Just a handful of days before election day left.  Hopefully too many naive people don't get their way, voting for socialism.

Regarding:  Right to Carry, Castle Doctrine, and Stand Your Ground Laws, Romney et al say;

"We support the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law-abiding citizen has a legal right to be, and we support federal legislation that would expand the excircise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents."

I got the above quote from 1st Freedom magazine.

Anyway, I don't see how Romney could loose.  A small handful of days into the future we'll know one way or the other.  I already voted early.  I've spoke to a few folks that don't regularly vote and they said they will be this time.  Also, whoever gets voted in for the next 4 years may very well be deciding on a couple of new Supreme Court Justices.

Not to mention that hopefully the Senate switches to a majority in favor of Republicans too by way of appropriate voting.

To any that don't regularly vote, please do this time around.  Thanks.

Discussing politics is some fun huh..

Just an observation from over the pond where we have similar socialist issues, it looks like Obama has Romney dead to rights. Particulary after that guy in New York praised his handling of Sandy. It's a slippery slope and Australia is already further down it than the US but I think you are catching up !

Buy more guns quick ! 

I won't say Romney has lost.  I wait for the results.  But it sure looks like he is loosing.

The pessimist in me has seen enough red and blue in the white house to be jaded.  I am not sure one would really be a bunch different than another.  The only real concerns I have about one over the other would be an unexpected supreme court nomination that would change the fundamental makeup of the court.

Other than that, I don't see a bunch of difference between the two.  I hope we do send Obama a republican congress, or Romney a democrat one.  I love gridlock in DC.  Means they don't "improve" anything.

One nice thing about living in Utah.  It is definitely NOT a swing state.  As our states electoral votes are known so I can vote FOR someone I really think could make a difference rather than voting AGAINST the lesser of two bad choices.  Bulks up the numbers which I hope someday will result in having a real chance to elect someone who will change things for the better.

Quote from: sqlbullet on November 02 2012 08:10:47 AM MDT
Other than that, I don't see a bunch of difference between the two.

I hope we get the chance to find out.  I personally see extreme difference between the two in numerous ways.  Though I can't prove it without Romney being in the White House for a bit in order to witness his actual actions.

Well "O" had four long years to make the CHANGE and that didn't raise my HOPE for this great nation to be better than before.

I say he had his CHANCE and all he did was VACATION on the tax payers DIME!  Screw him, I'll VOTE to see if the next guy can actually make a DIFFERENCE! 

Generally I vote democrat, have since I started voting. I sent in my ballot last week, and I must say, I surprised myself. The only democrat I voted for was some obscure city level council member. I voted republican on every other position, including president. And here is why:

After getting out of the military, I entered the line of work known as "Loss Prevention." Basically, I work undercover and bust shoplifters. Right now I am the district manager of loss prevention for a major security company that does undercover security for grocery stores.

I catch about 2-5 shoplifters a day. They steal beer, liquor, food etc. Either for personal use or stuff they can re-sell. They all have the same story. Over 75% of them are on food stamps. They trade their food stamp EBT cards for cash to buy drugs. Tax payer money for drugs. I have caught thousands that do this, repeatedly. Then they have to steal their food because they used their tax payer money for drugs. Others I catch trade their food stamps for cigarettes, clothes, cash to gamble, car payments etc. We, as tax payers pay for this.

Some of them will walk around the store and offer to buy someones groceries with their food stamps for pennies on the dollar. "Hey I will buy your groceries with my $200 food stamp card if you give me $50 cash."

Then they go buy drugs, cigarettes or booze with the $50. I catch them all day long. They make me sick.

I have no problems with helping people that NEED it. Or feeding hungry kids. But these druggies, dope heads, alcoholic, gang bangers, welfare queens, etc. just piss me off.

I am sick of social handouts. Obama and the Dems have allowed more low-lifes to get on food stamps by making easier to get on the program and lowering the income requirements. They have added 15 million more people to food stamps in the last 4 years.

The worst thing is that these low-life scum bastards will use their food stamp cards for drugs, but we follow them out to their cars and they have Cadillac Escalades, Mercedes, Acuras, Lexus and BMW's. I have a job and I'm rolling in a Ford Focus. These "poor" people have a nicer car than I will ever have.

These damn dopers have become dependent. Dependent on drugs, dependent on free government handouts. It's time to cut the cord.

That's why I'm voting against social handouts, and voting against democrats.

I hear you Reaper.  My college room-mate worked his way through his criminology degree in loss prevention.  The stories he would tell.

But, if you really look at the data, the last President we had that balanced the budget and showed any restraint on spending was, I am sad to say, Bill Clinton.  That is not to say he deserves all the credit.  After his first two years in office we gave him a very republican congress to fight with, resulting in actual restraint.  Though not reduction.

Bush 2 on the other hand increased subsidy spending more than any president since LBJ.

Just saying, you can't tell by their party what their fiscal policy is.  In general I think Romney will have good fiscal policy.  But I would really like to see a candidate that wants to actually and meaningfully slash programs.

It will be difficult to clean up the current mess this country is in, to say the least.
Grim Reaper, thanks for your stories about the miss use of funds and rampped theft...It urk's me to watch them load their baskets in the stores, pay with the stamps then push them out to the more expensive SUV's in the parking lots, with the obscene rims and tires, blacked out windows that reverberate as the stereo pounds when they crank the vehicle to drive off...   About the drug use, I say they all need to be tested before they recieve the first dollars worth of stamps.  Should they test positive they should be put off the program of 3 months for the first offense, two strikes you're OUT of the system.
However the addiction to drugs is more powerful that their need for food!  This will probably lead to even more crimes to obtain money for drugs!  Vicious cycle!

I was getting a ride to an Iowa airport by a car rental employee back in 2008. The driver was wearing a flannel jacket and a Deere Tractor cap. Politics showed up on the radio, so I said something. He responded with support for Obama. He was looking for hope and change.

Instead, we received truly dirty politics to pass the health care bill, subsidies to large corporations whose management blew world class opportunities and actions that went against what this country should be about. We got big government and big business. Can't see how the life of the guy with the John Deere cap is any better off.

I didn't vote for Obama. But when he won, I hoped he would know the difference between the promise of America and its implementation. Hoped he'd strive to move it toward its ideal. Figured someone from a people who've experienced our flawed implementation more than most, would want to do that.

Quote from: REDLINE on November 01 2012 11:27:29 PM MDT
Anyway, I don't see how Romney could loose. 

He could, easily, though it pains me to state this. Check out the link below to see some of the 'other side' and their views. Or, whatever they are.

http://www.democraticunderground.com

I've waited years hoping for another choice than the two we're given every four years. Both parties only want control for the jobs, power and influence their 'guy' gives them. For the rest of us we generally see little difference until the last decade or so. In the last few the changes have been fundamental although not always obvious. All directed to the executive branch and taken from the legislative and judicial. The 'Fourth Estate' is no longer a watchdog but nothing more than a shill for the side they support. That leaves it up to the individual to see through the BS and make an intelligent choice on their own. Not by what they're told or by pure financial influence.

The last four years haven't been good economically, domestically nor in foreign policy. We need a change......YMMV

Well,i say Obamer gets in.Not wanting it,just a hunch.And if so,were screwed.Grab your high capacity mags,ammo,and whatever your funds allow.If Mittins wins,hey im stock,cock and ready to rock.

Quote from: EdMc on November 02 2012 07:21:34 PM MDT
He could, easily, though it pains me to state this.

No doubt you are correct.  I would have to be ignorant to outright assume otherwise.

I'll just say it isn't looking too bad for Romney at this time, meaning it's super close in terms of polling data right now as far as the electoral college adds up.

Neither Obama or Romney have much of an edge right now.  Any slight edge probably goes to Romney at this point.  That wasn't the case before the first presidential debate where Obama was leading fairly heavily among swing states.  That has all but disappeared.  Plus, no doubt the democrat fan base won't turn out like it did 4 years ago, while at the same time the republican fan base should turn out equal or better than 4 years ago.

Sure, there's ~35% of voting Americans that will only ever vote for a democrat candidate.  But there is also ~35% of voting Americans that will only ever vote for a Republican candidate.  That leaves ~30% of voters.  Most of them consider themselves independants, and the last few leftovers will vote third party.  When you look at the polls of only independants, in virtually every one of those polls the independants currently favor Romney over and above the margin of error.

Those are a few honest points among many more.  All in all, from what I've seen and heard, Romney has a clear edge at this time.  I'm not saying it's a big edge, just an edge.  Also, at this point in time there are very few undecideds.  Therefore there won't be much poll swing from this time forward. 

I was wearing a "Glock Perfection" shirt when I voted yesterday...wonder if that gave away which little dot I filled in on the ballot??

Im old enough at this point and awaken that either one is "Bought and Paid For"by the bankers(Money Changer)masters and Wall St.Their puppets,and they WILL do what their told,or they get the grassy noll treatment.In terms of debt,were screwed.By math,it's impossible to pay off the debt,impossible.Im also a firm believer that the goal is to bring this country down via the dollar.Aside from all that,whatever the conclusion is,hedge yourself in terms of supplies.There will be pain either way,social,living standards as we know it or were use to.

While in general I believe in a balanced budget, I don't necessarily agree that we should prevent a deficit cycle via amendment, nor do I think, even if possible, eliminating the national debt is a good thing.

But out of control spending is definitely bad.  And the direction we are headed towards unlimited government is even worse.

Just look at New York's ban on sweetened drinks larger than 16 oz.  How is that remotely something the government has authority to regulate?

QuoteThe important thing to keep in mind is that the people who have created their government can give to that government only such powers as they, themselves, have in the first place. Obviously, they cannot give that which they do not possess. So, the question boils down to this. What powers properly belong to each and every person in the absence of and prior to the establishment of any organized governmental form? A hypothetical question? Yes, indeed! But, it is a question which is vital to an understanding of the principles which underlie the proper function of government.

--Hon. Ezra Taft Benson, "Proper Role of Government", 1968

I always frame the power of legislation in light of this philosophy.  If there were no government, could I rightfully take this action against another.  Ask yourself how many federal, state and local laws would pass this test.

None of the candidates are willing to embrace this idea of limited government, and until they are, we don't really have much choice.  The options we have are, as pacapcop said, bought and paid for.