Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
MSD, is the Veep a deal breaker for you? Who would you like to see with Obama other than Richardson? Are gun control and immigration your core issues like pro-choice is for onesnowyowl? Are they "non-negotiable"?
|
In this case I see the VP as strengthening the ticket.
Gun control is a big deal for me because I've been on both sides of the fence and no argument that I used when I was anti-gun and no rationale for gun control that I believe in has stood up to the simple test of looking at the facts. It's not entirely because I'm clinging to my guns, I see it as a test of whether a candidate is intellectually honest enough to look at the quantifiable facts and make a decision that may be counterintuitive or contradictory to emotions around the issue.
The main reason I'm leaving the Libertarian party is because my disgust with 4 of 5 leading candidates who were competing for the nomination had immigration policies that ranged from xenophobic to outright racist, and I find that kind of thinking deplorable.
The two issues are negotiable, but I will not vote for someone who I think will actively attempt to enact draconian gun control measures (fortunately, I think Obama realizes that another assault weapons ban would be political suicide, and picking someone like Richardson would be a sign that he's willing to move away from his formerly extremist stance.) I will not vote for someone who sees immigrants, even illegal ones, as less that human. Border security, to me, should be a way to keep known terrorists and wanted criminals out of the country, not a way to keep foreigners out. If someone sees a massive influx of people into the country as potentially harmful and has some sort of evidence to back it up, I consider it a political disagreement rather than a dealbreaker.