Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
Buy your amazon goods through FJ's link.
Just click this link and search for any product you want. FJ gets a commission on everything you buy.

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #51 - demandsgayversion (11/15/2012) [-]
The only reason anyone wants this guy for president is because he's for legalizing pot.
#56 to #51 - Yardie (11/15/2012) [-]
If that was literally the only reason people would just support Obama
User avatar #50 - richardw (11/15/2012) [-]
Ron Paul is my personal hero i love what he stands for and hasnt changed no matter what people thought of him
#68 to #50 - thamuz ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
You do realize hes just as bad as everyone else...everyone only wanted him because he would legalize pot.
You do realize hes just as bad as everyone else...everyone only wanted him because he would legalize pot.
User avatar #488 to #68 - richardw (11/16/2012) [-]
Oh quit being such an idiot
#87 to #68 - lifeisahighway (11/15/2012) [-]
Or you know, he's for smaller government and economic prosperity that would come from a reduction in government.
#111 to #87 - thamuz ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
Or the fact that 90% of America is undeducated on where they really stand.   
   
A smaller government wouldnt fix a damned thing. The Founding Fathers NEVER intended for an elected official to have a carrear as a politician. It was your DUTY to do so. And when you were done you stepped down and walked away. Not stayed in the game for 30+ years.   
   
   
BTW Did you know that Ron Paul was promoting in his Economic plan to lower corporate tax rates from 35% down to 15%?   
   
How about how he voted to end a regulation that is used to help catch Child Predators on the web.   
   
How about in the 80s and 90s Ron Paul wanted to abolish public schools?   
   
How about he supports medical research,but does not want the government to fund it?    
   
He flip flops on all his issues. Hes just like the rest of them. He only was pro legalization to get people to pay attention to him and get younger people to vote for him.   
   
Thats all he is. He is not your white knight. And all this is found on Google. Information is all around you. You need to make the choice to choose to find it. Not believe what the Media force feeds you.
Or the fact that 90% of America is undeducated on where they really stand.

A smaller government wouldnt fix a damned thing. The Founding Fathers NEVER intended for an elected official to have a carrear as a politician. It was your DUTY to do so. And when you were done you stepped down and walked away. Not stayed in the game for 30+ years.


BTW Did you know that Ron Paul was promoting in his Economic plan to lower corporate tax rates from 35% down to 15%?

How about how he voted to end a regulation that is used to help catch Child Predators on the web.

How about in the 80s and 90s Ron Paul wanted to abolish public schools?

How about he supports medical research,but does not want the government to fund it?

He flip flops on all his issues. Hes just like the rest of them. He only was pro legalization to get people to pay attention to him and get younger people to vote for him.

Thats all he is. He is not your white knight. And all this is found on Google. Information is all around you. You need to make the choice to choose to find it. Not believe what the Media force feeds you.
#119 to #111 - lifeisahighway (11/15/2012) [-]
I agree with all of the "how abouts" you presented, so I'm just fine with him.
1) Good! Lower taxes instills growth and will open up more jobs reducing unemployment and dependency on the federal government
2) Thats the parents job, if they do nothing to educate their children about the dangers of the internet, they could be victims with or without government intervention.
3) So? Charter schools provide much better education than public schools because they have an incentive to do better or they'll lose business. They are also much more cost efficient. If there were no public schools I guarantee new charities would open up to give scholarships to those who could not afford charter schools.
4) Why should government fund medical research? What they should do is loosen restrictions on pharmaceutical companies to allow them to test new drugs cheaper. But wouldn't that give a greater chance for people getting sick? no, because they would have the incentive to make a good product or they would lose all of their business.
#124 to #119 - thamuz ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
1) And where does that extra money go? Oh wait,it doesnt go into stimulating the economy and promoting growth..it goes right into off shore banks to avoid taxes in the first place! Thats right,deary me,I forgot thats what we do with all of our money now! Yes,lets give our CEOs and top execs ANOTHER 25% increase in self profits instead of spreading it equally through the company were everyone can profit and help stimulate the economy! Reagonomics doesnt work. Didnt then,doesnt now.    
   
2) Its *everyones* job to do so. Im sure you wouldnt want a cradle thief touching what is yours no? I know I wouldnt. With the vast amounts of misinformation spread and the fact that most people dont even know where a CP is around them,it really is all of our jobs to protect the little ones isnt it? Especially from something they dont understand or know.   
   
3) and the majority of those charter schools are well out side of 80% of Americas budget.  So instead of the right of education to gain the basics,you would get nothing. Sounds suspiciously like the 1800s where the rich and wealthy could afford good quality school.   
   
4) Why? Why do you think the FDA is in place? Look at the 1900s when all you would see is quack medicine. If you want to suck a tube of mercury down for a cold,be my guest. With the govts laws and restrictions they can actually get 						****					 done safely,instead of cheaply,poorly made(like anything is made with quality anymore) and quite possibly toxic to you.   
   
   
So yes. Ron Paul is not a white knight. You should stop promoting him to be what he is not. Anyone who looks into where he stands will see he is not better than anyone else.
1) And where does that extra money go? Oh wait,it doesnt go into stimulating the economy and promoting growth..it goes right into off shore banks to avoid taxes in the first place! Thats right,deary me,I forgot thats what we do with all of our money now! Yes,lets give our CEOs and top execs ANOTHER 25% increase in self profits instead of spreading it equally through the company were everyone can profit and help stimulate the economy! Reagonomics doesnt work. Didnt then,doesnt now.

2) Its *everyones* job to do so. Im sure you wouldnt want a cradle thief touching what is yours no? I know I wouldnt. With the vast amounts of misinformation spread and the fact that most people dont even know where a CP is around them,it really is all of our jobs to protect the little ones isnt it? Especially from something they dont understand or know.

3) and the majority of those charter schools are well out side of 80% of Americas budget. So instead of the right of education to gain the basics,you would get nothing. Sounds suspiciously like the 1800s where the rich and wealthy could afford good quality school.

4) Why? Why do you think the FDA is in place? Look at the 1900s when all you would see is quack medicine. If you want to suck a tube of mercury down for a cold,be my guest. With the govts laws and restrictions they can actually get **** done safely,instead of cheaply,poorly made(like anything is made with quality anymore) and quite possibly toxic to you.


So yes. Ron Paul is not a white knight. You should stop promoting him to be what he is not. Anyone who looks into where he stands will see he is not better than anyone else.
#137 to #124 - lifeisahighway (11/15/2012) [-]
1) If taxes were lower, the money would not be shipped overseas. Reagan had an economy much like the one Obama got, but instead of massive spending he reduced taxes and spending, leading to economic growth and a swift recovery. And what do the rich CEO's do with that money? What does anyone do with money? They spend it, greatly stimulating the economy.

2) Again, if parents are incompetent, they put their children at risk with or without the help of the federal government. A simple denial of access to the internet without parental blocks would easily solve this problem.

3) Which is why, as I said before, charities would open up to provide scholarships. If that absolutely failed, the government could as a last resort provide money, at half the cost of public schools, to send children to charter schools.

4) Imagine if someone today was given mercury by a drug company and died. The media coverage of such an event would destroy the company that produced it and render it bankrupt. So, in the interest of profits, they would create a good product.

So yes. Ron Paul is a white knight. You should start promoting him to be what he is. Anyone who looks into where he stands will see he is better than most everyone else.
#302 to #137 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
Also, Ron Paul is just another "State's Rights" jockey, which basically allows the states to discriminate against whoever. Ron Paul is just like George Wallace. And the funny thing is, states are not allowed to discriminate at all. Please go read up on your idol's rhetoric. Voting for someone just because they have a mask of "freedom" on, isn't cool son.
#288 to #137 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
Heh, you do understand that Reagan did not help the economy? Reagan had a higher debt increase than Barack Obama, silly pants. Also, Grand Wizard Ron Paul is quite fond of Reaganomics. Your beloved "Paul" is just another Republican, except he wants to legalize drugs, too bad he is homophobic **** wit who somehow gained a following of "sheeple", not to sound pretentious.


#152 to #137 - thamuz ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
1) again and again no. This has been proven that it does NOT work. You are right,Regan tried,failed miserably. Obama inherited Bush Jrs debts and mistakes,and hence was blamed for them. His stimulus did work,just not as well as planned. Lower taxes does NOT always guarantee a stronger economy. As the majority of that money thats made in those Fortune 500 companies will not stay in America. Clinton was the first president since FDR to get our country back in shape. Bush 						******					 it all up. Deregulation on the banks,and the mortgages with credit is what brought our economy down on its knees. NOT lower taxes. If you do not contain it,greed will ruin you,just like it did to our country. Stop humping his leg all the time and actually figure out why we crashed in the first place.   
   
2) thats depending on parents being competent,and in our society,most are not. so if you have the regulations in place that are used to help catch AND locate them,why not use them?   
   
3) Again,you are relying to the fact that you qualify for those charities to gain those scholarships. Some people do not qualify at all. So again,you will be damning a great majority of your population to rely on charity to get to a standard education.   
   
4) did you see the results of the steroids contaminated with meningitis? The media didnt destroy that company,all that has been called for is stiffer regulations. Several died and many became ill.   
   
Again,he is just another politician playing the uneducated on what he really is. He is no better than the next bottom feeder. I see no white knight in him.
1) again and again no. This has been proven that it does NOT work. You are right,Regan tried,failed miserably. Obama inherited Bush Jrs debts and mistakes,and hence was blamed for them. His stimulus did work,just not as well as planned. Lower taxes does NOT always guarantee a stronger economy. As the majority of that money thats made in those Fortune 500 companies will not stay in America. Clinton was the first president since FDR to get our country back in shape. Bush ****** it all up. Deregulation on the banks,and the mortgages with credit is what brought our economy down on its knees. NOT lower taxes. If you do not contain it,greed will ruin you,just like it did to our country. Stop humping his leg all the time and actually figure out why we crashed in the first place.

2) thats depending on parents being competent,and in our society,most are not. so if you have the regulations in place that are used to help catch AND locate them,why not use them?

3) Again,you are relying to the fact that you qualify for those charities to gain those scholarships. Some people do not qualify at all. So again,you will be damning a great majority of your population to rely on charity to get to a standard education.

4) did you see the results of the steroids contaminated with meningitis? The media didnt destroy that company,all that has been called for is stiffer regulations. Several died and many became ill.

Again,he is just another politician playing the uneducated on what he really is. He is no better than the next bottom feeder. I see no white knight in him.
#166 to #152 - lifeisahighway (11/15/2012) [-]
1) Yes, because plunging $6 trillion dollars deeper in debt over the last four years is still bush's fault. Maybe if you stopped blaming bush, you would realize that Obama has done the same things as Bush but on a larger scale. Tax revenue, regardless of rates has remained at around 13% of GDP. This means that an increase in the performance of the economy would mean more money, even if taxes are lower. Clinton only did well thanks to the tech boom. FDR extended the length of the Great Depression. He plunged us into huge amounts of debt and set up our now entitlement society. What caused the faulty mortgages? Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government organizations that nearly forced the banks to hand out loans that could not be paid back. Stop humping all of the liberals that actually began ruining our country.

2) Because the act of catching them already proves that children were previously hurt and the government has no way to prevent it.

3) As I said, if the charity thing fails (which is highly unlikely if public schools are eliminated) government could provide money to the families in a pinch at about half the cost of public schools.

4) Why? Because they felt the government would go and take care of that. If the government did not interfere, there would be more concern and as a result more media attention to outbreaks like that.

The fundamental difference in our views is I believe in the Locke political theory (mankind is inherently good), and you believe in the Hobbes political theory (mankind is inherently bad). I see no way in which we will be able to convince each other, so I will now exit this conversation to play madden 13' and will now thumb up all of your comments as an olive branch.
#177 to #166 - thamuz ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
1) No,Im not saying Liberals ruined the country,it was the every man who overextended themselves into a hole. The Great Depression was caused by insider trading and the stocks crashing bought on credit. I blame Bush for starting a fireball by letting go of the reigns so to speak and letting the horses run free,when in reality,they needed to be held in check.

Did I agree with Obamas 6trill spending spree? **** no. I firmly believe in Market Darwinism. Those companies should have died. Die and pave the way for a new generation of ideas and concepts.

Bush is the one in his tax programs that let Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac get so large and fat the way they did.
2) but knowing where they are(instead of just letting them go) would be beneficial no?

3) but Ron Paul states no govt interference,so in that case,you are still screwed.

4) And govt did take care of it,by revoking the licences of many of the practioners at the facility and by the start of new laws on medicinal production.

All in all,I think that we need to pull all of it down and start over from a fresh beginning. Thumbs in return for an intelligent debate. Off to =\/= now.
#313 to #177 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
Oh jesus, you completely slaughtered him. Nice job bro, but I think you shouldn't pick on him too much. You have to remember, he thinks Scott Brown is a moderate politician.
#336 to #313 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
What were the exact points upon which I was slaughtered? Because when I gave an answer he simply repeated what he already said despite me countering it?
#449 to #336 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
I can't seem to reply to your commet 435 so I will reply here. I have mentioned many of your illogical fallacies. You are also completely missing what I said. Besides young man, I am done arguing with you and illogical arguments. It's getting to the point where you are trying to push my buttons, but it ends up being an uncreative attempt at trolling. You might as well just spamming "TROLOLOLOL LOL U MAD p00sy BIATCH ****** ??!?!?!!!11!!!1!".
#463 to #449 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Okay, you've failed once again to explain how I'm wrong, but you again did not fail to insult me. I agree with you on only one thing, that this conversation is useless. I try to be civilized but your arrogance lead to nothing but insults.
#338 to #336 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
You do realize that you kept repeating your illogical fallacies, the only proper rebuttal he could give was one he already stated before. You will only reply to people if they call you out on your idiocy, which you happened to display pretty well. Your hillbilly attitude is very dull, and just plain stupid. Please be able to defend your positions before you try to start a flame war.
#347 to #338 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Okay, other than your feeble insults on my intelligence, please explain (in a civil way) what facts of mine were "illogical fallacies"? Or are you just a liberal that only attacks others to try and hide that they know very little?
#317 to #313 - thamuz ONLINE (11/16/2012) [-]
Some people just cant be reasoned with. Some people are too set on one thing to step back and see all of it.

Theres good and bad in everything. Politicians lie to make us believe they have good intent,when in reality,all they want is to be reelected and get fatter on corporate checks.

Thats all our country is becoming. I can see us becoming a country run by the corporate. Maybe not in our lifetimes,but certainly our childrens grand kids could see it.
#334 to #317 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Are you serious right now? I cannot be reasoned with? Typical liberal attitude: All those with different opinions must dull rednecks who don't understand anything. I don't think Ron Paul is perfect, I just think he is much better. I would much rather have corporations ruling rather than government, because corporations don't have armed forces.
#348 to #334 - thamuz ONLINE (11/16/2012) [-]
No not you :P Im saying theres other people. Go look at that woman who ran over her husband with her car because he "Made Obama win because he didnt vote"   
   
You were awesome for the debate really :D We just couldnt come to an agreement :P   
   
Have a cool gif :)
No not you :P Im saying theres other people. Go look at that woman who ran over her husband with her car because he "Made Obama win because he didnt vote"

You were awesome for the debate really :D We just couldnt come to an agreement :P

Have a cool gif :)
#350 to #348 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Alright, I like you, much more than the other guy...
#353 to #350 - thamuz ONLINE (11/16/2012) [-]
Well,you did shoot yourself in the foot with the whole "corporations dont have armed forces" bit.   
   
Private Military Companies,doing what your government wont do since the beginning of civilization!    
   
Other than that,I had fun,heres another awesome.gif I have :)
Well,you did shoot yourself in the foot with the whole "corporations dont have armed forces" bit.

Private Military Companies,doing what your government wont do since the beginning of civilization!

Other than that,I had fun,heres another awesome.gif I have :)
#344 to #334 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
Saying you would much rather have corporations over government, shows how very stupid you are son. Corporations don't give a **** about you or their product, they only care about a ******* profit you nitwit. If you really think the market will "regulate" it's self, just shows how inept you are to the outside world. Silly kid.
#349 to #344 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Again, other than your juvenile insults, can you explain where I'm wrong? Corporations care about profits which promotes the good service in the idea that in order to garner business. Government on the other hand has nearly a limitless budget and unlimited power if it so chooses in the use of the military.
#360 to #349 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
Of course businesses care about their profits, I said that. But it does not promote good service among their corporation, if that were the case then if I went to a fast food restaurant and ordered a burger, then they wouldn't mess up my order. Silly boy, although we do overspend on our military, you miss the part where the government actually does productive and helpful **** in your benefit. Like bridges, schools, roads, your internet, and your health. Please look at the whole picture, and not the stuff you dislike.
#364 to #360 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
I never said the government shouldn't do those things. And if you are dissatisfied with your order at fast food do not go there any more Silly, and if others do the same they will be forced to change Silly. Please look at the whole picture, and not just stuff you like.
#394 to #364 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
If you don't focus on the good things then how do you learn how to make other things great? That is how development works buddy, and you precious companies don't give a **** about development. Like I said before, they only care about a profit, bud. I really pity you, your arguments have became very weak and you are just harping on silly things. Remodeling my comment to your craft your own improper rebuttal is childish.
#409 to #394 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
Childish? How about your constant condescending attitude towards others combined with you excessive use of the word "silly". How are we supposed to improve if we do not look at the bad things? When you were in school and you got a ninety three, would you look at all you got right and say "Oh well that's good enough"? No, you would look at the seven you got wrong and decide how to do better next time. I'm willing to have a civil debate with you but your condescending attitude towards those with opposing opinions to yours makes that difficult.
#420 to #409 - clitface (11/16/2012) [-]
I would like to have a civil debate with you, but your logic is so illogical that is hard for me not to condescend you. I mean I am sorry pal. If you take the good things you did to get a 93 and apply that next time and you would develop. It is simple development my boy.
#435 to #420 - lifeisahighway (11/16/2012) [-]
You fail to mention anything illogical about my arguments that I cannot refute. Anyway, your time would be better served on finding what you did wrong in the seven percent rather than praising yourself for what you did in the 93 percent.
+1
#355 to #349 - elgringogordo **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#48 - hakrodashammy ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
#47 - mcfc (11/15/2012) [-]
Ron paul for president!
User avatar #49 to #47 - Rahmaniac (11/15/2012) [-]
Ron Paul isn't even running anymore. His son Rand Paul is.
#55 to #49 - mcfc (11/15/2012) [-]
I would prefer Ron but i guess Rand is far better than any alternative.
Rand Paul for president!
#168 to #55 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
Rand Paul is nothing like his father.
User avatar #42 - kabizus (11/15/2012) [-]
Majority of the Ron Paul fans would love Gary Johnson as an equal. If not, I can understand. Some don't.
-2
#39 - beeradthelaw has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #28 - wrocky ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
of course he had to. he wouldn't have to deal with them since it was his last
#20 - phanact (11/15/2012) [-]
I had no idea who to vote for in this upcoming election.

My stoner friends in college were being retarded, and like "Vote for ron paul he'll legalize weed!"

I'm pretty sure the president isn't capable of that alone
User avatar #16 - carmeloandy (11/15/2012) [-]
I really wanted to vote for this man so badly, but after he dropped out I voted Gary Johnson. I refused to vote for Obama or Romney...
User avatar #159 to #16 - awesomenessdefined (11/15/2012) [-]
I voted for myself.
User avatar #40 to #16 - vonspyder (11/15/2012) [-]
as did I my friend and I too voted Johnson.
#44 to #40 - Spikeydeath (11/15/2012) [-]
couldnt vote for him here in oklahoma
so i picked the socialist 3rd party
User avatar #165 to #44 - upunkpunk (11/15/2012) [-]
Wait you wanted to vote for a libertarian but couldn't so you voted for a socialist?
wtf?
#169 to #165 - Spikeydeath (11/15/2012) [-]
i have socialist views on some things
User avatar #172 to #169 - upunkpunk (11/15/2012) [-]
like what exactly, just wondering
#183 to #172 - Spikeydeath (11/15/2012) [-]
Government Aid
such as
the poor pay for the poor but has a set amount they can earn
the middle class pays for the middle class but has a fluctuating way they can earn
and rich can make what ever they want but they dont have to pay for each other
and by that i mean, depending on how much you make a year chooses if you have universal health care, or what we have now or a totally independent one, universal health care is payed for by the poor for the poor.
if that makes any sense
User avatar #186 to #183 - upunkpunk (11/15/2012) [-]
Well I dont agree with some of that stuff but anyway
I don't think that's socialism either.
Socialism would be more government enforced worker control over business.
I could be wrong though.
User avatar #45 to #44 - vonspyder (11/15/2012) [-]
could have done a write in vote. i did that against every unopposed incumbant.
User avatar #117 to #45 - thepalmtoptiger (11/15/2012) [-]
I still wrote in Ron Paul because **** all the candidates this year.
-31
#29 to #16 - swampert has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #46 to #29 - ShaunG (11/15/2012) [-]
I don't even live in America, and I can see how stupid you are from here.
#43 to #29 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
people like you destroy "democracy"
User avatar #37 to #29 - thepalmtoptiger (11/15/2012) [-]
This is such an ass-backwards mentality.

It is a wasted vote because society believes it is a wasted vote. People like you are the reason why Democracy is a joke.
User avatar #115 to #37 - chezburgadominator (11/15/2012) [-]
I'm not trying to take a side, but I believe he meant it in the terms that it's accepted that it's highly unlikely for a third-party to win and it was most obviously going to be a Republican or a Democrat representative.
User avatar #35 to #29 - ragingflamingos (11/15/2012) [-]
So instead we should be forced to choose between shooting our left and right foots? Face it. The government will continue to suck until enough people finally decide to "throw away" their votes on some candidates that are actually halfway decent.
#34 to #29 - eiyven (11/15/2012) [-]
My parents tried to tell me this. It's exactly this mindset that keeps independents from winning. If more people were like "hey yeah, I actually do like that guy, I'm going to vote for him regardless of whether or not I think others will" Ron Paul would have actually had a chance.
User avatar #32 to #29 - dtcdannyboy (11/15/2012) [-]
You realize that if the independent received just %percent of the votes this year, they would be recognized as a party next election and actually allowed to debate. Therefore it wasn't a wasted vote. Get your facts straight.
#26 to #16 - caplocker (11/15/2012) [-]
He's not a CFR member, he can't win. We can't vote an end to corruption, lol. It doesn't work like that.
#18 to #16 - comedylich (11/15/2012) [-]
Amen, brother. Amen.
#15 - mysticninja (11/15/2012) [-]
Ron Paul for the ******* win!
User avatar #10 - JosephDecreux (11/15/2012) [-]
i dont follow politics or anything like that but after watching that 'Ron Paul's predictions video' made me realise that he is a top guy!
User avatar #11 to #10 - JosephDecreux (11/15/2012) [-]
Jesus, my grammer is bad here. Corrections are welcome, try not to troll to hard ;)
User avatar #19 to #11 - LemonNADE (11/15/2012) [-]
Grammar* and too*
#12 to #11 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
*too
User avatar #13 to #12 - JosephDecreux (11/15/2012) [-]
its spelled two not too!
User avatar #17 to #13 - lordalpha (11/15/2012) [-]
christ man.... so much FALE

I meant to spell it like that for comic relief dont be hatin'
User avatar #30 to #17 - Maroon ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
are we purposely misspelling **** now or did you seriously just spell it FALE?
User avatar #9 - darthmaulman (11/15/2012) [-]
I don't understand why people say its so important to vote, i believe that you should vote only when you fully support a candidate. I fell a no vote is not as bad as a wasted vote, or an uninformed vote
User avatar #14 to #9 - Riukanojutsu ONLINE (11/15/2012) [-]
>wasted vote
if everyone dont want to"waste a vote" nothing will change
#8 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
Why do you think this is funny?
User avatar #7 - bounod (11/15/2012) [-]
I cheered for Ron Paul because he seemed to have some good ideas, but seems like all that doesn't really matter in USA voting system. Could also put some blame on the media for biased when it comes to presenting different candidates in time wise. One of my favorite American politicians along JFK.
#1 - frink (11/15/2012) [-]
I wrote him in for the elections, because I believe you should vote for someone who supports the same values as yourself. Even though I didn't want Obama to win, I am never going to vote for the other guy, just because I want the current kim jongistration out. I read some where that a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. It's funny that people who call him crazy, never even heard one minute of this man speak. He is a great American, who actually cares about individual freedoms and the fight against tyranny. I am getting sick of people voting for just (R) or (D), I want people to vote for principles and not politics.
#362 to #1 - diminishedsr (11/16/2012) [-]
I'm just pissed off about the whole damn electoral college system. There needs to be just one day to vote, and each vote ACTUALLY counts, with no "winning" a state. You win by getting more total votes. I just don't get why our voting system is so complicated. Since I registered as independent I'm not allowed to vote in the primary? **** this, ONE GODDAMN VOTE DAY for EVERYONE.
User avatar #369 to #362 - mahnamesjakers (11/16/2012) [-]
It's also weird that this is very similar to my avatar...
User avatar #367 to #362 - mahnamesjakers (11/16/2012) [-]
I ******* love you. TOOL FANS UNITE!
User avatar #372 to #367 - diminishedsr (11/16/2012) [-]
Woo! Hoped I would get a comment. ******* love Tool! Right now, I'm obsessed with Vicarious and Schism. They are so fun to play
User avatar #374 to #372 - mahnamesjakers (11/16/2012) [-]
Those were my favorite for the longest time. Now I've been hooked on Aenima for a few months and I can't stop listening to it. Lateralus and Aenima are tied for my favorite albums.
User avatar #307 to #1 - lordmoldywart (11/16/2012) [-]
Voting for R or D?

Ron Paul's a republican. You know this, right?
#220 to #1 - XxXRoxasXxX (11/16/2012) [-]
I like you. I think that the very existence of political parties is stupid.
I like you. I think that the very existence of political parties is stupid.
#144 to #1 - bulbakip (11/15/2012) [-]
I would of voted libertarian but i didn't get round to it, plus i prefer non voting. I'm a Voluntarist so..... voting = bad to put it shortly.
User avatar #366 to #144 - diminishedsr (11/16/2012) [-]
Pardon my french, but pieces of **** like you are what's wrong with America. Lazy asses who want things to go better for them but couldn't care less if they ACTUALLY vote to help change? Please, you don't deserve to live in this country. If you want some goddamn change, then vote for it, it's all you'll do. If you like things the way they are, just vote for the re-runners. It's quite simple.
+3
#249 to #144 - nengcaste **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#89 to #1 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
I agree with you on people voting just R and D, but Ron Paul is a strict christian who was against gay marriage, and was for the combination of church and state effectively making church the same as law, or at least close enough to have an impact on people who aren't religious.
User avatar #319 to #89 - lasmamoe (11/16/2012) [-]
Where the hell did you hear that??
User avatar #161 to #89 - upunkpunk (11/15/2012) [-]
he is not trying to make gay marriage illegal, he wants a state and its people to decide that.
#33 to #1 - themystic (11/15/2012) [-]
its too bad your opinion is in the minority   
   
it'll be a long time if ever where america votes for someone like him   
   
mfw voting
its too bad your opinion is in the minority

it'll be a long time if ever where america votes for someone like him

mfw voting
User avatar #5 to #1 - ChefBoyardee (11/15/2012) [-]
Vote for the lesser of two evil's. The two party system is inevitable in American style of government.. Duverger's Law: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law
#96 to #5 - anonymous (11/15/2012) [-]
That's a wasted vote, & I don't want an evil.
User avatar #6 to #5 - ChefBoyardee (11/15/2012) [-]
evils*
User avatar #3 to #1 - heraske (11/15/2012) [-]
Politics are so black and white now.
User avatar #4 to #3 - mikepetru (11/15/2012) [-]
literally
User avatar #2 to #1 - mikepetru (11/15/2012) [-]
I voted for Gary Johnson so that the Libertarian Party would have a chance of ending the duopoly Republicrats have over election ballots. As much as I wanted to vote for Paul, I knew the media would do something like add his ballots to a list of how many people supported The Republican Party and not mention who individually people voted for or some ******** like that.
 Friends (0)