Rasmussen Poll on Candidates

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by nate2512

Nader, anyone?

Eh, no.

[nate2512]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Eh, no.

Then who did you vote for? Surely not Bush? and not Kerry.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Republicans are bad for my livelihood. I am pretty sure I'm voting for Obama and I would be voting FOR Obama...not against someone else (as was the case for me in the last presidential election). As much as I dislike Clinton, I'd rather have her than McCain. But, I have a sinking feeling that when Democrats and independents have an opportunity to vote privately, they may not vote for the candidate they publicly support.

I'm not a Democrat and have never voted for a Democrat. This year will be the first time.

1. Explain.

2. God help us. I don't especially like any of our candidates....but I would rather a giant turd be voted into office than that heinous, cankled bitch.

[nate2512]

My cousin had detail in the white house during the Clinton administration, he noted that Hillary was one of the most evil people he'd ever met, and that she had a particularly profane mouth.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by nate2512

Then who did you vote for? Surely not Bush? and not Kerry.

I always vote Libertarian, even at the local level.

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

1. Explain.

I'm in human services. I work for a non-profit that is funded through a nation-wide federal grant that goes to individuals seeking employment or training. When Republicans are in office, the funds dwindle significantly.

2. God help us. I don't especially like any of our candidates....but I would rather a giant turd be voted into office than that heinous, cankled bitch.

LOL

Originally Posted by nate2512

My cousin had detail in the white house during the Clinton administration, he noted that Hillary was one of the most evil people he'd ever met, and that she had a particularly profane mouth.

That's hearsay but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

[shinerbock]

Jeni, you vote libertarian, but Republicans are bad for your livelihood?

I'm no expert on libertarian policy, but I dabble, and I can't imagine they through a lot of support behind increasing funding to social welfare programs.

[OneTimeSBX]

Originally Posted by nate2512

My cousin had detail in the white house during the Clinton administration, he noted that Hillary was one of the most evil people he'd ever met, and that she had a particularly profane mouth.

my cousin flies charter planes for high profile clients. he has flown the Obama's and Hillary, and is quick to point out the same thing: that she is a handful.

then again, compared to whats in office now, how much worse can it get? im tempted to start a last minute campaign with my two kids as nominees

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Jeni, you vote libertarian, but Republicans are bad for your livelihood?

I'm no expert on libertarian policy, but I dabble, and I can't imagine they through a lot of support behind increasing funding to social welfare programs.

There are different types of Libertarianism. I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative (really, fiscally responsible), but not as fiscally conservative as most Republicans I know. I don't have a problem with social programs that are effective, but I do have a problem with government officials favoring personal friends over those who are truly in need and I have a problem with mismanagement of funds.

ETA: Libertarian candidates are generally moderate and don't call for the entire deconstruction of our system.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

There are different types of Libertarianism. I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative (really, fiscally responsible), but not as fiscally conservative as most Republicans I know. I don't have a problem with social programs that are effective, but I do have a problem with government officials favoring personal friends over those who are truly in need and I have a problem with mismanagement of funds.

And what are your impressions regarding the overall scope of the Libertarian Party on this issue? I can understand that particular libertarians may not be damaging to career, but I can't imagine the Libertarian Party really meshes with it.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

And what are your impressions regarding the overall scope of the Libertarian Party on this issue? I can understand that particular libertarians may not be damaging to career, but I can't imagine the Libertarian Party really meshes with it.

The Libertarian Party is not against social welfare programs. However, the party calls for reforms and increased responsibility. I would say that many Libertarians believe that non-profits (like mine) are better equipped to handle local social issues than is the government. The party proposes such alternatives as supporting private/public charities by providing tax incentives to those who donate. It would then be the private/public charities that fund programs (like the one I work for) instead of the government. I'm personally in favor of that option, but I'll take what I can get.

Republicans, from what I can see, are anti-social welfare. That's why I said what I said.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

The Libertarian Party is not against social welfare programs. However, the party calls for reforms and increased responsibility. I would say that many Libertarians believe that non-profits (like mine) are better equipped to handle local social issues than is the government. The party proposes such alternatives as supporting private/public charities by providing tax incentives to those who donate. It would then be the private/public charities that fund programs (like the one I work for) instead of the government. I'm personally in favor of that option, but I'll take what I can get.

Republicans, from what I can see, are anti-social welfare. That's why I said what I said.

I think the idea that the Libertarian Party isn't against social welfare is somewhat arguable. I don't think they're broadly against the concept, but I certainly think their emphasis on private solutions to social problems and lessened government intervention would damage (what I thought were) your interests.

I actually libertarians take a stronger stance on social welfare that the GOP. As a more mainstream party, the GOP recognizes practical problems with ending social welfare programs, and thus the efforts are merely to curb. I think a lot of Libertarians in this country would take a much more drastic stance. That said, I think in your situation regarding the funding of non-profits, there is some history of Republican administrations (primarily Reagan, I believe) making things "difficult" for entities receiving federal funds. I know a lot of law non-profits (many of whom are politically liberal) were significantly burdened by these restrictions. I find the restrictions pretty reasonable, but I can see how people with different political leanings wouldn't be fond of them.

[Coramoor]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I'm in human services. I work for a non-profit that is funded through a nation-wide federal grant that goes to individuals seeking employment or training. When Republicans are in office, the funds dwindle significantly.

Dang, I was going to guess welfare recipient!

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Coramoor

Dang, I was going to guess welfare recipient!

Nope, but I do support impoverished people through personal giving. While my paycheck my come from a non-profit, a large portion of my income is from other sources (such as investments, profits, etc.) I believe it is my duty as a Christian to give to others. I'd rather be destitute on the side of the highway than withhold the blessings God is working through me for humanity.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Nope, but I do support impoverished people through personal giving. While my paycheck my come from a non-profit, a large portion of my income is from other sources (such as investments, profits, etc.) I believe it is my duty as a Christian to give to others. I'd rather be destitute on the side of the highway than withhold the blessings God is working through me for humanity.

I think Christians have the duty you describe. I don't think it should be forced, however.