Results 41 to 50 of 65
-
11-08-2012, 03:15 AM #41
I disagree with you on both those issues but completely agree it should be up to the states in both cases.
-
-
11-08-2012, 08:39 AM #42
You really are a piece of work. A troll would MOCK your thread. It's too bad you never take accountability for your words and actions as THAT is all I have ever questioned about you.
This is what I wrote...
I asked on the hypothetical that IMac posed as I thought it was a good question.
-
11-08-2012, 08:41 AM #43
My interpetation of your answers is "no". If the country is far worse off in 4 years and the evil white republicans don't change their stance you will not vote for them.
-
-
11-08-2012, 08:43 AM #44
You are quite good at playing the victim and martyr.
-
11-08-2012, 08:48 AM #45
Pretty much spot on with my friends and co-workers who did thing the correct way. This bothers them very much. Not enough to sway the majority to vote for the the R's though.
-
-
11-08-2012, 08:56 AM #46
You are the last person who should be using other's words against them as you cry when it happens to you.
So in your thread...
https://www.sportscardforum.com/threa...or-republicans
There are answers to your question.
In the thread I ask, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD QUESTION POSTED BY YOU, the crapstorm starts when you post...yes but I am a troll. Silly boy.
-
11-08-2012, 09:20 AM #47
Now I'm from an outside point of view being in Sweden, but the American election affects all of us, way too much actually, well not as much as the Chinese election does today but almost. This general question about the economy occurs everywhere, unfortunately, I personally think the global economy, especially USÁ and Europe, is going straight down the drain, something is wrong, very terribly wrong, and I don't think neither a Democrat or Republican president can change it in 4 years. So whoever would be sitting now would get the blame and the other party will scream "it's their fault!". being republican and scream about bad finances is a joke btw, as this whole mess is an inheritaed by Reagon's period.
But finances is not the only issue, like someone says there are human issues to vote for too. Why is it only 2-3 issues are debated, and everything else is not talked about? It's strange the good things Obama HAS accomplished is not brought up. Hardly no president before has done more for the Native Americans. I take extra interest in this as my cousin is Native American (or Indian as she prefers to say). But the way media plays it, the most important thing is the jobs for white honest middleclass people.
Or the environment which is whether you like it or not the isngle most important topic on the planet since we're killing ourselves. Not so much climate changes as I believe that is caused by changes in the sun (my brother is professor and works with this, he/me knows things you don't know about and probably don't want to know about), but the increase of cancer, number of sterile people (10% is not normal!!), increased asthma/allergies, the fact that yoing people got 300-1000 foreign chemicals in their bodoeis, that we literary poison ourselves to death, now that is not important at all it seems. Not over there, not here either. It just amaze me. And I'm no treehugger, vegan, or anti-nuclear person, I just see the science.
-
-
11-08-2012, 09:21 AM #48
It doesn't "overflow into being anti-immigration period." This is an example of you inserting your opinion of what you think conservatives believe because you usually disagree with them on other issues.
If Arapaio is such a "racist," how come he keeps getting re-elected in a place with such a large Hispanic population? He isn't a racist. He is tough on crime (which liberals generally hate), and he is in charge of maintaining peace in an area where illegals perpetrate a high number of violent crimes.
You are right about the latin vote helping obama win, but your opinion about what conservatives generally believe on the immigration issue (i.e., they are racist) is incredibly inaccurate.
-
11-08-2012, 09:23 AM #49
This was Santorum's point on the issue. The federal government has no business regulating the health insurance industry.
-
11-08-2012, 10:58 AM #50
Wow....so here is how you picture Dr. Ron Paul.
A gay, drug addicted, alcoholic racist who loves to kill unborn babies.
Just because someone is pro states rights does not mean that they are for those issues. He wants the states to decide what's right for themselves and leave federal mandates out of their business. If a state wants to allow marijuana, let em! If a state wants to allow gay marriage, let em! Why do we need the federal government to control what the states want? Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves if they knew how big the fed has gotten...........
-














