Bush vs. Badnarik

[weallbleed]

See signature. Badnarik is too extreme for me, but Bush is just an utter disaster.

I think Badnarik would win. Libertarian-orientated conservatives and people made at Bush's constant spending would vote for him, and the liberals would as well, simply as part of ABB. Even if they don't agree with Badnarik, they'd at most stay home, almost none would vote for Bush. Plus they'd prefer Badnarik's foreign policy as well.

Might I also point out various liberal groups and PACs could advertise that Badnarik's more extreme agenda would never pass anyway, so he's less dangerous than Bush.

So my guess with Badnarik in red:

[Bono]

I think Badnarik would do very well & possibly beat Bush in the "leave us alone" west- Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, & maybe the Nebraska 3rd (also, he could do well enough in western South Dakota to win the whole state); I think he could also win the Maine 2nd with it's history of strong showings for 3rd party candidates(see Ross Perot 1992.) New Hampishire might be a possibility also.

Bush:  520
Badnarik:  18

I think you are assuming that they would not have the same conditions at running.
We're talking about them being both the big-shot candidates.
Why, for instance, would CA vote for Bush over Badnarik?

[dbpman]

Explain, I'm interested to hear if you think a Government could function without proper taxation.

See 1788 to 1861...  its not like the idea of a government working solely on duties, imposts and excises tarriffs on imports is anything new to this country

[nomorelies]

I want TAXES to be abolished.

[DA]

No taxes = no government

um.. no.

Explain, I'm interested to hear if you think a Government could function without proper taxation.

Everything that gets used has a fee for using it. Get rid of deficit, start profiting off of foriegn countries, invest extra money. Any good financial advisor will tell you that after you've cleared your debt and are making more than just living paycheck to paycheck, save up the equvilant of 6 months (give or take depending on the advisor) pay. After you have that emergency fund invest in your immediate future (aggresive, and moderate mutual funds) for your retirement (conservative growth markets and bonds). If the government (especially federal) operated like a smart investor, then we shouldn't ever have money problems. We should be able to save up enough to try out new government programmes when we want to on a trial bases and not have to worry about the money. Also, if states did this as well it would be wise for them to invest in funds spread across several states.

By the way I'm going to look into setting up a P4E scenario giving Badnarik equal standing as Bush (in one cenario, then Kerry in another I suppose) and running them against each other, that is, if the new version can do computer v. computer players. First let me ask, does everyone agree that the two canidates stances on the issues are correctly interpreted in the latest P4E?