Who are you voting for in 2016?

Reagan definitely did end the cold war through the arms race. The soviet union used all of its resources trying to keep up with the United States.

 

Hilary, and not for objective reasons.

 

Ben Carson, although I doubt he will win.

 

No one. Ron Paul was the last to have any chance I think of anything great. I went around all the towns and cities in my area with fliers etc. campaigning for him. It was actually looking pretty bright, but he dropped the ball. (some suspect he succumbed to threats)

 

Literally lol'd at your post. Did you really just try and link us to thinkprogress? AKA one of the most liberal blogs ever AKA one of the biggest oppositions to conservatives and libertarians while Rand Paul is a social conservative and libertarian. That's like me trying to get you to read a Heritage Foundation (a conservative think thank) article on the opposition of Bernie Sanders (a liberal Democrat).

 

I'm sorry, I've just done internships in D.C before and am very involved in politics, speech, argumentation, and debate on a competitive level so usually when people throw sources like that their arguments are just shot down immediately. They aren't "liberal-leaning", they are completely liberal. They over-exaggerate, equivocate, and bend the truth.

However, there's nothing really wrong with not being a radical libertarian. I agree with you, he's not like his father, however he is a much gentler libertarian. Also the Cato article doesn't really call him bluff. I wouldn't really quote Cato on Rand either since if my memory serves me right he didn't do so well when he tried to garner the Koch brothers' support.

Radical libertarianism doesn't make you a "true" libertarian. There is no such thing as a "true" anything in the political world. He is defining his own type of libertarianism and I personally think it's great ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

Please vote for anyone that is pro-gun, these gun laws are dumb. People kill people, guns dont kill people.

 

nobody! because nothing will get fixed regardless!

 

Rand Paul for sure

 

Bernie Sanders probably, although I doubt he'll be able to beat Hillary in the primaries. On economic points, I agree with Republicans, but socially, I can't agree with them at all and so I'll never vote for them. The GOP needs to change if it wants to get younger voters on their side.

 

You will not beat the politicians in their own game. Elections will change nothing. Doesn't really matter which puppet will win unless you stop the vast majority of people from want wanting free stuff right here and now.

The sad reality is that even if a great man got into office then the same people who voted him in would demand for his removal since it would be painful, really ****ing painful to turn this thing around. We need a collapse, there is no way to fix the system from within and everyone dreaming about it should just wake up. There are way too many regulations,laws,etc in place for that to happen. Everyone hoping for a change should actualy be hoping for the collapse of the dollar (Fed). That's actualy something that might turn this thing around.

But ofcs you can choose to keep dreaming that there will be someone who will join the maffia and destory it from within. Sounds very possible, truely! glhf!

 

i personally think that picking the actual president matters very little, and social norms often dictate their responses to events anyway. none of them are stupid, and all of them want to improve things in some way

ot: probably hillary. if the republican candidate isn't deplorable, i could be persuaded to reconsider, but i don't think that's likely

 

The complete cynical approach that comes off as just bitching about the system is why nothing gets done.

There are ways to change the government, ways to promote greater representation in our government, and ways to change the system that does not require the collapse of the government (or the dollar.)

The collapse of the dollar would cripple the global economy. The U.S. economy is not just the U.S., world economies heavily interact with each other.

 

Its too far out to know yet.

 

Wakka for pres

 

It's not cynical it's just the reality. If everyone bitched(I call it facing the facts, but what ever floats your boat i guess) like me then noone would go to elections and the system would collapse on its own, so no people like me are not the ones who you can blame for the stupidity of the government. I'd argue that people like you who acutaly go and elect are the ones who are allowing this shity system to continue. It's like trying to cross the ocean while being neck deep in water and telling yourself "I'm almost there" and taking another step. That's how I see the goverment. A lot of attempts to do something which in reality have the opposite effects.

Also if you havn't noticed then pretty much all countries are in dept and it's supposed to be paid by the next generation. I don't see how anyone can be okay with it. This has to change and I don't see how it's possible without a collapse. People are just too greedy to give a **** about the next generation so it won't happen on its own.

 

Ahh, it's just reality.. "That's just the way things are, trust me" is always a great argument. Your so called "facts" have no basis. I think opinion is the word you're looking for.

No, the system wouldn't just collapse, if no one was voting there would likely be a shift to an authoritarian government. If there's no one to be accountable to, well, then individuals in power can do anything they want with complete disregard to the populace.

That's a horrible comparison, nor do I see what you're getting at. How do you see government? You say they're attempting to do something (without stating what this something is), but stating that it has the opposite effects. What are these opposite effects, considering you did not even identify what they're attempting to do.

I'm plenty aware of the debt crisis and the idea that it will be paid by the next generation will likely continue through our generation. We'll see what happens, I imagine it is possible to dig out of, but it would be incredibly difficult (if even possible.)

Being aware and being ok with something are two different things.

Well good thing there are people whom spend their lives trying to figure out ways to solve such issues without resorting to "well damn, we messed up, guess we need to hit the restart button."

 

War on drugs
War on poverty
War on terror
Wars in general
TSA
Transparant goverment
The patriot act
Obamacare
Public education system
Subsidies for growing unhealthy food
No subsidies for growing healthy food

This list is way longer, but I think you get the point.

The experement of using currency instead of money has lead to overspending, overconsuming, wars that can last for ever (One day the "terror" will surrender I bet), harder to climb out of poverty, near impossible to save money(since currency loses it's value rapidly) etc. Maybe it's time to call this one a failure but again you can defy logic and facts and hope for people to "magically" change overnight.

On a side note:

People like me would not accept any forum of government so that claim is not valid. I believe in free will and social norms which we can live by without the government. In a world where everyone thinked like me we would not shift to an authoritarian government, we would move to anarchy(the lack of government) or if that sounds scary to you then you can also call it voluntarism.

There is no way to fix the government without fixing the people and that process would take generations. And again, the steps that need to be taken would be so painful that the people who took them would be thrown out of office and replaced by people who promise to give more free stuff.

 

I am not a registered voter so I am not voting for anyone.

Thank god that Barack Obama is not going to be president anymore.

 

Voting for Bernie Sanders