Nurses, how are you going to vote? 2012 US Presidential Election - page 33

Nurses, Please take a second to vote below! We've polled our allnurses.com members the past 2 presidential elections and nurses got them both right! Let's see if we can predict the election results correctly for a 3rd... Read More

  1. 0
    Quote from ktwlpn
    the WORLD is in an economic crisis -it's not just the USA and it's not just due to Obama. "People like me"? I'm proud to say that I am the kind of person who cares about a woman's right to choose, accessible healthcare for everyone (not just the rich like Romney who can afford to pay for cutting edge treatments )and who cares about my brothers and sisters who are struggling and the planet that is being raped and pillaged. I'm PROUD to say that I'm that kind of person.
    You have issues.

    Get the hottest topics every week!

    Subscribe to our free Nursing Insights newsletter.

  2. 0
    Not even stating a position here, because inflammation won't help anything-as we know as nurses.But my rhetorical questions are simple, and they stick with me because there has been no good answer from our leadership in years. I charge the lack of reaching across the isle to BOTH parties. As I said, there is so much more we all have in common, than separates us.

    How can we spend our way into prosperity, printing money and credit we have no foreseeable way to pay back?

    How can a moral wrong be a civil right? Take that at face value.

    If the sanctity of marriage that has been naturally between one man and one women is to be done away with, why stop at same sex- there's a man in Iowa who wants to marry his Ford Mustang(how would that hurt us?)

    If we're now apologizing to terrorists, and announcing to them our exit dates from countries on the verge of civilization, why don't we just add then to the national debt too, and send them some foreign aid while we're offering all the support-as well as shrinking our military in a time where our enemies are increasing there's-including nuclear?

    What is the motivation to work hard, struggle through school while working 40 hours, and achieve independence and autonomy if you can sit at home, jobless, free family healthcare, free phone, and get more money for making more dependence and dependents on an already indebted government?Which outcome makes our country government stronger, giving to it in federal taxes, or taking from it in the form of welfare (with a healthy body that could be at work)?If all those freebies don't come from taxpayers, then what would happen if we all were dependent on government for our incomes? Healthcare? Phones? Birth control? Would God and Obama open their wallets to us for being such great stewards of this Awesome and once Great country?(in that event I couldn't call it a great country.)

    How can ALL of take out more than we give, and not collapse this thing?If I'm wrong for questioning these things, the rest of the world must have been too when they downgraded our credit rating for the way OUR government was spending without a way to PAY?

    Why are people who live in socialized countries trying so hard to get out attention that social policies such as increased entitlements, stifle economic growth, raise taxes for All (who pay them), and still always fail to make a one class system? (I.e. Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Nazi Germany- can anyone thank of a post USSR satellite that hasn't at one time been crushed by Socialism? And boy how they thrived when they were opened up. (I.e. Slovenia)

    I think my questions are shares by many, but I understand why things are the way they are. One guy is saying I want to give you this, and I can do it by taking extra from the rich, and the other is talking about a job for you, or perhaps an education and high skilled/high paying job that you can earn(personal responsibility), which sounds easier? What are people going want, freebies, or earning a paycheck paying 15-40% for the others to get those freebies, while they wait until 65 to get any help at all from the govenment(buy actually money back they earned).

    It's obviously unpopular, but I do care. I want to earn my way, I want to help those who need it temporarily- not lifelong while we reward laziness, dependence, getting more money by having more babies=viscous cycle.

    How would this make us Great Again?"Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, give him fish everyday, better hope the fewer and fewer fishing don't get tired of having their hard caught fishes taken, or somebody is going to HAVE to learn how to get up an go a fish'n! Or Hopefully "God and Obama" will pull of the loaves and fish thing again, and surely on a daily bases I hope for those waiting on the fish!
  3. 1
    You guys do realize that Obama won the election, right????????
    gypsyd8 likes this.
  4. 0
    Quote from Ineedhelp#
    You guys do realize that Obama won the election, right????????
    That is great that still doesn't make the things other people believe in any less important to them.
  5. 0
    Quote from DoGoodThenGo
    Americans have been moving more towards "issues" rather than "party" when it comes to politics and voting for quite some time. This is going to be a problem for both democrats and republicans as time moves on.
    Agree with this post 100%.

    As a liberal and Democrat myself, I think it's incredibly unwise to paint the Republican party as a single homogeneous group. The splintering of the Republican party in the last few years - with the emergence of the Tea Party, the resurgence of the Libertarian movement - only goes to highlight how un-homogeneous the Republican party really is. It will definitely be interesting to see if the rift between "old school" fiscal conservatives and whatever passes for the Moral Majority these days grows deeper. The loss of the likes of Akin, etc. highlights this rift although I doubt that these same voters are crossing party lines to vote Democrat -- most likely not voting at all.

    re. Democrats -- hell, Clinton saw the splintering of single-issue voters when he sought to solidify the Progressive base during his second term. Although, I do think that single-issue voters tend to have a fairly long-lived tenacity. Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973 but, on the other side of the fence, you still have plenty of people who continue to vote for pro-life candidates. And certain groups - gay rights, immigration issues - are still "new" enough in the public eye that small victories such as having someone campaigning against DOMA is enough to spur on voters who might otherwise easily become disillusioned.
  6. 0
    Quote from dirtyhippiegirl
    Agree with this post 100%.

    As a liberal and Democrat myself, I think it's incredibly unwise to paint the Republican party as a single homogeneous group. The splintering of the Republican party in the last few years - with the emergence of the Tea Party, the resurgence of the Libertarian movement - only goes to highlight how un-homogeneous the Republican party really is. It will definitely be interesting to see if the rift between "old school" fiscal conservatives and whatever passes for the Moral Majority these days grows deeper. The loss of the likes of Akin, etc. highlights this rift although I doubt that these same voters are crossing party lines to vote Democrat -- most likely not voting at all.

    re. Democrats -- hell, Clinton saw the splintering of single-issue voters when he sought to solidify the Progressive base during his second term. Although, I do think that single-issue voters tend to have a fairly long-lived tenacity. Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973 but, on the other side of the fence, you still have plenty of people who continue to vote for pro-life candidates. And certain groups - gay rights, immigration issues - are still "new" enough in the public eye that small victories such as having someone campaigning against DOMA is enough to spur on voters who might otherwise easily become disillusioned.
    Problem with issue voting blocks is once their needs are satisfied they may or may not hang around for the next election. Their votes essentially are up for grabs with each election cycle.

    Don't like saying this but one knows plenty of conservative/republican gay males who quite frankly are no different than their straight counterparts. That is the only thing AA's,Latinos and other minorities can do for them is clean their homes, prepare and serve their food and so forth. By virtue of their class and wealth whatever discrimination that often faces gays they are immune. Enough how ever want gay marriage enough to "hold their noses" and support BO. However make no mistake, and have heard this more than once, after DOMA is gone, so will they.

    Latinos want immigration reform. If that happens on any large scale there is nothing binding the current or future beneficiaries of such actions to the democratic or any other political party.

    The real sad thing is both groups seem to have studied the African American civil rights struggle and while each of the above groups are using lessons, laws and techniques that group employed, they are also learning from their mistakes.

    African Americans have had almost forty years of backing democrats in hopes of "civil rights" and for awhile it succeded, but over the past ten or so years whatever gains AAs made post 1960's have begun to backslide. Yes there is a half AA man in the WH, but the country as a whole is more segregated by race and class than it was during the 1950's. Many of the low skilled jobs that once helped sustain and even in some cases pull African-Americans out of poverty are either gone or taken by immigrants.

    Once thought to be the path to a secure economic future AA's also invested heavily in gaining and keeping public sector government jobs. Now as federal, state, and local governments cut back on spending those jobs are going away, many not likely to return.

    As for the "Moral Majority" and the republican party, that gig is slowly coming to an end. If Maryland supposedly the "state of churches" and one of the most religous can approve *gay marriage*,and Wisconsin elect an openly lesbian to the US senate, it shows the number of states giving cover to extreme religous views is decreasing.
  7. 1
    As a registered Libertarian for twenty years, I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that Libertarians are not Republicans. Libertarians are not even "conservative" in the currently used sense of the term. We are not "far right." We believe in Liberty. That vast majority of us agree with limited government, but not for the same reasons given by the GOP. Please do not conflate the two.

    The GOP would never support our stances on issues like foreign non-interventionism, immigration, marriage equality, or decriminalization of narcotics to name but a few glaring differences.

    I am personally quite progressive. I have major ideological, philosophical, and political differences with some fellow Libertarians, but unlike the currently elected leaders of both major parties we are able to use reason to discuss our differences.

    You are right the the GOP has completely lost touch with its own principles in favor of pandering to the American Taliban - it obviously did not work. If true conservatives are looking for a new home - we would be more than happy to have them. However, they should know that we will not compromise our principles for votes.

    If you are curious as to what Libertarians stand for, go here: Platform | Libertarian Party

    Thank you.

    Quote from dirtyhippiegirl
    Agree with this post 100%.

    As a liberal and Democrat myself, I think it's incredibly unwise to paint the Republican party as a single homogeneous group. The splintering of the Republican party in the last few years - with the emergence of the Tea Party, the resurgence of the Libertarian movement - only goes to highlight how un-homogeneous the Republican party really is. It will definitely be interesting to see if the rift between "old school" fiscal conservatives and whatever passes for the Moral Majority these days grows deeper. The loss of the likes of Akin, etc. highlights this rift although I doubt that these same voters are crossing party lines to vote Democrat -- most likely not voting at all.

    re. Democrats -- hell, Clinton saw the splintering of single-issue voters when he sought to solidify the Progressive base during his second term. Although, I do think that single-issue voters tend to have a fairly long-lived tenacity. Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973 but, on the other side of the fence, you still have plenty of people who continue to vote for pro-life candidates. And certain groups - gay rights, immigration issues - are still "new" enough in the public eye that small victories such as having someone campaigning against DOMA is enough to spur on voters who might otherwise easily become disillusioned.
    Last edit by gypsyd8 on Nov 8, '12
    Elvish likes this.
  8. 0
    Quote from gypsyd8
    As a registered Libertarian for twenty years, I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that Libertarians are not Republicans. Libertarians are not even "conservative" in the currently used sense of the term. We are not "far right." We believe in Liberty. That vast majority of us agree with limited government, but not for the same reasons given by the GOP. Please do not conflate the two.

    The GOP would never support our stances on issues like foreign non-interventionism, immigration, marriage equality, or decriminalization of narcotics to name but a few glaring differences.

    I am personally quite progressive. I have major ideological, philosophical, and political differences with some fellow Libertarians, but unlike the currently elected leaders of both major parties we are able to use reason to discuss our differences.

    You are right the the GOP has completely lost touch with its own principles in favor of pandering to the American Taliban - it obviously did not work. If true conservatives are looking for a new home - we would be more than happy to have them. However, they should know that we will not compromise our principles for votes.

    If you are curious as to what Libertarians stand for, go here: Platform | Libertarian Party

    Thank you.
    Personally think those pushing "marriage equality" may sooner or later open up a huge can of worms that in the end will cause some segments of society more harm than good.

    There are few if any good reasons today for most if not all the benefits handed out to married persons versus singles on the federal level. Indeed some of them including the tax code and SS cause more problems than they solve.

    IMHO the US should join Canada and whole host of other countries and stop promoting marriage as the be and end all cure for society's woes. If the idea is to provide for children and or the poor (whom in the United States are most likely to be either female or children), there are otherways of going about it.
  9. 0
    Quote from gypsyd8
    As a registered Libertarian for twenty years, I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that Libertarians are not Republicans. Libertarians are not even "conservative" in the currently used sense of the term. We are not "far right." We believe in Liberty. That vast majority of us agree with limited government, but not for the same reasons given by the GOP. Please do not conflate the two.

    The GOP would never support our stances on issues like foreign non-interventionism, immigration, marriage equality, or decriminalization of narcotics to name but a few glaring differences.

    I am personally quite progressive. I have major ideological, philosophical, and political differences with some fellow Libertarians, but unlike the currently elected leaders of both major parties we are able to use reason to discuss our differences.

    You are right the the GOP has completely lost touch with its own principles in favor of pandering to the American Taliban - it obviously did not work. If true conservatives are looking for a new home - we would be more than happy to have them. However, they should know that we will not compromise our principles for votes.

    If you are curious as to what Libertarians stand for, go here: Platform | Libertarian Party

    Thank you.
    THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!

    I don't march entirely in lockstep with the LP, but I voted libertarian in both the presidential and gubernatorial election this year.

    It drives me batty when people say libertarians have 'something for everyone' because they tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative. No, it's not about that at all. It's about preserving liberty.

    Even worse is when people tell me, as they did this year, and it was multiple people from multiple parties, that my vote was a wasted one. What?! I'm not the one who voted for someone they really didn't like just because he's not the other guy!
    Last edit by Elvish on Nov 8, '12
  10. 0
    Quote from gypsyd8
    As a registered Libertarian for twenty years, I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that Libertarians are not Republicans. Libertarians are not even "conservative" in the currently used sense of the term. We are not "far right." We believe in Liberty. That vast majority of us agree with limited government, but not for the same reasons given by the GOP. Please do not conflate the two.
    Eep. I'm sorry for offending. :/ I didn't really mean to conflate Republicans with Libertarians because they obviously aren't the same. However, many *fiscal* Republicans that I know strongly identify with Libertarian beliefs -- small government (I will admit to not knowing why Republicans favor small government vs. Libertarians), limited taxes. Definitely hugely different from the far right which advocates homophobia, anti-choice, pro-war, etc. etc.


Nursing Jobs in every specialty and state. Visit today and Create Job Alerts, Manage Your Resume, and Apply for Jobs.

A Big Thank You To Our Sponsors
Top