Chris : While I have some fundamental disagreements with both the Constitution Party and the Libertarians, more than anything else I am a values voter. And on values issues I could not possibly disagree more with the LP. For them, "anything goes." Granted that on some questions, OK, that's not a bad policy, but on same sex so-called "rights" my view is that the Libertarians are completely wrong since homosexuality is a mental illness and it is not valid to treat a psychopathology as a "rights" issue. Similarly with respect to the crap that Hollywood promotes, utter values nihilism, maybe not all the time, but surely is excess of 80% and for Libertarians that is perfectly OK. Not for me. No-one wants a return to the movie codes of the 1930s / 1940s and into the 1950s, but an ethos of "every film must be more disgusting than the last" strikes me a completely sick --while the LP position is that Hollywood should be free to produce anything they want and to hell with social consequences. And so forth for abortion, immigration, broadcasting standards, and you name it. All that matters is the individual, families don't count, communities don't count, and society as a whole doesn't count. My views on such issues is approximately 180 degrees the opposite. Again, not because I am keen for a revival of Victorianism, but simply because we need some sense of common morality and decency. About which the Libertarians could care less. I'm with then with respect to free speech and legalization of some victimless "crimes" like marijuana use and heterosexual prostitution, but the balance is waaaaay on the other side. Also many Libertarians are anti-Israel and pro-Muslim. My views on these issues are the exact opposite. About the Constitution Party, I disagree that American should officially become a "Christian nation." Still I agree that it would be good if some set of spiritual principles was upheld as a social good and something to respect. So, I'm not on their same page, but at least its the same book. Nor do I agree with their promotion of "old fashioned virtues" up and down the line. If a man and woman are dating and sleep together without benefit of wedlock, not the least problem --unless the relationship is exploitative or otherwise unhealthy. Still, like the Constitution people, I think it is a really, really good idea to promote marriage and family. On economics both the Libertarians and Constitutionals do not appeal to me. One is orthodox free trade, the other is similar, and I am at least somewhat of a protectionist and, about a few things, have a Keynesian outlook. That is, about economics I take a "mixed system" approach and look forward to the day when some new economic theory comes along to replace both Keynes and laissez faire. Neither the LP or the Constitutionists remotely share my views. However, to repeat the point, mostly I am a values voter. So, all right, there is some stuff in the Constitution Party that I don't like, but not all that much even if some is important. Hence my protest vote, when a protest vote makes good sense, goes to them. But this is always contingent on the political reality of the time. In 2000 my vote went to Nader. My hope, however unrealistic, was that the election would go the House. And I could not stand either Bush or Gore. Similarly for my support, such as it was, for Perot in 1992. In both of those cases there were some major objections to each candidate but I simply could not stand both the Dem and Rep candidates. Billy ==================================== 4/5/2012 9:16:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
Billy In situations like this in the past I have voted Libertarian. Why is the Constitution Party better? Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 11:10 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RC] Spiritual Suicide If, God forbid, Romney is down by 7 or 8 % just prior to the election, I might vote Constitution Party. If it was close then I'd cast my vote for Mitt because it would count. But if he is likely to lose then I may as well help out the Constitution people. Obviously there are a number of disagreements I have with the Constitution Party, but it would be a meaningful protest vote. My approach, for what it is worth. But I don't have any serious objection to voting for a Mormon. Romney is not my first choice but it is damned rare when anything like my first choice is remotely in the cards. Billy 4/4/2012 9:57:30 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Well, my brother in law will not vote for a Mormon. He won't vote for Obama either, so I don't know what he is going to do. David "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz On 4/4/2012 2:43 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Poll: Evangelicals May Double Their Support for Obama in 2012 Election By _Napp Nazworth_ (http://www.christianpost.com/author/napp-nazworth/) , Christian Post Reporter April 4, 2012|2:40 pm In the 2012 presidential election, President _Barack Obama_ (http://www.christianpost.com/topics/barack-obama/) could double the amount of support he got from _evangelicals_ (http://www.christianpost.com/topics/evangelicals/) in the 2008 election, according to Barna Group, a Christian polling organization. In 2008, Obama received the support of about 11 percent of evangelicals, according to Barna Group. In a March 14-21 Barna Group poll of 647 likely voters, twice as many evangelicals, 22 percent, said they were prepared to vote for Obama. Barna categorizes "evangelical" more narrowly than most other polling organizations. Many polls simply include self-identifiers – those who say, when asked, that they are evangelical or born-again. Under Barna's classification, an evangelical is one who says they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ and that commitment remains important to them, and shares seven beliefs common among evangelicals, such as the existence of Satan and that eternal salvation comes through grace, not works. Using this measure of evangelical, Barna found that evangelicals comprise seven percent of the population and 10 percent of likely voters. Though Obama appears to be gaining the support of evangelicals, the enthusiasm levels of those supporters remain low. Only three to five percent of evangelicals said they would "definitely" vote for him, while 53-58 percent of evangelicals said they would "definitely" support the Republican challenger. Among religious skeptics, defined as atheists and agnostics, Obama receives strong support. Against Mitt Romney, the likely Republican nominee, Obama would likely receive the support of about 70 percent of this group if the election were held now. Religious skeptics would also comprise 11 percent of the electorate, about the same as evangelicals. Barna Group cautions, though, about reading too much into the results. The election is not until November and the Republican nominee has not been chosen. "Without the Republican candidate having been selected yet, and with three months of the major party candidates bashing each other after the upcoming party conventions, much could change before November 6. However, a few early indicators were flagged as factors to watch during the coming months," Barna Group writes. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus four percentage points. Christian author George Barna founded Barna Group and is currently working with the Newt Gingrich campaign. He sold his majority share of Barna Group in 2009 and is no longer involved in its operation. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) > Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ (http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) Radical Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/) -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ (http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) Radical Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/) -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
