PDA

View Full Version : Results of Iowa State Republican Caucus


Tyburn
01-04-2012, 04:49 PM
Yesterday the Citizens of the State of Iowa were asked to decide which of the six Republican Candidates they wanted to back as the Presidential Candidate

The State has spoken.

Iowa State has decided to back Mitt Romney....But incase you are wondering, the gap between poll and second place for Rick Santorum is LESS then TEN votes :blink:

Ron Paul came Third. Newt Whats-his-chops came Fourth, Rick Perry came Penultamate and that Woman came last...and because of that she has decided she doesnt want to be President anymore and pulled out :laugh:

Tyburn
01-04-2012, 04:53 PM
meanwhile Sole Candidate and Current sitting President addressed Democrat Caucauses via Video Link. Democracy is fantastic when your the sole nomination for your party I suppose...Sucks to be a Democrat if you dont like Barack Obama at times like these I would have thought.

Miss Foxy
01-04-2012, 05:01 PM
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rearnakedchoke
01-04-2012, 05:23 PM
i doubt the GOP will be able to get anyone who can derail BHO ... but we shall see ..

Miss Foxy
01-04-2012, 05:38 PM
i doubt the GOP will be able to get anyone who can derail BHO ... but we shall see ..

Good thing your vote or lack of vote won't affect the GOP.. Regardless of what you the Canadian says Americans don't like the change...Most are realizing they were played like fools. We will take the nation back. He's not that popular maybe in Compton or Harlem, but Americans really don't march to his beat.

rearnakedchoke
01-04-2012, 05:41 PM
Good thing your vote or lack of vote won't affect the GOP.. Regardless of what you the Canadian says Americans don't like the change...Most are realizing they were played like fools. We will take the nation back. He's not that popular maybe in Compton or Harlem, but Americans really don't march to his beat.

ok

adamt
01-04-2012, 05:55 PM
last night at midnight it showed 100 percent reporting and it had santorum up by 34 votes this morning it had romney winning by 8 votes :blink:


semms a little fishy to me



anyways, romney didn't get anymore support than he did four years ago, so that is not a good sign, he spent oodles of money of negative ads here in iowa and i never saw a single santorum ad on tv. so the real winner is santorum, by a landslide, if romney can't win iowa with all the money he had and spent here, then i don't think he can beat barack.... santorum on the other hand basically won with no money against the establishments candidate and it is pretty well a given that all who voted for bachmann would gave voted for santorum and most of the people that voted for perry and gingrich would have too, so i think the results are a very poor indication of who should be the nominee

flo
01-04-2012, 07:55 PM
last night at midnight it showed 100 percent reporting and it had santorum up by 34 votes this morning it had romney winning by 8 votes :blink:


semms a little fishy to me



anyways, romney didn't get anymore support than he did four years ago, so that is not a good sign, he spent oodles of money of negative ads here in iowa and i never saw a single santorum ad on tv. so the real winner is santorum, by a landslide, if romney can't win iowa with all the money he had and spent here, then i don't think he can beat barack.... santorum on the other hand basically won with no money against the establishments candidate and it is pretty well a given that all who voted for bachmann would gave voted for santorum and most of the people that voted for perry and gingrich would have too, so i think the results are a very poor indication of who should be the nominee

Adam, all the polls have consistently showed Romney as the candidate that would best unseat Obama.

As far as the closeness of the race, I could equally say that Santorum was the big loser as he has spent most of his time and money there, visited every single county - some more than once - whereas Romney spent little time and money there.

Take a look at the polls. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/)

Chris F
01-04-2012, 08:46 PM
Biggest loser is the American people. Real conservatives will not vote for Mitt. So they will either no show or vote third party thus ensuring another 4 years of Obama

Miss Foxy
01-04-2012, 08:53 PM
Biggest loser is the American people. Real conservatives will not vote for Mitt. So they will either no show or vote third party thus ensuring another 4 years of Obama

Perhaps, but there are plenty of moderate Republicans who will .. :laugh:

NateR
01-04-2012, 09:49 PM
that Woman

Her name is Michele Bachmann, Dave. Also, she beat out Jon Huntsman, Herman Cain and Buddy Roemer; so she didn't come in last.

Here are the official numbers:

Mitt Romney - 30015 - 24.6%
Rick Santorum - 30007 - 24.5%
Ron Paul - 26219 - 21.4%
Newt Gingrich - 16251 - 13.3%
Rick Perry - 12604 - 10.3%
Michele Bachmann - 6073 - 5%
Jon Huntsman - 745 - 0.6%
Herman Cain - 58 - 0%
Buddy Roemer - 31 - 0%
No Preference - 135 - 0.1%
Other - 117 - 0.1%

Tyburn
01-04-2012, 10:07 PM
Oh...I thought there were only six of them :blink: are the ones below her still in it to win it...or have they all gone now also :huh:

adamt
01-04-2012, 10:10 PM
Adam, all the polls have consistently showed Romney as the candidate that would best unseat Obama.

As far as the closeness of the race, I could equally say that Santorum was the big loser as he has spent most of his time and money there, visited every single county - some more than once - whereas Romney spent little time and money there.

Take a look at the polls. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/)

i am not sure i can go along with those polls, there were polls saying gingrich would win, herman cain was doing well for a while,..... anything can happen and the only poll that is accurate is the only done on election day

alot of those polls on there still have santorum as a sixth place finisher, there is just too much that goes on to put much stake in polls right now

romney spent 4.3 million in iowa, mostly on negative ads and yes, his super pac spent 3.4 million, he skipped over us, santorum spent 500,000 and still tied romney



one article today claims romney did worse than he did four years ago, and county by county shows that the only way romney won was by carrying the super liberal counties of iowa

the only reason they thing romney will win is because he is a moderate and will pull dem votes or cause dems not to vote, but i would hate to see a moderate get it, and it didn't work too well last time with mccain anyways, that and he has money:


COST PER VOTE=
Perry: $480 per vote, Romney: $156, Paul: $104, Gingrich: $92, Santorum: $24, Bachmann: $4.


not to mention romney has all the supporters he can get, and the rest are split between the rest of the field.... it is safe to say most of perry and bachmans supporters would have went for santorum, gingrichs voters would have been split

Chris F
01-04-2012, 10:49 PM
Perhaps, but there are plenty of moderate Republicans who will .. :laugh:

There is not enough of them to beat Obama. A GOP cannot win wihtout the right wing of the party

Tyburn
01-04-2012, 11:04 PM
The good news is...this is only the first...as I understand it, all the States have to vote to back a Candidate and the highest number of backings wins the nomination

Nevermind the presidency...we havent strictly speaking got a Candidate at all yet to stand against Obama...at present they stand only against each other....its part of what I dislike about the way American Politics works...in order to try and get a candidate against Barack, they try and split the party into supporting different members...with the danger IMHO of causing a civil conflict within the party itself...as one Republican tries to out-do another Republican...and as nominations dwindle...so might the ammount of people who vote.

There maybe some Republicans who have their favourite and who will abstain if their Favourite doesnt become the Contender to Barack Obama...its a false assumption to believe that as numbers dwindle, Republican voters will simply switch to the next...until they all vote for the same guy..it just doesnt happen like that in politics...as you wipe out nominations, you risk wiping out the voters who support those nominations...and as that gets nasty betweeen the last few nominations, its the exact time when the actual Ellection begins...leaving the Opposition Party almost certainly knackered and divided as they go against the Ruling Elite (unless of course the sitting President has come to the end of the line...)

It just seems a lot of work and stress on the party not in power...Thank goodness there are many more Caucauses to go hey :w00t: Ideally...the only way to do this so the Party is in the healthiest position possible, is to have one Nomination stand so far ahead of everyone else its incontestable...Like one person getting 50 percent for example. The sooner its obvious whose won the better...a close race will not prove to ever be in the parties interest if this is the method of your Ellection.

flo
01-04-2012, 11:07 PM
Biggest loser is the American people. Real conservatives will not vote for Mitt. So they will either no show or vote third party thus ensuring another 4 years of Obama

Chris, I respectfully disagree. I'm a conservative and I will vote for him because the alternative is another 4 years of Barack Obama. Many will do the same.

flo
01-04-2012, 11:13 PM
i am not sure i can go along with those polls,

But Adam, it's not a question of you going along with it; statistics are statistics. I was linking you to that site so you could see that Romney does indeed have the best and most consistent numbers to beat Obama head to head. Those statistics have not changed.

We better hope poor loser Gingrich doesn't keep on with his enmity towards Mitt (which is weird anyway as Ron Paul had the most negative Gingrich ads in Iowa) - all it will do is play into Obama's hands.

Vizion
01-04-2012, 11:37 PM
I like Santorum more than Romney.

I will plug my nose and vote for Romney, but his politics and Mormonism are not a good thing.

Still, Obama is a COLLOSAL failure and has gots to go!

Vizion
01-04-2012, 11:38 PM
Chris - don't stay home on election day!

I know a lot of Christian-conservatives weren't crazy for McCain and did stay home.

Look what we got because of that :cry:

flo
01-04-2012, 11:51 PM
I like Santorum more than Romney.

I will plug my nose and vote for Romney, but his politics and Mormonism are not a good thing.

Still, Obama is a COLLOSAL failure and has gots to go!

I like Santorum more too, Vizion. He, Bachmann and Perry come closest to my own personal views. But whether I like it or not, the Republican nominee needs to be able to attract moderate and independent voters to win the election.

I'll ask Chris not to stay home too! Romney is a whole lot better than what we have now.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 02:16 AM
Chris, I respectfully disagree. I'm a conservative and I will vote for him because the alternative is another 4 years of Barack Obama. Many will do the same.

1. A vote for he lesser of two evils is still EVIL.

2. Romans 13 is clear the person who wins the election is who God wants in office and thus I can vote or note vote with a clean conscience instead of lowering my standards to vote for a person who is not constitutionally sound.

So if you want to vote for evil then be my guest. But I refuse to vote for any man or women who does not fit my standards or passes constitutional mustard.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 02:19 AM
Chris - don't stay home on election day!

I know a lot of Christian-conservatives weren't crazy for McCain and did stay home.

Look what we got because of that :cry:

See my post to Flo. I would rather have my body covered in paper cuts and dipped in lemon than vote for a unconstitutional moderate or a Mormon. Sorry that is just how I feel.

flo
01-05-2012, 02:50 AM
1. A vote for he lesser of two evils is still EVIL.

2. Romans 13 is clear the person who wins the election is who God wants in office and thus I can vote or note vote with a clean conscience instead of lowering my standards to vote for a person who is not constitutionally sound.

So if you want to vote for evil then be my guest. But I refuse to vote for any man or women who does not fit my standards or passes constitutional mustard.

Mitt Romney is hardly evil. Take a deep breath and think about 4 more years of Barack Obama.

As far as "constitutionally sound" goes, how did you like Obama's power grab today? Just more shredding of the constitution. Your "standards" of not supporting his opponent are naive at best and if enough people do the same you can congratulate yourselves for giving Obama has another term.

flo
01-05-2012, 02:58 AM
I would rather have my body covered in paper cuts and dipped in lemon than vote for a unconstitutional moderate or a Mormon.

Wow. For someone who claims to believe so deeply in the Constitution, you don't care much about the First Amendment/Freedom of Religion part. You aren't voting for your pastor, you're voting for the leader of ALL the people of the United States.

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 01:31 PM
1. A vote for he lesser of two evils is still EVIL.

2. Romans 13 is clear the person who wins the election is who God wants in office and thus I can vote or note vote with a clean conscience instead of lowering my standards to vote for a person who is not constitutionally sound.

So if you want to vote for evil then be my guest. But I refuse to vote for any man or women who does not fit my standards or passes constitutional mustard.

i have to agree with this .. the opposition is just grasping at straws to find someone who will beat obama and not necessarily do a good job himself, thus moving away from their beliefs ... i guess if the people are willing to shoot themselves in the foot, or even cut off their nose to spite their face, that is fine .. but i agree with you Chris .. if you don't feel one of the candidates meet your standards, you shouldn't vote

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 01:44 PM
Oh...I thought there were only six of them :blink: are the ones below her still in it to win it...or have they all gone now also :huh:

she still did awful, hence her withdrawl .. herman suspended his campaign .. huntsman is still in it i believe and he did worse .. she didn't have a chance from the start .. she makes palin look like a genius .. well, palin is a genius .. but still ...

NateR
01-05-2012, 01:59 PM
See my post to Flo. I would rather have my body covered in paper cuts and dipped in lemon than vote for a unconstitutional moderate or a Mormon. Sorry that is just how I feel.

I would actually be very conflicted voting for a Mormon as well. I'm hoping Romney does not get the nomination.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 04:31 PM
Mitt Romney is hardly evil. Take a deep breath and think about 4 more years of Barack Obama.

As far as "constitutionally sound" goes, how did you like Obama's power grab today? Just more shredding of the constitution. Your "standards" of not supporting his opponent are naive at best and if enough people do the same you can congratulate yourselves for giving Obama has another term.

Flo did you ignore # 2 on my list. If Obama wins then God wants him to have 4 more years. How we vote is meaningless to anything but our own consciences. Obama is a socialist to the highest degree. However what he did Yesterday is what every president has done since Thomas Jefferson. His problem is he did not wait till they were in recess longer. The modern day presidents have found a loop hole. The reason they had recess appointments was because the congress was not in session year around like today. They were in session then went home to be farmers and lawyers and such. They need to amend it to remove the recess appointments and bring back real checks and balances.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 04:47 PM
Wow. For someone who claims to believe so deeply in the Constitution, you don't care much about the First Amendment/Freedom of Religion part. You aren't voting for your pastor, you're voting for the leader of ALL the people of the United States.

Flo this is a debate you cannot win sister. First of all the first amendment was set up to keep the feds from starting a national church. Why people are still so ignorant to think it was anything else is beyond me. Fisher Ames the author of the first amendment even wrote a long essay on its meaning and Madison who co authored it wrote a series of papers explaining it. Also the debate in the constitutional congress are transcribed and they all say the same thing. Up until the 1840's most all states had state churches paid for by state governments. So this idea that the 1 st amendment is anything close to a separation of church and state really needs a civics lesson.


Secondly, when we were founded almost all had a religious litmus test for their vote. In some states you could not even be nominated if you were not a member of a church and an actives participant in the church. But that is just the tip of that iceberg. In fact the first Chief Justice of the SCOTUS said this:

John Jay

(America's first Supreme Court Chief Justice and Co-Author of the Federalist Papers)

October 12, 1816

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."

So you ask me if I want a cultist Mormon in the white house. NO WAY. Just like I do not want the closet MUSLIM that is there now. We have a duty as Christians to vote for Godly people of good morals and Christian principals. This is a big reason why since 92 the year I was able to vote I have never cast a vote for GOP or DNC candidate. I vote my conscience not my FEARS.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 04:48 PM
i have to agree with this .. the opposition is just grasping at straws to find someone who will beat obama and not necessarily do a good job himself, thus moving away from their beliefs ... i guess if the people are willing to shoot themselves in the foot, or even cut off their nose to spite their face, that is fine .. but i agree with you Chris .. if you don't feel one of the candidates meet your standards, you shouldn't vote

Thanks man. :)

flo
01-05-2012, 04:53 PM
i have to agree with this .. the opposition is just grasping at straws to find someone who will beat obama and not necessarily do a good job himself, thus moving away from their beliefs ... i guess if the people are willing to shoot themselves in the foot, or even cut off their nose to spite their face, that is fine .. but i agree with you Chris .. if you don't feel one of the candidates meet your standards, you shouldn't vote

Says the Obama supporter. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

I would actually be very conflicted voting for a Mormon as well. I'm hoping Romney does not get the nomination.

Why? Are you passing judgement on someone whose beliefs don't mirror yours? In your average lifetime, you will probably get the privilege of voting for 15 people in presidential elections. How many of those people do you suppose would be evangelical Christians?

Flo did you ignore # 2 on my list. If Obama wins then God wants him to have 4 more years. How we vote is meaningless to anything but our own consciences.

Yes, I did see your #2 Chris, and to be honest with you, I just disregarded it. Do you not believe that God gave us free will? That we do actually make decisions every day that guide the course of history? Just shrugging your shoulders and saying "It's God's Will" is naive, in my opinion. And it *is* just my opinion, I like you Chris, and respect your knowledge of history and particularly of the bible.

What if you had cancer? Are you going to sit back with no action on your part to seek a cure and just say "It's God's Will"?

Chris F
01-05-2012, 05:09 PM
Says the Obama supporter. :laugh::laugh::laugh:



Why? Are you passing judgement on someone whose beliefs don't mirror yours? In your average lifetime, you will probably get the privilege of voting for 15 people in presidential elections. How many of those people do you suppose would be evangelical Christians?



Yes, I did see your #2 Chris, and to be honest with you, I just disregarded it. Do you not believe that God gave us free will? That we do actually make decisions every day that guide the course of history? Just shrugging your shoulders and saying "It's God's Will" is naive, in my opinion. And it *is* just my opinion, I like you Chris, and respect your knowledge of history and particularly of the bible.

What if you had cancer? Are you going to sit back with no action on your part to seek a cure and just say "It's God's Will"?

You can disregard me all you like but the bible is truth and not subject to your voting preferences.

Romans 13

1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.


ALL civil authorities are from GOD. Sometimes he allows bad ones to get the people in line to return to him. For example if the Cesar when Jesus was born not there he would have never ordered a census and Joesph would have no reason to go to Bethlehem and thus the prophecy would not have been fulfilled. God uses the good and the evil ones to achieve his will and purpose for His people. Yes God allows free will and w can vote for whoever we choose but our vote does not mean that is who God wants. Another example Israel wanted a king like everyone else. God let them and bad things happened. He used their bad idea to make his will work.

The bible is clear all leaders are ordained of God so if Obama wins that is who God ordained to be in there. If the cultist Mormon wins then that is who he wants in there. So I can vote with a clear conscience.

Besides that I live is the reddest state in America. Our electoral college votes are going for the GOP no matter how I or if I vote.


OMT- Flo I had cancer. And it was God's will for me to have it. Had I died of it I would have not been bitter because I got cancer. God is God we are not. He is either sovereign or he is not. Bible says not even a sparrow falls from the sky w/o him knowing it. Nothing we do will change so much to catch God of guard. What you are saying here makes it sound like you do not think God is Omniscient or Omnipotent. I know that is not what you believe based on your comment in the past but when you say things like that it makes it sound that way. I am prepared to accept whatever God gives me because he said he will never give us more than we can bare. God bless Flo. What makes America great is we can have opinions.

NateR
01-05-2012, 05:10 PM
Why? Are you passing judgement on someone whose beliefs don't mirror yours? In your average lifetime, you will probably get the privilege of voting for 15 people in presidential elections. How many of those people do you suppose would be evangelical Christians?

I never said that I wasn't going to vote. Just that I would feel conflicted voting for someone who adheres to an apostate religion like Mormonism. Regardless of who is on the Republican ticket, I will show up on election day to make sure that my vote AGAINST OBAMA is recorded.

We had a public service announcement that ran on AFN while I was in Korea, during the 2000 elections. It stated that not voting is like giving two votes to the opposition.

In other words, if I show up and I'm the only person who votes for the Republican candidate and there is only one other person who has already voted for the Democrat. That puts the results of the election at 1-1. So the Democrat now needs a third person to vote for him, so that he can win the election with 2 votes. However, if I never bothered to show up, then that third vote would not have been necessary and the Democrat would have won the election with just one vote. So, not voting is like giving two votes to the other side.... :unsure-1:

Now, I've been trying to process that logic in my head for the last 12 years, but it sorta kinda makes sense in a very simplistic way. :laugh:

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 05:10 PM
^^^

well i didn't vote for him the first time around .. LOL .. well, not directly .. i have 4 family members in florida who vote and convinced them all to change their vote for barack ..

i am just an outsider looking in and telling it how i see it ...

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 05:11 PM
flo .. would you vote for a republican if he or she happened to be a muslim?

Chris F
01-05-2012, 05:20 PM
I never said that I wasn't going to vote. Just that I would feel conflicted voting for someone who adheres to an apostate religion like Mormonism. Regardless of who is on the Republican ticket, I will show up on election day to make sure that my vote AGAINST OBAMA is recorded.

We had a public service announcement that ran on AFN while I was in Korea, during the 2000 elections. It stated that not voting is like giving two votes to the opposition.

In other words, if I show up and I'm the only person who votes for the Republican candidate and there is only one other person who has already voted for the Democrat. That puts the results of the election at 1-1. So the Democrat now needs a third person to vote for him, so that he can win the election with 2 votes. However, if I never bothered to show up, then that third vote would not have been necessary and the Democrat would have won the election with just one vote. So, not voting is like giving two votes to the other side.... :unsure-1:

Now, I've been trying to process that logic in my head for the last 12 years, but it sorta kinda makes sense in a very simplistic way. :laugh:

If you can live with that by all means. What if the choice were Saddam or Hitler. Would you still vote for Saddam because he killed less people and did less evil? Mitt and Obama are 2 heads of the same monster. Both are socialist. Both ignore the constitution. Both serve a god that is not the God of the Bible. So when it boils down to it they are not much different. I think we should worry more about local races and congressional races. Especially the Senate.

Miss Foxy
01-05-2012, 05:22 PM
flo .. would you vote for a republican if he or she happened to be a muslim?

I would most definitely NOT.. Unlike Muslims Mormons don't wish death for Christians...

Miss Foxy
01-05-2012, 05:22 PM
I never said that I wasn't going to vote. Just that I would feel conflicted voting for someone who adheres to an apostate religion like Mormonism. Regardless of who is on the Republican ticket, I will show up on election day to make sure that my vote AGAINST OBAMA is recorded.

We had a public service announcement that ran on AFN while I was in Korea, during the 2000 elections. It stated that not voting is like giving two votes to the opposition.

In other words, if I show up and I'm the only person who votes for the Republican candidate and there is only one other person who has already voted for the Democrat. That puts the results of the election at 1-1. So the Democrat now needs a third person to vote for him, so that he can win the election with 2 votes. However, if I never bothered to show up, then that third vote would not have been necessary and the Democrat would have won the election with just one vote. So, not voting is like giving two votes to the other side.... :unsure-1:

Now, I've been trying to process that logic in my head for the last 12 years, but it sorta kinda makes sense in a very simplistic way. :laugh:

We need your vote Mr. Rosario.. I get what your saying, but what can be worse than Obama? :laugh:

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 05:22 PM
I would most definitely NOT.. Unlike Muslims Mormons don't wish death for Christians...

yeah, but the constitution provides for freedom of religion?

Chris F
01-05-2012, 05:40 PM
yeah, but the constitution provides for freedom of religion?

Actually when it was written it covered christian denominations only. Muslims were not allowed to vote or run for office. In fact they were not allowed to live in 12 of the 13 states. Most all Eastern religions were not protected.

As for Mormons they were not invented yet so hard to say if they would have had protection under the 1 st amendment as it was initially written.

flo
01-05-2012, 06:06 PM
OMT- Flo I had cancer. And it was God's will for me to have it.

I'm sorry, Chris. I didn't realize that, had I known I would never have made that analogy.

We do have our different opinions and I'm glad we can express them freely here. I believe in God will all my heart. You, Nate and Adam take a more literal view of the Word than I do. But someday everything will be explained to all of us. In the meantime, I appreciate having the Christianity section here on the forums, I know this topic has drifted in that direction.

Chris F
01-05-2012, 06:22 PM
I'm sorry, Chris. I didn't realize that, had I known I would never have made that analogy.

We do have our different opinions and I'm glad we can express them freely here. I believe in God will all my heart. You, Nate and Adam take a more literal view of the Word than I do. But someday everything will be explained to all of us. In the meantime, I appreciate having the Christianity section here on the forums, I know this topic has drifted in that direction.

No problem at all Flo. I found no offense with the analogy. :)

flo
01-05-2012, 06:37 PM
I would most definitely NOT.. Unlike Muslims Mormons don't wish death for Christians...

Yes, same here and for the same reason. Although if a moderate Muslim was running against Obama, I'd probably vote for them. Sharia law really scares me which is the main reason I'd have to think long and hard before voting for a Muslim.

rockdawg already called me a hypocrite so go ahead and do the same, rnc. :laugh: Religion usually doesn't play a part in my voting decisions but I'd be hesitant to vote for an atheist as well.

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 07:29 PM
Yes, same here and for the same reason. Although if a moderate Muslim was running against Obama, I'd probably vote for them. Sharia law really scares me which is the main reason I'd have to think long and hard before voting for a Muslim.

rockdawg already called me a hypocrite so go ahead and do the same, rnc. :laugh: Religion usually doesn't play a part in my voting decisions but I'd be hesitant to vote for an atheist as well.

i am not calling you a hypocrite .. and you did say you'd vote for a moderate muslim ... i saw a documentary yesterday something like Love Crimes of Kabul or something .. based on sharia .. crazy stuff ...

flo
01-05-2012, 08:06 PM
i am not calling you a hypocrite ...

I was just teasing, rnc. :wink: Obviously, I still feel a little hurt about rockdawg saying that...he's my friend!

Miss Foxy
01-05-2012, 08:24 PM
I was just teasing, rnc. :wink: Obviously, I still feel a little hurt about rockdawg saying that...he's my friend!

Don't feel hurt.. Part of the beauty here we can bash each other one day then be friends the next :wink:..You have given me hell and vice versa, but we are adults and at the end of the day have each others best interests at hand.. And Rockdawg is constantly giving me grief over my fighter tastes! haha. He's a character...

flo
01-05-2012, 08:37 PM
Don't feel hurt.. Part of the beauty here we can bash each other one day then be friends the next :wink:..You have given me hell and vice versa, but we are adults and at the end of the day have each others best interests at hand.. And Rockdawg is constantly giving me grief over my fighter tastes! haha. He's a character...

Thank you for saying that.

{{Miss Foxy}}

rearnakedchoke
01-05-2012, 11:10 PM
I was just teasing, rnc. :wink: Obviously, I still feel a little hurt about rockdawg saying that...he's my friend!

yeah, rockdawg is cool ... he was just being himself .. LOL ... its that foxy you have to worry about ... whatever she says, she means and it can't be taken back!!!!! beware