Candidate X is cutting the Federal Government in half - will you vote for him?

[TrumanB]

The thread about what federal programs people would cut got me thinking (which I know some of you believe is a dangerous thing).

There are a lot of posters (or posers) on this board who claim to be "fiscal conservatives". Even some of the Obama supporters (yeah, right ). I believe there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters who would probably vomit if he actually implemented any of his economic ideas (I believe many of them are just anti-war).

Anyway, what if Candidate X existed and he proposed slashing EVERY federal government department and program in half. No exceptions. That means Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and yes, even military spending. IN HALF. Nothing would be exempt. Let's also assume that Candidate X would have a realistic chance of getting this done - a mandate from the American people to carry this out. And let's say this would just be a "starting point". Massive tax cuts would follow and possibly further cuts to federal spending.

Let's assume that Candidate X is a "neutral" character. A Sam Nunn type that would be agreeable to most everyone in terms of character and personality. Would you vote for Candidate X as opposed to Obama or McCain?

Let me say that I would vote for Candidate X, even with the cuts to military spending. Our federal government is out of control. The budget for fiscal year 2009 (which just started this month) is over 3 TRILLION dollars. WTF? That's nearly DOUBLE the size of the federal budget from just 10 years ago. This is insanity people. We don't need a scalpel or a sledgehammer. We need a ****ing chainsaw.

Vote now.

[SnyderShrugged]

I love the thought of cutting the federal government in half (if it's the right things, of course), but I cant vote for you because I really dont like you at all

You really dont have a clue about what Ron Paul supporters and others who desire simple, strict constitional government if you believe we are "anti-war"

[da#1skinsfan]

worst idea ever.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Uh........no

[TrumanB]

I love the thought of cutting the federal government in half (if it's the right things, of course), but I cant vote for you because I really dont like you at all

You really dont have a clue about what Ron Paul supporters and others who desire simple, strict constitional government if you believe we are "anti-war"

First, you're not voting for me, you're voting for Candidate X.

Second, I said some of the Paul supporters are strictly anti-war.

[SnyderShrugged]

First, you're not voting for me, you're voting for Candidate X.

Second, I said some of the Paul supporters are strictly anti-war.

Why did you use "I'm cutting" if X didnt mean you?

(please note the smiley, I was just having fun with ya)

[TrumanB]

Why did you use "I'm cutting" if X didnt mean you?

(please note the smiley, I was just having fun with ya)

I changed the title, to make it more "agreeable".

[SkinsHokieFan]

Where do I cast my ballot?

People, cutting the federal gov't in half would take us back to 1999 spending levels, not something crazy like 1977 spending levels

[GibbsFactor]

Why I'm probably voting for Chuck Baldwin.

[TrumanB]

Where do I cast my ballot?

People, cutting the federal gov't in half would take us back to 1999 spending levels, not something crazy like 1977 spending levels

Exactly. So I wonder why there are people already posting thinking this is a crazy idea?

[SnyderShrugged]

Why I'm probably voting for Chuck Baldwin.

LOL, according to Truman, you are crazy for agreeing with "his" idea:)

[twa]

Hard to see how you could cut entitlement spending, much less get any other major cuts...nice thought though.

Cutting the funds they get their paws on seems more workable,if unrealistic:(

No easy answers

[GibbsFactor]

LOL, according to Truman, you are crazy for agreeing with "his" idea:)

Let's see how crazy it actually is.

Economy is back to 1997 levels, why shouldn't Government spending?

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I'm cracking up at the people that think that McCain will really cut down on spending.

:rotflmao:

[Toe Jam]

Sorry Truman.

Looks like Obama still wins.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Candidate X is gonna get spanked.

[SnyderShrugged]

Let's see how crazy it actually is.

Economy is back to 1997 levels, why shouldn't Government spending?

I'm happy to be in the nut house with ya bro!

[luckydevil]

I am kind of conflicted, because certain things needs to be prioritized in terms of spending cuts. I would deal with the "hidden" welfare state ( as well as the warfare state) before the actual welfare state. However, the likelihood of a candidate pushing cuts on this scale is so incredibly rare that I wouldn't turn down the chance vote for candidate x.

[GibbsFactor]

Sorry Truman.

Looks like Obama still wins.

"If you allow the majority to vote, they will inevitably elect a moron."

~ some smart guy circa 1798

[Toe Jam]

"If you allow the majority to vote, they will inevitably elect a moron."

~ some smart guy circa 1798

..and that is evidenced by our president of the past eight years.

[TrumanB]

Sorry Truman.

Looks like Obama still wins.

Oh, I knew that would happen. Most people want their cake and eat it too. Too bad that we'll eventually have to go through a real meltdown (we're almost there now) to eat that cake.

[GibbsFactor]

Candidate X is gonna get spanked.

Yes I know. Elections are just another form of reality TV. Some of us don't mind being outside the norm and would rather do what is right for our selves and fellow citizens. But I do admit, that is a small minority.

[GibbsFactor]

..and that is evidenced by our president of the past eight years.

No argument from me.

[luckydevil]

Where do I cast my ballot?

People, cutting the federal gov't in half would take us back to 1999 spending levels

Would it really take us back to those levels? Wow, that's insane. Nice job republican party.

[TrumanB]

I am kind of conflicted, because certain things needs to be prioritized in terms of spending cuts. I would deal with the "hidden" welfare state ( as well as the warfare state) before the actual welfare state. However, the likelihood of a candidate pushing cuts on this scale is so incredibly rare that I wouldn't turn down the chance vote for candidate x.

That's why Candidate X is proposing evenly cutting EVERY federal department and program. Everyone shares in the pain. That's why this is a starting point. The scalpel can be used after we're finished with the chainsaw.