Ron Paul Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
exnihilo said:
I dont know where you get your facts but polling indicates no such thing. Ron Paul has widespread support. It is very early in the campaign. Dr. Paul has been marginalized by the media and savaged by ‘conservative’ pundits for not wanting to bomb and kill Iranians.

Ron Paul actually has a good shot at winning vs. Obama. If he were to lose it would be because Republicans would rather blow up Iranians than actually reduce the size and power of government and thus would vote for Obama.

Independents Prefer Ron Paul Vs Obama

Obama gets 85% of his party’s vote and Paul only 81% of his in Paul vs Obama. That means a good number of Republicans actually think Obama aint that bad. Maybe that is why they like Romney, Gingrich, Santorum et all who are, to borrow from Pat Buchanan, just the other wing of the same bird of prey.

And what back up plan do Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Huntsman have? Those guys are so inept that they dont even qualify for many state primaries. They wont get the nomination because they cant run a campaign.

Waffled? Really? He has consistently said he has no intention to run as a third party candidate but that he doesn’t like to ever rule out possibilities about running for office. If you have quotes to the contrary please post them.
Click to expand...
Sorry our posts crossed. You can read the poll results and listen to the man himself at the links I provided.

Nice try though. 👍
 
“This is still the greatest country in the world and don’t you ever forget it” is right up there with…

“The fact that I have several shots of Jack Daniels every single day after work, does not mean I have a drinking problem”

“There’s no way I could possibly have lung cancer, I just cough and get short of breath constantly because I’m allergic to something in the air”

“I’m not overweight, they just don’t seem to make doors as wide as they used to”
 
rlg94086 said:
How the active military votes may influence you, but I vote on the candidates stances, his leadership qualities, and his electability.
Click to expand...
I think the point of where active duty military give money is that the rest of the Republican candidates, who are all salivating to kill Iranians, have both never served (save for Rick Perry) in the military and do not have the support of the average soldier. The average soldier would rather be led by Ron Paul than these other Republicans. The average soldier seems to find Ron Paul to be a capable leader. They do not seem very impressed by the guys who never served and yet want even more war.

Since one of the chief knocks on Paul from some Republicans is his supposed isolationist stance this contribution evidence makes that point silly. The guys who supposedly fight to keep us free think coming home from the many war zones will not endanger our freedom otherwise they’d back another candidate.
 
For Ron Paul supporters:

If Ron Paul does not get the nomination, will you vote for the winning GOP candidate, will you lean toward Obama and the Democrats, or will you just not vote?
 
exnihilo said:
I think the point of where active duty military give money is that the rest of the Republican candidates, who are all salivating to kill Iranians, have both never served (save for Rick Perry) in the military and do not have the support of the average soldier. The average soldier would rather be led by Ron Paul than these other Republicans. The average soldier seems to find Ron Paul to be a capable leader. They do not seem very impressed by the guys who never served and yet want even more war.

Since one of the chief knocks on Paul from some Republicans is his supposed isolationist stance this contribution evidence makes that point silly. The guys who supposedly fight to keep us free think coming home from the many war zones will not endanger our freedom otherwise they’d back another candidate.
Click to expand...
Okay. And, this changes his ability to lead and electability in what ways?

Thus, my non-interest in this stat…
 
irishpatrick said:
For Ron Paul supporters:

If Ron Paul does not get the nomination, will you vote for the winning GOP candidate, will you lean toward Obama and the Democrats, or will you just not vote?
Click to expand...
More likely than not I will be sitting this one and the rest of them out until the GOP actually starts delivering on its promised message of small, responsible government. I’d rather shave my head with a cheese grater while chewing tinfoil than vote for a Democrat. Their party platform is an abomination to my Christian sensibilities.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
More likely than not I will be sitting this one and the rest of them out until the GOP actually starts delivering on its promised message of small, responsible government. I’d rather shave my head with a cheese grater while chewing tinfoil than vote for a Democrat. Their party platform is an abomination to my Christian sensibilities.
Click to expand...
So, you are not of the mind that anyone on the GOP list is better than Obama? You would rather see Obama get a second term, than to vote for a non-Paul candidate?

I have heard this many times from Ron Paul supporters. It is NOT a good thing.
 
irishpatrick said:
For Ron Paul supporters:

If Ron Paul does not get the nomination, will you vote for the winning GOP candidate, will you lean toward Obama and the Democrats, or will you just not vote?
Click to expand...
If Ron Paul is not the nominee I will not vote for business as usual.

Ron Paul has been clear on what he intends to cut. I still am not sure what Mitt Romney intends to cut, if anything.

It would be a pleasure to witness the utter destruction of the war party. Unfortunately we’ll have to wait for the destruction of the welfare party.
 
rlg94086 said:
Sorry our posts crossed. You can read the poll results and listen to the man himself at the links I provided.

Nice try though. 👍
Click to expand...
This is your source?

Ron Paul says his fallback is to give a speech at the convention. So you think the guy is a bad leader because he has a backup plan?

He says he essentially ruled out a third party run. He does not want to run third party. He has no plans. But he says he is not an absolutist. How is that waffling? And why on Earth would his plans about a third party run make any difference to whether you vote for him. There are many reasons to not vote for him but doing so because he won’t say definitively he won’t run as a third party candidate seems very trivial. I would think Romney’s waffling between supporting abortion and now not supporting it would be important. That doesn’t seem to bother a big chuck of Republicans which tells me something about that big chunk i.e. the party.
rlg94086 said:
Okay. And, this changes his ability to lead and electability in what ways?

Thus, my non-interest in this stat…
Click to expand...
Well you think he is a not a capable leader. That is your opinion. But the opinion of service members is that Ron Paul is the best leader out of the Republicans. It might be worth considering their opinion since the Republicans make the military such a priority (of course I realize they really only make the military contractors the priority).
irishpatrick said:
For Ron Paul supporters:

If Ron Paul does not get the nomination, will you vote for the winning GOP candidate, will you lean toward Obama and the Democrats, or will you just not vote?
Click to expand...
I typically dont vote in federal elections since a vote is so irrelevant. I would vote for Dr. Paul because he actually represents real change from the status quo but have no plans to vote for anyone else. I see no difference in Obama vs the other Republicans. It is not worth my time to vote for one or the other. Not to mention I think the best way to change the system is to not vote since the government most fears losing legitimacy which voting helps to create.
 
irishpatrick said:
So, you are not of the mind that anyone on the GOP list is better than Obama? You would rather see Obama get a second term, than to vote for a non-Paul candidate?

I have heard this many times from Ron Paul supporters. It is NOT a good thing.
Click to expand...
At least Obama is up front about his marxist agenda. A stealth candidate from the republican party will do much more damage.
 
exnihilo said:
Not to mention I think the best way to change the system is to not vote since the government most fears losing legitimacy which voting helps to create.
Click to expand...
Good point. it’s getting to the point where citizens will have to just withdraw the consent of the governed.
 
exnihilo said:
This is your source?
Click to expand...
Yes. You may disagree and think that Ron Paul is a poor source for things concerning Ron Paul. Suit yourself. 🤷
exnihilo said:
Ron Paul says his fallback is to give a speech at the convention. So you think the guy is a bad leader because he has a backup plan?
Click to expand...
Nope…never connected the two. Personally, I believe the “fallback” is his actual plan. I think Ron Paul is smarter than his supporters and knows he has no chance for the nomination or winning in a general election.
exnihilo said:
He says he essentially ruled out a third party run. He does not want to run third party. He has no plans. But he says he is not an absolutist. How is that waffling? And why on Earth would his plans about a third party run make any difference to whether you vote for him. There are many reasons to not vote for him but doing so because he won’t say definitively he won’t run as a third party candidate seems very trivial. I would think Romney’s waffling between supporting abortion and now not supporting it would be important. That doesn’t seem to bother a big chuck of Republicans which tells me something about that big chunk i.e. the party.
Click to expand...
Yep. I’m voting for the best candidate for the Republican Party, and fully support a candidate who has become more pro-life. I don’t support egomaniacs who go third party after losing. I hope Ron Paul resists the urge again.

Waffling involves changing a position back-and-forth…like saying “I have no intention of running third party” in an interview, later saying “I won’t rule that out,” and then stating again that he has no intention of running third party. You call that “not an absolutist.” I call it a flakey waffle. 😃
exnihilo said:
Well you think he is a not a capable leader. That is your opinion. But the opinion of service members is that Ron Paul is the best leader out of the Republicans. It might be worth considering their opinion since the Republicans make the military such a priority (of course I realize they really only make the military contractors the priority).
Click to expand...
I’m not a one-issue, anti-war voter, so, again, your point about how active military vote really doesn’t interest me. His lack of leadership ability is evident from his years in Congress. How many things did he author and get passed by his colleagues? If he couldn’t succeed in Congress, why should I have confidence in his ability to lead the whole nation?
exnihilo said:
I typically dont vote in federal elections since** a vote is so irrelevant. **I would vote for Dr. Paul because he actually represents real change from the status quo but have no plans to vote for anyone else. I see no difference in Obama vs the other Republicans. It is not worth my time to vote for one or the other. Not to mention I think the best way to change the system is to not vote since the government most fears losing legitimacy which voting helps to create.
Click to expand...
You just rendered all your posts irrelevant. Why should I care about the opinion of someone who isn’t going to vote?
 
Michael_C said:
If Ron Paul is not the nominee I will not vote for business as usual.

Ron Paul has been clear on what he intends to cut. I still am not sure what Mitt Romney intends to cut, if anything.

It would be a pleasure to witness the utter destruction of the war party. Unfortunately we’ll have to wait for the destruction of the welfare party.
Click to expand...
So then, why not vote for Obama if Paul loses?
 
irishpatrick said:
So, you are not of the mind that anyone on the GOP list is better than Obama? You would rather see Obama get a second term, than to vote for a non-Paul candidate?

I have heard this many times from Ron Paul supporters. It is NOT a good thing.
Click to expand...
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil. Sorry you don’t see it that way. 🤷
 
exnihilo said:
This is your source?

Ron Paul says his fallback is to give a speech at the convention. So you think the guy is a bad leader because he has a backup plan?

He says he essentially ruled out a third party run. He does not want to run third party. He has no plans. But he says he is not an absolutist. How is that waffling? And why on Earth would his plans about a third party run make any difference to whether you vote for him. There are many reasons to not vote for him but doing so because he won’t say definitively he won’t run as a third party candidate seems very trivial. I would think Romney’s waffling between supporting abortion and now not supporting it would be important. That doesn’t seem to bother a big chuck of Republicans which tells me something about that big chunk i.e. the party.

Well you think he is a not a capable leader. That is your opinion. But the opinion of service members is that Ron Paul is the best leader out of the Republicans. It might be worth considering their opinion since the Republicans make the military such a priority (of course I realize they really only make the military contractors the priority).

I typically dont vote in federal elections since a vote is so irrelevant. I would vote for Dr. Paul because he actually represents real change from the status quo but have no plans to vote for anyone else. I see no difference in Obama vs the other Republicans. It is not worth my time to vote for one or the other. Not to mention I think the best way to change the system is to not vote since the government most fears losing legitimacy which voting helps to create.
Click to expand...
Wow. You desired to get into a lengthy discussion about Ron Paul, and yet you won’t even vote? Your opinion has zero value to any person who actually cares about this country. Worthless.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil. Sorry you don’t see it that way. 🤷
Click to expand...
Friend, we live in the world. As Catholics we are not to be of the world, but we must still live here. We are called to do what we can to help this world. There simply is no comparison between Obama and any of the GOP candidates. I do not like Ron Paul or what he stands for, but if he wins the nomination, I will vote for him because he is a vast improvement over Obama. You wait long enough, and there simply won’t be a country left to vote in.

BTW, no matter who you were to vote for, it will literallly always be a choice of the lesser of two evils. Since we are fallen, there are NO perfect people and NO perfect candidates. Paul will let you down just as much as any other canidate–the idea is to make the best choice we can, because someone will win the next election–we must choose who that will be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top