Quantcast

Which GOP Presidential Candidate Should Drop Out of the Race?

Politics 2012/03/20 23:49:33
You!
Add Photos & Videos
We know you want to make your opinion count -- especially during the time of a serious election. So, every week, SodaHead will host a handful of up-to-date polls having to do with the upcoming 2012 election.

Vote on this week's election questions below and make sure to come back every Tuesday to see how everyone voted -- and to receive a new batch of questions worth pondering. It's a great time to have an opinion. So, dive right in to our 2012 Election poll.


Read More: http://www.sodahead.com/survey/featured/2012-elect...

Add a comment above

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Oblahblah 2012/04/03 15:53:24
    Rick Santorum
    Oblahblah
    Santorum because he is unworthy of the presidency and Gingrich because his long history shows he is not a man of the people.
  • Jericho 2012/03/27 23:58:59
    Newt Gingrich
    Jericho
    I would say Santorum and Romney, but that will be a Snowy day in Hades, so I will go with the complete reversed jargon from his entire Political Career--The Newt Himself
  • spectacle 2012/03/27 18:53:23
    Newt Gingrich
    spectacle
    +1
    Ron Paul should win. He's our only hope of saving the economy. Seriously!
  • TJ 2012/03/27 12:57:06
    They should all stay
    TJ
    Otherwise Romney will get the nomination.
  • Flea 2012/03/27 02:28:25
    They should all stay
    Flea
    This answer should be "They should all drop out", because they're all insane and I wouldn't trust any of them with a burnt-out match.
  • David William 2012/03/23 23:20:29
  • Veteran Patriot 2012/03/23 21:57:51
    Newt Gingrich
    Veteran Patriot
    +1
    Wolf in sheeps clothing, just like Romney.
  • rdmatheny Veteran... 2012/03/24 05:39:11
    rdmatheny
    Don't forget to throw Santorum in that mix.

  • Jack 2012/03/22 04:57:01
    Newt Gingrich
    Jack
    He is lagging behind. Stop wasting time and money. Try again the next time.
  • Vitalani 2012/03/21 21:58:51
    Rick Santorum
    Vitalani
    Oh yeah, and the rest of them as well.
  • Gir 2012/03/21 21:22:03
    Newt Gingrich
    Gir
    He just isn't gonna make it. Sorry Newt, but I want to see other people.
  • Pat 2012/03/21 17:36:17
    Newt Gingrich
    Pat
    I think both Gingrich and Paul should drop out but I'm sure that they both want input at the convention so as long as they have delegates, they'll continue.
  • Technotrucker_exposingthetruth 2012/03/21 15:34:31
    Rick Santorum
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +2
    Along with Mittens and Mewt. They are nothing but imposters that will continue spending this nation into oblivion. None of them have a leg to stand on in improving this country. Ron Paul is the only one that has a plan to give the people back their liberties and regain sound financial status in this country. The rest are frauds and pretenders wanting to be the next CEO of the Corporation of the United States. Adulterers, thieves, and frauds, people keep putting them in office, then complaining when their rights are stolen. Makes no sense at all.
  • turtledove123 2012/03/21 12:06:04
    They should all stay
    turtledove123
    +1
    Hey let them all keep going. It is their right to keep on trying if they still have backing, money, and support.
  • Mitt Romney
    Jerry (Iron Priest)☮ R ☮ P ☮ 201
    +1
    He won't change the way the country is run.
  • metalmania17 2012/03/21 11:30:13
    They should all stay
    metalmania17
    Actually they should all go... and elect me.
    Speak English or leave.
    Photo I.D. when you vote.
    Must pass drug test to get government assistance.
    Welfare only last 4 years.
    Government jobs i.e. senators, judges, ect. 8 year limits.
  • Mopvyzo 2012/03/21 11:22:09
    They should all stay
    Mopvyzo
    Really they should all drop out, because Obama will win re-election.
  • hisomouth Mopvyzo 2012/03/21 15:45:07
    hisomouth
    LOL
  • Pm 2012/03/21 07:33:16
    Ron Paul
    Pm
    This guy is nuts
  • rdmatheny Pm 2012/03/22 17:12:04
    rdmatheny
    +1
    ...or maybe half of America is nuts.

  • Pm rdmatheny 2012/03/23 07:13:27
    Pm
    Watched it...I think Ron Paul is nuts...He seems to hate the executive branch, along with his supporters..I dont blame his supporters, they get all their information form RP.
  • rdmatheny Pm 2012/03/23 11:40:30
    rdmatheny
    +1
    Actually, we get our information from the Constitution. The founding fathers whom left a tyrannical country in the name of Great Britain that was run by a king, knew for a free society to work, its government had to be limited with powers from doing as they wish. The constitution was designed to limit powers of the executive branch to prevent the country from being ruled under the rule of a king.


    So in essence, if you believe the constitution is "nuts", then I can see how your feeling toward Dr. Paul would be the same.
  • Pm rdmatheny 2012/03/23 18:44:35
    Pm
    RP's and libertarian's interpretations of the constitution..Every bill passed has been constitutional. You have no evidence to say other wise...The judicial branch deems it constitutional, then it is...This is the beauty of our system.
  • rdmatheny Pm 2012/03/23 18:53:10
    rdmatheny
    Yeah right. You are so gullible. I'll let a Judge explain.

  • Pm rdmatheny 2012/03/23 19:03:09
    Pm
    You are gullible. He is writing this book to make off of people like yourself who are submissive to this fear mongering.
    Tell me what liberties you lost?
  • rdmatheny Pm 2012/03/23 19:37:24
    rdmatheny
    +1
    Oh boy, where to begin.
    1. The freedom to earn a livable wage that is not taxed to death by taxes to pay for wasteful government spending, unconstitutional wars and corporate bailouts to name a few.
    2. The freedom to be able to shop for health and auto insurance across state lines due to regulations that cripple a free market society and restrict my choices.
    3. As a business owner, the freedom to not be burdened from over regulation that cuts into profits.
    4. As a traveler, the freedom to travel without being groped and fondled.
    5. The freedom to live any where in the world I choose without being under the wrath of the IRS.
    6. The liberties to live my life without government interference as far as what I can buy or use or digest as long as my actions do not harm others or violate anyone else's rights.
    7. The liberty to live my life without being tracked by every move and being forced to supply social security number for certain transactions.

    These are a few on the top of my head. I'm sure if I thought ii out, I could supply more.
  • Pm rdmatheny 2012/03/23 19:55:31
    Pm
    1. Taxes are only paid to defeat monetary deflation. The government uses the printing press to pay for its programs.
    2. This isnt a free market society. Its a mixed economy. Plus, state regulations vary by state, so purchasing a plan in IL but you live in WIS would create legal issues and one might not be covered in IL even though the WIS ins plan would cover it.
    3. The regulations are harsh and I believe need to be reformed and the 300 Obama passed need to be cut along with the EPA. having said that, non of our liberties are taken by such regulations and they are completely constitutional.
    4. Groped and fondled isn't what happens. You are a business owner aren't you, you can reject anyone from using your business for any reason you want. Its the freedom we have...IF you do not like being patted down for safety, the airlines wont allow you to fly. Thank freedom for that.
    5. As long as you pay your taxes, you have that freedom.
    6. If it is harmful to you and your body, I dont see why its a problem the government bans certain foods and drugs.
    7. This is just plain paranoia. SS number is used to make sure it is you and not stolen.
  • Pm rdmatheny 2012/03/28 00:21:01
    Pm
    Judge is a libertarian who spews conspiracy theories out of his mouth for 5 minutes straight.
  • spectacle Pm 2012/03/27 18:56:09
    spectacle
    +2
    That's the only negative comment I've heard from you and others. Do you have anything more solid? I'm only asking, because I've listened to Ron Paul, and he knows the economy very well and I firmly believe he can fix it.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/03/28 00:19:58
    Pm
    For starters, his entire base of economic knowledge comes from the Austrian school of thought.. It has never been implemented anywhere in the world, and is over 100 years old.
    I give you a couple facts regarding Austrian theory, here is a quote from Hayek's work, "economic theories can never be verified or falsified by reference from facts, all we can and must verify is the presence of our assumptions in the particular case."
    They use deductive reasoning, not inductive which draws conclusions from data...Applies PRECONCEIVED generalizations to the data, its why its per-sceientifc and cannot use the SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Don't get me wrong, deduction takes place in science, but generalizations come from previous data, not A PRIORI assumptions. How is that a sound method of reasoning????.....Austrian followers say, they can critique the world but the real world is prevented from informing their theories. They have qualitative predictions not quantitative, meaning they can call the government bad but the data suggesting otherwise wont disprove their claims. This means they can never be wrong...LOL Do you not see the flaw in this thought?
    They use rationalism philosophies which have been abandoned since the 1880s. Rationalists are not constrained by data, facts, statistics, history, ...
    For starters, his entire base of economic knowledge comes from the Austrian school of thought.. It has never been implemented anywhere in the world, and is over 100 years old.
    I give you a couple facts regarding Austrian theory, here is a quote from Hayek's work, "economic theories can never be verified or falsified by reference from facts, all we can and must verify is the presence of our assumptions in the particular case."
    They use deductive reasoning, not inductive which draws conclusions from data...Applies PRECONCEIVED generalizations to the data, its why its per-sceientifc and cannot use the SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Don't get me wrong, deduction takes place in science, but generalizations come from previous data, not A PRIORI assumptions. How is that a sound method of reasoning????.....Austrian followers say, they can critique the world but the real world is prevented from informing their theories. They have qualitative predictions not quantitative, meaning they can call the government bad but the data suggesting otherwise wont disprove their claims. This means they can never be wrong...LOL Do you not see the flaw in this thought?
    They use rationalism philosophies which have been abandoned since the 1880s. Rationalists are not constrained by data, facts, statistics, history, or experimental confirmation...
    Honestly, anyone educated as an economist can tell you this. The only people who follow this school of thought are ones who are out to gain something by doing so, for instance, Peter Schiff, owns a gold investment firm....
    (more)
  • spectacle Pm 2012/03/28 19:06:05
    spectacle
    +1
    You seem to know more about it than I do. I've only taken an Econ 101 class in College and it seems pretty straight forward. Here's what I'm seeing though: Inflation is weakening the dolar. Prices go up every year by 3-5% compounding. It is my understanding that this inflation is due to debt owed to the Federal Reserve which was institued to save the US during the great depression. It is also my understanding that Ron Paul wishes to do away with the Federal Reserve. I know I'm making a huge leap here, but wouldn't that nullify our debt and stop inflation? Wouldn't that make the dollar strong against foreign currency and help the economy? This may be over simplified, but it just seems like there has to be a better, simplier way that how we've been doing things.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/03/28 22:25:18
    Pm
    Prices are not going up 3-5% a year..
    Here is a document to prove prices are stable
    http://www.bls.gov/news.relea...
    The price of oil is the main culprit in higher prices than the normal, annual inflation rate of 2%. We all know oil is needed to make and transport everything. Costs go up because of that. ^
    We can blame the 2001 Futures & Commodies Act for the prices per barrel of oil going up....This bill allowed anyone to become a oil speculator..Before only the companies who used the oil could speculate the prices for the futures market...Speculators are needed for pricing the oil a couple months down the line after purchase...Why? Whoever bought the oil it takes 3-4 months to get the oil for consumption.
  • spectacle Pm 2012/03/29 20:04:21
    spectacle
    +1
    In the first paragraph of the government website says that the price of all consumer price indexed items went up 2.9% over the last 12 months... which is closer to 3% than 2. That's been about the average rate of inflation since a gallon of gas cost 10 cents. Your *proof* contradicts your own statement.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/03/30 04:44:13
    Pm
    its 2-3% a year of infaltion. I dont get the point you are trying to make
  • spectacle Pm 2012/03/31 00:38:55
    spectacle
    +1
    It doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things what point I'm trying to make. I just wish there was a way to keep things the same price from year to year. From what I've heard from Ron Paul, it's possible.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/03/31 03:23:39
    Pm
    IF we would like to have an economy which never grows and stays at teh same level, then ya, it is possible. But as the econmy grows, wages increase, prices increase, and inflation is the aid for all this.
  • spectacle Pm 2012/04/02 06:04:26
    spectacle
    +1
    But all this really accomplishes is having bigger numbers attached to the same items. A gallon of milk one day may be a million dollars. But wages may be in the billions for minimum wage. Why? What's the point? We have bigger numbers just so we can claim that our economy is growing? It's pretty dumb if you ask me.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/04/02 23:37:08
  • spectacle Pm 2012/04/03 18:13:17
    spectacle
    I want you to consider the following scenario very carefully. Imagine an apartment in which a man and a wife live. They have children that live out of the house and have to pay child support. They both are working, making minimum wage, and while looking to get better jobs, they are living hand to mouth. They are unable to save money because they are just barely able to pay the bills.

    The price of oil (or whatever) is causing the price of things to go up every month (not every year, as explained in that government link you provided). There may come a time when their income won't be enough to sustain them. A year will pass and they will both get a %3 raise which will allow them to pay their bills again. But after a few months, because of the exponential growth in price, they won't be able to keep up. This is becoming a reality. It's not what anybody as told me. It's what I am observing for myself.

    If the numbers don't change from year to year, then a raise will mean more income. It will mean more affluence and buying power. It won't mean, just keeping up with inflation and possibly drowning in debt just to keep your head above water. I hope you can see the potential truth of this.
  • Pm spectacle 2012/04/03 19:28:15
    Pm
    There isn't an exponential growth in price...Please show me the empirical data to prove it..You can find the data to prove yourself wrong. Just check the ratio between prices and annual wages from any year in the past and compare to now.
    I agree with "the price of oil is making prices go up." But what we were talking about was the FED and the ability of the government to print money. You said, its the governments and the FED's fault for lowering the purchasing power..Which is not true..No data ever has suggested.
    Ron Paul says Ron Paul says Ron Paul says, people think for yourself. USE DATA not claims. How can you keep prices the same if without hindering the growth of our economy? The economy grows, the money supply grows with it. Prices go up because of our beautiful system of capitalism.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/24 15:28:19

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals