Ron Paul...

VINNY GOOMBA

mikepegg44 wrote:

Smellyman wrote:

I could vote for him on his foreign policy alone.

Just have a hard time with him domestically. He would let corporations run amok and they were/are a huge reason we are in this mess.

Not being combative, but can you explain to me how corporations could run amok? And more so, explain to me how that is different than what occurs today?

Foreign policy alone is worth voting for him. Can you imagine at least 4 years of the US simply protecting its self at home rather than all over the world? There is a reason he gets more money in donations from military members than anyone else, and it isn't because he is a war monger.

It is certainly ok to be weary and skeptical of the free market,

http://libertypulse.com/article/ron-pau ... interview/

listen to part 3 specifically. pretty good discussion.

strict property rights would definitely alleviate many of the fears that people have about the free market

Here's an article by a liberal who coined the term "Blue Republican," on a number of reasons why liberals should support Ron Paul, and he gets into how corporations and government contractors "run amok" under the current system much more than in a Free Market in the sense that Ron Paul describes it. Free Market does not equal anarchy.

Edit: Forgot the article!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koe ... 84563.html

VINNY GOOMBA

polaris_x wrote:

truthfully, everyone on this forum should be voting for this guy ...

the reality is that the whole system has to be blown up ... but before this can happen - people need to realize how fucked up it is ... the majority of people still think along partisan lines and that is always their answer ...

a ron paul presidency would definitely expose what really ails america ... even if he can get people to realize that americans engage in wars strictly for profit - that would be a major hurdle ...

Chip McFlennigan

Oh my God he's so totally awesome and against-the-grain! Dude he's so ballsy! He's not a puppet! Wow he tells it like it is.

Oh, yeah, and he also wants corporations to have more power than they already do.

Instead of trying to balance the power between the corporations, the government, and the proletariat, Ron Paul would rather big companies have access to everything about you.

brianlux

johnny america wrote:

Oh my God he's so totally awesome and against-the-grain! Dude he's so ballsy! He's not a puppet! Wow he tells it like it is.

Oh, yeah, and he also wants corporations to have more power than they already do.

Instead of trying to balance the power between the corporations, the government, and the proletariat, Ron Paul would rather big companies have access to everything about you.

A little hyperboli here I'm guessing, correct?

mikepegg44

johnny america wrote:

Oh my God he's so totally awesome and against-the-grain! Dude he's so ballsy! He's not a puppet! Wow he tells it like it is.

Oh, yeah, and he also wants corporations to have more power than they already do.

Instead of trying to balance the power between the corporations, the government, and the proletariat, Ron Paul would rather big companies have access to everything about you.

explain your comments about corporations having more power. Remember he is one of the few who believe that corporations aren't people...but you wouldn't know anything about that since you just want to believe that all republican candidates hate the poor and love big business...

polaris_x

mikepegg44 wrote:

johnny america wrote:

Oh my God he's so totally awesome and against-the-grain! Dude he's so ballsy! He's not a puppet! Wow he tells it like it is.

Oh, yeah, and he also wants corporations to have more power than they already do.

Instead of trying to balance the power between the corporations, the government, and the proletariat, Ron Paul would rather big companies have access to everything about you.

explain your comments about corporations having more power. Remember he is one of the few who believe that corporations aren't people...but you wouldn't know anything about that since you just want to believe that all republican candidates hate the poor and love big business...

my interpretation of dude's writings are that he is not partisan ... i am pretty sure he loathes both republicans and democrats equally ...

inlet13

RB112589 wrote:

Discuss!

Interesting interview...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/ ... 32548.html

polaris_x

inlet13 wrote:

Interesting interview...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/ ... 32548.html

nothing really new here except that he likes chocolate chip cookies! ...

i think he walks a fine line trying to enact change from within a system and party that has been as guilty as any other for causing the problems he so loathes ... he most definitely should be running as an independent ..

inlet13

polaris_x wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Interesting interview...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/ ... 32548.html

nothing really new here except that he likes chocolate chip cookies! ...

i think he walks a fine line trying to enact change from within a system and party that has been as guilty as any other for causing the problems he so loathes ... he most definitely should be running as an independent ..

Not going to say the Republican party is flawless... they are filled with flaws... so, yes, they are responsible for a lot of the problems he loathes. But, from Paul's perspective to equate them with the Democrats is laughable.

I don't think he'd run as an independent because I think he really does understand he would basically re-elect Obama by doing so.

To me, there's only a few things that could re-elect Obama. A solid libertarian candidate, like Paul is one. The other is the beginnings of a World War. The third is an economic bounce like none we've ever seen.

Out of the three options, I think the first is the most likely... but, I don't see it happening.

Go Beavers

inlet13 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Interesting interview...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/ ... 32548.html

nothing really new here except that he likes chocolate chip cookies! ...

i think he walks a fine line trying to enact change from within a system and party that has been as guilty as any other for causing the problems he so loathes ... he most definitely should be running as an independent ..

Not going to say the Republican party is flawless... they are filled with flaws... so, yes, they are responsible for a lot of the problems he loathes. But, from Paul's perspective to equate them with the Democrats is laughable.

I don't think he'd run as an independent because I think he really does understand he would basically re-elect Obama by doing so.

To me, there's only a few things that could re-elect Obama. A solid libertarian candidate, like Paul is one. The other is the beginnings of a World War. The third is an economic bounce like none we've ever seen.

Out of the three options, I think the first is the most likely... but, I don't see it happening.

Obama's ahead of all the Republican's in the polls, with Romney being the closest. And if Romney's nominated, it's a definate win for Obama. All Obama needs is an economic trickle where unemployment is on a downward trend. The more support that Ron Paul gets, the more his agenda will be incorporated into the other candidates agenda's, which makes it even less likely Paul gets nominated.

Monster Rain

It's very close right now with romney and Obama. Who's leading the polls right now depends on which polls you read. USA Today/Gallup has them tied 47-47. Reuters has Romney leading 44-43. ABC News/Washington Post has Romney leading 47-46. NBC News/Wall St. Journal has Obama leading 49-43. There are enough polls out there that anyone can look at them and point out that their preferred candidate is leading. Until a Republican winds the party's nomination and we are closer to Election Day 2012 there's no way to tell where anyone really stands in the polls and I think it's a bit optimistic on your part to call it a definite win for Obama if Romney is nominated considering he's leading or tied in 3 polls released within the past few days.

Go Beavers wrote:

Obama's ahead of all the Republican's in the polls, with Romney being the closest. And if Romney's nominated, it's a definate win for Obama. All Obama needs is an economic trickle where unemployment is on a downward trend. The more support that Ron Paul gets, the more his agenda will be incorporated into the other candidates agenda's, which makes it even less likely Paul gets nominated.

Go Beavers

Monster Rain wrote:

It's very close right now with romney and Obama. Who's leading the polls right now depends on which polls you read. USA Today/Gallup has them tied 47-47. Reuters has Romney leading 44-43. ABC News/Washington Post has Romney leading 47-46. NBC News/Wall St. Journal has Obama leading 49-43. There are enough polls out there that anyone can look at them and point out that their preferred candidate is leading. Until a Republican winds the party's nomination and we are closer to Election Day 2012 there's no way to tell where anyone really stands in the polls and I think it's a bit optimistic on your part to call it a definite win for Obama if Romney is nominated considering he's leading or tied in 3 polls released within the past few days.

No Republican has a statistically significant lead, and the polls obviously show where people are at currently. My point anyway was to counter inlet's overconfidence in Obama losing. I mentioned it before, but I think Romney loses against Obama because all that would be needed is some ads about him being an LDS and that's a good 3 or 4 point swing.

polaris_x

inlet13 wrote:

Not going to say the Republican party is flawless... they are filled with flaws... so, yes, they are responsible for a lot of the problems he loathes. But, from Paul's perspective to equate them with the Democrats is laughable.

I don't think he'd run as an independent because I think he really does understand he would basically re-elect Obama by doing so.

To me, there's only a few things that could re-elect Obama. A solid libertarian candidate, like Paul is one. The other is the beginnings of a World War. The third is an economic bounce like none we've ever seen.

Out of the three options, I think the first is the most likely... but, I don't see it happening.

i think most people who think partisanship is problematic and also a joke would say the two party system is perpetuating the same problems over and over again ...

either way - ron paul is doing what politicians do ... which is sell themselves to gain power ... i mean the dude actually said he only watches abc news in that interview ... obviously, i hope it was a joke but it does re-iterate that he is part of the entity that is most tied with the military industrial complex ...