 PM

Bastiat's The Law

11-05-2013, 12:55 PM

Cuccinelli is a no brainer. If nothing else, just to block the Clinton acolyte and spite the MSM.

mosquitobite

11-05-2013, 12:55 PM

Bastiat's The Law

11-05-2013, 12:57 PM

Someone else said it in another thread, but here's the deal:

McAuliffe has a nice lead in most of the polls, no?

The establishment wrote off this race for whatever reason.

If Ron/Rand can come in and actually pull off a win for Cooch - it will be a big deal.
I pray he pulls it off!

The Pauls would look like king makers for liberty. One could easily imagine other high-profile races inviting Ron and Rand to come in to speak and give their stamp of approval. It would benefit the liberty movement a lot.

thoughtomator

11-05-2013, 01:16 PM

I really dislike this argument:

"Vote for this person you dislike, because otherwise this other person that you hate will win instead!"

Last November when I voted, I didn't like "either" candidate in two races. In one race I wrote in "Satan" and in the other I wrote in "Beelzebub." I felt great about it.

So in other words you voted for the lesser evils anyway...

Antischism

11-05-2013, 01:21 PM

I chose "would not vote," but Sarvis getting 10% + would be a huge victory for the LP in Virginia. So there's that.

eduardo89

11-05-2013, 01:23 PM

Overwhelming majority in favor of Cuccinelli so far.

Good to see a large majority aren't brain dead here.

FrankRep

11-05-2013, 01:25 PM

I chose "would not vote," but Sarvis getting 10% + would be a huge victory for the LP in Virginia. So there's that.

National LP needs to fully audit the VA LP to find out why the he was nominated since he's anti-libertarian. How embarrassing for the LP.

pcosmar

11-05-2013, 01:32 PM

Does it really need to be explained to you how representative government works

:confused:

I know how it is supposed to work..

Haven't seen much of that. :(

No1butPaul

11-05-2013, 01:39 PM

7 people here are "insane"!!!!:p

eduardo89

11-05-2013, 01:56 PM

7 people here are "insane"!!!!:p

Probably just stoned.

phill4paul

11-05-2013, 02:00 PM

Probably just stoned.

and nekkid.

Brian4Liberty

11-05-2013, 02:43 PM

Obviously, discussing the pros and cons of candidates is very popular. Doing it the day of an election is a bit late though.

Why not get ahead of the curve? We have a new section (sub-forum) dedicated to vetting candidates. Check it out! Be sure to read the top two stickied threads before getting started. Now is the time to vet next year's candidates.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?343-Liberty-Campaign-Evaluation

chudrockz

11-05-2013, 04:13 PM

Probably just stoned.

Well for my part, I'm not insane, stoned, or naked. I worked all day. Having some bacon mac n cheese before heading out for pool league tonight.

Good to know though that there are those here who really DO think that anyone who disagrees with them is insane. Pretty asinine, really.

Bastiat's The Law

11-05-2013, 04:25 PM

I chose "would not vote," but Sarvis getting 10% + would be a huge victory for the LP in Virginia. So there's that.

A LP candidate supporting a carbon tax isn't a victory. It's an embarrassment.

RickyJ

11-05-2013, 04:35 PM

I don't know any of them so I can't say. No election where I live.

jdmyprez_deo_vindice

11-05-2013, 04:39 PM

I would be voting third party but sadly I am not in VA yet so I missed all the fun.

pcosmar

11-05-2013, 04:46 PM

Probably just stoned.

Nope,, haven't been in quite some time,,
but I would welcome it.

and nekkid.

Nope,, a nice day today,, not that nice.
I did get a truckload of wood cut though.

69360

11-05-2013, 04:54 PM

Well the poll results vindicate RPF a bit in my eyes. I guess the counterproductive people just screamed the loudest.

RickyJ

11-05-2013, 04:56 PM

Well the poll results vindicate RPF a bit in my eyes. I guess the counterproductive people just screamed the loudest.

What are you talking about? Ron Paul himself asked people to not vote for the Libertarian candidate, and in case you didn't know, he carries a lot of weight around here, so the poll results really should not be surprising.

69360

11-05-2013, 05:06 PM

What are you talking about? Ron Paul himself asked people to not vote for the Libertarian candidate, and in case you didn't know, he carries a lot of weight around here, so the poll results really should not be surprising.

Didn't you see the other thread today with a few people continuously nitpicking Cucinelli? After all that the poll results were a little surprising is all.

thoughtomator

11-05-2013, 05:12 PM

Didn't you see the other thread today with a few people continuously nitpicking Cucinelli? After all that the poll results were a little surprising is all.

I'll still nitpick Cuccinelli, even though I voted for him. And the nitpicking won't stop if he becomes Governor.

69360

11-05-2013, 05:47 PM

I'll still nitpick Cuccinelli, even though I voted for him. And the nitpicking won't stop if he becomes Governor.

That's fine with me as long as you saw the value in voting for him or a candidate like him.

Ender

11-05-2013, 05:58 PM

If you were a voter in Virginia today, who would you vote for?

No. One.

CaptLouAlbano

11-05-2013, 06:01 PM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

CPUd

11-05-2013, 06:14 PM

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

chudrockz

11-05-2013, 06:22 PM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

Guess you can feel free to put me on ignore then if you like. But that's pretty childish. I didn't even know there WAS an ignore function. And I've seen some pretty annoying little pricks on here in my time. Speaking of that, I've been here almost five years longer than you have, so as to your suggestion that I "take a hike".... nah.

CPUd

11-05-2013, 06:30 PM

This poll is flawed. It doesn't have an option to write in Ron Paul :(

Dr.3D

11-05-2013, 06:32 PM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.
Click HERE (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.php?pollid=5729&do=showresults).

Saint Vitus

11-05-2013, 06:41 PM

I'll take a shitty Libertarian over a shitty Republican any day. But neither Sarvis or Cuccinelli have a chance in hell of winning.

Todd

11-05-2013, 06:44 PM

Click HERE (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.php?pollid=5729&do=showresults).

I still respect a lot of those people who I vehemently disagree with on this topic.

cajuncocoa

11-05-2013, 06:44 PM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

Please put me on ignore.

Snew

11-05-2013, 08:57 PM

I'd pass.

FrankRep

11-05-2013, 08:58 PM

I'll take a shitty Libertarian over a shitty Republican any day. But neither Sarvis or Cuccinelli have a chance in hell of winning.

Congratulations on your victory.

Terry McAuliffe (D) 909,434 47.13%
Ken Cuccinelli (R) 891,384 46.20%
Robert C Sarvis (L) 128,775 6.67%

juvanya

11-05-2013, 08:59 PM

Probably Cuccinelli. I dont throw a shit fit over social issues. The economy is not worth destroying over gay marriage and abortions.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 08:45 AM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

It IS a public poll. Even the simple things are too hard for a GOP shill to comprehend. :rolleyes:

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 08:47 AM

It IS a public poll. Even the simple things are too hard for a GOP shill to comprehend. :rolleyes:

LOL

Keith and stuff

11-06-2013, 08:54 AM

I'm not educated on all of the many important elections in VA yesterday. For the governor's race, I know a little bit about it and would have held my nose and voted for the Republican.

kahless

11-06-2013, 09:12 AM

phill4paul, I can understand people voting for a Libertarian (heck I usually do) but you and 9 other people did not vote for a Libertarian. You voted for a LINO that clearly stated across the board that his polices were not Libertarian. The guy even went so far as to state that his economic polices were not Libertarian among other things and even went so far as to say he wanted tracking devices in all vehicles.

You and 9 people voted for a guy Ron and Rand went out of their way to campaign against where the Republican was more Libertarian than the LP candidate.

So based on all these issues I think it is difficult for people here to understand the reasoning why so called RPF members would sabotage Ron/Rand actual Libertarian efforts and then be so surprised that people here are miffed?

AuH20

11-06-2013, 09:15 AM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

If this is a Christie Presidential poll, I bet that 66% would either vote third party or not vote at all, including myself. So don't paint with such a broad brush. Yes, there are some incorrigible people unaware of the battle that is raging politically and what it portends to future non-political conflicts in the future.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 09:17 AM

A LP candidate supporting a carbon tax isn't a victory. It's an embarrassment.

Yeah, I'm pretty shocked that one of the Moderators voted in the poll for this guy.

AuH20

11-06-2013, 09:18 AM

Probably Cuccinelli. I dont throw a shit fit over social issues. The economy is not worth destroying over gay marriage and abortions.

This is quote worthy. A man with a brain!!!!! Social issues are shiny lures for the lowbrows. Some libertarians and Rick Santorum cultists are the same exact people. That's the irony!

http://www.thedailycrank.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/SM100-074CROM.jpg

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 09:19 AM

76% of this site gets it. The other 24% really needs to take a hike. compromise, you should have made this a public poll so I could see who to put on ignore.

Just click on View Results. It is a public poll. You can then click on any of the numbers that indicate the number of votes and up will pop a list of who voted for what.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 09:27 AM

LOL

Sorry, but you deserved a neg rep for this. Your constant high-fiving someone for their rudeness is really low class behavior.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2hcgvx5.png

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 09:31 AM

Sorry, but you deserved a neg rep for this. Your constant high-fiving someone for their rudeness is really low class behavior.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2hcgvx5.png
Says the queen of low class behavior. :rolleyes:

TheTyke

11-06-2013, 09:32 AM

As usual, looks like it was a just few vocal people trying to shout down the efforts of those taking effective political action to promote liberty.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 09:43 AM

The Pauls would look like king makers for liberty. One could easily imagine other high-profile races inviting Ron and Rand to come in to speak and give their stamp of approval. It would benefit the liberty movement a lot.

Yup. It WOULD HAVE meant a lot. But, some cared more about pushing a political party (Libertarian) than they did furthering liberty.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 09:43 AM

As usual, looks like it was a just few vocal people trying to shout down the efforts of those taking effective political action to promote liberty.

Yup.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 09:54 AM

Yup. It WOULD HAVE meant a lot. But, some cared more about pushing a political party (Libertarian) than they did furthering liberty.

Bullshit. I'm not a member of the L.P. but I'll call a pig a pig anytime of day.

Keith and stuff

11-06-2013, 09:54 AM

Yeah, I'm pretty shocked that one of the Moderators voted in the poll for this guy.

Why? The libertyish movement has a big tent from socially conservative and fiscally conservative folks like Ken to folks like Vermin Supreme. There are a large variety of views here. Some people think it's best to move forward with the Democratic Party. Some people think the GOP. Some people the LP. Some people are against voting at all. Some people think the only option is for liberty people to move to Grafton, New Hampshire or even an island that is privately owned and not in the United States. All of these views are somewhat valid views, even if some make a lot more sense then others. After all. we are best known for being open-minded and hard to control.

helmuth_hubener

11-06-2013, 09:57 AM

Yup. It WOULD HAVE meant a lot. But, some cared more about pushing a political party (Libertarian) than they did furthering liberty. Get serious. Here is the reality:

Libertarians have very little political power.
This Sarvis guy running for governor was not even particularly libertarian. It's arguable that the Republican was more libertarian than he in some ways!
Libertarians have very, very little political power.
Obviously nothing anyone on this forum said or advocated was going to make a lick of difference in the governor's race in Virginia.
Libertarians have very, very, very little political power.

Your post seems to bemoan "Oh, if only some people on this forum wouldn't have been so short-sighted and blind! Oh, if only they could have done the right thing for liberty instead of pushing a political party at all costs! Wo, wo, wo! It all could have been different."

Sorry, no, it couldn't have been different. The actions of the denizens of RonPaulForums.com did not affect the outcome of the Virginia governor's race. It was never going to. No one in their right mind would think that it was going to. There was never any coherent plan for denizens of RonPaulForums.com to affect the Virginia governor's race.

The people who cost the GOP boy the race were not RonPaulForums.com libertarians. They were probably not even libertarians at all. They were just mainstream people so disgusted by both the candidates they determined to vote for someone -- anyone! -- else. Based on the precinct-by-precinct results, it appears in fact that Sarvis pulled more heavily from the Dem's supporters than the Gop's. So the Dem guy would likely have won by a much greater percentage had Sarvis not been in it -- 4 or 5 or 6% instead of 1%.

I hope this has been educational for you, and that now you can stop blaming a powerless group of people for all the political problems in the world. All the best to you, Eagle!

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 10:36 AM

Why? The libertyish movement has a big tent from socially conservative and fiscally conservative folks like Ken to folks like Vermin Supreme. There are a large variety of views here. Some people think it's best to move forward with the Democratic Party. Some people think the GOP. Some people the LP. Some people are against voting at all. Some people think the only option is for liberty people to move to Grafton, New Hampshire or even an island that is privately owned and not in the United States. All of these views are somewhat valid views, even if some make a lot more sense then others. After all. we are best known for being open-minded and hard to control.

I was talking about voting for Sarvis. Someone who wants to put a black box in my car to track me, seems like the height of non-libertarianism.

AuH20

11-06-2013, 10:38 AM

I was talking about voting for Sarvis. Someone who wants to put a black box in my car to track me, seems like the height of non-libertarianism.

His libertarian bonafides were his black wife and ghey marriage positions. Nothing else mattered. LOL

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 10:41 AM

Get serious. Here is the reality:

Libertarians have very little political power.
This Sarvis guy running for governor was not even particularly libertarian. It's arguable that the Republican was more libertarian than he in some ways!
Libertarians have very, very little political power.
Obviously nothing anyone on this forum said or advocated was going to make a lick of difference in the governor's race in Virginia.;

If this is what you honestly believe, why are you here? Once upon a time, the people on this forum moved mountains. It could again.

Libertarians have very, very, very little political power.

Bullshit. We have the power we work for and earn.

Your post seems to bemoan "Oh, if only some people on this forum wouldn't have been so short-sighted and blind! Oh, if only they could have done the right thing for liberty instead of pushing a political party at all costs! Wo, wo, wo! It all could have been different."

What I don't expect is to come to a forum bearing Ron Paul's name and see people actively working AGAINST a candidate for whom Ron Paul is actively campaigning.

Sorry, no, it couldn't have been different. The actions of the denizens of RonPaulForums.com did not affect the outcome of the Virginia governor's race. It was never going to. No one in their right mind would think that it was going to. There was never any coherent plan for denizens of RonPaulForums.com to affect the Virginia governor's race.

The people who cost the GOP boy the race were not RonPaulForums.com libertarians. They were probably not even libertarians at all. They were just mainstream people so disgusted by both the candidates they determined to vote for someone -- anyone! -- else. Based on the precinct-by-precinct results, it appears in fact that Sarvis pulled more heavily from the Dem's supporters than the Gop's. So the Dem guy would likely have won by a much greater percentage had Sarvis not been in it -- 4 or 5 or 6% instead of 1%.

I hope this has been educational for you, and that now you can stop blaming a powerless group of people for all the political problems in the world. All the best to you, Eagle!

Losertarian blather not worth responding to.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 10:44 AM

Losertarian blather not worth responding to.

Building coalitions this morning I see. We see how well that worked out in VA.

compromise

11-06-2013, 10:46 AM

His libertarian bonafides were his black wife and ghey marriage positions. Nothing else mattered. LOL

And he was more open about his desire to legalize marijuana than Cuccinelli was, which won Sarvis the all important "Colorado marijuana voter block". This in turn won him the endorsement of the king of stoners, Gary Earl Johnson and his apprentice, Speciallyblend, who will not be a delegate for him.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 10:54 AM

Building coalitions this morning I see. We see how well that worked out in VA.

Sorry, but I fail to see any hope of a coalition with long-time members of this forum, who have read all the stuff and should know better, who chose Sarvis.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 11:00 AM

Sorry, but I fail to see any hope of a coalition with long-time members of this forum, who have read all the stuff and should know better, who chose Sarvis.

You do understand that some chose Sarvis in hopes of getting enough votes (percentage) to make the LP a relevant party in VA politics? I cannot fault them for that. Given the choice of the shit sandwiches offered that reason is as viable as any.

CaptLouAlbano

11-06-2013, 11:03 AM

Sorry, but I fail to see any hope of a coalition with long-time members of this forum, who have read all the stuff and should know better, who chose Sarvis.

Agreed. It is far more profitable to spend time finding new activists, then to try and sway the narrow minded opinion of some on this forum. There's a handful of people up here that make up a vocal minority, and moving forward, I am not bothering to comment or respond to any of their posts. They can talk to themselves for all I care.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:04 AM

You do understand that some chose Sarvis in hopes of getting enough votes (percentage) to make the LP a relevant party in VA politics? I cannot fault them for that. Given the choice of the shit sandwiches offered that reason is as viable as any.

Sorry, but I think it was sheer stupidity. If Cuccinelli would have won this race, it would have given our movement HUGE leverage, because the win would have been viewed as being won because of Ron and Rand's support.

I thought our guys were supposed to be the bright ones. Guess not.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 11:12 AM

Sorry, but I think it was sheer stupidity. If Cuccinelli would have won this race, it would have given our movement HUGE leverage, because the win would have been viewed as being won because of Ron and Rand's support.

I thought our guys were supposed to be the bright ones. Guess not.

Think what you may. Calling people in a specific party "losertarians" and "inconsequential" has results. The GOP had the perfect chance to broker a deal with the LP particularly with Ron's creds. However, they chose not to court them.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:14 AM

Think what you may. Calling people in a specific party "losertarians" and "inconsequential" has results. The GOP had the perfect chance to broker a deal with the LP particularly with Ron's creds. However, they chose not to court them.

Have you been asleep or what? The establishment in ANY PARTY don't want someone for whom Rand or Ron would campaign. Where on earth have you been? This can't be news to you. The GOP establishment was AGAINST Cuccinelli. They weren't going to broker any damn deals to help him.

That's why Ron and Rand were appealing to those whom they believed had brains to help them.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:17 AM

His libertarian bonafides were his black wife and ghey marriage positions. Nothing else mattered. LOL

I guessed that was why he was so hated by "conservatives".

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:17 AM

I guessed that was why he was so hated by "conservatives".

Maybe it was the fact that he wanted to install black boxes in every car to track mileage and God knows what else.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:19 AM

I guessed that was why he was so hated by "conservatives".

Sarvis was a RINO when he was a Republican and continues to be a progressive fraud whatever party he represents.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:21 AM

I was talking about voting for Sarvis. Someone who wants to put a black box in my car to track me, seems like the height of non-libertarianism.

I have herd few "R"s oppose the Black Boxes.. In Fact,, they very seldom oppose any Law enforcement tools, whether Gun control (registration/restrictions) or the War on Drugs..
Or using Drones for Liquor store holdups. :(

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/01/06/black-boxes-cars-edr/1566098/

Two things are certain. Black boxes are here to stay. And without strict rules of the road, they are less a boon to safety than an intrusive hitchhiker.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 11:23 AM

Have you been asleep or what? The establishment in ANY PARTY don't want someone for whom Rand or Ron would campaign. Where on earth have you been? This can't be news to you. The GOP establishment was AGAINST Cuccinelli. They weren't going to broker any damn deals to help him.

That's why Ron and Rand were appealing to those whom they believed had brains to help them.

I'm talking Cuccinelli and his coalition didn't bother to broker any deals. And I would imagine that many in the LP weren't particularly endeared to Rand for his remarks concerning libertarians smoking pot and dancing around nekkid. Like I said actions have consequence. Time and again I keep hearing "Losertarians" "inconsequential" and now somehow those that use these phrases are crying because the LP didn't come out to back their candidate. It's really not hard to understand.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:25 AM

Or using Drones for Liquor store holdups. :(

Please do not misrepresent Rand's position.

Adam Kokesh, for once in his life, explains it well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPQJMdTVshk

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:26 AM

Sarvis was a RINO when he was a Republican and continues to be a progressive fraud whatever party he represents.

I never followed him,, and did not support him,, I am not in Virginia,, so did not vote for him.

I would simply because he was third party,, and for no other reason. Just as a middle finger vote to the R&D Party.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:27 AM

I never followed him,, and did not support him,, I am not in Virginia,, so did not vote for him.

I would simply because he was third party,, and for no other reason. Just as a middle finger vote to the R&D Party.

So you'd also be happy to vote for a Communist Party candidate?

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:29 AM

Please do not misrepresent Rand's position.

Fuck you. I heard him say it.. It was fucking stupid,

He should have said NO DRONES in the US period,, or kept his mouth shut.

AuH20

11-06-2013, 11:30 AM

I guessed that was why he was so hated by "conservatives".

More that he was as libertarian as Bill Maher or Andrew Sullivan.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:31 AM

Fuck you. I heard him say it.. It was fucking stupid,

He should have said NO DRONES in the US period,, or kept his mouth shut.

Drone doesn't necessarily mean MQ-8 Predator.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:32 AM

So you'd also be happy to vote for a Communist Party candidate?

R&D are communist..
We Have had socialist system here all my life.

I would vote for Mickey Fucking Mouse.

Winning isn't winning when you lose by winning.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:32 AM

I'm talking Cuccinelli and his coalition didn't bother to broker any deals. And I would imagine that many in the LP weren't particularly endeared to Rand for his remarks concerning libertarians smoking pot and dancing around nekkid. Like I said actions have consequence.
Oh, please. You must know that was misconstrued. The media has been doing their damnedest to drive a wedge and the fact is, it is so very simple to do with us. I wouldn't have believed it unless I had seen it, but we act like little pussies. It's pretty disgusting to me, at least.

Time and again I keep hearing "Losertarians" "inconsequential" and now somehow those that use these phrases are crying because the LP didn't come out to back their candidate. It's really not hard to understand.

Whose candidate would that be? And here I thought we put principles above Party. Guess I was wrong about that too, eh?

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:33 AM

R&D are communist..
We Have had socialist system here all my life.

I would vote for Mickey Fucking Mouse.

Winning isn't winning when you lose by winning.

In essence you did vote for the Commie. Cuccinelli, on the other hand, wasn't one. Which is why the establishment didn't support him.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 11:34 AM

His libertarian bonafides were his black wife and ghey marriage positions. Nothing else mattered. LOL

I didn't hear anyone on this board promoting any "libertarian bona fides" with respect to Sarvis; quite the opposite in fact. I originally said I would support the LP candidate, but not once I learned that he didn't seem to have a liberty bone in his body.

That said, your derisive comment about his "black wife" and "ghey (sic) marriage positions" seems to suggest something a little sinister....there's no place for that in Liberty.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:35 AM

R&D are communist..
We Have had socialist system here all my life.

I would vote for Mickey Fucking Mouse.

Winning isn't winning when you lose by winning.

Are you trying to say that Ken Cuccinelli is a communist?

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:36 AM

Drone doesn't necessarily mean MQ-8 Predator.

NO Spy Drones.
The Surveillance cameras everywhere are repulsive enough.. That needs to be addressed,, restricted and negated..

Not more added.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 11:36 AM

Maybe it was the fact that he wanted to install black boxes in every car to track mileage and God knows what else.

A stance that made him no more or less libertarian than anti-sodomy, anti-no-fault divorce, anti-nullification Cuccinelli. But do carry on.

compromise

11-06-2013, 11:37 AM

NO Spy Drones.
The Surveillance cameras everywhere are repulsive enough.. That needs to be addressed,, restricted and negated..

Not more added.

Rand explicitly said in that very interview he was against spy drones.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:38 AM

I didn't hear anyone on this board promoting any "libertarian bona fides" with respect to Sarvis; quite the opposite in fact. I originally said I would support the LP candidate, but not once I learned that he didn't seem to have a liberty bone in his body.

That said, your derisive comment about his "black wife" and "ghey (sic) marriage positions" seems to suggest something a little sinister....there's no place for that in Liberty.

Don't even try. Everyone saw what you and your comrade did during the race.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 11:38 AM

Oh, please. You must know that was misconstrued. The media has been doing their damnedest to drive a wedge and the fact is, it is so very simple to do with us. I wouldn't have believed it unless I had seen it, but we act like little pussies. It's pretty disgusting to me, at least.

“I’m not advocating everyone go out and run around with no clothes on and smoke pot,” he said. “I’m not a libertarian. I’m a libertarian Republican. I’m a constitutional conservative.” Rand Paul

Not a whole hell of a lot to misconstrue there.

Whose candidate would that be? And here I thought we put principles above Party. Guess I was wrong about that too, eh?

We were discussing the LP and those that are now crying because they didn't come out to support Cuccinelle. No?

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:40 AM

Are you trying to say that Ken Cuccinelli is a communist?

I would not vote for him.
He is an extremist Authoritarian. I read His Double talk bullshit on the Restoration of Rights (When all these threads started)

NO,, And Fuck No. I would not vote for him. And am highly disappointed Ron's Endorsement. Disgusted even. :(

AuH20

11-06-2013, 11:41 AM

I didn't hear anyone on this board promoting any "libertarian bona fides" with respect to Sarvis; quite the opposite in fact. I originally said I would support the LP candidate, but not once I learned that he didn't seem to have a liberty bone in his body.

That said, your derisive comment about his "black wife" and "ghey (sic) marriage positions" seems to suggest something a little sinister....there's no place for that in Liberty.

My antennae go up when a libertarian runs a race like a democrat. That's all. Who cares if you're half Asian? Who cares if you married a black woman? Want a cookie? Integrity and ideas trump this false prize of diversity.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 11:41 AM

Don't even try. Everyone saw what you and your comrade did during the race.

Uh, yeah. We stood up for liberty.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 11:42 AM

Rand explicitly said in that very interview he was against spy drones.

EXCEPT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

Fuck that.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 11:43 AM

My antennae go up when a libertarian runs a race like a democrat. That's all. Who cares if you're half Asian? Who cares if you married a black woman? Want a cookie? Integrity and ideas trump this false prize of diversity.

I'm just addressing the comment you made.

dannno

11-06-2013, 11:46 AM

Looks like Sarvis was funded by some Obama dems.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:48 AM

Uh, yeah. We stood up for liberty.

lolol

Yeah, helping Sarvis was really standing up for liberty. :rolleyes:

Unbelievable. lolol

Keith and stuff

11-06-2013, 11:51 AM

Looks like Sarvis was funded by some Obama dems.

And it might have back fired, but not enough to cost the Democrats the election. Exit polls showed that if it was a 2 man race, the LP candidate voters would have more likely voted for the Democrat than the Republican. http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/11/05/va.gov.exit.polls.1120p.110513.v2.final%5B1%5D.cop y.pdf

Though, there is always the possibility that the exit polls are wrong. The polls leading up to the election were certainly not how things turned out on election day.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 11:54 AM

lolol

Yeah, helping Sarvis was really standing up for liberty. :rolleyes:

Unbelievable. lolol
See, that's the same "with us or against us" rhetoric that I thought many of us rejected 12 years ago. I wasn't helping any of the candidates in the VA gubernatorial race. But when called upon to oppose the characterization that Cuccinelli is a liberty candidate, yep, I was right on that. If the GOP had fielded a better candidate, we would probably not be having this discussion and you could be celebrating the victory.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:54 AM

“I’m not advocating everyone go out and run around with no clothes on and smoke pot,” he said. “I’m not a libertarian. I’m a libertarian Republican. I’m a constitutional conservative.” Rand Paul

Not a whole hell of a lot to misconstrue there.

There ARE some Libertarians who resemble that. We both know that. You also know that he was trying to stop the media from attempting to crown him with the libertarian label that they tried to with his father. Because he knew that it was only to make Republican voters avoid him because he's not a Republican. Some are silly like that.

Sure, I would have preferred that he didn't say it like he did. But, I think way more is being made of it than was meant.

We were discussing the LP and those that are now crying because they didn't come out to support Cuccinelle. No?

Yes. And my point was that we are supposed to be the ones who put principles above Party, right?

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 11:55 AM

See, that's the same "with us or against us" rhetoric that I thought many of us rejected 12 years ago. I wasn't helping any of the candidates in the VA gubernatorial race. But when called upon to oppose the characterization that Cuccinelli is a liberty candidate, yep, I was right on that. If the GOP had fielded a better candidate, we would probably not be having this discussion and you could be celebrating the victory.

Oh yes you were. You were actively campaigning against the candidate that Ron and Rand endorsed and for whom they were campaigning.

The jig is up. In fact, it was up a long time ago.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 11:59 AM

Yes. And my point was that we are supposed to be the ones who put principles above Party, right?

I'm still not getting what you are saying. I'm not in the LP and neither are you. I was merely explaining what I believe to be reasoning of those in the LP.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 12:02 PM

In essence you did vote for the Commie. Cuccinelli, on the other hand, wasn't one. Which is why the establishment didn't support him.

NO I did NOT. I did not vote,, I do not live in Virginia. I am posting my opinion in thread on this forum that are promoting this bullshit (to the point of extreme annoyance)

I would NOT vote for the man.
He supports the pseudoscience of the Mental Health Industry.. (and is a huge advocate)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/20/cuccinelli-mental-health-care-in-virginia-will-be-/?page=all

“I’ve made one spending promise, and it’s mental health,” he said in a recent discussion with reporters and editors from The Washington Times. “And most of that is going to be shifted within Medicaid. We have huge — and I’m talking on the order of the tens of millions of dollars — expenditures in what are called waiver programs, and we can move that money around without federal permission.”

A worse and more dangerous pseudoscience than Global Warming ever was.

It is Backdoor Gun control and opens up Thought Police.
Fuck that.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 12:02 PM

I'm still not getting what you are saying. I'm not in the LP and neither are you. I was merely explaining what I believe to be reasoning of those in the LP.

I'm just saying that they apparently do NOT put principles above Party.

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 12:06 PM

I'm just saying that they apparently do NOT put principles above Party.

Possibly. There are many in every party like that.

compromise

11-06-2013, 12:09 PM

EXCEPT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

Fuck that.

Where did he say he supported spy drones for law enforcement?

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 12:11 PM

Possibly. There are many in every party like that.

For sure. I just wrongly thought those registered in the Libertarian Party were allies. I guess I was wrong.

compromise

11-06-2013, 12:12 PM

Don't even try. Everyone saw what you and your comrade did during the race.

I think it's fairly clear that Cajun does not support Sarvis.

Better to focus on the people that do.

pcosmar

11-06-2013, 12:18 PM

Where did he say he supported spy drones for law enforcement?

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/23/rand-paul-clarifies-his-position-on-dron

Article has the quotes,, and his half ass attempt to justify it.
and tries to redirect it to the phony War of Terror. Which is another,,though closely related bullshit position.

(terror is a tactic,, Used most effectively by our own government)

compromise

11-06-2013, 12:19 PM

I would not vote for him.
He is an extremist Authoritarian. I read His Double talk bullshit on the Restoration of Rights (When all these threads started)

NO,, And Fuck No. I would not vote for him. And am highly disappointed Ron's Endorsement. Disgusted even. :(

Extremist authoritarian:
- Opposes Real ID
- Wants to rein in the EPA
- Open to legalizing marijuana
- Opposes the existence of Obamacare exchanges
- Strongly defends the 2nd amendment
- Supports nullifying NDAA

phill4paul

11-06-2013, 12:19 PM

For sure. I just wrongly thought those registered in the Libertarian Party were allies. I guess I was wrong.

They could be. But you don't get something, in this case a vote, for nothing. The LP goal, I believe, was to get enough votes to get greater accessibility in VA politics and to grow their own party. The dems realized they would be a spoiler and financially backed them. So for doing absolutely nothing more than run their own candidate they got wider publicity and financial gain. Team Cuccinelle didn't offer anything that I am aware of. I believe that was a missed opportunity.

compromise

11-06-2013, 12:23 PM

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/23/rand-paul-clarifies-his-position-on-dron

Article has the quotes,, and his half ass attempt to justify it.
and tries to redirect it to the phony War of Terror. Which is another,,though closely related bullshit position.

(terror is a tactic,, Used most effectively by our own government)

So, he supports surveillance on specific targets using drones if there's a warrant.

What exactly is the problem with that? Why is the drone technology somehow worse than actual people? At the end of the day, the drones are just doing the same thing cops otherwise would.

Please do go back and watch that Kokesh video I linked you.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 12:27 PM

I think it's fairly clear that Cajun does not support Sarvis.

Better to focus on the people that do.

thank you. +rep

helmuth_hubener

11-06-2013, 12:28 PM

Losertarian blather not worth responding to. I am sorry you feel that way. I thought it might help you to see reality from a more realistic perspective.

Fact: libertarians do not form 6.6% of Virginia's voting population.

Fact: Both candidates had very strong negatives. They were both viewed extremely unfavorably by the Virginia voting population.

Fact: There were only three choices on the ballot for governor.

Likely conclusion: Many of those voting for the LP guy were mainstream voters expressing disgust for both main candidates, more than an approval, or even an awareness, of the LP guy's positions. He just wasn't as disgusting as the other two (to them. Rightly or wrongly.).

More empirical data: Based on the precinct-by-precinct results, it appears that Sarvis pulled more heavily from the Dem's supporters than the Gop's. This conclusion is also supported by exit polling, linked to by Keith.

Likely conclusion: The Dem guy would likely have won by a much greater percentage had Sarvis not been in it -- 4 or 5 or 6% instead of 1%.

All of this seems to me like it should be relevant to anyone, like yourself, wanting to form an opinion on the Virginia governor's election, what to make of it, and what to think about libertarians' role it in.

Just trying to help, Eagle. Just trying to help. Don't be mean to me. :)

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 12:34 PM

Oh yes you were. You were actively campaigning against the candidate that Ron and Rand endorsed and for whom they were campaigning.

The jig is up. In fact, it was up a long time ago.I must have missed some obligation to campaign for candidates that Ron and Rand endorse. Were we supposed to campaign for Romney as well then? :rolleyes: I am my own person, LE; I don't follow orders well. Not from you, not from Rand, not from Ron. When I believe they've made a mistake (and I do believe Ron made one in this race) I will choose my own path. I am not a lemming.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 12:38 PM

For sure. I just wrongly thought those registered in the Libertarian Party were allies. I guess I was wrong.

And they can be* if given a reason to be. But there are partisans in every party. And there was really nothing Cuccinelli had to offer to those in the LP above and beyond what Sarvis was offering. Sarvis was an imperfect Libertarian to be sure (and why I had to drop my support of him early on)...but Cuccinelli wasn't exactly oozing liberty from his pores either.

*edit to add: being allies is a two-way street though. Given the amount of bashing we see here at RPF for the LP, I can't imagine why anyone here could possibly believe the LP owes the GOP anything at all.

helmuth_hubener

11-06-2013, 12:39 PM

For sure. I just wrongly thought those registered in the Libertarian Party were allies. I guess I was wrong.

Virginia does not provide for indicating a party preference at registration. In Virginia, there are ZERO people "registered" in the Libertarian Party.

If they did provide for party preferences in voter registration, I can of course guarantee that there would be a lot less than 6.6% of the total registered as Libertarians.

kcchiefs6465

11-06-2013, 08:18 PM

So, he supports surveillance on specific targets using drones if there's a warrant.

What exactly is the problem with that? Why is the drone technology somehow worse than actual people? At the end of the day, the drones are just doing the same thing cops otherwise would.

Please do go back and watch that Kokesh video I linked you.

I have spoken ad naseum about the trouble with drones being used domestically. I have given detailed accounts of how this technology will work to further invade on any semblance of privacy you thought you had. From drones used to monitor speed/issue tickets, to drones the size of a penny perched on the tree outside of your home to make sure you aren't burning on a no-burn day; And yes, to being armed with "less than lethal" devices such as mace and beanbag rounds for crowd disbursement as well as lethal devices for targeting and killing someone (for their lack of compliance).

The good these devices could do, delivering a pizza for example, are outweighed by the bad they will do. I will concede in the interest of freedom that private citizens ought be able to own and operate a drone. Insofar as it is well known and accepted that I keep the ones I capture... or destroy. If people wish to live in a virtual reality where every action needs be second guessed as to who may be watching, they ought to have the sense to recognize (and respect) that others do not. Idgaf about a owner's claim to property rights, if they violate one's airspace or are intruding on one's privacy, they should expect their drones to be taken down. When drones the size of a penny (or smaller) are flying around you will understand the meaning of "chilled." From the pedophile and perverts clamoring around to watch you and your children, to the stalkers and jealous exes spying and reporting your behavior. Spontaneity will be lost. Every action will be internally considered and second guessed.

And of course, the government ought not have drones. Idgaf if they say they are looking for stranded hikers. Incrementalism is incrementalism and precedence is precedence. They can go about their data collecting ways the old fashioned way, or summarily fuck off. The choice be theirs. And of course, at the least, 83% are actually worse than worthless (they are a weight.. or in other words, counterproductive). They should be let go without thought.
..

Saint Vitus

11-06-2013, 08:32 PM

Why are we still talking about this Cuccinelli loser? He's a loser. A Tardpublican loser. He was a Republican and couldn't even win in Virginia because of his views on buttsex. How bad do you have to fuck things up to lose to Terry McCaulliff? He let the Libertarian get 7% because he was such a shitty candidate. It's 2013 and he wanted to make oral sex a felony. What a moron.

Yeah I know this was an awful post. But its about on par with all the Sarvis and Libertarian bashing done from the Cuccinelli-bots.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 08:39 PM

And they can be* if given a reason to be. But there are partisans in every party. And there was really nothing Cuccinelli had to offer to those in the LP above and beyond what Sarvis was offering. Sarvis was an imperfect Libertarian to be sure (and why I had to drop my support of him early on)...but Cuccinelli wasn't exactly oozing liberty from his pores either.

*edit to add: being allies is a two-way street though. Given the amount of bashing we see here at RPF for the LP, I can't imagine why anyone here could possibly believe the LP owes the GOP anything at all.

Absolutely NO ONE has said that anyone at all owes ANY political party ANYTHING. You darn well know that. Cuccinelli was a far better candidate than anyone else running. Was he perfect? Hell no. But, in addition to being better, he also would have solidified our movement's political muster. So much for that.

Ron Paul On Virginia Election: Big Corporations And MIC Got Candidate They Wanted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzhh6JxZI40

Enjoy.

Saint Vitus

11-06-2013, 08:42 PM

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 08:43 PM

Absolutely NO ONE has said that anyone at all owes ANY political party ANYTHING. You darn well know that. Cuccinelli was a far better candidate than anyone else running. Was he perfect? Hell no. But, in addition to being better, he also would have solidified our movement's political muster. Now, not so much.I don't vote (or support candidates) based on some vague promise to "solidify our movement's political muster"....especially when said candidate really is not all that much better than his opponents from a liberty point of view. I also no longer support the least among 3 evils approach. If that's all ya got, I'll stay home every time. But I will continue to speak out when anyone tries to promote any of those 3.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 08:44 PM

I don't vote (or support candidates) based on some vague promise to "solidify our movement's political muster"....especially when said candidate really is not all that much better than his opponents from a liberty point of view. I also no longer support the least among 3 evils approach. If that's all ya got, I'll stay home every time. But I will continue to speak out when anyone tries to promote any of those 3.

It's called trolling, Cajun.

Here ya go and you helped. Wear it proudly.

Ron Paul On Virginia Election: Big Corporations And MIC Got Candidate They Wanted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzhh6JxZI40

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 08:49 PM

It's called trolling, Cajun.

Here ya go and you helped. Wear it proudly.

Ron Paul On Virginia Election: Big Corporations And MIC Got Candidate They Wanted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzhh6JxZI40

I'm flattered that you believe I'm so influential, Eagle.

BTW, you should give Bryan's latest post a read:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?432576-A-way-forward-for-liberty

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 08:51 PM

I read it. Nowhere did I see him saying that your trolling was ok.

cajuncocoa

11-06-2013, 08:55 PM

I read it. Nowhere did I see him saying that your trolling was ok.

You may have missed the part about having respect for others' efforts. Nowhere did I disrespect the efforts of others; I disagreed with them (Bryan covers that in his post). I gave my own opinion as to why I believed Cuccinelli was not a good candidate. But others (including you) certainly had a lot of choice names to call me over my opinion!

I'm pretty sure calling someone a troll goes against his directive to stop name-calling, too.

LibertyEagle

11-06-2013, 08:57 PM

You may have missed the part about having respect for others' efforts. Nowhere did I disrespect the efforts of others; I disagreed with them (Bryan covers that in his post). I gave my own opinion as to why I believed Cuccinelli was not a good candidate. But others (including you) certainly had a lot of choice names to call me over my opinion!

I'm pretty sure calling someone a troll goes against his directive to stop name-calling, too.

The problem is that you REGURGITATE your hatred for a candidate all over the forum, in every nook and cranny and you do it repeatedly. Your goal is to derail the candidate on these forums. You did the very same thing when it came to Rand.

There is nothing name-calling about that. It is the absolute truth.

NOTE: I described your behavior as trolling. That isn't a noun, so it doesn't describe you as a person; just your behavior.

compromise

11-08-2013, 12:06 PM

No, he wasn't far better than Sarvis. Sarvis was not even a good Libertarian candidate, but he was still better than Cuccinelli on almost every single issue.

If the only issues you care about are social issues, sure.

Cuccinelli was light years better on economic issues. Sarvis openly disavowed Austrian economics.

juvanya

11-11-2013, 06:41 PM

This is quote worthy. A man with a brain!!!!! Social issues are shiny lures for the lowbrows. Some libertarians and Rick Santorum cultists are the same exact people. That's the irony!

http://www.thedailycrank.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/SM100-074CROM.jpg
Cant tell if you agree or not. Im saying that Im not going to toss a guy because he wants to ban gay marriage, if he is very strong on economics and other issues. The lives of all of us are far more important than one issue for a minority, especially when we are talking about "lesser evils".

If the only issues you care about are social issues, sure.

Cuccinelli was light years better on economic issues. Sarvis openly disavowed Austrian economics.

Thanks. Thats solidifies my support for Cuccinelli. Now I feel bad for saying on another forum that Sarvis winning is the best case scenario. Guy sounds more and more foolish by the day.