Well then I hope you have ceded all your credibility to any political discussion aside from your anarchy. How much evidence do you need for your vote to become meaningful before you start voting again? If everyone thought like you, then that would be never because we would all cease to vote.DustyDrB said:
Poll: Would you vote for a presdential republican candidate...
- Thread starter DudeistBelieve
- Start date
I wouldn't vote in a REPUBLICAN. Dont' give a damn about their religious affiliation though maybe a PUBLICLY atheist one would do good for the party as a whole.
I would have to hear his positions and see his running mate. I would not rule him out because of his religion but I am not going to suddenly go to the Republican party because there is an atheist candidate. I am not opposed to Christian politicians, I am opposed to theocratic politicians. I would probably not vote for him because he will probably try to tell me what is best for the country is tax cuts while pretending like it is realistic to just cut out most of our budget that is not going to defense.
In the current incarnation of the Republican party?
No. Not even vaguely worth considering. To be fair, the current Republicans have nothing to do with the tenets of the party they claim to be members of. They aren't really Republicans, they're just sort of vaguely-asshole conservatives (some of which lose the vaguely, and add arch- to the conservative). Frankly the whole system is a shambles, and the two-party structure doesn't help it in the least. Encourages camp loyalty more than it does actually thinking about issues. Kind of a shame.
But to answer your question, OP - whether the candidate is an atheist or not wouldn't impact my voting for a candidate. I can't think of any religion (or lack thereof) that would. There's far more important shit to consider.
No. Not even vaguely worth considering. To be fair, the current Republicans have nothing to do with the tenets of the party they claim to be members of. They aren't really Republicans, they're just sort of vaguely-asshole conservatives (some of which lose the vaguely, and add arch- to the conservative). Frankly the whole system is a shambles, and the two-party structure doesn't help it in the least. Encourages camp loyalty more than it does actually thinking about issues. Kind of a shame.
But to answer your question, OP - whether the candidate is an atheist or not wouldn't impact my voting for a candidate. I can't think of any religion (or lack thereof) that would. There's far more important shit to consider.
Athiest, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, whatever. Don't vote based on any kind of lines. Go down their platforms, piece by piece, determine what is most important to you, and weigh them on that. I'm a registered Republican, but would be perfectly willing to vote for a Democrat if they covered my issues better than their opponents.
On a side note their dosent seems to be a lack of diversity in US system, in Canadas election right now their are 5 major parties a Quebec seperatist party, a Green party, a far left near socialism party, the Liberals and the Conservatives, and all parties have a good shot of getting seats in parliment.
I feel the partisan system is fundamentally flawed, I agree w/ republicans on some thoughts, democrats on others, and 3rd parties elsewhere. I have nothing against a the Athiest part, its the Republican I don't want to vote for. So I more often then not vote for a 3rd party, pretty much pissing away my vote but retaining my right to ***** about the affair as I at least "tried" to get the best candidate in (and yes generally speaking I think 3rd parties are the best candidates as they are more free to sway on one idea or other then the candidates that feel party obligations to vote one way or another).
Here here! How anyone can call themselves a first world country without everyone getting healthcare without needing private insurance is beyond me.Azrael the Cat said:
We just got through Reagan in AP U.S. History and I'm still very confused over where he was going with "Reaganomics."Jabberwock King said:
OT: I don't particularly care about religious affiliation. Right now, whether I vote for Obama or the Republican candidate, comes down to who runs. My prime goal is for a president who's focused on properly keeping the budget balanced and reducing our growing deficit. Though if Sarah Palin runs, I'm voting for her just to see how she might screw up. /Onion
Or, like every other reasonable country, you just put the taxes up a reasonable amount. People don't want to lose services? Then they have to pay for them.coolkirb said:
