http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/perfe...45041.html

How strongly do you feel on these issues?

I'd say environmental policy, raising the debt ceiling, supporting insurance mandate, and raising taxes are the deal breakers I see. Everything else is no problem (many are pluses), except for messy family relationships. I'd say that depends on how much the candidate is pandering to the family values voters. If they aren't, I'll give them a pass for a divorce or affair.

Other deal killers for me not listed are voting for the Patriot Act, TARP, or stimulus, or voicing any having any kind of close ties to the Fed.

Interesting that 42% of likely Republican caucus-goers - - often the most conservative of the party - - would consider voting for a candidate who supports civil unions or gay marriage. Times have changed, indeed.

My only deal Killer is abortion, bye bye Romney!

(06-29-2011 02:42 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  Interesting that 42% of likely Republican caucus-goers - - often the most conservative of the party - - would consider voting for a candidate who supports civil unions or gay marriage. Times have changed, indeed.

Key word there = "consider". Second key word = "supports." I mean, Dick Cheney "supports" some legal recognition of homosexual relationships. I would definitely "consider" voting for him.

(06-29-2011 02:59 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 02:42 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  Interesting that 42% of likely Republican caucus-goers - - often the most conservative of the party - - would consider voting for a candidate who supports civil unions or gay marriage. Times have changed, indeed.

Key word there = "consider". Second key word = "supports." I mean, Dick Cheney "supports" some legal recognition of homosexual relationships. I would definitely "consider" voting for him.

Understood, but even still, a significant change in attitude is taking place among a wide portion of the populace.

(06-29-2011 02:42 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  Interesting that 42% of likely Republican caucus-goers - - often the most conservative of the party - - would consider voting for a candidate who supports civil unions or gay marriage. Times have changed, indeed.

I thought that it was sad that, with all the problems we face today as a nation, it was the biggest deal killer listed. Baby steps, I guess.

At least we know we'll continue to waste money on the military, and continue to cut tax revenue at the same time. If a Republican wins, they'll almost certainly be a one timer like the first Bush, even if they do a good job, because they'll have no choice but to raise taxes unless Obama does it first.

(06-29-2011 04:19 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  At least we know we'll continue to waste money on the military, and continue to cut tax revenue at the same time. If a Republican wins, they'll almost certainly be a one timer like the first Bush, even if they do a good job, because they'll have no choice but to raise taxes unless Obama does it first.

They could get away with a Reagan/Bill Bradley approach of removing loopholes with offsetting rate reductions, and if the removing loopholes piece was substantially bigger than the rate reduction piece, it would increase tax revenues. That's the only way out of this. That's what pretty much everybody who has looked at the problem extensively has suggested.

Doing that plus a consumption tax is the way I would go. I would eliminate the individual income tax entirely in exchange for the consumption tax, which could easily be structured to generate more revenues. Do the consumption tax with the Boortz-Linder prefund and you'd make a lot of welfare programs redundant (and move a lot of people out of the income level where they means-test as eligible).

One thing for sure. I won't be winning the Iowa republican caucus. Way too many deal-killers for me in that table.

The deal killer for me is using a CAUCUS to choose a candidate, instead of a CLOSED primary. Caucuses often attract the most hard core of the supporters and can be gamed easily. They also attract the followers of what some people consider fringe candidates, who can easily swamp the straw polls.

Another problem is OPEN primaries (where you do not need to be registered with the party whose primary you are voting in.) Think - South Carolina in 2008. Many dems alleged that they voted for McCain, even though they were registered democrats. Not against the rules. Dumb strategy that really needs to be changed. Why not let the opposition decide who they want to run against?

Sorry, GTS but the Paul-bots proved in 2008 that they can win straw polls but little else. While some of his ideas (the Fed audit, etc.) are resonating more now than in 2008, I don't see it translating to that many more votes than the last time.

As for the deal killers on the list - for me there are only 3.

1) Individual mandate for healthcare.
2) Favors raising the debt ceiling
3) Includes raising taxes to reduce the deficit

(06-29-2011 02:42 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  Interesting that 42% of likely Republican caucus-goers - - often the most conservative of the party - - would consider voting for a candidate who supports civil unions or gay marriage. Times have changed, indeed.

That's one way to spin it. You could also spin it that half of the 13% lean deal killer but will consider the right candidate.... meaning about 2/3's of Republicans oppose same sex CIVIL UNIONS. The important point here is the survey posed the question as Civil Unions, I suspect the percentage that would call same sex MARRIAGE a deal killer is more in the neighborhood of 85%.

I don't know how to say this nicely .... so I'll just come right out and say it:

If you said gay marriage was a deal killer, but the debt ceiling or ObamaCare or raising taxes WERE NOT deal killers ... IN THIS ECONOMY ... you shouldn't be voting.

(06-29-2011 02:45 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  My only deal Killer is abortion, bye bye Romney!

This. Not only would I not support a pro-abort in the primary, but I would vote 3rd party in a general election just as I have in my last 2 congressional elections where the Republicans have run a pro-abort candidate.

I'm ambivalent about abortion - i think it should be safe, legal, and very rare, as Bill Clinton used to say - but it's puzzling to me that you would use that as a litmus test for a Presidential candidate, because realistically what can the President do directly to end abortions? Wouldn't take a Supreme Court overturn of Roe v. Wade? Legislation to end abortion is simply not going to happen. I don't think it's realistic beyond what states like Kansas have been able to do, severely restrict abortion through other means.

(06-29-2011 08:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I don't know how to say this nicely .... so I'll just come right out and say it:

If you said gay marriage was a deal killer, but the debt ceiling or ObamaCare or raising taxes WERE NOT deal killers ... IN THIS ECONOMY ... you shouldn't be voting.

I would say this ANY candidate who would allow Congress to waste the nations time working on a National Gay Marriage or Gay Civil Union bill is a complete F*ing moron. A serious candidate should tell Congress such a bill will be vetoed until:

1) The Budget is Balanced
2) Balanced budget law is passed requiring a 2/3's majority congressional vote to repeal.
3) Plan to eliminate the national debt and cover or eliminate unfunded obligations.
4) The true unemployment rate is under 5%.
5) Offshore and Anwr Oil reserve exploration is approved

Once all this is complete THEN and ONLY THEN should a MINOR domestic issue be discussed.

(06-29-2011 09:08 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 08:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I don't know how to say this nicely .... so I'll just come right out and say it:

If you said gay marriage was a deal killer, but the debt ceiling or ObamaCare or raising taxes WERE NOT deal killers ... IN THIS ECONOMY ... you shouldn't be voting.

I would say this ANY candidate who would allow Congress to waste the nations time working on a National Gay Marriage or Gay Civil Union bill is a complete F*ing moron. A serious candidate should tell Congress such a bill will be vetoed until:

1) The Budget is Balanced
2) Balanced budget law is passed requiring a 2/3's majority congressional vote to repeal.
3) Plan to eliminate the national debt and cover or eliminate unfunded obligations.
4) The true unemployment rate is under 5%.
5) Offshore and Anwr Oil reserve exploration is approved

Once all this is complete THEN and ONLY THEN should a MINOR domestic issue be discussed.

you are living in some bizarre wingnut talk radio la-la land.

(06-29-2011 09:13 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 09:08 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 08:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I don't know how to say this nicely .... so I'll just come right out and say it:

If you said gay marriage was a deal killer, but the debt ceiling or ObamaCare or raising taxes WERE NOT deal killers ... IN THIS ECONOMY ... you shouldn't be voting.

I would say this ANY candidate who would allow Congress to waste the nations time working on a National Gay Marriage or Gay Civil Union bill is a complete F*ing moron. A serious candidate should tell Congress such a bill will be vetoed until:

1) The Budget is Balanced
2) Balanced budget law is passed requiring a 2/3's majority congressional vote to repeal.
3) Plan to eliminate the national debt and cover or eliminate unfunded obligations.
4) The true unemployment rate is under 5%.
5) Offshore and Anwr Oil reserve exploration is approved

Once all this is complete THEN and ONLY THEN should a MINOR domestic issue be discussed.

you are living in some bizarre wingnut talk radio la-la land.

So you think letting the country burn while stupid social issues take center stage is a better use of Congressional time. I better not mention any radio talk show hosts I may listen to since you think its okay to harrass radio talk show hosts because of their beliefs.

(06-29-2011 09:17 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 09:13 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 09:08 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(06-29-2011 08:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I don't know how to say this nicely .... so I'll just come right out and say it:

If you said gay marriage was a deal killer, but the debt ceiling or ObamaCare or raising taxes WERE NOT deal killers ... IN THIS ECONOMY ... you shouldn't be voting.

I would say this ANY candidate who would allow Congress to waste the nations time working on a National Gay Marriage or Gay Civil Union bill is a complete F*ing moron. A serious candidate should tell Congress such a bill will be vetoed until:

1) The Budget is Balanced
2) Balanced budget law is passed requiring a 2/3's majority congressional vote to repeal.
3) Plan to eliminate the national debt and cover or eliminate unfunded obligations.
4) The true unemployment rate is under 5%.
5) Offshore and Anwr Oil reserve exploration is approved

Once all this is complete THEN and ONLY THEN should a MINOR domestic issue be discussed.

you are living in some bizarre wingnut talk radio la-la land.

So you think letting the country burn while stupid social issues take center stage is a better use of Congressional time. I better not mention any radio talk show hosts I may listen to since you think its okay to harrass radio talk show hosts because of their beliefs.

No, the country isn't burning, but it will unless the Republicans stop playing political games and protecting the wealthiest and the corporations. The politics and popular opinion on this is against them, as polls have shown over and over again. They need to wake up to political reality, and to what will actually help this country by having a chance of actually getting done. This is going to take a realistic solution, and what you have laid out is simply fantasy - it's not going to happen.

So instead of wasting time spouting off about impossibilities and things like a balanced budget law that simply are never going to happen, and let's focus on cutting spending where it can be cut, generating revenue by ending some big tax breaks, investing in infrastructure and getting people back to work. All this grandstanding by the GOP is sure not going to help the economy, because there is no chance of it ever happening. We need real, feasible solutions not blather you hear from the right wing radio screamers.

Allowing gay marriage will ALLOW 210 million extra dollars over the next 2 to 3 years in NY State alone. Remember that and imagine the possibilities for the whole COUNTRY. Not so minor anymore is it? Marijuana legalization and taxation... another couple hundred million. (there's your billion!) And we are OFF to the balanced budget races!

(06-29-2011 09:30 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  Allowing gay marriage will ALLOW 210 million extra dollars over the next 2 to 3 years in NY State alone. Remember that and imagine the possibilities for the whole COUNTRY. Not so minor anymore is it? Marijuana legalization and taxation... another couple hundred million. (there's your billion!) And we are OFF to the balanced budget races!

Yes, and yes.

And we need to get our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as humanly possible. We've hemorrhaged enough $$$$ into those countries.