2008 Presidential Primaries

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
Emperor et al.,

Why don't you just sum up Ron Paul's views as "gold standard isolationist" to save space?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he isn't an isolationist? He is a free trader just like every other libertarian..

Please keep up with the inaccurate stereotyping though.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Ron Paul voted to track down and Kill all terrorists having anything to do with 9/11 and even sponsored legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]


Only the exact terrorists and their commanders? Or any and all individuals and states who give them aid and comfort?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
TE has expressed MANY times that he doesn't support any one presidential candidate. That is completely up to each individual to decide. So no worries of a "weightstone."

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. That's exactly right.

Everyone,

What I attempted to do was analyze where each candidate stands and the relative benefits to us. We're all intelligent enough to do through the information and figure out for whom we each feel we should vote.

As for the Republican primaries, five declared candidates are staunchly against us, one is for us, and we're not sure of the remaining three. A vote for Paul is a vote for our position on poker (everyone here can look at the current polls, plus his straw polling, and can make a decision on the viability of his campaign). A vote for Giuliani probably helps us to keep some evangelicals at home on Election Day, helping us in Congress. Until we find out more about Romney and Thompson, I think those are our two options in the Republican primary. If someone else sees something beyond that within the Republican Party, please post that.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ron Paul voted to track down and Kill all terrorists having anything to do with 9/11 and even sponsored legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]


Only the exact terrorists and their commanders? Or any and all individuals and states who give them aid and comfort?

[/ QUOTE ]

He voted to authorize military action against Afganistan.

The discussion is getting beyond poker. Ron Paul is clearly an underdog, and he's clearly on our side. Aside from the one opinion posted that Paul will win the nomination, I don't think many of us dispute either statement. If Paul gets into contention and wins, it will be a good day for poker. However, a vote for him is, at this point (based on polling data), a vote to make a statement within the party that we want limited government.

[BluffTHIS!]

A vote to make a statement is wasted. A better strategy IMO would be to vote for the "least bad" repub, which as a repub I will probably do. The issue of poker aside, I would probably lean toward Thompson. And as far as dems go, there is no way in hell I would ever vote for Billary. The fact is that in the presidential race we don't have good choices that have a realistic shot to win. But then again, being as any pro-poker bill will probably not be stand alone but instead attached to something else, we probably only need someone who isn't so against us as to veto such a bill for that reason alone.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
A vote to make a statement is wasted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some feel that way. Others don't. I personally won't express an opinion. I'll say that a vote for Paul is a vote to make a statement...the good folks here can decide what relative value they feel such a vote has.

[ QUOTE ]
A better strategy IMO would be to vote for the "least bad" repub, which as a repub I will probably do. The issue of poker aside, I would probably lean toward Thompson.

[/ QUOTE ]

My personal vote will involve more than only poker, of course, but my discussion here on this thread is poker-only (same as the NRA; they don't worry about candidates' non-gun rights positions at ratings time).

[ QUOTE ]
And as far as dems go, there is no way in hell I would ever vote for Billary. The fact is that in the presidential race we don't have good choices that have a realistic shot to win. But then again, being as any pro-poker bill will probably not be stand alone but instead attached to something else, we probably only need someone who isn't so against us as to veto such a bill for that reason alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the strategy you mention, I personally think Giuliani is the best candidate to get as pro-poker a Congress as possible, for reasons discussed earlier (keeping FoF home on Election Day). Otherwise, it appears Obama is the only top-tier candidate in either party who may support us. Thompson is an open question. I sure hope we can find out where he stands soon.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Thompson is an open question. I sure hope we can find out where he stands soon.

[/ QUOTE ]


Why don't you ask Mr. Pappas to ask Sen. D'Amato to ask Sen. Thompson and relay the findings?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thompson is an open question. I sure hope we can find out where he stands soon.

[/ QUOTE ]


Why don't you ask Mr. Pappas to ask Sen. D'Amato to ask Sen. Thompson and relay the findings?

[/ QUOTE ]

I almost wrote that in my original reply. I'll see what I can find out.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ron Paul voted to track down and Kill all terrorists having anything to do with 9/11 and even sponsored legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]


Only the exact terrorists and their commanders? Or any and all individuals and states who give them aid and comfort?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think only Obama has mentioned bombing Pakistan and Saudia Arabia (the 9/11 attackers were Saudi's), every other politician seems to be ignoring this.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I think only Obama has mentioned bombing Pakistan and Saudia Arabia (the 9/11 attackers were Saudi's), every other politician seems to be ignoring this.

[/ QUOTE ]


If Obama comes out for poker, and adds Iran to the bombing list, he's got this repub's vote for sure if he gets the dem nod.