I will not have a problem supporting Sam in the general. I know splitting the vote is not what we wanted for the primary, but I need to vote my gut.
I'd even vote for Smith in the general. But Scaringi is best for the primary.
I think we should see what the polls closest to the election say. If Scaringi still has significantly less votes than Rohrer and the establishment guy is neck and neck with Rohrer then I'm definitely voting for Rohrer and don't care that he's not perfect. Because a vote for Scaringi will essentially be a vote for this Smith guy. You have to use your head as well as your gut. The choice is between Rohrer and the establishment unless Scaringi seriously surges within the next couple weeks. Instead of having a Mitt Romney type a-hole we could have Rohrer for now and maybe Scaringi or someone of that caliber next time around. Rohrer getting in and making significant improvements to our state will only increase the credibility of a purer liberty candidate the next time. Whereas right now there's nothing for a libertarian candidate in Pennsylvania to point to to say see that, the kind of policies that I want to implement make things better so let's have more of them.
The truth is I don't get that excited over politicians anyway, I view voting as an act of self-defense. I'm not really that averse to compromising somewhat in voting strategically in order to get the best candidate that's feasibly electable rather than the purest one in general because to me even the act of voting is somewhat of a compromise. Because t.b.h. if it were up to me there wouldn't even be a government
Last edited by HigherVision; 03-25-2012 at 03:17 AM.
According to an email from Rohrer's campaign, Michele Bachmann endorsed Sam today.
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=...c&e=ddb453e541
That should help.Originally Posted by jeremiah89
He needs to ward off Tom Smith so he can battle Welch 1-1.
Scaringi is the guy I am for. Sam is looking more and more not the person I liked at first. Scaringi seems to be the man!
This video is a good example of why I'm voting for Rohrer, unless Scaringi soars in the polls and surpasses him prior to the election. The political climate being what it is I don't think that we have the luxury to hold out for perfect when our basic rights like the right to earn a living are compromised. I don't want freedom to just be an ideal that I talk about my whole life but that's never realized, I want as much freedom as is politically possible now and that's what I think Rohrer can bring. Dude says he will get rid of this stuff ^ and to me that's huge.
nevermind
Sam Rohrer is not just a cut of past Republicans. He is from Lancaster co. and this is as conservative as it gets, as far a conservatism goes. He is the conservative amoung conservatives and is a very good candidate amoung the base as well. I do not know about the rest of the candidates, they sound good, all of them. Sam Rohrer has a name recognition advantage and a record to go with it. Pick well my friends. We have good candidates.
Scaringi is perfect but if he has no chance it doesn't matter. Although I wouldn't care if none of the other candidates are good, like with the presidential race, but since Rohrer is decent that's probably the best we can get. What will happen is we'll get neither cause the lib vote is divided.
Smith is mailing negative flyers against Rohrer, I got one in the mail today.
Marc Scaringi is the guy I am voting for!
I'll be voting for Rohrer just as I supported him for Governor. He isn't Ron Paul of course but he is so, so much better than Casey, Toomey, and Tom Smith. I view Rohrer as being similar to Rand. We'll see but I want to see what Sam can do as Senator. Marc Scaringi looks like a solid candidate too, and hopefully this race gets his name out there, but he's not getting anywhere as a rookie. Support Sam, and then get Scaringi in some other statewide office.
Hope this settles it. @7:30 The candidates are asked to select the presidential candidate that most resembles their views. Scaringi identifies Paul. Rohrer identifies Santorum. Anyone who needs a reason not to vote for Rohrer look no further. And anyone who still thinks Rohrer is a libertarian needs to have their head examined.
bump for hopefully impending end of discussion
To quote a forum member in another thread, "It comes down to, do you vote with your heart or your head." My heart and my gut are with Scaringi, however, my head tells me Rohrer has the best chance against Casey. And Casey has to go. Rohrer is a good guy and I still don't consider him the lesser of two evils. I don't know at this point who I'll go with and may not know until I walk up to the machine on the 24th.
“But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty.”
― Ron Paul
I could see supporting the lesser of two goods for practical reasons, but I refuse to hold my nose and vote for someone who publicly claims to stand closer to Santorum than Paul. That settles it for me.
I don't like Welsh and Christian at all. If either by chance win this thing, I will have a real hard time voting for them in the general. Scaringi, Rohrer and Smith I am ok with, Scaringi is best.
But Scaringi was a Santorum staffer. You have to vote your conscience, but I hope you'd look at the big picture and not just the coattails their trying to ride.
Personally, I'd take either of them. I listened to them both and like both of their stances. I think they are both in the liberty camp. No - I know they are.
So then, it becomes a question of which one is better suited for this position. In my judgment, it's Rohrer. He's got a better chance of winning this time. I'm not trying to convince anyone because either choice is a good one. But it would be nice if we wouldn't split our vote. That'll give us Smith - which will give us Casey.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
Rohrer has the best shot at winning the primary. i will be voting for him. Scaringi is better but Roherer is also better than anyone in office in this state and he can actually win.
He has explained being his staffer and where he differs on the issues. Plus thats different than who you would vote for. He didnt have the opportunity to work in Paul's office. Or maybe he's changed views since then, but either way it is extremely revealing (in my opinion) that Rohrer stated Santorum. Very disturbing. He couldve declined to answer but essentially endorsed Santorum over Paul. That is NOT a way to get my vote. All that does is prove to me that all his limited government talk and constitutional conservative rhetoric is nothing more than Tea Party pandering and when push comes to shove he sits on the side of the Neoconservatives on Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties and Drug Policy.
So based on everything I've seen in this thread I presume it is safe to say that all you Rohrer people would be voting for DeMint in this Presidential Election over Paul had he entered, because he wouldve had a much higher chance of winning than Paul. DeMint is definitely better than Obama, and probably would have been leading Paul in the polls. I assume then all of you Sam people would have suggested piling onto DeMint in order to not split the "Libertarian" vote?
Last edited by Shane Harris; 04-12-2012 at 12:54 PM.
Could not of said it better my self ^
I'm strongly leaning toward voting for Scaringi now. I can sympathize with the Rohrer people on here, since he might have a higher chance of winning, but it's been one little small thing after another that's made me not comfortable voting for him. I was willing to let the Cain and Bachmann endorsements slide, because you can't really help who endorses you, obviously. But when he then says he's closer to Santorum, that's all him. I'd probably vote for him over Casey in the general election, but I'm a little hesitant to vote for him in the primary.
For me it is about advancing an agenda of principles that I stand for, not any one man. So if DeMint would have been a viable candidate and he campaigned on advancing an agenda I stand for then I may have supported him. I am not such an absolutist, that I would donate & volunteer my time for a man who I agree with 99% of the time and has no chance of winning, while refusing to support a man I agree with 95% of the time that can win.
Rohrer's Voting Integrity Checklist
http://www.rohrerforsenate.org/blog/?p=698
Good stuff here
Two man race between Smith and Rohrer. Looks like Scaringi is still a 1% candidate.
That is an interesting scenario. It depends how much DeMint came out against the FED during the primaries.
I'd vastly prefer DeMint over Goldman sachs Romney.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us