Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Liberal probubally gonna be voteing republican....

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
First off, for context I am probubally the most anti-evangelical liberal on ATS.


However I really think rand Paul is gonna be the GOP candidate in the next presidential election. If so I really think his stance on the war on drugs will be more advantageous to society then the policies I disagree with him on would be.

I think the war on drugs has gifted us gangsta culture, brutalized the low income communities. Lead to us incarcerating 10% of the US population 70% of those are nonviolent drug offenders. Broken up homes and families. Cost tax payers trillions. Cost citizens trillions in legal fees and fines. Militarized our police forces. Lead to the negative way police are viewed in society. Exc, exc , exc

I think fixing these things are more important then gay rights, abortion, and welfare combined!

I have no idea why ( with the exception of Rand) niether political party has the balls to go after pot legalization and an end to the war on drugs. To me it's a no brainer. By the polls 80% of the population thinks pot should be legal for medical reasons and 70% just think it should be totally legal. What else do 80% of Americans agree on? Nuthing lol!


That said if rand wins the GOP primary the only way I won't vote for him is if the dems take the same stance.... Which I don't think hillary Clinton will take.

So I was just wondering if anyother liberals are thinking the same thing?


PS I am kinda wondering if rand really sold out to the tea party types.. Or if it was a strategy to get GOP backing. He was raised by Ron Paul after all so hopefully he's more libertarian then conservative.
edit on 27-4-2014 by ArtemisE because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-4-2014 by ArtemisE because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

The following is where I thought Liberals could appreciate someone like Rand Paul (although with Obama, I'm not sure what Liberals stand for anymore other than gay marriage and abortion).
  • His stance regarding the "war" on drugs. He's against it. It should rightfully be called the war on the 4th Amendment.
  • Hes against the police state, government's warrant-less spying on citizens.
  • Working with Holder to repeal or reduce federal mandatory minimum sentencing.
  • Trying to change our policy of endless warfare.
Liberals and people in general need to realize that many if not most issues have to be dealt with on a state level.

Right now for example, abortion and gay marriage are being hashed out in individual states.

We need a Rand Paul on a federal level to halt the 1-Party ("bi-partisan") national agendas.

edit on 27-4-2014 by gladtobehere because: wording



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Honestly if it's hillary vs rand, I think the right wing talking points about liberals being sheeple who blindly vote for dems gets busted.

I think there's a ground swell of support for rand that pops up and he might leave hillary looking like a neo-con.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Hell I think you could end welfare, abortion and bring prayer back to public school ( all I think would damage society) and still have society be over all improved by ending the war on drugs.

edit on 27-4-2014 by ArtemisE because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

The biggest fallacy that many seem to buy into is that if you participate in the US presidential election by voting, you are predominantly in alignment with the chosen candidate's ideology. Anyone not blinded by propaganda can see through the fallacy.

The two party system is designed to disintegrate the middle ground of society (e.g. the core) and financial interests perpetuate this ruse.

I'm not advocating any issue at this point except we need to demand more responsiveness from the political system. Maybe that is class action or boycotts or general strikes, IDK. A general strike is the most damaging and scariest thing to the elites.

If you play their game don't be surprised at the results.



edit on 27-4-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: syntax



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Whoa, whoa, whoa....

NOTHING is more important than gay marriage, abortion, race baiting, and where that lost airplane is.

The reason civilizations crumble is because of their lack of concern over these very points.

(P.S. For those on ATS missing the humor/sarcasm chromosome, this is a joke)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Anyone who votes for either major party should be required to have a psych evaluation.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots


Yea cause the ones who don't vote are the real patriots!


That also was sarcasm. :p



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Just register as an Independent and vote as you feel,systems label things,this is too important for that.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: captaintyinknots


Yea cause the ones who don't vote are the real patriots!


That also was sarcasm. :p
No, really, by all means, keep voting for the same broken system and then bitching about the fact that its broken.

The clinical definition of insanity is to repeat the same action expecting different results. SO. FITTING.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

There are some overlaps between ideologies...of course, the big differences come in how to implement some of those policies. Of course, some people focus on one or two topics and everything else falls to the way side. The 'single-issue voter.'

You listed four topics, there's hundreds of topics that are much more important to other people. Gay marriage is a big one, especially if you're gay. Abortion is another one, especially if you've been in any number of possible situations where you faced that decision.

I don't even want to try and speculate on what's going to happen in 2016, mostly because I've got bigger things to worry about right now. Rand has been changing the tune of the GOP lately though. He's been endorsing 'big government' candidates and, most recently, suggesting compromise is a greater quality than ideological purity.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: gladtobehere


We need a Rand Paul on a federal level to halt the 1-Party ("bi-partisan") national agendas.



I don't think A Rand Paul presidency will be any different than what Obama offered up.

Rand will bend to the will of the real power of the Corporate Oligarchy/military industrial complex, just like Obama did.

In fact Rand has already made the move in that direction with his endorsement of Susan Collins.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But the GOP has been hijacked by the TParty and God only know what kind of guy they will pick. Whoever it is...It's obviously going to be hand picked by the Koch Bros ; Doubt if it will be Rand.



edit on 27-4-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I'm voting for a write in candidate.
I've narrowed it down between Rev Bud Green. Or ATS's very own Bongripasaurus..
Decisions decisions.. Hmm.





new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join