Originally Posted By: Derid

Paul thinks those should be decided at the State level.


No, he deflects this to the state level, knowing well that for places that are his natural base it is "the right way". It is not unlike if a liberal from New York stated that gun regulation should be decided at the municipal level.

Quote:
Personally I dont care who marries who and have always leaned pro choice.


Personally, I think that any candidate left of "legitimate rape" is fine, problem is that there are a lot of these rapists in the GOP. Any candidate that willing to uphold Roe vs. Wade is palatable to me.

Quote:
I just think that beside things like intentional wealth transfer, regressive taxation, and surveillance/police state.. those issues fade to literally nothingness in relative importance.


I actually agree. Free abortions on each corner while living in a police oligarchy is less desirable than otherwise free society that does not allow abortions.

If these issues were the only thing, I'd be voting libertarians. At the same time I am nowhere near as liberal as Jet.

My personal reason for holding the nose and sticking with Democrats through ugly and Ugly and UGLY is following:

They are the party that is not hell-bent on dismantling social nets and programs that I see as crucial to functioning society. Free society is impossible when people are allowed to starve on the streets. Free is only possible when the basic needs are addressed - food, shelter, healthcare. I am willing to be pragmatic about it and realize that resources to help are limited, but I absolutely could not get behind someone that sees people in need as lazy parasites living off the dole.

[Linked Image]