Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems Wordio
Log In Create Account

The other candidates debate tonight

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ The other candidates debate tonight
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Oct 24, 2012 2:19 AM
Some good Gary Johnson sign time. Haha
Oct 23, 2012 10:19pm
pmoney25's avatar

pmoney25

Senior Member

1,787 posts
Oct 24, 2012 2:25 AM
Pretty good debate. I think Johnson easily one. King pretty on point with the moderating but it was refreshing to see people just tell their views instead of spending time arguing with someone else.
Oct 23, 2012 10:25pm
S

sjmvsfscs08

Senior Member

2,963 posts
Oct 24, 2012 4:15 AM
WebFire;1303130 wrote:But it has to start with voting NOW. And too many don't understand that.
I'm voting Romney and writing in Ron Paul or Gary Johnson in for every other office on the ballot. Romney is my last hope since I think he's the most qualified "conventional" Presidential candidate since WW2.

If he fails, it's Libertarianism forever.
Oct 24, 2012 12:15am
Cleveland Buck's avatar

Cleveland Buck

Troll Hunter

5,126 posts
Oct 24, 2012 7:24 PM
mucalum49;1303141 wrote:Governor Johnson killing it with 30 year old foreign policy knowledge of how we funded OBL in the 80's to fight the USSR. Pretty impressive, never heard that discussed publicly before.
You never heard Ron Paul talk about it? You should have been watching during the Republican primaries.
Oct 24, 2012 3:24pm
Cleveland Buck's avatar

Cleveland Buck

Troll Hunter

5,126 posts
Oct 24, 2012 7:30 PM
sjmvsfscs08;1303221 wrote:I'm voting Romney and writing in Ron Paul or Gary Johnson in for every other office on the ballot. Romney is my last hope since I think he's the most qualified "conventional" Presidential candidate since WW2.

If he fails, it's Libertarianism forever.
I have no idea what you think makes him qualified, but whatever floats your boat. His stimulus plans will fail and his wars will bankrupt us, just like all of his predecessors. Welcome to libertarianism.
Oct 24, 2012 3:30pm
mucalum49's avatar

mucalum49

Senior Member

1,639 posts
Oct 24, 2012 11:00 PM
Cleveland Buck;1303636 wrote:You never heard Ron Paul talk about it? You should have been watching during the Republican primaries.
Yeah, I couldn't remember that part. I honestly didn't watch as intently during primaries, mostly had it on in the background while doing other stuff. Probably reading the OC ha..
Oct 24, 2012 7:00pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Oct 25, 2012 11:22 PM
Voting was opened up to declare winners of this debate. Of course Gary Johnson was the overwhelming winner. And somehow Jill Stein finished 2nd. Those 2 will have another debate. In which Johnson will make her look foolish.
Oct 25, 2012 7:22pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Oct 26, 2012 12:10 AM
Jill Stein came in 2nd because the Green party is a much more publicized party than the Justice Party or the Constitution party.
Oct 25, 2012 8:10pm
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Oct 26, 2012 3:25 AM
I would've ranked them:

Johnson
Goode
Anderson
Stein
Oct 25, 2012 11:25pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Oct 26, 2012 3:27 AM
justincredible;1304585 wrote:I would've ranked them:

Johnson
Goode
Anderson
Stein
Same here.
Oct 25, 2012 11:27pm
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Oct 26, 2012 3:32 AM
If it weren't for Anderson's views on college education he would've probably been second (from what I saw, missed the last few questions). I didn't like Goode's stance on the drug war but he at least wanted to spend less money on it. I guess that's something.
Oct 25, 2012 11:32pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Oct 26, 2012 12:25 PM
justincredible;1304589 wrote:If it weren't for Anderson's views on college education he would've probably been second (from what I saw, missed the last few questions). I didn't like Goode's stance on the drug war but he at least wanted to spend less money on it. I guess that's something.
Yeah I can't get past the free college. It doesn't make sense on many levels. The thing I did like about Virgil was that he says what he thinks, even if he knows it might not be the popular opinion. Just like the drug topic, he started off with "people in this audience may not like it, but...". We need more of that in politics. Stand up for what you believe in, even if it's not popular.
Oct 26, 2012 8:25am
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Oct 26, 2012 1:46 PM
WebFire;1304686 wrote:Yeah I can't get past the free college. It doesn't make sense on many levels. The thing I did like about Virgil was that he says what he thinks, even if he knows it might not be the popular opinion. Just like the drug topic, he started off with "people in this audience may not like it, but...". We need more of that in politics. Stand up for what you believe in, even if it's not popular.
Yep. I absolutely hate pandering and he just doesn't do it. At all. I respect the hell out of that.
Oct 26, 2012 9:46am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 26, 2012 3:59 PM
pmoney25;1303128 wrote:The Drug war is not only about the money spent but the fact that once you get busted and get put in jail for marijuana, you now have a record. It becomes difficult to get a job, therefore you get stuck on welfare.
It's about handing out punishment for breaking the law.
Oct 26, 2012 11:59am
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:04 PM
Con_Alma;1304807 wrote:It's about handing out punishment for breaking a stupid, pointless law.
More accurate, now.
Oct 26, 2012 12:04pm
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:08 PM
That's subjective.

Although the cultural tide is shifting towards legalization or at least decriminalization, until then government law enforcement has an obligation to not only enforce but penalize those who break it.
Oct 26, 2012 12:08pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:10 PM
Con_Alma;1304812 wrote:That's subjective.

Although the cultural tide is shifting towards legalization or at least decriminalization, until then government law enforcement has an obligation to not only enforce but penalize those who break it.
Clearly they don't because Denver has had legalized marijuana yet the federal government does nothing about it.
Oct 26, 2012 12:10pm
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:12 PM
sleeper;1304814 wrote:Clearly they don't because Denver has had legalized marijuana yet the federal government does nothing about it.
I disagree. They do continue to have the obligation of enforcing and penalizing. Denver's activity or lack thereof doesn't change the obligation.
Oct 26, 2012 12:12pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:13 PM
WebFire;1304686 wrote:Yeah I can't get past the free college. It doesn't make sense on many levels.
Actually there may be a case for a broad sharing of the cost of acquiring human capital. As with physical capital...converting income into human capital broadly across the economy increases the aggregate wealth to society. However, unlike physical capital, people who acquire human capital cannot divest it when it works out poorly and this operates like a tax on the acquisition of human capital.

This is borne out in the real world in countries like the nordic countries where the cost of college is broadly shared and upward mobility is much higher than in the United States or in the post-war United States wherein G.I.'s acquired human capital via the G.I. Bill.

FWIW people used to say that universal public secondary education didn't make sense either...
Oct 26, 2012 12:13pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:14 PM
I'd like to see the stats on first time offenders serving solely for marijuana possession. Fair point about having a record, but I'm not sure it's any more damaging than a DUI (to be fair it probably should not be equivalent).

My guess is people actually locked up (more than just overnight or awaiting arraignment) are actually getting popped for parole violations. That still doesn't make it right, but it does change the context a fair amount.
Oct 26, 2012 12:14pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:14 PM
Con_Alma;1304807 wrote:It's about handing out punishment for breaking the law.
malum prohibitum
Oct 26, 2012 12:14pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:16 PM
Con_Alma;1304816 wrote:I disagree. They do continue to have the obligation of enforcing and penalizing. Denver's activity or lack thereof doesn't change the obligation.
The federal government hasn't arrested anyone in Denver since the law was passed. The law is being selectively enforced.
Oct 26, 2012 12:16pm
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:17 PM
BoatShoes;1304819 wrote:malum prohibitum
Yep. Laws are made by the people through representation.
Oct 26, 2012 12:17pm
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:18 PM
sleeper;1304822 wrote:The federal government hasn't arrested anyone in Denver since the law was passed. The law is being selectively enforced.
That doesn't negate the obligation nor responsibility of the agencies.
Oct 26, 2012 12:18pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Oct 26, 2012 4:19 PM
Con_Alma;1304826 wrote:That doesn't negate the obligation nor responsibility of the agencies.
So you are okay with the federal government enforcing it everywhere else but Denver, CO. Gotcha.
Oct 26, 2012 12:19pm