Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by servo75

  1. Libertarianism doesn't have to mean no Federal government. We tried that once under the Articles of Confederation and it was a disaster. I look at it like this: A Federal government is necessary for things that state governments cannot do. The state government is necessary for things that local governments cannot do. Local governments are there for things that individuals cannot do. Everything else should be in private hands. Libertarians tend to agree that less government overall is necessary, but an all-powerful state government and a weak central government like we had before the Constituti
  2. Honestly, that's a matter of opinion not a platform.
  3. Hmmm... Maybe it's not a matter of right and left. I don't hold McConnell in high esteem because though I give him credit for the SCOTUS nominations, he's been absolutely terrible in bringing forth a conservative agenda, he's too establishment and too tied to special interests. And even with SCOTUS, let's face it Bret Kavanaugh was a Bush guy.
  4. That first one, not sure how you enforce it or prove that someone is "not using it for militia purposes." Militia is nothing more than a group self-defense which is what 2A is for. It's already so that only Congress can declare war. We haven't had a declared war since WW2 though that's not a Constitutional issue I think. What rights do women not have? You should at least specify. Otherwise it's too vague to be enforceable. Recalls can be problematic. I assume you would mean 60% of the Electoral College, right? The specifics of that would have to be spelt out. I'm not comfortable
  5. Sad but true. What really frustrates me about the GOP is that since the Democrats have gone so off the reservation to the point where the two parties can't even agree that America is a good country anymore, there is, if we define 0 as hard left and 100 hard right, an enormous vacuum in the 20-60 range where most voters are, that the GOP could, but refuses to fill because of their stubborn holding to social conservatism and moral policing. If they started putting their social policies in the 21st century and reached out to the center left, I don't think you need the social conservatives any mor
  6. I think that map is utterly ridiculous. But RE branding? the GOP hasn't rebranded itself in 40 years and I don't think it's capable of doing so now. The first thing I would recommend if advising them would be to grow a spine and a set of testicles. But that might be asking too much.
  7. I like a lot of these. #1 & 2 I obviously agree with because I noted them myself. 23rd I'm 50/50 on. 26th I think so. This amendment dates back to the days when 18 year olds were informed enough to make political decisions. But our education system has become so atrocious that I think most people under 21 are not experienced enough or educated enough in U.S. history and civics to have well-formed opinions on matters as weighty as selecting a President. Though I reserve that state and locals could keep it at 18. #5-7 Again I love the idea, I thought I was expressing that in my no
  8. What exactly do you mean by that? @Patine How would we be ungovernable?
  9. I think these might be as popular here as one of President Trump's tweets, but we need some variety here I think. These are in approximate order of priority 1. The Congress SHALL pass a full budget every year and dollars allocated may not exceed dollars in revenue taken in from income tax and similar sources during the previous year. Exceptions may only be granted during the following emergencies (<insert list here>) which must be approved by the President and a 2/3 vote in both Houses of Congress, and will only be good for a single budget year. 2. Any bills resulting in an inc
  10. Put it this way, even with the lower approval numbers for Trump, who you're running against matters. I'd bet that if the Democrat nomination were still up in the air, and the poll were Trump vs. <Generic Democrat> it may very well be a double-digit deficit. You start putting a name to that opponent, when he becomes a real person and Americans start to ask themselves, "Okay I may not like Trump but THIS guy????" When Biden gets on a debate stage and has to start forming and stringing together coherent sentences, and starts referring to Trump as "George Bush," those numbers will go up. The
  11. This whole topic is rather absurd, I think, as is reflected in the near unanimity of the thread poll. First, Carville is entertaining, I'll give him that. But so blatantly partisan, one can't take anything he says with anything other than a few pounds of salt. All this talk about "Trump is desperately behind, he'd better drop out now" is, I think preposterous. Say what you want, like him or not, he's not one to quit. And to think that some Republicans will turn on him by Labor Day? First there's no indication of that happening beside rumor. McConnell and company would be better served pay
  12. Libertarians are very varied on this subject. But not unanimous. I think it's a bit inaccurate to say a "complete" lack of social support, nor is it a big plank. The anarcho-capitliasts, so-called, are I believe a minority. I can only speak for myself here, but I think most of us agree that some social safety net is necessary, as long as it's used juidiciously, when necessary, managed correctly to prevent fraud, and most importantly, coupled with job training needed to increase one's station. I think it's very true that there is a significant portion of those on means-tested programs who do no
  13. I'd be very interested in why you feel he would turn the U.S. into a "Corporatist Neo-Feudal" system. To be honest, I'm not even sure what that means. There seems, to me at least, to be a mis-perception among many that people of Dr. Paul's ilk, being pro-business, means they condone the current system. Right now, we really don't have a true 100% capitalist system. Yes capitalism is at the core of our system, but also we have many bad aspects which I, and I believe libertarian Republicans, abhor: We have cronyism, with government and corporations in bed with each other, special favors, loophole
  14. Yes, but... not nearly the name recognition. Johnson did pathetically for a race where the two front runners were supposedly so hated. 3% nationally and that's a record? I'd be surprised if Jorgensen breaks 1%. If good ideas won Presidential elections, we'd be finishing up Ron Paul's 2nd term now.
  15. I didn't vote for Romney, I was a write-in. I don't think he's a bad guy. He has something against Trump, whatever. It clearly shows in his actions but that's his right. I also think he's at best a milquetoast Republican without any clear principles. He all but threw the election, he had plenty of chance to beat a weakened Obama but after a good first debate all but threw the election because he was too nice. He never stood for principles. America was ready for a change but Romney was a worse campaigner than Hillary, if that's possible.
  16. If you reverse the two, maybe. I wouldn't mind seeing Haley in the top spot. But Romney blew it in 2012, he had a man in a much weaker position than Trump and basically threw the election because he was too nice to properly attack him. Romney is too much swamp. Besides, changing horses at this point would be disastrous. It will be blood in the water.
  17. Shouldn't be. If the people of D.C. want voting representation in Congress they can become part of Maryland, just like the "Virginia side" of D.C. did in the 19th century. It would even gain one Democrat House seat. But I think this is a ploy to get two more Democrat Senators. Ultimately this will be a non-issue for this election though I think.
  18. Yes I second that. All of us, and I admit myself included, need to know when to turn down the temperature. I do get very heated and passionate, I think a lot of that comes from the fact that conservatives and libertarians are so grossly outnumbered here, at least in number of posts, that I feel sometimes like it's 20 against one. If I had a suggestion for @admin_270 it's on the forum rules. Obviously "no political posts" is out the window, but there's been a marked lack of civility here at times. I try to just avoid those people, but personal attacks and ad hominem, especially in the third pe
  19. No, in fact I'm saying quite the opposite. It's a "marriage of convenience." The whole point is that they're not endorsing these people, they're only going to them because they'll say bad things about Trump. As for your second paragraph, yes I think you're right about that, in fact it has happened recently. In fact, I'm glad you brought it up. Alan Dershowitz comes to mind and is the perfect counter-example. He came in to defend Trump during the impeachment hearings even though he disagrees with almost all of Trump's policies. He was brave enough to stand up and say, "I may not like the Pre
  20. Yet I find it kind of funny (no, literally humorous) how many Democrats will go flocking to a Republican or former Republican when they have something bad to say about Trump. Romney marches with BLM and suddenly all the nasty things they said about him in 2012 go away. Same thing with the late John McCain, and with the Bushes. They don't like Trump, so all of the sudden their heroes. John Bolton writes a tell-all book and now MSNBC and CNN, liberal reporters who called him every "-ist" around during the Iraq War, now suddenly can't book him fast enough.
  21. Wow, it was one thing when @Patine was only personally attacking me, now he goes after our moderator @admin_270as well? Okay, this has gone too far. We have very good, passionate, even heated discussions on this forum. But there is no cause for personal insults. Crap like this does nothing to advance conversation and is strictly against the forum guidelines. If there are any moderators left, it's about time they do their job and start moderating or shut this forum down, because it's become clearly too toxic if we're resorting to not only personal insults, but THIRD-PERSON insults. If I've b
  • Create New...