I'll probably vote for Chuck Baldwin for president

Forum Tip: Look just above this and to the right. Look for "Latest Posts" to see the most recent posts on the forum.

I'll probably vote for Chuck Baldwin for president
Topic Started: Oct 27 2008, 01:42 PM (136 Views)
kingsley	Oct 27 2008, 01:42 PM Post #1
Posts: 1 Group: Members Member #28 Joined: Oct 18, 2008	I'll probably vote for Chuck Baldwin for president. Ron Paul endorsed him. Chuck Baldwin said he'd start bringing our troops home from Iraq, Afghanistan and over 130 countries around the world. He said he'd also work to overturn the so-called Patriot Act. Baldwin 08 http://www.baldwin08.com/ Thanks, Kingsley
Posts: 1 Group: Members Member #28 Joined: Oct 18, 2008


Ministry of Truth	Oct 28 2008, 09:11 AM Post #2
Thought Police Posts: 92 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	Chuck Baldwin's Platform "Join the Constitution Party in its work to restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Biblical foundations." is why I cannot vote for Him. The US Constitution is a Secular Document, this was very deliberate of the Founding Fathers in order to prevent Religious Tyranny. Although Baldwin is a Good person, those who come after him may not be and Ignoring the First Amendment would not be healthy for the USA in it's current World Standing. Article 11 of the US Treaty of Tripoli makes it very Clear: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ..." The US Treaty of Tripoli: Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation. Why make Liars of the Founders, so many people have spat on the Constitution already!



markedson	Oct 29 2008, 08:40 AM Post #3
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	You're going to let a small thing like the religious inclination of a principled candidate or his party keep you from voting for him are you? There is NO WAY that any action on Baldwin's part is going to federally mandate the practice of religion in the states. I honestly believe you can put that fear out of your mind. I too am supporting Baldwin because of: 1) Ron Paul's endorsement and 2) Ron Paul himself stated that a write-in campaign has no hope of success and 3) Ron promoted the support of ANY of 4 third party candidates as an important step in breaking the monopoly that we have today with our one (I mean 'two') party system. Writing in Ron Paul is understandable from an emotional/dedicated/honorific standpoint but I believe that the choice that will aid the country the most is to follow Ron's advice on the matter. After all, doing what he suggests is still honoring the most gracious and humble servant of liberty in decades. Perhaps even more so.
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008


Ministry of Truth	Oct 30 2008, 03:25 PM Post #4
Thought Police Posts: 92 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	A Write in Vote as a Protest Vote will have a greater impact than a we're desperate to elect a third part with Baldwin who isn't even on the Ballot in 29 States. I didn't spend the past 19 Months campaigning for Baldwin, I did it for Liberty and Ron Paul. I refuse to sacrifice ground and principles both.



JasonDelWraa	Oct 31 2008, 10:05 AM Post #5
Posts: 89 Group: Global Moderators Member #2 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	Baldwin voter here as well. I'm not terribly thrilled with the CP's platform but I like Chuck Baldwin as an individual. Too bad Barr is such a tool, this could have been a great year for the LP.



markedson	Nov 1 2008, 08:43 AM Post #6
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	I hear that, M.O.T. A lot of people worked really hard on Ron Paul's campaign. It is very disappointing that we couldn't rally other republican's around him. He would have definitely won. He was the clear choice.
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008


Ministry of Truth	Nov 2 2008, 01:48 AM Post #7
Thought Police Posts: 92 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	He's the Only Rational and Reasonable Choice. The Supporters are scattering their votes instead of focusing them. How did Whatcom County send so many delegates to State? We Focused on Certain people giving the Optimal Vote to them, instead of a bunch of people voting for a whole lot of random choices. If Dr. Paul's Supporters vote for anyone but Ron Paul, the message will be conveyed as this: When it got difficult they scattered and ran, if everyone focused their votes the message would be very clear that people are waking up. In the Primaries Dr. Paul had a Total US Vote Count of 9.4% (McTreason has 11%) That's More than any third party candidate has gotten since the 1800's...



markedson	Nov 3 2008, 08:41 AM Post #8
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	I beg to differ. Ron Paul requested that we vote for one of the four third party candidates of our choosing. He is both rational and reasonable and I trust his judgment.
Posts: 74 Group: Admins Member #8 Joined: Aug 25, 2008


Ministry of Truth	Nov 4 2008, 03:02 AM Post #9
Thought Police Posts: 92 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: Aug 25, 2008	Not a wise move to scatter and deplete the votes across multiple candidates, but it's too late now, Diebold and the CFR have Chosen Obomba. Only on 2 Occasions has the CFR been incorrect in it's Presidential General Election Predictions: 1. JFK 2. Ronald Reagan (First Term) Both Were Shot, Reagan joined the CFR Shortly After; If JFK had some how survived he probably would have Joined as well.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Baldwin · Next Topic »