LImited gov't platform is appealing to conservatives.
Legalized drugs is appealing to degenerates.
Iran having the bomb is appealing to democrats.
Seem like he ought to win by a landslide...
Limited government couldn't be appealing to neo-cons. They say it is but their actions prove otherwise. They want government spending. It increases under their watch as much as democrats. There are no small government neo-conservatives. Look at who is running and tell me which one is the small government conservative? Their idea of cuts is limiting the spending increase...
we wouldn't have to be afraid of nuclear war if we left other countries alone. Aren't you the least bit concerned that the same drum beats of weapons of mass destruction are now being leveled at Iran...With us out of the region Israel would be free to do as it pleases by the way.
what will you say when you open your wallet and a bunch of kindling falls out...if we keep on our same pace that is all our dollars will be good for...but at least we kept drugs illegal...
Support Paul or don't, but don't complain to me about government spending when a democrat or a different republican wins.
Neo-cons boo the golden rule...enough said
I don't know what you are talking about when you start using terms like "neo-con'. I don't think most people on here understand the definition of that beyond something on a PJ poster with Cheney or Bush.
I guess you might be referring to Bush, McCain, Romney, Boehner-type Republicans? I would call these "establishment-Republicans". Big-spending politicians.
The GOP is fractured, and this primary is working it out. True conservatives (Tea Party) are battling it out with these establisment-R big spenders.
But what does that have to do with this thread?
You are warning me of what will come from Paul not winning.
I'm talking about the topic: Why can't he win.
And I still say, when you say crazy shit, you get crazy looks. Not votes.
The majority of Republicans recognize Paul's foreign policy as naive and dangerous, and that is why he will never win.
Cry about the "golden-rule" all you want to, but I don't know what that has to do with reality.
France tried that golden-rule thing- right before the Blitzkrieg. Good luck with that....
First off, I thought you were responding to me specifically, sorry if you weren't. Didn't mean to jump on you.
Cry about the "golden-rule" all you want to, but I don't know what that has to do with reality.
I was referring to the religious conservatives booing the golden rule at the last debate. Either you are religious or you aren't...either you vote based on christian principles or you don't...it is to bad that the MIC has been able to make non-interventionism seem naive and dangerous...it isn't either
what I am saying is that the republican party isn't about small government anymore. That is why Paul cannot get elected President...because the republican party is full of people who talk out of both sides of their mouths.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Please. People have been predicting the demise of the U.S. for over 200 years. Why is Ron more credible than any that have come before him. Be careful about those trying to get votes by preaching fear.
I hear what you're saying, and agree with you that the Repub party is currently run by those you described.
Being a religious conservative doesn't mean you can't defend yourself as a nation. It doesn't mean you have to be pacifist.
And how do you know that it was religious consevatives that were booing Ron? Just because they are South Carolinians?
I hope not... Otherwise everyone in New York is a god-less gay liberal.
I understand it doesn't equal pacifism, but certainly do unto others as they do unto you is much more a christian principle than hit them in the mouth first, wouldn't you say? You can certainly defend yourself, but attacking a country based on what you think might happen in the future is not defending yourself...but I digress
I didn't assume they were christian because they were South Carolinians but because they are Americans...of which I think around 80% consider themselves christian(I believe it is higher for republicans). so I felt it was safe to assume those same Christians who for some reason applauded Newt's indignation over the question about his wife were the ones booing...I would be startled if the vast majority of the people booing did not consider themselves christian.
But that is the damage the Neo-cons are doing...they have perverted what it means to spend money on the military and how to best honor veterans...and unfortunately there are a lot of lives...a lot of young lives that have been negatively affected...
but who knows...maybe they are right, maybe Iran will strike New York City with a nuclear weapon inside of one year of Ron Paul being president and israel will no longer exist.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Please. People have been predicting the demise of the U.S. for over 200 years. Why is Ron more credible than any that have come before him. Be careful about those trying to get votes by preaching fear.
Please. People have been predicting the demise of the U.S. for over 200 years. Why is Ron more credible than any that have come before him. Be careful about those trying to get votes by preaching fear.
Ron Paul is the only one not preaching fear.
Because he wants you to believe that if we practice the golden rule, nobody will hate/hurt/attack/kill us.
Just love, man. Love is all you need.
To propel Paul's ideas, the other candidates are being made to look like murder-hungry warhawks.
Please. People have been predicting the demise of the U.S. for over 200 years. Why is Ron more credible than any that have come before him. Be careful about those trying to get votes by preaching fear.
Ron Paul is the only one not preaching fear.
Which is why he'll never get elected. This country runs on fear.
i hope ron paul never gets elected. he's talking about ending social security and welfare and giving corporations free reign. more corporate power, less social programs=disaster.
i hope ron paul never gets elected. he's talking about ending social security and welfare and giving corporations free reign. more corporate power, less social programs=disaster.
I didn't know he supported this, but at the same time I just assumed that most politicians support the idea of getting rid of social security and medicaid (they're all scum).
There's no surer way of imploding this country than taking away social services. Talk about the end of this country as we know it...
i hope ron paul never gets elected. he's talking about ending social security and welfare and giving corporations free reign. more corporate power, less social programs=disaster.
you really have no understanding of his platform if this is what you get out of it
he is talking about phasing out social security for people under the age of 25...actually allowing them to opt out of it and to control their own future. the program itself will never be fully removed.
he has already said that even though he doesn't support the idea behind the programs he realizes that they are necessary because so many have grown dependent on them. But he also realizes they need to be paid for...and he has said on numerous occasions he would help fund for those programs by stopping the overseas spending.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i hope ron paul never gets elected. he's talking about ending social security and welfare and giving corporations free reign. more corporate power, less social programs=disaster.
you really have no understanding of his platform if this is what you get out of it
he is talking about phasing out social security for people under the age of 25...actually allowing them to opt out of it and to control their own future. the program itself will never be fully removed.
he has already said that even though he doesn't support the idea behind the programs he realizes that they are necessary because so many have grown dependent on them. But he also realizes they need to be paid for...and he has said on numerous occasions he would help fund for those programs by stopping the overseas spending.
Yup, and he is not for Corporations running amok.
He believes the free market system along with the court system will balance the system out. Now because of regulation, Corporations have a ton of control, through manipulating the system controlled by big government.
If you get government out of the way then lobbyists and big money can't influence policy.
Now is it completely anarchy from the old system on day 1 of Paul's Presidency?
No he would phase some things out gradually, mostly by opting out. And with a fully bought and paid for Congress they would fight on every thing he tried to do.
My feeling is there would be a very healthy balance of the two systems, but overall the American people would come out ahead, because Government at the Federal level would become smaller. Less American's would be sent overseas to die for wars that Congress did not declare.
And perhaps we would move closer to a sound money financial system, not a system of bubbles and busts that keeps the rich rich and the poor poor. And is slowly eroding the middle class.
I voted Clinton, and Gore, and Kerry, and Obama. I've always preferred 'Socially' bought and paid for candidates, over "military, wall street" bought and paid for candidates. Those are your two choices every election.
Both Parties bought and paid for to keep the status quo.
Paul is the first viable candidate that would challenge the system and in my opinion make America better.
I mention my previous penchant for voting Democrat only because I'm not against social programs. I just don't think they should be run at the Federal level. Let states manage them.
i hope ron paul never gets elected. he's talking about ending social security and welfare and giving corporations free reign. more corporate power, less social programs=disaster.
you really have no understanding of his platform if this is what you get out of it
he is talking about phasing out social security for people under the age of 25...actually allowing them to opt out of it and to control their own future. the program itself will never be fully removed.
he has already said that even though he doesn't support the idea behind the programs he realizes that they are necessary because so many have grown dependent on them. But he also realizes they need to be paid for...and he has said on numerous occasions he would help fund for those programs by stopping the overseas spending.
Yup, and he is not for Corporations running amok.
He believes the free market system along with the court system will balance the system out. Now because of regulation, Corporations have a ton of control, through manipulating the system controlled by big government.
If you get government out of the way then lobbyists and big money can't influence policy.
Now is it completely anarchy from the old system on day 1 of Paul's Presidency?
No he would phase some things out gradually, mostly by opting out. And with a fully bought and paid for Congress they would fight on every thing he tried to do.
My feeling is there would be a very healthy balance of the two systems, but overall the American people would come out ahead, because Government at the Federal level would become smaller. Less American's would be sent overseas to die for wars that Congress did not declare.
And perhaps we would move closer to a sound money financial system, not a system of bubbles and busts that keeps the rich rich and the poor poor. And is slowly eroding the middle class.
I voted Clinton, and Gore, and Kerry, and Obama. I've always preferred 'Socially' bought and paid for candidates, over "military, wall street" bought and paid for candidates. Those are your two choices every election.
Both Parties bought and paid for to keep the status quo.
Paul is the first viable candidate that would challenge the system and in my opinion make America better.
I mention my previous penchant for voting Democrat only because I'm not against social programs. I just don't think they should be run at the Federal level. Let states manage them.
Paul is the first viable candidate that would challenge the system and in my opinion make America better.
There is no way the system is going to allow a candidate who would blatantly challenge the system anywhere near the position of being elected. This is been mentioned!
Paul is the first viable candidate that would challenge the system and in my opinion make America better.
There is no way the system is going to allow a candidate who would blatantly challenge the system anywhere near the position of being elected. This is been mentioned!
It is easy to agree with you on this thought. And I think history will bear this out in this election cycle.
But if the American people continue to wake up to his message, as they are in droves, then perhaps there is a slight glimmer that he could be the POTUS.
But regardless of if he wins, he is already winning. He is winning by getting his message out there.
You know who favors gay marriage. Young people. Gay marriage will happen, and soon.
You know who favors Ron Paul. Young people. His message is hitting home with the future of this country.
Every day he remains on the campaign trail is another day letting the American people know that there is an alternative to the Republicrat candidates.
Every day he remains he reminds everyone that the USA was founded on small government principles, and the current system is not the way it needs to be.
And in a more concrete way, if Ron Paul can ride into the convention with 1/4, 1/3, of the votes, then he will have a voice in the policy of the Republican party.
He will have power. The power to have his ideas incorporated into the narrative, or perhaps even into the promises of the party to the American people who support many of Ron Paul's ideas.
He might not be up against Obama in November, or perhaps he will be
He might not beat Obama in November, or maybe he will?
But either way he (and his ideas) are winning in 2012.
Comments
First off, I thought you were responding to me specifically, sorry if you weren't. Didn't mean to jump on you.
Cry about the "golden-rule" all you want to, but I don't know what that has to do with reality.
I was referring to the religious conservatives booing the golden rule at the last debate. Either you are religious or you aren't...either you vote based on christian principles or you don't...it is to bad that the MIC has been able to make non-interventionism seem naive and dangerous...it isn't either
what I am saying is that the republican party isn't about small government anymore. That is why Paul cannot get elected President...because the republican party is full of people who talk out of both sides of their mouths.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Please. People have been predicting the demise of the U.S. for over 200 years. Why is Ron more credible than any that have come before him. Be careful about those trying to get votes by preaching fear.
I hear what you're saying, and agree with you that the Repub party is currently run by those you described.
Being a religious conservative doesn't mean you can't defend yourself as a nation. It doesn't mean you have to be pacifist.
And how do you know that it was religious consevatives that were booing Ron? Just because they are South Carolinians?
I hope not... Otherwise everyone in New York is a god-less gay liberal.
I understand it doesn't equal pacifism, but certainly do unto others as they do unto you is much more a christian principle than hit them in the mouth first, wouldn't you say? You can certainly defend yourself, but attacking a country based on what you think might happen in the future is not defending yourself...but I digress
I didn't assume they were christian because they were South Carolinians but because they are Americans...of which I think around 80% consider themselves christian(I believe it is higher for republicans). so I felt it was safe to assume those same Christians who for some reason applauded Newt's indignation over the question about his wife were the ones booing...I would be startled if the vast majority of the people booing did not consider themselves christian.
But that is the damage the Neo-cons are doing...they have perverted what it means to spend money on the military and how to best honor veterans...and unfortunately there are a lot of lives...a lot of young lives that have been negatively affected...
but who knows...maybe they are right, maybe Iran will strike New York City with a nuclear weapon inside of one year of Ron Paul being president and israel will no longer exist.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Ron Paul is the only one not preaching fear.
Because he wants you to believe that if we practice the golden rule, nobody will hate/hurt/attack/kill us.
Just love, man. Love is all you need.
To propel Paul's ideas, the other candidates are being made to look like murder-hungry warhawks.
Same game, different strategy. Its all BS.
Which is why he'll never get elected. This country runs on fear.
Ron Paul gets it.
Sadly, fear is a great motivator.
Trying to drum up fear has been a GREAT vote-getter.
I didn't know he supported this, but at the same time I just assumed that most politicians support the idea of getting rid of social security and medicaid (they're all scum).
There's no surer way of imploding this country than taking away social services. Talk about the end of this country as we know it...
you really have no understanding of his platform if this is what you get out of it
he is talking about phasing out social security for people under the age of 25...actually allowing them to opt out of it and to control their own future. the program itself will never be fully removed.
he has already said that even though he doesn't support the idea behind the programs he realizes that they are necessary because so many have grown dependent on them. But he also realizes they need to be paid for...and he has said on numerous occasions he would help fund for those programs by stopping the overseas spending.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I couldn't believe the part where Brian Williams asked Paul if he could endorse Newt, should he win...
Mitt shit his pants.
Yup, and he is not for Corporations running amok.
He believes the free market system along with the court system will balance the system out. Now because of regulation, Corporations have a ton of control, through manipulating the system controlled by big government.
If you get government out of the way then lobbyists and big money can't influence policy.
Now is it completely anarchy from the old system on day 1 of Paul's Presidency?
No he would phase some things out gradually, mostly by opting out. And with a fully bought and paid for Congress they would fight on every thing he tried to do.
My feeling is there would be a very healthy balance of the two systems, but overall the American people would come out ahead, because Government at the Federal level would become smaller. Less American's would be sent overseas to die for wars that Congress did not declare.
And perhaps we would move closer to a sound money financial system, not a system of bubbles and busts that keeps the rich rich and the poor poor. And is slowly eroding the middle class.
I voted Clinton, and Gore, and Kerry, and Obama. I've always preferred 'Socially' bought and paid for candidates, over "military, wall street" bought and paid for candidates. Those are your two choices every election.
Both Parties bought and paid for to keep the status quo.
Paul is the first viable candidate that would challenge the system and in my opinion make America better.
I mention my previous penchant for voting Democrat only because I'm not against social programs. I just don't think they should be run at the Federal level. Let states manage them.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/ron-paul-stars-astros-rainbow-uniform-76-congressional-135224691.html
I have to admit-- that dude is a pimp!
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/206057-oliver-stone-would-vote-for-ron-paul-over-president-obama?utm_campaign=briefingroom&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterfeed
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
I missed the first hour.
Did he get to talk more? Didn't seem like it in the second half.
Well laid out. Nicely done.
There is no way the system is going to allow a candidate who would blatantly challenge the system anywhere near the position of being elected. This is been mentioned!
It is easy to agree with you on this thought. And I think history will bear this out in this election cycle.
But if the American people continue to wake up to his message, as they are in droves, then perhaps there is a slight glimmer that he could be the POTUS.
But regardless of if he wins, he is already winning. He is winning by getting his message out there.
You know who favors gay marriage. Young people. Gay marriage will happen, and soon.
You know who favors Ron Paul. Young people. His message is hitting home with the future of this country.
Every day he remains on the campaign trail is another day letting the American people know that there is an alternative to the Republicrat candidates.
Every day he remains he reminds everyone that the USA was founded on small government principles, and the current system is not the way it needs to be.
And in a more concrete way, if Ron Paul can ride into the convention with 1/4, 1/3, of the votes, then he will have a voice in the policy of the Republican party.
He will have power. The power to have his ideas incorporated into the narrative, or perhaps even into the promises of the party to the American people who support many of Ron Paul's ideas.
He might not be up against Obama in November, or perhaps he will be
He might not beat Obama in November, or maybe he will?
But either way he (and his ideas) are winning in 2012.