Republican Primary--Solution to the Problem?

What if everyone just votes down the neocons in the next republican primary?

>>1 Not gonna happen. As long as people are uneducated, protestant and/or care more about hurting gays rights than their own place in the constitution they will always have a base.

>>2
Yes, but there will be different republicans running, is the point.  Do you know how primaries work? 

You get to vote for who will run ON the republican ticket... before the actual election. 

I'm talking about the antidote to neoconservatism, not the solution to gay rights violations. 

>>3
The solution to gay rights violations is to give gay people the right to fight back.  Firearms restrictions do nothing but harm this. 

http://www.pinkpistols.org/

Someone clone more Reagans, plz.

>>5 Motherfuck Reagan. In the ear. It's a shame he didn't die of fibromyalgy or ebola or something equally painful.

Vote libertarians. Don't think your vote is lost. Inform people and get more voters. Together we can bring down both democraps and republicants and perhaps even restore lost freedom of United States.

What problem?

The only problem I see is that we're not killing enough muslims. How do libs propose to solve that?

>>6

Why?  What exactly did he do that piss`d ya off so much?

>>9
He helped pull the berlin wall down.

>>9 & >>10 During his presidency women's right experienced an assault on all fronts - That doesn't score points in my book.

>>11
urm.. what did he do?

>>12 Nothing. Yet he should have stood up. Also, he busted unions everywhere, and like almost all repubs he was bad for the economy. He was loads better than Bush Snr., but he wasn't good.

>>3
Yeah, different Republicans running, but the same voters voting, you know, the same uneducated, bigoted types who re-elected GW in 2004. Whether or not the new Republicans running will choose to perpetuate the Bush agenda during their campaign still remains to be seen, though. Either way, the next president is going to spend much of his term cleaning up the mess that GW has made, and we can only hope that they choose to clean it up, rather than make it worse.

You can only vote in the Republican primary if you register as a Republican (and possibly an Independent, but I can't remember if I had that option last time).

>>14
They voted in Bush because Bush is a friend of firearms.  The NRA is the most powerful non-profit organization in the United States.  They are largely responsible for giving the last two elections to Bush and the republican majority, and keeping Kerry, Gore, and the anti-gun democrats out of office. 

The democrats need to wake up and change their position on this issue.  This is the retaliation you democrats get for the Clinton years.  Gun rights folks had to put up with a lot of shit under Clinton's administration, and if we have our way, we won't have to again. 

>>15
Actually, the AARP has more lobbying power than the NRA, but the NRA is much more focused on one single issue, so it's much easier to cater to it.

Besides, what does that say about you if you base your vote on whether or not you can own a gun, which to most people, is just an expensive toy. Face it, it'll be a long time before the U.S. gets rid of gun-ownership rights, assuming that ever happens. The fact that gun owners even feel this right is being threatened is ridiculous.

There's less of a chance of their rights to own guns being abolished than there is for that proverbial intruder to come into their house, as they love to repeat over and over.

Get a life, there's a lot more to life than guns, you know, like getting a job.

>>16
I actually have job, but I'm still evil terrorist who doesn't enjoy trading away his freedoms for security, what I'm doing wrong? You can move to UK and enjoy your police state. If that's not enough try China.

>>1-10000
Make no compromise and vote Libertarian.

Libertarians live in a dream world where corporations won't exploit labor and resources like crazy to make a profit, and where the little man has a chance.

>>18
Ironically social democracy is more corporate friendly. Taxes drive small businesses quickly down and only ones who survive are big corporations.

>>19 Sweden is a strobe-light example of that. Soc. Dems. actually did a lot (a lot) of great things earlier but now it's fucked up.
>>16 They have some movie called "Innocents Betrayed" showing how 170 million people died largely because the government had all the guns. I guess they use that as an example. But I also think that any libertarian who voted for Bush needs to take a long har look in the mirror. In fact, all who voted for Bush should look in the mirror. And then get badly hurt in a very painful manner.

>>18
10% of the profit of an international energy coorporation is a lot less than 10% of the profit of all the corner stores, self-employed electricians, janitors, garages and light industries in existence.

I supose you can tax the big evil coorporations, but because so many people are dependant on singular mass heavy industry all that does is cause a trickle down effect. The garage pays more for the gas it sells and is worse off. The liberal mind doesn't seem to be capable of understanding this simple fact.

You need to make tax as fair as possible and as low as possible, the only exception being the funds used to preserve justice.

>>20
I think everyone who voted for Kerry should get badly hurt in a very painful manner.  Bush>Kerry.

>>18 "Libertarians live in a dream world where corporations won't exploit labor and resources like crazy to make a profit, and where the little man has a chance." Yeah, exactly. How do they plan to do that, then? I mean, not all corporate transgressions are due to America being a mixed economy. So how do they expect memebers of a laissez-faire society to manage to keep track of what their providers do overseas? Will they even do this willingly? America has a lot to gain from implementing a free market. It has an equal lot to lose.
>>22 "Bush > Kerry". I thought so too for a while. Then I realized Bush sucks both at economy, national security and as a commander in chief. There is no way Kerry could have sucked more, and he would have won if it weren't for the blatant cheating.

Libertarians are just Bush supporters who don't want to be labeled as Republicans. They think it makes them sound smarter.

>>22
Why don't you back up your talk, keyboard warrior. You probably couldn't even beat up a pacifist.

>>23
Wrong.  The difference between Bush and Kerry was far greater than many people realize. 

The one who gets elected shows, largely, what path we will continue down. 

Bush wanted to privatize Social Security, which would have been a huge step forward in defeating the onslaught of socialist-resembling programs instituted by our government. 

Kerry and the democrats, on the other hand, wanted not only to support social security, but to nationalize health care as well. 

On just the economy alone, the difference between the two is startling.  One represents private enterprise (somewhat), and the other represents a step closer to socialism. 

While I'll agree, the libertarians are the better party by far, I am much happier that Bush won, however much I disagree with him on gay rights, the war, the Patriot act, and domestic spying. 

This is, of course, not to mention all the other differences between the two, some of which I just outlined. 

>>26 Wah Wah Wah about the soc. sec. Here are some resources about that.                                                 http://www.cepr.net/pages/socialsecuritymedicare.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-24-retiree-taxpayers_x.htm