Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-05-2012, 11:33 AM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 11:37 AM by reverendjeremiah.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 11:25 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(04-05-2012 11:12 AM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  No, what irritates me is that twice ihave pointed out how twisted and fucked Ron Paul is for doing what he is doing to the delegates, yet you brush it aside.
I'm a fan of his strategy. I love that he is more successful at it than Romney, which is the sole reason it's even possible. The RNC created this delegate process specifically to aid Romeny in securing delegates in districts that he would not win. They've made it very clear that it's not about the votes, it's about the delegates. If anyone is to blame it's the RNC, not Ron Paul. Maybe you're just scared because you know Ron Paul can beat Obama.
(04-05-2012 11:17 AM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  out as many right wingers and moderates as possible.
You're a loon dude. Fringe to the point of extreme. God forbid those crazy fucking moderates get elected.
Of course you are a fan of his strategy. It is a "legal" cheat, and cheating is the only way Ron Paul will ever even get close to the presidency. The problem is, when it comes time for the presidential elections, you will have those states who popularly voted for romney, but have Ron paul delegates packed, suddenly you will not see anyone voting Republican.
-
As I said before, why would I vote for a forced Ron Paul delegation when I want Romney in office.....but you really dont understand do you? The only way you could sneak ron Paul into office is if we didnt have the first amendment and nobody reported on the backhanded tactics Ron Paul is using. This tactic just SCREAMS to me "Im Ron Paul, I cant win the popular vote...so I have to find a legal way to cheat." It just screams out loud how untrustworthy and unpopular the libertarians are in America.



Quote:You're a loon dude. Fringe to the point of extremism. God forbid those crazy fucking moderates get elected.
At least i am doing it legitimately, instead of supporting back handed ways around the electoral system like you are doing...yet you call me a loon. I am completely opposed to delegate packing. You, on the other hand, are so extremist that your party has to resort to "legal" cheating in order to impose your extremism on the rest of us....besides, some moderates I dont mind.

"Praise Sweet Baby Jesus!" - RevJ. Cool

My Sites: www.jesuschristarcade.com - www.facebook.com/jesuschristarcade - Twitter@jesusarcade
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 11:39 AM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 11:41 AM by germanyt.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 11:33 AM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  
(04-05-2012 11:25 AM)germanyt Wrote:  I'm a fan of his strategy. I love that he is more successful at it than Romney, which is the sole reason it's even possible. The RNC created this delegate process specifically to aid Romeny in securing delegates in districts that he would not win. They've made it very clear that it's not about the votes, it's about the delegates. If anyone is to blame it's the RNC, not Ron Paul. Maybe you're just scared because you know Ron Paul can beat Obama.
You're a loon dude. Fringe to the point of extreme. God forbid those crazy fucking moderates get elected.
Of course you are a fan of his strategy. It is a "legal" cheat, and cheating is the only way Ron Paul will ever even get close to the presidency. The problem is, when it comes time for the presidential elections, you will have those states who popularly voted for romney, but have Ron paul delegates packed, suddenly you will not see anyone voting Republican.
-
As I said before, why would I vote for a forced Ron Paul delegation when I want Romney in office.....but you really dont understand do you? The only way you could sneak ron Paul into office is if we didnt have the first amendment and nobody reported on the backhanded tactics Ron Paul is using. This tactic just SCREAMS to me "Im Ron Paul, I cant win the popular vote...so I have to find a legal way to cheat." It just screams out loud how untrustworthy and unpopular the libertarians are in America.
You underestimate the desire that the right have to see Obama gone. Any Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Palin, Bachman, Cain, Perry, Huntsman, McCain, Huckabee, etc, etc voter will vote for Ron Paul in a general election. Ron Paul would carry more moderates and independents than Obama and would gain Democrats that are dissatisfied with Obama. How you feel about the way the RNC operates it's nomination is irrelevant. In a general Ron Paul would win popular and electoral vote.
(04-05-2012 11:33 AM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  You, on the other hand, are so extremist that your party has to resort to "legal" cheating in order to impose your extremism on the rest of us.
Because small, fiscally responsible government and increased individual liberties is extreme. Dodgy

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 11:54 AM
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
Quote:Maybe you're just scared because you know Ron Paul can beat Obama.
LMFAO - ron Paul is barely able to keep his senate seat, much less actually present a true threat to any presidential candidate. Thankfully he is doing what he is good at, splitting up the right wing vote...which I support him doing 100%.
Quote:You underestimate the desire that the right have to see Obama gone. Any Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Palin, Bachman, Cain, Perry, Huntsman, McCain, Huckabee, etc, etc voter will vote for Ron Paul in a general election. Ron Paul would carry more moderates and independents than Obama and would gain Democrats that are dissatisfied with Obama. How you feel about the way the RNC operates it's nomination is irrelevant. In a general Ron Paul would win popular and electoral vote.
I see. So you admit that ron Paul could NEVER be able to win the presidency on his own merits, so he therefore needs to pack the delegates and ride in on right wing racism and hatred...LOL...what a wonderful presidency that would be.

"Praise Sweet Baby Jesus!" - RevJ. Cool

My Sites: www.jesuschristarcade.com - www.facebook.com/jesuschristarcade - Twitter@jesusarcade
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 12:05 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 12:23 PM by TrulyX.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 10:53 AM)germanyt Wrote:  Ron Paul is a Christian and a creationist.
Had to look that up, and his comments on evolution were absurd. You could say he was just being a good politician (i.e. lying to get support), but even if that were the case, it's still crazy.

How, or why, would you be willing to support someone like that? I know you said you agree with some of his other positions, but I think him displaying such ignorance, and maybe even lack of intelligence, should lead you to, at a minimum, retract your support for him and find another candidate with similar views, on the issues you support, and a little more intellect.

Quote: Because small, fiscally responsible government and increased individual liberties is extreme.
He is a libertarian; isn't that about as far right as you can go?

If someone on the left was a Communist, would you not call them extreme?

edit: The other Republicans are just about as extreme as Ron Paul on economical issues, but they differ from Paul because they happen to think individual liberties are up for strict regulation.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 12:09 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 12:22 PM by germanyt.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 11:54 AM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  
Quote:Maybe you're just scared because you know Ron Paul can beat Obama.
LMFAO - ron Paul is barely able to keep his senate seat, much less actually present a true threat to any presidential candidate. Thankfully he is doing what he is good at, splitting up the right wing vote...which I support him doing 100%.
Quote:You underestimate the desire that the right have to see Obama gone. Any Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Palin, Bachman, Cain, Perry, Huntsman, McCain, Huckabee, etc, etc voter will vote for Ron Paul in a general election. Ron Paul would carry more moderates and independents than Obama and would gain Democrats that are dissatisfied with Obama. How you feel about the way the RNC operates it's nomination is irrelevant. In a general Ron Paul would win popular and electoral vote.
I see. So you admit that ron Paul could NEVER be able to win the presidency on his own merits, so he therefore needs to pack the delegates and ride in on right wing racism and hatred...LOL...what a wonderful presidency that would be.
I admit that the RNC has done everything it can to prevent Paul from winning. That's only half the problem though. The other half is people not getting to the polls. And LOL at riding the racism. There are as many racists voting for Obama because he's black as there are voting against him because he's black. And on that note, I'm done discussing this with you. You are blinded by your own partisanship.

Oh and Ron Paul is a congressman, not a senator.
(04-05-2012 12:05 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(04-05-2012 10:53 AM)germanyt Wrote:  Ron Paul is a Christian and a creationist.
Had to look that up, and his comments on evolution were absurd. You could say he was just being a good politician (i.e. lying to get support), but even if that were the case, it's still crazy.

How, or why, would you be willing to support someone like that? I know you said you agree with some of his other positions, but I think him displaying such ignorance, and maybe even lack of intelligence, should lead you to, at a minimum, retract your support for him and find another candidate with similar views, on the issues you support, and a little more intellect.

Quote: Because small, fiscally responsible government and increased individual liberties is extreme.
He is a libertarian; isn't that about as far right as you can go?

If someone on the left was a Communist, would you not call them extreme?

edit: The others on the right are just about as extreme as Ron Paul on economical issues, but they also happen to think individual liberties are up for strict regulation.
Libertarianism is not, NOT a right wing position. I'm a Libertarian and fall dead center on the political compass between left and right. The opposite of libertarianism is authoritarianism. And the reason his faith doesn't concern me is because he has no interest in legislation regarding it. I support his right to practice his religion and he supports my right to be free from it.

[Image: 250px-Political_chart.svg.png]

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 12:43 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 12:52 PM by TrulyX.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
Quote: Libertarianism is not, NOT a right wing position. I'm a Libertarian and
fall dead center on the political compass between left and right.
You can't just pick a random chart, post it and say, randomly, I fall there (and it happens to be the center) to reject being an extremist.

The left and right (not the top and bottom displayed in the picture) would be Socialism (fully implemented) and Capitalism (also full implemented).

Libertarianism generally refers to people in regards to both individual and economical freedoms. That would make them extremists. You can't get anymore extreme than an unregulated completely capitalistic economical structure supported by libertarians.

edit: I know it's due to years of negative rhetoric, but I frustrates me to see how a progressive liberal who simply wants to regulate a economy that is based on capitalism gets called and extremist, when the extremist position would be a communist. Then someone advocating a completely free, or at least as close to unregulated as you can get, market is not an extremist. Hell at least let liberals start a Marxist socialist transition first.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 12:53 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 12:58 PM by germanyt.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
Economic Left/Right: -0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.67

[Image: pcgraphpng.php?ec=-0.38&soc=-4.67]

I wasn't just randomly picking a spot for myself. And libertarianism doesn't suggest completely unregulated capitalism. A true libertarian would advoate only laws in the interest of public safety and protection of private property. So no seatbelt laws (for adults) but keep speed limit laws. Corporate regulatory laws could fall under public safety because public safety is not exclusive to protection from physical harm. It also includes how a company might take financial advantage of an individual or the system itself.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 12:56 PM
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
Quote: And the reason his faith doesn't concern me
I was referring to his position on evolution. How can you get away with saying you don't believe in evolution, or I think the quote I saw was something along the lines of "evolution is just a theory"? Would as a logical, rational, and educated person be outraged by those comments? Wouldn't, also, those comments make you question his intellect?

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 01:00 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 01:05 PM by germanyt.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 12:56 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
Quote: And the reason his faith doesn't concern me
I was referring to his position on evolution. How can you get away with saying you don't believe in evolution, or I think the quote I saw was something along the lines of "evolution is just a theory"? Would as a logical, rational, and educated person be outraged by those comments? Wouldn't, also, those comments make you question his intellect?
It might if not for his position on a dozen other issues that I find important and agree with him on. I can look past religious indocrination since he's not proposing social conservatism like a Rick Santorum would. Now I'm not saying Ron Paul wouldn't mind seeing creationism taught to people. Just that he would not enact laws like that on a federal level involving the school system. In this particular case he understands that there are private schools out there for parents to send their kids to if they choose and those that dont' want their kids to learn creationism should have that choice too. He's a firm believer in separation of church and state and he acknowledges that his faith plays a part in the kind of person he is but doesn't impact his policy.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2012, 01:08 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2012 01:15 PM by TrulyX.)
RE: Why Ron Paul is not going anywhere.
(04-05-2012 12:53 PM)germanyt Wrote:  Economic Left/Right: -0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.67

[Image: pcgraphpng.php?ec=-0.38&soc=-4.67]

I wasn't just randomly picking a spot for myself. And libertarianism doesn't suggest completely unregulated capitalism. A true libertarian would advoate only laws in the interest of public safety and protection of private property. So no seatbelt laws (for adults) but keep speed limit laws. Corporate regulatory laws could fall under public safety because public safety is not exclusive to protection from physical harm. It also includes how a company might take financial advantage of an individual or the system itself.
Libertarianism might not, but libertarians seem to have no problem suggesting, maybe not 'completely', but a lot farther to the right than you suggesting. To be in the center economically you'd basically have to be for a mixed, regulated economy. You can't stand up, scream, and put your foot down for the free market and then not consider yourself an extremist, on the idea that capitalism sound cool; it's still far right on the chart.

To be in the middle, you'd basically have to be for socialized programs like health care, education, welfare programs, as well as police, firefighters, public officials, infrastructure/transportation, and R&D and all that good shit, as well as being for regulated capitalism in the rest of the economy.

You'd basically be Barack Obama.



(04-05-2012 01:00 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(04-05-2012 12:56 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I was referring to his position on evolution. How can you get away with saying you don't believe in evolution, or I think the quote I saw was something along the lines of "evolution is just a theory"? Would as a logical, rational, and educated person be outraged by those comments? Wouldn't, also, those comments make you question his intellect?
It might if not for his position on a dozen other issues that I find important and agree with him on. I can look past religious indocrination since he's not proposing social conservatism like a Rick Santorum would. Now I'm not saying Ron Paul wouldn't mind seeing creationism taught to people. Just that he would not enact laws like that on a federal level involving the school system. In this particular case he understands that there are private schools out there for parents to send their kids to if they choose and those that dont' want their kids to learn creationism should have that choice too. He's a firm believer in separation of church and state and he acknowledges that his faith plays a part in the kind of person he is but doesn't impact his policy.
So I'm assuming that you're not questioning his intellectual abilities? To me, I couldn't trust anyone that ignorant. There are tons of religious people who believe in evolution and science and still hold a faith in god.

Is it just because he is the only one running. It seems to me a guy like Penn Jillette would be your idol.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: