Most right leaning  will be voting against Obama. But the best part that most don't like him like they would Reagan, who ironically if Reagan ran today, could not pass the litmus test of the people who are settling for Romney.

Even Sanatorum after he dropped out a couple of days ago when asked by a reporter "That sounds like an endorsement" Santorum responded something to the affect "don't put words in my mouth, call it what you will". 

If the democrats pull out all the stops attacking Romney it should, SHOULD be easy, Kerry was Swift boated with far less flip flops. The issue is, will the DNC pull out all the stops?

To me it is Obama's to lose. But after the re-election of Bush the second time I won't put anything past the right wing.

Blame the plumber for the crap that stuck up the toilet.

You are voting for a stupid fucking utopia that does not exist. You want "every man for themselves" which is the same economic bullshit that got us into the great depression.

Glad you are wasting your vote. One less minion to stupidly attempt the utopia of anarchy which will never exist.

"I'm not for either", no, you are for right of right wing, economically speacking which is far worst than Romney and Romney is bat shit insane. Romney is for at least crumbs, well ruffie poison crumbs. You are for "die quickly if you don't have money".

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

Please do, because every vote you take away from Mitt is going to help out that evil commie black guy whom I will be voting for.

Poor daddy warbucks, my heart bleeds for you. You don't have to kill yourself, you just need to get your head out of your ass.

Mitt will simply implement the same Bush economics on steroids. So if you think things are bad now, if he wins say bye bye to your business as well. I think the only way you will pull your head out of your ass is if you lose everything yourself.

"Every man for themselves" "Let them eat cake". Yep, keep it up, maybe we can end up with the same slave wages and sweat shops as India and China.

Please vote for that third party, you'll be helping out Obama.

 Johnson's got some interesting ideas. I agree with his position of not spending money in other countries to rebuild their infrastructure. Unfortunately, I'm not a big fan of his not wanting to spend any money to rebuild ours. I'm also not thrilled about his reticence on taxing the unproductive rich and putting it on the poor and working class by "reforming" Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and taxing marijuana (don't know that many rich folk who smoke weed). 

I said "unwittingly" and "ignorantly".

You again, claim to hate both parties, but consistently said "I don't want the government to take my money", and "smaller government".

But when you complain about corruption nothing you have said or put forth would solve a damned thing even if you maximized your tax returns and government became smaller, it would still be corrupt and would still favor the money monopoly. You simply have a utopia mindset which is nothing more than the anarchist version of the republican party on steroids.

"SMALLER GOVERNMENT" depends on self introspection other than "getting rich is my only goal and fuck everyone else".

You support the republican party by proxy of the same mantras of "smaller government" less taxes". So if your version of "smaller government" and "less taxes" is not the same as what you claim BOTH parties have been using to fuck up the economy, then you have been nothing but an unwitting pawn convinced that if you go beyond the republican party to Libertarian corporate anarchy, things will get better.

MONEY has corrupted our political process and it is not the middle class and poor that have done it. You want government to protect your money, not the rights of those with less. Your cherry picking is the problem, not inequity, and not a free market. You simply bitch when you don't get what you want.

You want less people on the government dime? I gave you the solution. Cant and dont want to are two differnt things.

GIVE DIRECTLY in the form of better pay, lower prices, health care, income that can support a person on ONE job. Now, at your level not being a big business, I agree this CANNOT happen right now, because of MINDSET of the big corporate businesses. Pay gap dumping the tax burden on the middle class and poor AND YOU is what has caused this mess.

The same mindset caused the great depression. What got us out of it was INVESTMENT and lower pay gap AND higher taxes. And the building we did WENT TO PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.

You support the IDEA, the MOTIF which allows those at the top to fuck even you over. You are not in the same weight class as Wal Mart or GE. You keep siding with the likes of them you'll be lucky to keep your business. It is the climate, the motif, the idea I object to.

YOUR IDEAS of "smaller government" and "lower taxes" can only work when the private sector behaves itself which at the top HAS NOT. All you advocate is money equals power and might makes right. It is screwing you over and pushing you down and you are too stupid to realize it.

Oh, ok... now we're starting to see eye-to-eye. That's fine: I don't think minarchy is meaningful if it continues the habits of the older system of government.

You're right; people buying homes/shit they could barely afford on a really good day did cause this.

And... what, inherently, is wrong with that?

Nothing like what you advocate, but consumers and laborers have viable options to deal with the economic problems they face, currently. They just haven't exercised their basic right to it, yet: collective bargaining. Consumers can do it (boycotting, consumer advocacy groups) and laborers can do it (unions).

Brian... lotsa a people say that while having almost NO idea whatsoever is involved with the developed world's education expenses (namely the education budgets of the US, which are laughably bloated and *COUGH* a tremendous financial strain in most civic regards.)

Here's an alternative until leftists arguing for the world to "throw more money at the problem" educate themselves on the actual numbers involved; educate your own fucking children instead of having the state pay for it. It can be done in a secular context, and it can EASILY outclass a public education any day of the week. The fact that so many secularists lean towards "OMFG PUBLIC SCHOOLZ!!1" demonstrates a rather fucked up (and tautological) ideological bias on behalf of numerous atheists, here.

In a nation as fucked up as ours, I think it's very much safe to say that public school is no longer the automatic answer for educating teens and kids in an unbiased and secular environment.

People are already being paid livable wages; otherwise they would be living in their cars and starving. You want to get paid moar?! (queue Oscar-esque "MMMMOOOAARRR?!" from the speakers)

Look for a job from someone else, then.

Paradox/nonintelligible

I think you like making false and distorted claims about people on this site just for shits and giggles, personally.

Someone probably said the same thing about pagan witches, once.

There's always a useful scapegoat, right?