John Galt 2016. :V

Who is John Galt?

https://twimg0-a.akamaihd.net/profi....._there_Fry.jpg

http://youtu.be/KlJM4UhbQ7A

Indeed. We need him.

We need railroads! Lots of railroads!

William Edward Hickman 2016

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/20.....7/18640112.php

Nonsense, that's like saying Rand would take government handouts, it's all prepost---

http://www.good.is/posts/conservati.....ment-handouts/

...oh.

I know that I am ready to shrug...

Pssst -- I was being facetious. I'm a red, the farthest thing from an Objectivist. :V

a... red?

maybe I need a little bit more explanation here, please

You know, a red. Socialist, anarchist, ~*~communist~*~. One of those evil anti-capitalists that made it to Canada from the evil, scheming nightmare that is Europe. Muahahahaha.

could have easily been 'Red State', which is why I asked for the clarification

now I know I can disregard anything else you say as being deranged, and to the hard left of Josef Stalin

I'm glad to know my fellow anarchists who died in Spain fighting the fascists and Soviet-backed communists were horrible people like Stalin.

Three cheers for enlightened and civil political discussion, mate! It's good to see you're better at being calm and rational than the Democrats are.

both of my grandfathers fought in world war 2. I had the honor of knowing them, and hearing first hand accounts on the few times they would even talk about it.

and if George Smith Patton could have had his way, he'd have rearmed Germany and marched on Stalin the next friggin day.

And my great grandparents, despite supporting the reds in the Finnish civil war and being socialists through life, still fought Stalin and later Hitler, too. The fact that I, like them, happen to be leftist -- even if I swing more to the libertarian corner as a proper anarchist than they did -- doesn't make me some ruddy Stalinist.

The left runs a pretty wide gamut, just like the right does.

I am neither left nor right. I hold conservative ideals, and quite liberal ideas.
I cannot abide socialism, nor anarchy. nor could I live without a nice healthy dash of anarchy and Rugged Individualism.

I am one of the Smallest Minority, and no one is watching out for my best interests.

Wouldn't put anarchist and socialist in the same description.

Anarchism and socialism have very close roots, and the two often blur towards the left wing of anarchism and the libertarian wing of socialism. Take for example democratic socialism and libertarian socialism, which in their more radical forms are very, very close to anarchist philosophies. In fact, often indistinguishable.

You hit forms of anarchism at both extremes of the political/economic spectrum.

At one end you have the anarchist libertarians, (such as the Randroids), and the other end you have Marxist anarchists. IME the only difference between the two is the utopia they believe in.

I did forget about anarcho-communists. Most Marxist systems tend to either collapse and become free market again, or devolve into totalitarianism that's socialist mostly in just name.

None of the anarchist societal designs are stable: Barring collapse they all fall prey to various forms of 'power gravity' that return them to some other form.

The two runs at full-up Marxist anarchism never got to that point, as they both serve as demonstrations of how badly they suck at war. (Although the only question about the Versaillese/Prussian victory was when, not if.)

But by then the Republican hardliners will have figured out how to bring Strom Thurmond back from the dead~

It's more likely to happen than seeing Romney as the front runner again, who I am almost certain is about to lose all forms of support immediately.

Romney wont run again.

It's either Rand Paul, Paul Ryan himself, or or Marco Rubio in 2016.

I wouldn't count out Christie or Perry for the moment, and I don't know if Bobby Jindal has thrown his hat in the ring, but he's got a few years to mull it over.

While Christie is an effective leader, he is insufficiently conservative on such issues as the Second Amendment, and Lower taxes. Perry is not smart enough to project a sufficiently weighty presence. Bobby Jondal is extremely smart, but lacks Charisma.

Marco, Marco, Marco, Marco :D

hahahah XD

It's only necromancy if you don't like the people doing it.

You KNOW they're trying right now.

Rand Paul's too cuckoo, his father would have had a chance if the media and the republican party in general had taken him more seriously but Rand... I don't think he's presidential material.

Chris Christie might just do it though, if he displays the same sort of leadership and willingness to work with others readily he's shown since Sandy.

The problem with taking Ron Paul more seriously is that it also brings out all of his nuttier positions into public view. He would do a bit better than he has but worse than McCain or Romney.

Monobear 2016!

upupupupupu

Ron Paul is the man but I am not sold on Rand

If you get to vote for Ron Paul, I get to vote for Vermin Supreme. They're about on the same level.

he can, he may just need one of those motorized carts.

ok, im going to hell now.

Just twice? Seems like everyone elected since Regan's campaign has been ok with a little bit more leftism.

This.

Romney was too moderate?

Dear god, is your definition of a "full on actual conservative" nothing short of John Galt stapled to a bald eagle?

You know it probably is. :V

That was Romney in the third debate. He was trying to sound palatable to undecideds and was almost certainly not espousing his actual views.

I'm not exactly convinced that corporate America is being strangled by regulation right now, but that's a whole different discussion.

_Corporate America_ doesn't believe that corporate America is being strangled by regulation right now. There are some companies who want to be free from any meaningful regulation but that's so they can go back to the days of robber baron capitalism.

Exactly this.

+1 this.

The truth hurts, and this is the truth.

Definitely.

What really confuses me though is why individuals sometimes buy into the idea that corporate America is being somehow held back by ethical/environmental regulation, despite the lack of evidence (with a meaningful sample size) and despite the fact it's just ridiculous on its face. Individuals who are not CEOs or high-level executives have nothing to gain and everything to lose from taking this position.

Is it more that the Republican party and Fox have drank the Kool-Aid and people just parrot that once it gets bombarded at them for long enough?

I am thinking Marco Rubio or Maybe Paul Ryan again.

The problem is, it's probablya Moot point, as there is a chance that the current officeholder will appoint one or two liberal Supreme Court judges, and Obama Care is unfortunately now locked in Stone as of 2014. There is no way it can be repealed and we will go the way of Britain, where the Military is starved to feed the freeloaders on the socialized medicine. entitlements never go away. What chance we had Aiken (Selfish Bastard) and Mourdock blew with their comments. Yes, I am fairly depressed about this and unable to eat. The only good side is the House of Representatives is firmly in Republican hands. But this also means four more years of working without a budget, thanks to harry Reid.

The only hope I have is that like most second Term Presidents, scandal and Error will limit the damage that can be done.

Scott. You sir are a wide man. You also said almost everything I was scrolling down to say .I thank you for that :)

Once Obamacare becomes institutionalized, No one will support a repeal. As has been said, You cannot run successfully against Santa Claus.

An interesting comparison as Obama is more like Putin than Santa.

Anyways I think it might go down but it won't be a pretty death. It will be a death the likes America hasn't seen since its founding .the screams will be heard round the world but not a soul will cine to its aid. It will be a death that lasts atleast several decades. Patron politics always die but history shows its never pretty.

Hate to sound all French revolution like but its spooky to watch such an event unfold.

I would have to disagree, as The new Deal hasn't gone away, The Great Society hasn't gone away.Class Warfare always appeals to those with limited educations and bottomless grivances.

there is always hope that society may return to the way it once was. perhaps people will return to being proud of what they do. they just need a swift kick to get them going again.

all problems stem from the loss of pride in what we do and who we are as americans. peolpe would rather be patrons to the govt than work to support themselves. "why work when i dun hav ta" (exatly the way he said it) a man in Cleveland said to me the other day when i asked him about it. this is the source of the political problems. people have simply given up.

luckily i saw something no one else did. the percentage of people who voted republican and conservative is going back up every election. when obama started he won by a land slide this time he only got 49 percent. thats huge growth and perhaps it will continue.

Actually. it won't change, uinless enough virtuous ppeople ead by example and get good results. See:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s02S.....ature=youtu.be

I like to think something can happen. Being without hope it's what put us in this mess.

I will have to watch that hour and a half beast at a time I'm on WiFi.

Yeah I tell you, up here in Canada the universal health care has been hitting us hard. Our banks are some of the least stable in the world, bankruptcies due to unavoidable illness are rampant, the housing bubble hit us twice as badly as you, and our highest levels of government just keep getting more liberal as a result. Not to mention, taxes are so high that nobody feels an incentive to succeed in life.

By the way I like your sentiment of hoping for incompetence, scandal, really anything disruptive and irrelevant to keep the other guys' administration from getting anything done. It shows a certain patriotism.

nearly poisonous level of sarcasm. I know Canada very well.

This was beautiful :'3 I love you!

You do know that:

Before the ACA, the US actually had the _highest_ per capita government spending on health care in the developed world.
and
The ACA actually _saves_ money.

right?

Gary Johnson 2016, he just needs to switch back to republican ticket.

Yes and no; he's more likely to get elected if he gets past the primaries, but his social liberalism will make that difficult. Unless he compromises his principles, that is.

Well, I feel that the republican party is going to have to totally restructure. It has two options, go libertarian, or go total reactionary. Libertarian would save it, reactionary would destroy it further. So what Johnson needs to do is rally the growing sentiment against social conservatism in the republican party, and lead it to the forefront. He needs to pick up where Ron Paul left off.

Libertarians and Tea Party could bring it together. Though a lot will be misplaced

I'm hopeful about the emergence of independents in the legislature, like Angus King. I think that voters are becoming disaffected due to the venomous partisan politics-- a climate ripe for visionary, charismatic, moderate independents.

Nyarlathotep 2016
Why vote for a lesser evil?

Azathoth/Mindless Flute Players 2016

Can Cthulhu be the running mate?

No, he's got some cultist this year. Charles Ward or something.

Freaking cultists...

Nero 2016 - ∞!

When it really comes down to it, vote for the guy that has the numerological name of 616 (Latin to Hebrew) or 666 (Greek to Hebrew). We need a leader that isn't shaken by the prospect of death. Since he's done that by his own hand!

ahahah i can't tell if you're being serious or not

but if you are, wow

wow

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/56967491/HAHAHAHA.WAV

^ Exactly this.

Yes. Rand, or Gary Johnson.

hmmmm..... TUMMY RUBS RIGHT NOW! c:

I'm voting for my Dalek overlords come 2016. *sage nod*

Vermin supreme

Ponies for everyone!

Mecha-Hitler

http://youtu.be/p_Pe4Mbcvqc

As requested

i actually expect Jindal

im writing in the frito bandito

Julian Castro 2016.

I say Jesse Ventura 2016

Roseanne barb: 2013 - apocalypse

Handsome Jack 2016

RuPaul 2016!!!

Hell yeah. :D I'd vote for that shit.

If I lived in the USA.

Jill Stein.

Woooo!

Stein 2016!

Yus! :3 Green Party all the way.

Deadpool 2016!

How about we enjoy the next two years without any future political campaigning... please?

3rd parties. Because the only vote wasted is a vote for a politician.

How about no.

Palin Ryan 2016, herp a derp.

An updated version of the Democratic wish for Palin/Bachman? Except that Ryan isn't as blatant a nutter as Bachman.

Gary johnson should run again :P

How about Gary Busey?

He certainly did a good job of handing Obama a few states this go round, that's for sure.

As a Kentuckian, I can tell you that that man has done little to nothing that has benefited our state. Same goes for his turtle-like companion McConnell.

I was going to vote for Rand Paul this year actually. As like a write-in...but our State's ballot didn't allow it. (So I voted Green, since I wasn't pleased with either candidate)

If they had gone with him over Romney they might have had a chance. He was the most moderate Republican in the field. Of course they'd try to elect one of the unelectable crazies. Both Romney and his running mate were too far to the right, during a season where the right wingers had finally gone overboard making fools of themselves.

I'm not going to speculate right now, because this loss is so significant it could actually cause damage to the Republican Party. They gave corporations personhood just to raise infinite money to try and buy the election; spent some 16 Billion or close to try and elect this Romney guy. For four years they refused to work with the President in Congress in an attempt to finger-point and discredit him when the election came around. It all backfired.

It's clear to everyone that something is going to have to give in the Republican Party before the next election cycle. If they try to field right-wing nutjobs again, they'll only lose unless if the Dems try and pit another Kerry against them. If they continue to do nothing to try and discredit Obama, not only does it jeopardize the well-being of the nation with that financial cliff coming up, but it will lose them even more seats in the midterms.

I predict the Republican Party is going to split into two. I don't see the hardliners wanting to go away, since they've had so much success during the Bush era, and they don't see what damage their policies have done to us. Meanwhile, there are bound to be more moderate conservatives who recognize that swinging too far to the right is a lost cause, and will want to abandon ship without switching to Democrat. This would work for big spending interest groups too. Instead of being forced to put all their money on someone who by all rights should be unelectable, they'd suddenly have safer hedge-bets in the splinter party.

Nico Ki'alalai for 2016. PRESIDENT OF EARTH.

Real talk right now? Jeb Bush.

Christie will have a heart attack or something. It's Rand Paul and/or Marco Rubio. Jeb Bush is actually great, but is unelectable unless he changes his name.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_DyGGlXVMd.....z-preview1.png

PORN HAUL 2016

Theodore Roosevelt 2016.

It won't matter, there is no eligible politician in the USA more qualified to be President than Hillary Clinton. Who ever runs against her has to somehow show that they can be a better leader, and I don't want to be the poor sap running against that resume.

I really wish we could have had Obama vs Huntsman this cycle. That would have been an awesome race.

Firstly the GOP needs to come out and definitively say that rape is bad, imo.

The Republicans are looking for someone who can win both the Republican primary and the general election. Unfortunately for them, no such person exists.

No Gary Johnson supporters here? ...Huh.

Fuck that, I vote Stephen Colbert 2016!

at this point any one would be good. but some people are predicting that obama will run for a third and fourth term. there a vid on how this would work to. but i really hope this time hes wrong on his prediction, he has not been wrong yet.
as for Rand Paul he seem clean cut but need to read more on what he stand for.

1. surprised  fisk hasn't posted on this journal :V

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUPz.....7bQ&t=6m4s

Undecided Voters for Candidate.

2016 gonna be REAL INTERESTINGGG

Eh. If he runs he'll be nailed for his quips about social issues (gay marriage, AGW policy, abortion/contraception), Roger Stone's accusations that Rand is getting all his dad's campaign money, and his Romney endorsement, which has upset the base that he inherited from his father's fans. Though regarding the latter, that may not be too big issue considering Paul supporters just rolled over for Romney anyway (Cato Institute actually reported that).

That's not to mention that he runs with the GOA crowd who think that the UN Small Arms treaty means Americans have to secure their pistols, or that he compared NFIB v. Sebelius to fucking Dred Scott. The GOP used to have multiple political blocs. But in general it's just gotten more and more uniform (look at guys like Justice Stevens, a Ford appointee, being consistently lambasted by sitting Republicans), same with the Dems to a lesser extent. Not to mention, polarization at the congressional level is insane and the general public remains pretty dumb with regards to major issues. Electing a congressman who's just another part of these trends seems a repugnant conclusion imho. That's why Romney, at least at the outset, was a smart choice. Though he was setting himself up for a campaign ages ago, e.g. when he was criticized for being the model for PPACA, he popularized the term Obamacare in response.

Regarding the Johnson supporters here - Charging that being barred from the debates is a Human Rights Act violation is hilariously dumb. Third parties are at a structural disadvantage, and that's unlikely to change any time soon, but this is Onion-grade material...

Regarding the Ryan supporters here - He'd have to do something regarding foreign policy while in Congress. He's unremarkable in FP outside of concessions to defense spending, and that's a big weakness for a POTUS candidate (e.g. even Obama had his bipartisan efforts with Hagel and Lugar to address relations with Iran and Russia respectively). Also considering he was one of commission members who voted down the Simpson-Bowles report, he'd also have to polish his alternative budgets. And they have their own problems as well, esp given than an ideological ally (supply-sider Bruce Bartlett) called him out for bypassing procedure so the Heritage Foundation could rubber stamp his FY 2012 submission.

Just in case you're serious about that: http://youtu.be/YUXwDMqjC-A

I can't believe all of the disgusting communists, socialist, and other radical leftists on this thread. Your ideals are why we're in this mess.

Maybe we'll be lucky enough to get Rand Paul or some other actual Right-ist (who isn't a rediculously religious bigot). Americans were pissed at Obama for Obamacare. So what do the Republicans do? Put up the guy who invented it at the state level. A leftist Republican who is "electable".

We're not going to fix our problems by being ideological cowards. I'd proudly and seriously take John Galt stapled to a Bald Eagle. Nothing less will save us.