What's with the Ron Paul bandwagon?

LedbetterusLedbetterus Posts: 592
edited December 2007 in A Moving Train
Excuse me for being in the dark. I consider myself somewhat political. However I haven't been paying *much* attention to this election yet. I am registered Democrat but consider myself an Independent. I haven't really looked into all of Election '08 yet so..

My question(s). Why has Ron Paul become the new "internet fad" (I use that term loosely)?

Every where I look, it's Ron Paul this, and Ron Paul that. I know he vying for the Republican nomination.. and I could be VERY wrong here, but I would think most PJ fans (US fans of course), consider themselves more on the liberal side. And I see a lot of Ron Paul stuff on the net (and everywhere in this forum), but most major networks seem to just write him off, at least from what I've seen.

So again, why are a lot of people, especially a lot of Democrats, in favor of Ron Paul? Is he the lesser of all evils? Are his proposed policies more liberal than his fellow Republican candidates?

If so, why not run Democrat? What makes him Republican?

I watched a good bit of the YouTube.com debate a week or so ago, and nothing really jumped out at me about this guy.

Can anyone give me a run down?
Abraham Lincoln once said, "If you are a racist, I will attack you with the North."
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    good question - i also posed a good one in the "fox" thread

    i'm a little more to the right than the avg PJ fan :)
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    If so, why not run Democrat? What makes him Republican?

    I watched a good bit of the YouTube.com debate a week or so ago, and nothing really jumped out at me about this guy.

    Can anyone give me a run down?

    http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/ that should be enough to learn about him.
    The only thing that really makes him democrat his the position on the war; however, that has traditionally been a conservative view (in line with limited government). I think the reason he gets so much support is because of his ideas (you know where he stands and you know what his guideline is for decision making...and it's not opinion polls) and b/c of his integrity. The man stands for something and it's what he has always stood for. People are tired of the status quo which appears to be politicians that believe they deserve to be president b/c they put their time in and now for whatever reason it's their turn. Listen to debates not one of the front runners says they want to lead the US, they say they want to win the election. I want someone with passion who wants to lead and make changes; NOT someone who wants to win a contest as president.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • He's popular with the left because he wants to end the war, voted against the Patriot Act, and some other things.

    He's Republican because his views are extremely conservative. Look at his positions on social security, health care, welfare, abortion, or even race relations...pretty scary if you ask me.

    I think a year from now, we won't be talking about him though.
  • YoyoyoYoyoyo Posts: 310
    I don't know if everyone has the same definition of liberal. If you read Ann Coulter or watch O'reilly then your definition is the one they use, but a historical meaning of liberal does not match well with the new meaning of liberal. Chomsky for example calls Neo Conservatism, Neo Liberalism.

    People want Ron Paul in charge to stop over spending on foreign policies. They realize the budget deficits are not sustainable and worry about the future.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • YoyoyoYoyoyo Posts: 310
    Saturnal wrote:
    He's popular with the left because he wants to end the war, voted against the Patriot Act, and some other things.

    He's Republican because his views are extremely conservative. Look at his positions on social security, health care, welfare, abortion, or even race relations...pretty scary if you ask me.

    I think a year from now, we won't be talking about him though.

    Ron Paul's positions on those issues are pretty moderate actually. Social security- let younger people opt out so when the program tanks(which it will for 100% certainty) they are protected and not dependant on the government. Health care- remove the middle man in the health system and strenghthen the doctor patient relationship and put them in charge of care decisions. Abortion- he is personally pro-life, but doesn't think the federal government has the authority to make laws on the issue, it is a State issue.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • Mestophar wrote:
    Ron Paul's positions on those issues are pretty moderate actually. Social security- let younger people opt out so when the program tanks(which it will for 100% certainty) they are protected and not dependant on the government. Health care- remove the middle man in the health system and strenghthen the doctor patient relationship and put them in charge of care decisions. Abortion- he is personally pro-life, but doesn't think the federal government has the authority to make laws on the issue, it is a State issue.

    I don't wanna get into the whole social security story, but it's not going to tank. It's a lie. Rich investors want to convince people it's "in trouble" so they'll support its privatization. Paul isn't actually one of these people, however: he's just plain against social security and welfare in general, so he just uses the same story because it happens to be in-line with his position. From his site: "It is fundamentally unfair to give benefits to anyone who has not paid into the system."...a ridiculous philosophy that carries over to many programs like public education. It would imply that I have no interest in seeing children get educated even though they don't pay taxes. It also covers his basic position on health care: not everyone deserves it.

    I'm glad he didn't authorize the war or the Patriot Act, but it doesn't make him a good candidate in my eyes.
  • He's the only candidate that isn't chocked full of shit up to his/her eyeballs.

    He's also said a few times he is not against slashing programs if he can reel in the utterly insane billions being wasted abroad.

    That and abolishing the federal reserve. I vote for him for this one reason alone....no question about it.

    This is a guy actually looking out for the common people and the country instead of the wealthy elite slave masters.

    He's the best thing going by a looong shot.

    you'd have to be crazy not to see it. That or devoid of fundamental economic concepts.

    It's really not a question of who to vote for anymore. There is only one candidate period. Eventually people are going to wake up to this reality over the next year. Hopefully...otherwise the US is going to fall into the shitter even faster than it is now.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • He's a white supremacist.
    "It's all happening"
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    He's a white supremacist.

    full of crap
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • Saturnal wrote:
    I don't wanna get into the whole social security story, but it's not going to tank. It's a lie. Rich investors want to convince people it's "in trouble" so they'll support its privatization.

    Show me where you get this crap from?

    Do you understand terms like "future obligations", "unfunded account", "off balance sheet liabilities" and such?

    You do realize that these liabilities are in the tens and tens of TRILLIONS, right?

    You realize there are only roughly a trillion dollars in circulation, right?

    HOW is the government going to meet these obligations?
    Are they going to multiply the money supply several fold?

    Newsflash: that doesn't work.
    You can't make the pie any bigger just by cutting it up in more pieces.

    :(
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    He's a white supremacist.

    Stupid.

    Nice try, race-baiter.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Saturnal wrote:
    From his site: "It is fundamentally unfair to give benefits to anyone who has not paid into the system."...a ridiculous philosophy that carries over to many programs like public education.

    It is only a ridiculous philosophy to a looter. You clearly have no problem with theft, and feel the rich (meaning any who has a job, I suppose) should be made to pay.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • g under pg under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
    He's a white supremacist.

    This is the best you could come with, back it up DH.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • g under p wrote:
    This is the best you could come with, back it up DH.

    Peace

    His funding has been linked to White Supremacy groups....http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=ron+paul+white+supremacist&fr=yfp-t-501-s&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8
    "It's all happening"


  • I've heard some crap before...and this is up right there.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • I've heard some crap before...and this is up right there.


    I'm sure if it were Clinton or Edwards...you'd be all over it though.
    "It's all happening"
  • I'm sure if it were Clinton or Edwards...you'd be all over it though.

    Nope. I'm only interested in people that have a chance at winning.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Nope. I'm only interested in people that have a chance at winning.

    So any democrat will do for next year then.
    "It's all happening"
  • jeffbr wrote:
    It is only a ridiculous philosophy to a looter. You clearly have no problem with theft, and feel the rich (meaning any who has a job, I suppose) should be made to pay.
    So again, a child is considered a looter if you follow this philosophy...they're stealing the benefits of public education...that is ridiculous.

    And I didn't single out the rich in this either.
  • Saturnal wrote:
    So again, a child is considered a looter if you follow this philosophy...they're stealing the benefits of public education...that is ridiculous.

    And I didn't single out the rich in this either.

    Well, the welfare statists actualy consider a child to be property of his or her parent for most purposes.

    Therefore, the parents are paying the tax.

    Beyond childhood education, your argument is just plain incorrect anyhow.

    Who are these people who haven't paid in to the system that you would like to see rewarded, exactly? and WHY?

    Government mandated public school was set up entirely by the interests of the elite class, by the way. They wanted human widgets for their factories and a means of severing the parent\child bond so that they could imbue the young workforce-to-be with their own "values" via their parent-proxy, the municipal teacher.

    Here is a history lesson for yah.

    :D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • Relax on the attacks people, lol. I just wanted some clarification on here. Thanks for the replies. One thing that bothers me with RP is it seems he has zero chance of winning. At least according to most people who don't pay attention to his "internet phenomenon".

    The Democrats have a solid set of bull shitters this year as well. It will be interesting to see how it all develops, and especially who the winners choose as their running mates.
    Abraham Lincoln once said, "If you are a racist, I will attack you with the North."
  • Well, the welfare statists actualy consider a child to be property of his or her parent for most purposes.

    Therefore, the parents are paying the tax.

    So since I don't have kids, then I shouldn't have to pay for public education? That's where this argument is going isn't it? If it's unfair for someone who doesn't "pay into the system" to take from it, then obviously it's unfair to force someone to pay into a system where they DON'T take from it.

    I just think that whole line of thinking is silly...I think it does benefit me when the kid next door to me gets an education...or when his mom is able to get help from the government to feed him when she's out of work...or when he's able to get medical attention when he's sick.
  • Relax on the attacks people, lol. I just wanted some clarification on here. Thanks for the replies. One thing that bothers me with RP is it seems he has zero chance of winning. At least according to most people who don't pay attention to his "internet phenomenon".

    The Democrats have a solid set of bull shitters this year as well. It will be interesting to see how it all develops, and especially who the winners choose as their running mates.

    Why do you say he has a zero chance of winning.

    Remember that the polls showing him at 10% (yes, it is 10+ percent these days!) are polls based on likely Republican primary voters -- numbers taken from polls of 2004 republican primary voters ... a year where Bush ran UNOPPOSED, so voting for him in the primaries was a 100% symbolic gesture done ONLY by those hardcore chickenhawks that still wanted more war and right winged shenanigans after the first Bush go-round ... it was the LOWEST TURNOUT EVER for a republican primary ... like 6% turnout.

    So you want the popularity polls based on the 6% who turned out to re-nominate bush in his uncontested 2nd term primary to indicate to you that Ron Paul is unelectable!?!

    The Ron Paul movement is HUGE.
    Even the media is admitting that currently.
    Go watch the Tucker Carlson Ron Paul blimp piece, or the ABC roundtable discussion where they talk about him, or any of the last few Wolf Blitzer pieces ... the guy has a SERIOUS following.

    What other PRIMARY candidate has such a motivated group that is GUARANTEED to go out and vote for them?

    I tell you this much: that candidate is NOT a repubican.

    ;)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • Saturnal wrote:
    ...I think it does benefit me when the kid next door to me gets an education...or when his mom is able to get help from the government to feed him when she's out of work...or when he's able to get medical attention when he's sick.

    The benefit achieved and the means of achieving this benefit have become irrationaly confused in your mind.

    On healthcare

    Free Market Education

    Answer this question:
    If by cutting federal government involvement in education and subsidized public schooling, EVERY family received a guaranteed tax deduction large enough to cover their childs education, would you support the abandonment of that system?

    Could we do that and offer vouchers to those that truly couldnt handle it, then maybe phase out those vouchers?

    Is it really too "cruel" to assume that people could and should be willing to pay $50 a month or so for the education of their child? They are paying anyway, they just don't have to manage it themselves, uncle sam takes care of it.

    If someone can't be bothered to budget X dollars a month for the education of their child, do they really have any business having children? Do we really want to encourage that lack of resolve in our country through the unqualified subsidy of their childs education?
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • Why do you say he has a zero chance of winning.

    Remember that the polls showing him at 10% (yes, it is 10+ percent these days!) are polls based on likely Republican primary voters -- numbers taken from polls of 2004 republican primary voters ... a year where Bush ran UNOPPOSED, so voting for him in the primaries was a 100% symbolic gesture done ONLY by those hardcore chickenhawks that still wanted more war and right winged shenanigans after the first Bush go-round ... it was the LOWEST TURNOUT EVER for a republican primary ... like 6% turnout.

    So you want the popularity polls based on the 6% who turned out to re-nominate bush in his uncontested 2nd term primary to indicate to you that Ron Paul is unelectable!?!

    The Ron Paul movement is HUGE.
    Even the media is admitting that currently.
    Go watch the Tucker Carlson Ron Paul blimp piece, or the ABC roundtable discussion where they talk about him, or any of the last few Wolf Blitzer pieces ... the guy has a SERIOUS following.

    What other PRIMARY candidate has such a motivated group that is GUARANTEED to go out and vote for them?

    I tell you this much: that candidate is NOT a repubican.

    ;)

    I'm glad you put it that way. As I stated, I've been in the dark on most of the candidates until a few weeks ago. I would like to see Ron Paul win the nomination. At least that would assure us of something better than the passed 8 years. Democrat or Republican president :D
    Abraham Lincoln once said, "If you are a racist, I will attack you with the North."
  • I don't know whats up with the Ru Paul bandwagon. He's a good cross-dresser, but president? I dunno, I guess we'll see.
  • I've heard some crap before...and this is up right there.


    How is this crap? It's not like people are making it up. He is funded and supported by white supremacist groups, no one is making it up.

    He might not agree with them but they do support him because his ideas would give organizations like theirs more leeway.

    It's not a personal dig at him it's just the way it is.
    "Don't lose your inner heat...ever" - EV 5/13/06
  • How is this crap? It's not like people are making it up. He is funded and supported by white supremacist groups, no one is making it up.

    He might not agree with them but they do support him because his ideas would give organizations like theirs more leeway.

    It's not a personal dig at him it's just the way it is.

    His funding is over 10.5 MILLION for the QUARTER (probably going to be 15-20 MILLION by quarter end thanks to 12\16)!

    The white supremeiCIST ... SINGULAR, ONE OF THEM ... one prominent white supremecist ... contribute a whopping FIVE HUNDRED dollars.

    500\1,000,000.000 = Who Gives A Fuck

    ???
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • So any democrat will do for next year then.

    None have come forth with any plan that makes sense other than lip service.

    No substance....no character. Same old...same old...

    fool you three times.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • How is this crap? It's not like people are making it up. He is funded and supported by white supremacist groups, no one is making it up.

    He might not agree with them but they do support him because his ideas would give organizations like theirs more leeway.

    It's not a personal dig at him it's just the way it is.

    This is where you're wrong, it is exactly a personal dig. It's nonsense.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
Sign In or Register to comment.