What issue is so important to you that a candidate would take where you would not vote for him?

At this point, there is still a primary, so a vote weeds someone out.  I don't mean in a general election.  There are NO ISSUES that would make me vote for any Democrat!

For myself, stand on illegal immigration is the most important. 

Wondering how others feel.

DaisyJane     

Quote from: DaisyJane on September 30, 2014, 02:14:36 PM
What issue is so important to you that a candidate would take where you would not vote for him?

At this point, there is still a primary, so a vote weeds someone out.  I don't mean in a general election.  There are NO ISSUES that would make me vote for any Democrat!

For myself, stand on illegal immigration is the most important. 

Wondering how others feel.

DaisyJane     

I am not a single issue voter. I attempt to put all their positions in a package. However. open borders and amnesty would be a very big negative to me.

I don't mean this as a one issue voter thing. 

The primary is a place to get your most important issue dealt with.  For the general election, I could compromise.  I would have voted for Romney NO MATTER WHAT over Obama.

I take special exception of allowing people in this country sucking our assets from us.  NOPE for me.

DaisyJane     

The #1 and most important issue is our 2nd Amendment rights hands down.  I would never vote for ANYONE who was anti-2nd Amendment.  Romney at one point in time was anti-gun; then changed his tune; something that for me was very concerning, and for that matter still is.

Without our 2nd Amendment rights, we will have no rights period.

Right now, amnesty and illegal immigration is the single greatest threat to this country.

That's why I say Ted Cruz is the ONLY best choice. Others, among those generally considered Tea Party, seem, to varying degrees, to be at least open to that annoying phrase "a path to citizenship." The country would be better off if we ended ALL immigration for thew next generation. The country is no longer a "melting pot," but as Paul Harvey once said, a "boiling cauldron"

This generation of immigrant misfits (since 1965), needs to either become Americanized, or we wait them out until they all die off.

But as far as your question, I am not a "single issue" voter. In the end, I will vote for the most conservative candidate possible, but I will vote!  I just hope a true conservative, and not a Progressive, makes it thru the Primary.

Quote from: carlb on September 30, 2014, 04:40:34 PM
Right now, amnesty and illegal immigration is the single greatest threat to this country.

That's why I say Ted Cruz is the ONLY best choice. Others, among those generally considered Tea Party, seem, to varying degrees, to be at least open to that annoying phrase "a path to citizenship." The country would be better off if we ended ALL immigration for the next generation. The country is no longer a "melting pot," but as Paul Harvey once said, a "boiling cauldron"

This generation of immigrant misfits (since 1965), needs to either become Americanized, or we wait them out until they all die off.

But as far as your question, I am not a "single issue" voter. In the end, I will vote for the most conservative candidate possible, but I will vote!  I just hope a true conservative, and not a Progressive, makes it thru the Primary.

National security...that encompases many things, Illegal immigrants, border security, fighting terrorism,(in the US and Abroad) strong foreign policy, strong support for the Military.

I would have to cite the 2nd amendment as being the most important to me.  National security running second.  The candidate(s) I vote for will have to have had a strong stand on these two issues, not having had waverings of his/her ideals during any point of their political careers.

I wouldn't vote for any Congressman or Senator who endorsed communist revolution.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sanders-ready-to-preach-revolution-to-democrats-2014-10-01


I was shocked the last time I heard Max Baucus speak, and I was shocked at some of the language used by the IBEW at the Labor Day Picnic, 2012.  Baucus will soon be  Ambassador to red China. He concentrates  on corporations and unfair wealth distribution. Now the talk is going mainstream.

         One thing stands out. Bernie Sanders  is not saying what he 
has in mind as a course of action. Neither does Max.  What they do 
is point their fingers at employers and wealthy people and say,  "See
there. There's your problem. It is those greedy rich people and the
businesses they own."  Then, they leave it up to us to conclude that
if we vote for one of them, they will ease our pain legislatively.  That
is implied.

         Correct me if I err, but I think the term is "demagoguery"  In the strictest
sense, Hillary, Bernie, Nancy, Maxine, Barack, Michelle, Eric, and Al are all demagogues,
by one or another definition of the word, more and more, just by being Democrats.
The difference, though, between Barack and a true demagogue is that a true demagogue
endorses immediate action.  Our demagogues in the Democratic and American Communist
Parties use the rhetoric of the demagogue to intimidate and threaten Republicans,
and energize their base.


Definition:
A demagogue /ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/ (from French "demagogue", derived in turn from the Greek "demos" = people/folk and the verb "ago" = carry/manipulate thus "people's manipulator") or rabble-rouser is a political leader in a democracy who appeals to the emotions, fears, prejudices, and ignorance of the lower classes in order to gain power and promote political motives. Demagogues usually oppose deliberation and advocate immediate, violent action to address a national crisis; they accuse moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness. Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient Athens. They exploit a fundamental weakness in democracy: because ultimate power is held by the people, nothing stops the people from giving that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.

I for one could never vote for someone who would criminalize human intimacy with caterpillars.

Quote from: AndyJackson on October 01, 2014, 10:50:22 AM
I for one could never vote for someone who would criminalize human intimacy with caterpillars.

Huh?  Hey pal, I didn't get this one.       

Quote from: AndyJackson on October 01, 2014, 10:50:22 AM
I for one could never vote for someone who would criminalize human intimacy with caterpillars.

That's OK. I stepped on my caterpillar last night.

My deal breaking issue is illegal immigration and the failure to stop it.  I, too, am tired of the "Path to citizenship" jargon, and want illegals to be sent back to wherever they came from, no matter their age, and require that they enter this country the legal way, by applying for admission as most of our forefathers did.

And a candidate must support Israel.  I am not Jewish nor do I believe that everything Israel does is right, but I so detest Muslims that I support anyone or any country who recognizes them for their true selves--bloodthirsty demons.

     You're right on about that, Andy. I think anyone who wants
to marry a caterpillar, settle down and raise little caterpillars,
I say, don't you dare say anything agin that boy (or girls.)

Spending, spending, and spending. It will be the fall of our nation.

I'm with Bronx on spending. After that illegal immigration. It's insane to allow illegals in, when we have this many people unemployed.