|
Post by Adam on Jan 8, 2012 17:04:20 GMT -5
Then he does, he will still be a better president then the sack of sh** we have now! I have nothing against gay people, but the sanctity of marriage should be protected under the Constitution as one man & one woman. My Catholic faith teaches me that I should love & respect all of God's people, but that doesn't mean I can't disagree with them. So lets protect marriage...by preventing people from getting married. We already have a 50+% divorce rate. I'm well aware of what Catholic faith teaches, my question is why should all non-Catholics (myself included) subscribe to it too? In Catholic belief, "marriage is a faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love. Homosexual unions, do not express full human complementarity and are inherently nonprocreative, so they cannot be given the status of marriage," That is what I firmly believe. ...and America is forbidden to endorse a particular religion. If we're going to talk procreation, where does that leave couples who are incapable of having children?
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 8, 2012 17:36:38 GMT -5
I think it's sad to say that Obama will most likely be re-eleceted. The republican choices arent very good. I wouldnt vote for Romney or Santorum. And I think Ron Paul is just bat poop crazy. Rick Perry appeals to me but he's pretty low down on the totem poll. Rick Perry is nutty. I saw his commercials he ran out that were openly anti-gay marriage. Ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 8, 2012 17:40:34 GMT -5
Fair enough. But why should it be unconstitutional? In Catholic belief, "marriage is a faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love. Homosexual unions, do not express full human complementarity and are inherently nonprocreative, so they cannot be given the status of marriage," That is what I firmly believe. No one forces the Catholic church to accept and acknowledge any marriage. There are many straight people who are married and the Catholic church chooses to not acknowledge or recognize their marriages and is well within their rights to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 8, 2012 17:44:16 GMT -5
I will vote for whoever the Republican nominee is, but I support Rick Santorum. Take a look at his voting record & his personal life. He holds strong moral values, believes in the family, is a devout Catholic man and supports America. He has a plan to cut billions from the deficit, lower taxes, provide jobs and get the economy moving again. He believes that this country is under attack, not only economically, but religiously as well. Obama has done nothing more but criticize religion at every chance he can get. We cannot afford Obama to get re-elected and further destroy this great nation. If he is given four more years - he will destroy the economy, wage a war on Christianity, demolish the military and overstep Congress at every chance he gets. This man should've been impeached a long time ago, but the media refuses to tell us the truth about him. He is a socialist, a dictator and an atheist who would love to see nothing more than this country go down in flames. If you love America, then you will vote Republican to stop this man once and for all. Vote Republican - Uphold the Constitution & Save America! Vote Obama - the Mayans were right, its the end of the world! People wonder why others think a bunch of Americans are crazy...
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Jan 9, 2012 13:37:02 GMT -5
I think it's sad to say that Obama will most likely be re-eleceted. The republican choices arent very good. I wouldnt vote for Romney or Santorum. And I think Ron Paul is just bat poop crazy. Rick Perry appeals to me but he's pretty low down on the totem poll. Rick Perry is nutty. I saw his commercials he ran out that were openly anti-gay marriage. Ridiculous. I havnt seen those adds. Even then, gay marriage isnt an issue for me so I dont really care one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by chumped on Jan 9, 2012 13:51:41 GMT -5
Of course Milincoln supports Rick Perry, hahahaha.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 9, 2012 14:03:27 GMT -5
Of course Milincoln supports Rick Perry, hahahaha. I think what sealed the support was Rick Perry suggesting that there be a binational health care plan between Texas and Mexico.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 9, 2012 14:17:01 GMT -5
Source: Public Policy Polling
Romney holding steady in NH
Mitt Romney continues to be headed for a comfortable win in New Hampshire. PPP's final poll there finds him with 35% to 18% for Ron Paul, 16% for Jon Huntsman, 12% for Newt Gingrich, 11% for Rick Santorum, 3% for Buddy Roemer, and 1% for Rick Perry.
Romney's support has been remarkably consistent over the course of PPP's three Granite State tracking polls, never straying from 35-36%. He's the most popular of the candidates in the state, with a 60/34 favorability rating. And he also has the most committed supporters...85% of them say they're definitely going to vote for him and when you look at the race just among those whose minds are completely made up his lead over Paul expands to 40-19.
The excitement in New Hampshire on Tuesday night will probably be the battle for second place. There Huntsman has the momentum. His support is up from 12% to 16%, while Paul's has declined from 21% to 18% over the last week and a half. Huntsman's favorability (55/30) is far better than Paul's (43/51) and 13% of voters list Huntsman as their 2nd choice compared to only 5% for Paul.
All of these same arguments for Huntsman potentially overtaking Paul could have been applied to Santorum overtaking Paul on our Iowa poll last weekend and of course that's what did happen when it was finally time to count the votes.
Even if Huntsman does pull the second place finish though it's hard to see that translating into much success further down the line. Among actual Republican voters Huntsman finds himself in 5th place at just 11%. But 40% or more of the electorate on Tuesday will be non-Republican and Huntsman's greatest strength is with Obama voters, among whom he gets 35% to 25% for Paul and 19% for Romney. The problem for him is there won't likely be another primary where 25% of the voters chose Obama in 2008.
Beyond the battle for second it looks like the only other intrigue on Tuesday night will be who finishes fourth, which is presently close between Gingrich and Santorum. Gingrich has stopped the bleeding in New Hampshire over the last week and a half, dropping only from 13% to 12%. Santorum though is actually the biggest gainer relative to a week ago, up 8 points from his previous 3% standing.
If you think momentum is a major factor Huntsman probably bests Paul for 2nd and Santorum probably beats out Gingrich for 4th.
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Jan 9, 2012 15:42:46 GMT -5
And see, that's exactly why I don't get why Huntsman isn't getting more exposure from the Republican party. That article states a true fact, Huntsman appeals to Obama voters more than anyone else. Why not fight fire with fire and put up Huntsman against Obama. He's a Republican and will support the Republican causes, but he also appeals to Democrats in a way that none of the other major party candidates really do. Obama's willing to work with both sides, but I think both sides would be more willing to work with Huntsman than Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 9, 2012 17:12:45 GMT -5
And see, that's exactly why I don't get why Huntsman isn't getting more exposure from the Republican party. That article states a true fact, Huntsman appeals to Obama voters more than anyone else. Why not fight fire with fire and put up Huntsman against Obama. He's a Republican and will support the Republican causes, but he also appeals to Democrats in a way that none of the other major party candidates really do. Obama's willing to work with both sides, but I think both sides would be more willing to work with Huntsman than Obama. Jon Huntsman put ALL of his eggs into one basket in New Hampshire. Of course he's going to poll higher there than he would in other states. Look at how poorly he did in Iowa. That's all that really needs to be said about his real support nation-wide.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 9, 2012 18:13:04 GMT -5
Exactly what I said about Santorum in Iowa, and it seems like it will be the same for Perry in South Carolina.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Tebow™ on Jan 9, 2012 22:20:09 GMT -5
I think it's pretty obvious as to who our next president will be...
...Vermin Supreme
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Jan 9, 2012 23:38:18 GMT -5
I think it's pretty obvious as to who our next president will be... ...Vermin Supreme It better be, we need ponies.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Jan 10, 2012 2:11:12 GMT -5
Of course Milincoln supports Rick Perry, hahahaha. I think what sealed the support was Rick Perry suggesting that there be a binational health care plan between Texas and Mexico. You kinda hit the nail on the head there. All politicians talk a good game BEFORE they are elected. Look no further than Obama. He made all kinds of promises towards immigrants and has kept none. Now when I look at Santorum, Romney, Paul, these guys all have taken strong anti immigrant views. So when they are already promising to F over immigrants BEFORE being in office it just makes me think things will only go downhill. And as such I cant support any of them. Which brings me back to my saying Obama will win.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 10, 2012 13:32:02 GMT -5
LoL at "F over immigrants."
If they're not legal citizens, they're not entitled to things.
|
|
|
Post by chillax on Jan 10, 2012 13:43:31 GMT -5
Jon Huntsman put ALL of his eggs into one basket in New Hampshire. Of course he's going to poll higher there than he would in other states. Look at how poorly he did in Iowa. That's all that really needs to be said about his real support nation-wide. This makes no sense. Iowa doesn't represent the entire country anymore than New Hampshire does.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 10, 2012 13:52:06 GMT -5
Jon Huntsman put ALL of his eggs into one basket in New Hampshire. Of course he's going to poll higher there than he would in other states. Look at how poorly he did in Iowa. That's all that really needs to be said about his real support nation-wide. This makes no sense. Iowa doesn't represent the entire country anymore than New Hampshire does. It makes complete sense. A legitimate candidate is going to have his or her numbers at least SOMEWHAT consistent across the board. It's not like Huntsman is polling well nation-wide. He's polling 4th, 5th or even 6th on most polls.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 10, 2012 15:02:30 GMT -5
Huntsman didn't even campaign in Iowa. It's dumb to point to his numbers there as meaning anything at all.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jan 10, 2012 15:38:16 GMT -5
Huntsman didn't even campaign in Iowa. It's dumb to point to his numbers there as meaning anything at all. Anyone that's a legitimate contender would be campaigning in every state, not praying to come in 2nd in one state.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 10, 2012 16:00:28 GMT -5
Huntsman didn't even campaign in Iowa. It's dumb to point to his numbers there as meaning anything at all. Anyone that's a legitimate contender would be campaigning in every state, not praying to come in 2nd in one state. He doesn't have the money.
|
|