[Bobboau]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/11/usa-campaign-perry-idUSN1E77A1OL20110811

[Luis Dias]

America is going downhill towards idiocracy.

[NGTM-1R]

Mrs too!

Hi Michelle Bachmann.

[jr2]

ooooohhh....


+1, this is good news. 

* jr2 gazes in amusement at all the angry people with flamethrowers running towards him

[Bob-san]

I dislike Rick Perry. All hype, no substance. Add in the stupid religion bull**** he does. Ron Paul is naturally my choice.

[Nuke]

please republican party, dont give me a ****ing preacher who wants to be president. i really really dont want to have to vote for obama. come up with a sane republican at least.

[Bob-san]

please republican party, dont give me a ****ing preacher who wants to be president. i really really dont want to have to vote for obama. come up with a sane republican at least.

Yes--this.

Preferences for 2012:

1) Libertarian
2) Fiscally conservative Republican
3) Obama
∞) Sarah Palin or Rick Perry

[BrotherBryon]

please republican party, dont give me a ****ing preacher who wants to be president. i really really dont want to have to vote for obama. come up with a sane republican at least.

Isn't a sane republican a bit of an oxymoron at this point in time. Not saying democrats are much better but the republicans seem to have an "off your rocker" job requirement these days.

[Nuke]

unfortunately that is true. but i never liked obama, and i still dont, and i would hate to have to vote for him because hes the best candidate on the ticket. that kinda thing would give me a very negative view of american politics. seriously? is this the best we can come up with? perhaps i should vote on the candidate statistically most likely to start a nuclear war, thet would certainly change the political landscape, by literally burning it.

[G0atmaster]

Maybe he's decided that God was asking him to do the same?

[Bobboau]

nuke; I'm surprised you didn't already vote that way.

[Snail]

perhaps i should vote on the candidate statistically most likely to start a nuclear war, thet would certainly change the political landscape, by literally burning it.

Didn't you already do that? Why the change of heart? Starting to like the world?

[StarSlayer]

"And our next Question was submitted by a concerned voter from Alaska: 'Which one of you schlubs is most likely to embrace cleansing the earth in MIRV borne nuclear fire?'"

[Nuke]

perhaps i should vote on the candidate statistically most likely to start a nuclear war, thet would certainly change the political landscape, by literally burning it.

Didn't you already do that? Why the change of heart? Starting to like the world?

this is kinda a tricky thing to do. see the problem is that the only president to ever authorize the deployment of nuclear weapons was truman, a democrat. but modern democrats seem to be a bunch of peace mongers. so you cant use this kind of precedent to derive methodology for selecting candidates based on their itchy nuclear football finger. theres just not enough data on the subject, and nuclear strategy is rarely in debate between politicians these days so its impossible to derive their opinions on the subject. rest assured that the ones who want to feel the power of the sun in their hands, will never mention it to the general public. so id theres a reason i dont vote like that then its because ive yet to come up with a way. also considering that one vote for the nuclear candidate isn't enough to do the job. maybe i can start a political party for nuke fanatics, call it the scorched earth party. yeep, that would be the way to do things. but alas, im lazy.

[JCDNWarrior]

Rick Perry is not a good guy to have for president, given his earlier track record. I suggest Ron Paul, it's just the best choice to do if you want the USA (and the world) to start climbing out of the debt crisis. I never was able to catch him flip-flopping on issues. He's definitely a front running candidate for 2012, he became very well known and popular during the 2008 republican nomination. I'd suggest watching some of the videos during debates or interviews (also normal interviews outside of election cycles) and even his old stuff from 1988. I think that he'll make a much better president than the rest of them, mostly because they don't seem to know how to fix the problems we're all facing in the first place.

[Luis Dias]

Ron Paul seems to be quite popular in here. I really am amazed.

[Nemesis6]

This man is quite split -- He wants to be president of the country that he wants to secede from.

As far as Ron Paul goes: He's a dangerous candidate because of his extreme "states' rights" stance. If it were up to him, stuff like the Supremacy Clause and the 10th amendment would be irrelevant. The strange thing is that Ron's rabid supporters portray him as a "champion of the constitution", even when he's so obviously intent on subverting it.

[pecenipicek]

"And our next Question was submitted by a concerned voter from Alaska: 'Which one of you schlubs is most likely to embrace cleansing the earth in MIRV borne nuclear fire?'"

if the news companies were brave enough to actually air that question live, i think they'd make quite a few people around the globe very amused

[Snail]

maybe i can start a political party for nuke fanatics, call it the scorched earth party. yeep, that would be the way to do things. but alas, im lazy.

You'd have my support all the way, mister!

[Bob-san]

This man is quite split -- He wants to be president of the country that he wants to secede from.

As far as Ron Paul goes: He's a dangerous candidate because of his extreme "states' rights" stance. If it were up to him, stuff like the Supremacy Clause and the 10th amendment would be irrelevant. The strange thing is that Ron's rabid supporters portray him as a "champion of the constitution", even when he's so obviously intent on subverting it.

Err what? Please, explain your position.