Romney and Cain... (voting, campaign, ethics, liberal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He just said in an interview with Chris Wallace that he would not run as a third party candidate. When Wallace asked him why, he said in Ron Paul fashion..."Because I don't want to". lol.
Thanks for the update> I have been busy cooking all day and haven't watched Chris Wallace yet, but Paul has pretty much said all the way along, he would not run as a third party candidate. I believe he is sincere and certainly smart enough to know if he can't get the nomination running as a libertarian or anything else will only cost money with no chance of victory.
I don't know, nor do I care. Ron Paul looks like he's running as a Libertarian if he doesn't get the GOP nod, so I'm gonna be voting 3rd party
I guess if you place your ideology ahead of the best interest of the country that is fine... Ron Paul will only see the oval office if he is invited to visit a sitting president.
I guess if you place your ideology ahead of the best interest of the country that is fine... Ron Paul will only see the oval office if he is invited to visit a sitting president.
Yep. That's right. I'm not voting for Obama-lite. You can continue endorsing corruption, but I'm getting off the Go Team bandwagon. Come back to me when your "electable, mainstream" candidate fails you. After all, it was "electable, mainstream" presidents that ran this country into the ground. You do the math, just don't come back blaming Obama when the GOP president, if elected, does not come through
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7
He just said in an interview with Chris Wallace that he would not run as a third party candidate. When Wallace asked him why, he said in Ron Paul fashion..."Because I don't want to". lol.
I guess if you place your ideology ahead of the best interest of the country that is fine... Ron Paul will only see the oval office if he is invited to visit a sitting president.
Quote:
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
-John Quincy Adams
Quote:
Any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one
Yep. That's right. I'm not voting for Obama-lite. You can continue endorsing corruption, but I'm getting off the Go Team bandwagon. Come back to me when your "electable, mainstream" candidate fails you. After all, it was "electable, mainstream" presidents that ran this country into the ground. You do the math, just don't come back blaming Obama when the GOP president, if elected, does not come through
That was published on October 27th, this interview was on just today. He made it crystal clear that he would not run as a third party candidate. Why would he want to?
Both excellent quotes.. and if I could agree with Ron Pauls stance on either drug policy or foreign policy, then I could and would support him. I agree with his vision of smaller government and recognize his economic prowess... However, at the end of the day, I can not and will not support him on either of the other two and therefore cannot support him as a presidential candidate.
Thanks for the update> I have been busy cooking all day and haven't watched Chris Wallace yet, but Paul has pretty much said all the way along, he would not run as a third party candidate. I believe he is sincere and certainly smart enough to know if he can't get the nomination running as a libertarian or anything else will only cost money with no chance of victory.
NIta
I always watch this at 6PM on Sunday. I forgot Paul was the guest.
Both excellent quotes.. and if I could agree with Ron Pauls stance on either drug policy or foreign policy, then I could and would support him. I agree with his vision of smaller government and recognize his economic prowess... However, at the end of the day, I can not and will not support him on either of the other two and therefore cannot support him as a presidential candidate.
First off, all he wants to do is get the federal government out of the drug business. He's not "legalizing" them he's simply recognizing that they the jurisdiction of the states. The federal war on drugs has been an abysmal failure and a boondoggle of epic proportions. Individual states will be more than welcome to keep drugs illegal, and I'd imagine most of them would.
As far as foreign policy goes, I challenge you to look at the state of the country, and the state of the world and ask yourself if we're on the right path? We spend upwards of a trillion dollars a year on total defense related spending, and what has it profited it us? Even if you insist on a hawkish policy predicated on offense the simple fact is we can't afford it. It's unsustainable. Look into the concept of blowback. The CIA acknowledges this phenomenon exists.
The idea that the US can gallivant all over the globe and deploy troops onto any country we see fit without causing any resentment is not just wrong, but dangerously naive. For every "terrorist" we kill over there we create 10 new ones. We go around thinking we can drop bombs anywhere we want, well he kill innocent people and just chalk it up to "collateral damage!" Imagine if other nations did this to us? Imagine if Iran decided to build a base in your state and said they were taking over the region. What if the locals decided to resist this and attack that base and Iran decided their policy was if we just kill enough Americans maybe they'll stop? Think about for a second how you would react if your mother got killed in an air strike and that's met with a shrug and "meh it happens, collateral damage?" We don't want them doing it to us, so what gives us the authority to do it to them? We don't get it from the Constitution that's for sure.
"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy."- John Quincy Adams
Ron Paul is often chided by his Republican opponents for his extreme views on American foreign policy. His calls for ending all foreign wars and shutting hundreds of military bases across the globe have drawn howls from his GOP rivals, who have labeled the moves irresponsible and naĂŻve.
His campaign pledge of cutting all foreign aid and withdrawing U.S. participation in the World Trade Organization and the United Nations has been at odds with even the most conservative members of his own party.
Yet as voting day in Iowa and New Hampshire draws near, Paul, the Congressman from Texas, is finding support for his non-interventionist positions from a growing number of foreign policy experts.
“He’s attacking our rich lazy friends, why is that not more popular,” said Harvey Sapolsky, emeritus professor of public policy and organization at MIT. He backs Paul’s calls for reducing America’s military budget, arguing that much of it is used to defend wealthy nations’ security.
A huge, Cold War-era global presence — with hundreds of overseas military bases — isn’t necessary, now that the Soviet threat is over and the collapse of communism, Sapolsky said.
“It’s not in America’s interest,” said Sapolsky, who added that despite the drumbeat in the media over the fear of terrorism, America is the safest it has ever been in its history.
Christopher Preble, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, is also another foreign policy expert who agrees that the United States is extraordinarily secure due to its geography and nuclear weapons, and doesn’t need a huge global presence.
WASHINGTON, Nov 4 (Reuters) - A consumer group asked U.S. regulators on Friday to probe allegations that Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain got illegal campaign cash from an influential conservative group backed by the wealthy brothers who run Koch Industries.
The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics consumer group in Washington said it filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission seeking a probe of a report alleging that tens of thousands of dollars in illegal contributions were made to Cain's campaign earlier this year by outside political groups.
Officials for the Cain campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Corporations, including those that are not-for-profit, are not allowed to donate to presidential candidates. Only individuals and political action committees can give, and such contributions are limited.
The complaint comes as Cain is dogged by sexual harassment accusations by at least three women from when he was head of the National Restaurant Association in the mid-1990s. He maintains his innocence.
The charges against Cain could blunt his swift rise in the Republican race, where he has surged ahead of Mitt Romney or even with him in national polls and in Iowa, the state that holds the first U.S. nominating contest of 2012 on Jan. 3.
The illegal contributions complaint follows a report in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel this week citing records of Wisconsin-based Prosperity USA and another political group that show they funded travel for Cain as he traveled in Iowa, the purchase of iPads, and other expenses.
The documents show that Prosperity USA, a unit of the national Tea Party-aligned group Americans for Prosperity, was owed about $40,000 by the Cain campaign. Such a payment would be illegal whether it was a donation or a loan to be paid back, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics said.
The Cain Train is derailing, anyone still on it is more than welcome in the Ron Paul Express.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
