pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
SWSA Tells Obama Voters to Pound Sand
#31
ArcticSplash;40241 Wrote:I don't care about the Us vs. Them because I voted Libertarian. I'm just eating the popcorn watching the extremists on both sides battling it out while Rome burns.

I think I've must have read over 30 conspiracy theories now on why Romney didn't win.

I knew Romney was doomed when he turned into Jan Brewer during the GOP primary war and going against immigration reform. (The whole Bush family knows that's a non-starter; why do y'all think GWB behaved the way he did during the 8 years he was prez).


Jesus Christ... the GOP lost the Cuban Vote for the first time EVER since the Bay of Pigs massacre. Out of all the different Hispanic minorities, the most faithful voting block to the GOP was that one. They took their fiesta and went back to la casa.


I got sick of the GOP back in 2004 when they decided to demonize the gays and step on us to lift themselves into office. Fuck that noise. I'm enjoying all of this, actually. It's a matter of time before the crazy ideologues are booted out of the party.

"The Party of Reagan" is not what the current GOP is. It will be at some point, but not until a lot of people are ejected from the party or leave in disgust.

Once again:
In 1984 Reagan got 37% of the Latino vote
In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million illegals.
In 1988 GHW Bush got 30% of the Latino vote.

So, just how does immigration play into helping Republicans win over Latinos?
It doesn't.

And if it takes pandering to Latinos about immigration to get their votes, they can keep them, just like the Libertarians.
But what's funny about that is that the Latinos that voted for Democrats actually won something and will get something out of their vote, something you Libertarians can't say.

You claim you are Libertarian, yet you seem to believe that gays should be a protected class. Nobody should be a protected class.
Either we are all equal or not, which is it in your infinite wisdom?

The crazy ideologues have their own party, it's called Libertarian. You know, the losers as well. Just how much of the vote did Johnson get again?
Some people need to read this book: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1936976021/ref=...jwbZH1GAZF

Reply
#32
39Flathead;40332 Wrote:
ArcticSplash;40241 Wrote:I don't care about the Us vs. Them because I voted Libertarian. I'm just eating the popcorn watching the extremists on both sides battling it out while Rome burns.

I think I've must have read over 30 conspiracy theories now on why Romney didn't win.

I knew Romney was doomed when he turned into Jan Brewer during the GOP primary war and going against immigration reform. (The whole Bush family knows that's a non-starter; why do y'all think GWB behaved the way he did during the 8 years he was prez).


Jesus Christ... the GOP lost the Cuban Vote for the first time EVER since the Bay of Pigs massacre. Out of all the different Hispanic minorities, the most faithful voting block to the GOP was that one. They took their fiesta and went back to la casa.


I got sick of the GOP back in 2004 when they decided to demonize the gays and step on us to lift themselves into office. Fuck that noise. I'm enjoying all of this, actually. It's a matter of time before the crazy ideologues are booted out of the party.

"The Party of Reagan" is not what the current GOP is. It will be at some point, but not until a lot of people are ejected from the party or leave in disgust.

Once again:
In 1984 Reagan got 37% of the Latino vote
In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million illegals.
In 1988 GHW Bush got 30% of the Latino vote.

So, just how does immigration play into helping Republicans win over Latinos?
It doesn't.

And if it takes pandering to Latinos about immigration to get their votes, they can keep them, just like the Libertarians.
But what's funny about that is that the Latinos that voted for Democrats actually won something and will get something out of their vote, something you Libertarians can't say.

You claim you are Libertarian, yet you seem to believe that gays should be a protected class. Nobody should be a protected class.
Either we are all equal or not, which is it in your infinite wisdom?

The crazy ideologues have their own party, it's called Libertarian. You know, the losers as well. Just how much of the vote did Johnson get again?

Uhm, but your president-hopeful is sitting in Boston right now hoping to re-activate his old gigs because he's not moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, isn't that right?
Reply
#33
The Cubans from the bay of Pigs are way different from the Cubans that voted for OhBlowMe. For one, the older Cubans wanted to make something of themselves. The current ones have lived under Fidel for 2 generations. They come here to make some $$ but also to live off the government test, like they did in Cuba.

The Latinos we are getting in now (the illegals) are for the most part uneducated, unskilled and unwanted by their own countries for being drags on their economies. We are taking them in because the DNC views them as ready made Dummycrats. I guarantee you if we said ok, give them amnesty but they cannot vote for 20 years, the DNC will be all for booting their freeloading asses out.
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply
#34
I'm fine with what SWSA did. It's his business. He can do what he wants. If it sends away customers, then so be it. It it draws in customers, then so be it.

No shirt, no shoes, no service. No Obama voters, either.

It's his call to make.
Regards,
Paradigm
Reply
#35
Spacemanvic;40346 Wrote:The Latinos we are getting in now (the illegals) are for the most part uneducated, unskilled and unwanted by their own countries for being drags on their economies. We are taking them in because the DNC views them as ready made Dummycrats. I guarantee you if we said ok, give them amnesty but they cannot vote for 20 years, the DNC will be all for booting their freeloading asses out.

Lenin's "useful idiots". Make it 5 years and you'll achieve the same goal.

Their only value to the party is the ballot they can cast. I wonder what's going to happen when the party kicks all these hipsters and bleeding heart whites to the curb now that they've served their purpose? Those with jobs are gonna get ass-raped just like the rest of us, and those with PhDs in "The Music of Middle Ages England" still won't be able to find jobs.

The majority of blacks really don't count in that mix. They've owned them from Day One. A segment of that bloc will vote for cell phones.
I don't suffer from insanity.
I enjoy every minute of it.
Reply
#36
Spacemanvic;39568 Wrote:
TheWolff;39485 Wrote:I did not vote for Obama and I wouldn't be shopping there either. This divisiveness is hurting the country. People refusing to listen to the other side does not help us move forward.
BS.

The left divided this country to conquer it. Look around, they won this time.

You're right, but there's lots of people on both sides interested in dividing the country. The left ABSOLUTELY did their share of it, but we just have to look at the campaigns of Nixon, George HW Bush, and George W Bush to see examples of the same thing from the other direction.

This guy is just another businessman -- like Limbaugh, for example -- who will benefit financially by encouraging these divisions, even if it hurts our cause in the long run.

If we want to be successful in defending the right to keep and bear arms, what we need to do is make sure that the majority of people support the issue. Stunts like this are not getting us new supporters.
Reply
#37
39Flathead;40332 Wrote:Once again:
In 1984 Reagan got 37% of the Latino vote
In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million illegals.
In 1988 GHW Bush got 30% of the Latino vote.

So, just how does immigration play into helping Republicans win over Latinos?
It doesn't.

Once again: where's your proof of causality here? There were a lot of issue in play in 1988.

The below makes about as much sense as the argument you're cribbing from Limbaugh:

In 1984, Reagan got 34% of the Latino vote.

In 1986, Reagan signed a law banning the ownership of new full auto firearms.

In 1988, GHW Bush got 30% of the Latino vote.

Therefore, we should stop electing gun-grabbers like Reagan to win the Hispanic vote.

There's also the fact that Reagan won 66% of the white vote, compared to Bush's 60%. Maybe some people were just tired of 8 years of a GOP President and felt it was time for a change?

Maybe people felt Bush was a rich northeastern elitist who was a bit out of touch?

Do you (or Limbaugh, since you're just copying and pasting his argument,) have any surveys indicating why Bush received fewer votes across-the-board than Reagan?

Get real.
Reply
#38
I don't want to hear how a business owner's freedom of speech and freedom to run his business how he pleases is "divisive" after we've had the most divisive President in American history.

Republicans don't always have to be wishy-washy "reaching across the aisle" all the time, placating others and being the "nice guys" because these days, being a "nice guy" doesn't work.

This country is long overdue for some "tough love". Although I'm afraid it may be a bit late for it, now.
Error 396: Signature cannot be found.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Detroit Police Chief Tells People They Can Reduce Crime Carrying Concealed Firearms middlefinger 7 1,750 01-04-2014, 10:18 AM
Last Post: halftrack
  Newtown father tells rally anti-gunners don’t speak for all residents priell3 0 732 04-26-2013, 11:33 AM
Last Post: priell3
  My Olive Branch to Democrats and Other Low-Information-Voters ArcticSplash 29 3,699 04-18-2013, 01:15 PM
Last Post: Spacemanvic
  Gun voters are one-issue voters ArcticSplash 8 1,147 04-10-2013, 03:52 PM
Last Post: billamj
  Y'all come to Texas, state official tells New York gun owners Pocketprotector 5 845 01-24-2013, 08:01 PM
Last Post: MrPeanut



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.