Ron Paul's devious plan to steal the presidency (interview, poll, regular)

[pollyrobin]

Originally Posted by RPON

LOL...love this.
Ron Paul’s Devious Plan to Steal the Presidency

We use THEIR rules against them and now we are stealing it...ah the joys of hearing neo cons crying.

These are three words I love: Paul - Devious - Plan.

devious: Longer and less direct than the most straightforward way.

We will get there, all the same

[CDusr]

Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow

I wish I could rep a thousand more times for this post.

That last line is the best metaphor yet.

LOL. Yeah I though it quite appropriate.

[Loveshiscountry]

Originally Posted by LauraC

And he hasn't done it and that's why he has no accomplishment. After 22 years in the House he still can't influence people.

What part of helping his constituents did you not understand? The late Senator Byrd from West Virginia is one of the few who has has done as much if not more for his constituents than what Ron Paul has done.

Quit electing big government spend, spend, spend candidates then. That's on you. Take personal responsibility for picking the ones with the failed policies. It's time for you to change direction. Quit going back to the poisonous well.

[stycotl]

Originally Posted by noexcuseforignorance

I'll call BS on that. It's not like he's been even at all close in any of these.

wrong. even with the ballot tampering that the local GOP committees are not even trying all that hard to hide, he has still come very close in some states. you have a hard time with numbers?

then, if you take into account the fraudulence committed against him and other candidates, he would have been close in more of them, and would have taken some of them.

i'm not claiming by any stretch that he would be winning, but he would be closer.

The business community doesn't back

because they, along with the bloated politicians that conspire with them, are the primary beneficiary of the blood, sweat, and tears of the americans that are paying for their luxurious lifestyles under the current system. of course they won't jump happily onto paul's wagon.

I guess though if you're overly emotional and have a man crush on a politician then you might want to make excuses than face up to the fact that most people disagree with the guy.

or we just don't agree with you. but if you really need to cast around ad hominems and straw man arguments in order to feel better about your tenuous grasp of politics, go right ahead.

Originally Posted by JasonF

He's the candidate for people who like to shut off their brains.

i'll just quote to you what i said to noexcuse:

Originally Posted by me

if you really need to cast around ad hominems and straw man arguments in order to feel better about your tenuous grasp of politics, go right ahead.

They want simple solutions to complex problems, and that's what Paul offers. Only his solutions will never get implemented, and if they did, would bring about the downfall of the Republic.

wait, are you suggesting that the system we currently have under established democratic and republican leadership is not bringing about the downfall of the republic?

further, are you seriously trying to contend that the only constitutionalist among the candidates is the one that is going to bring about its death? as opposed to the other four candidates that have time and again shown that they don't at all care for the constitution?

are we even talking about the same presidential race? you know this is 2012, right?

please show me even one other candidate that has a better grasp than paul on constitutional and therefore, republican, values. feel free.

Originally Posted by JasonF

This would be an economic disaster.

you just referred to vetoing any unbalanced budget as a crazy idea, only a couple of posts after trying to claim that paul is the one that would dump america in the toilet. do you not understand where money comes from? do you not understand that an unbalanced budget will put america in the toilet, as we have seen over the last decade or so?

so how precisely is fixing the budget and holding americans responsible for their expenditures a bad thing?

While this idea is fine during good economic times, it immediately leads to disaster when economic downturns occur, government revenues drop, and government spending goes up. We've already seen what happens when governments try to implement enormous austerity measures during a recession - economic failure. It has never worked. It didn't work in the US. It didn't work in Europe, and it's failing in Europe again now.

whether or not you think it is fine, raising the ceiling doesn't work. it didn't work last time, it isn't working now, and it won't work in the future. you can't even call it a bandaid or temporary fix, because it is actually just making things worse.

again, do you not understand where money comes from? you can't just make it out of nothing, and you can't just keep spending what you don't have. bad credit is killing our nation, and you are proposing that we continue to aggravate the problem rather than fix it.

Originally Posted by JasonF

Yes, I am in charge of my finances. That's why I, unlike the Paulbots, realize that I can't quit my job and expect to still be able to afford a place to live and food to put on the table.

what we are talking about is the need to sell the porsche, get rid of the gym membership that no one even uses, stop eating out for every meal, get rid of cable, and for heaven's sake, quit asking for more lines of credit to pay for all of this entitlement nonsense.

I guess I now see how a Ron Paul supporter is able to support his insane ideas - complete ignorance of math, economics, and even basic historical facts.

again, keep resorting to insults in a failing attempt to hide the fact that you don't have an argument.

Originally Posted by Natural510

People aren't flocking to Paul from either side of the aisle for a valid reason...he's a kook; not because of his policies but his overall line of thinking.

yeah, because a constitutional, fiscally responsible and conservative overall line of thinking is way out of line… if you're looking at it from the slovenly viewpoint of an establishment democrat or republican.

Originally Posted by nmnita

I am not to sure you know much about politics. Being a Paul supporter, obviously you are biased, which is to be expected,

any more biased than die-hard supporters of other candidates? doubt it.

but much of what you say is subject to debate. The chances of any candidate winning the pres at this time in our country is almost impossible.

i'll presume you mean 3rd-party candidate. and if so, i agree, because the democratic and republican party set it up that way in their lust for power and money.

doesn't sound like something i'd be bragging about as much as you do.

Remember Perot tried it and before him John Anderson. The Libertarians are getting stronger and may, someday be a party to becken with, not yet. I am not sure you are old enough to even know who those 2 men are. The reason so much of the opposition is coming from the Republican party has to do with his not really being a Republican at heart.

i am not sure you are old enough to know this, but the current republican party is not truly republican––they aren't the true republican party. go look up the history of the republican party and tell me in what ways the current party resembles its predecessor, and in what ways it differs.

He has a base, yes, but I don't think you can call it all that strong,

the only candidate with a base that might compare is obama. no other candidate can come close, otherwise we wouldn't see so much whining toward paul supporters about possibly splitting the party vote and possibly even bringing it to a brokered convention.

the only reason paul and his supporters are still a minority when it comes to political clout is again because of the established system, the parasitic political system that we currently suffer under.

and most that do support him do so based on one or two issures.

one issue, actually. the constitution.

Many seem to like his stand on world affairs, even though the majority of the population does not agree with him, some like his stand on drugs, most do not. Neither of these views are truely supported by Republicans.

of course not, because current republicans are fiscal liberals and only social conservatives, and by that, i mean uber social conservatives.

You think he isn't a loser, I think the word Loser, is too strong but he hasn't gotten much accomplished in his many years in congress. What does that tell you?

that he isn't willing to lower his standards for popularity. that he is fighting an uphill battle because he refuses to step on the backs of his countrymen in order to get a leg up before abandoning them to the wolves like pretty much every other elected official in washington.

As for those supporting him being educated, other than the very young college crowd, I doubt there are anymore college educated Ron Paul supporters than Gingrich, Santorum or Romney.

Can you explain your statement about Republicans being progressive? This, of course, can be said about either party on some issues since the beginning of our country, but overall it isn't really true.

Nita

i don't know the statistics on his supporters versus the opposition at all, because that honestly doesn't concern me. his policies concern me, and the policies of the opposition really concern me. who votes for them doesn't matter one whit.

still, in my experience, most paul supporters that i know support him because they have done their homework and become absolutely disgusted with the rest of the politicians. whereas most of the establishment supporters that i know do so out of tradition or straight party line, and don't attend caucuses or rallies (thus the basis of this thread in the first place, because the paul supporters are outnumbering others at the local level), really don't follow or understand the issues, and are perfectly comfortable in their passive state.

[emilybh]

Originally Posted by CDusr

I don't see it this way. Too me it is quality over quantity. It's not just about how many bills you pass. It matters what you try to pass and what you chose not to vote for. I am quite happy with RP's consistent record.

Congress's approval rating is barely beating for a reason, yet they pass plenty of bills. This means nothing to me.

HR 1207 for example, had huge overwhelming support of reps and people yet didn't get passed. Key individuals used some of the same old dirty tactics we often see to prevent it.

However, it lead to some of the most important information we have had to date and also to raising awareness to a very important issue. This was mainly due to RP.

So many issues have been brought to people's attention that are very important. The constitution, foreign policy, economic and fiscal policy, as well.

Exactly and in the past 20 years, I think anyone would be hard pressed to find 3 bills that were passed (or even one for that matter) that actually did some good for Americans and weren't designed to strip us of more freedoms and kill our free market system or give government and big corporations more control over us. Who wants to vote for anyone who sponsored legislation like that? I certainly don't.

[emilybh]

Originally Posted by thebigr

"He's the candidate for people who like to shut off their brains". I believe you have that wrong. He is the candidate for people who shut off the TV and find the truth about what is really happening in the world. I use to think Paul was a kook also because the MSM told me so. But after I did the thinking for myself I realized Paul made more sense then any other candidate.

I use to be a registered Republican loving everything Bush did, faithfully watching FOX news and believing everything they told me. But anyone with half a brain eventually catches on and can see how we are being lied to.

Hate to break your bubble Jason but I do believe if we continue the path we are on now the Republic will fall. If you don't believe me just keep spending more money than you bring in in your personal life and see how long you survive.

Good for you!

[emilybh]

Originally Posted by LauraC

And he hasn't done it and that's why he has no accomplishment. After 22 years in the House he still can't influence people.

He "influenced" the entire House of Representatives to want an in depth audit of the Federal Reserve. I consider that a huge accomplishment.

He's influenced so many people just about every American who follows politics in the least knows who he is. He's had more media appearances than any of the other GOP candidates in the past 4 years.

What do you mean he can't influence people? He's got thousands of people showing up to see him wherever he is whereas the other more "influential" (in your eyes) candidates can only draw dozens of people.

Just because lobbyists can find spineless legislators to pass bad bills and pay them off to do it doesn't mean those legislators are "influential" in any way that is beneficial to We the People.

[emilybh]

Originally Posted by emilybh

He "influenced" the entire House of Representatives to want an in depth audit of the Federal Reserve. I consider that a huge accomplishment.

He's influenced so many people just about every American who follows politics in the least knows who he is. He's had more media appearances than any of the other GOP candidates in the past 4 years.

What do you mean he can't influence people? He's got thousands of people showing up to see him wherever he is whereas the other more "influential" (in your eyes) candidates can only draw dozens of people.

Just because lobbyists can find spineless legislators to pass bad bills and pay them off to do it doesn't mean those legislators are "influential" in any way that is beneficial to We the People.

Not only that but according to this Time Magazine Poll, he's the most influential in the entire WORLD ....by FAR! Poll Results - The 2012 TIME 100 Poll - TIME

[slackjaw]

Originally Posted by emilybh

He's had more media appearances than any of the other GOP candidates in the past 4 years.

We interrupt our regularly scheduled constant claims the media is ignoring Ron Paul to bring you this special bulletin... Ron Paul has had more media appearances than any of the other GOP candidates in the past 4 years.

What do you mean he can't influence people? He's got thousands of people showing up to see him wherever he is whereas the other more "influential" (in your eyes) candidates can only draw dozens of people.

A lot more than a dozen keep voting for the other candidates. Well except maybe Newt.

Originally Posted by emilybh

Not only that but according to this Time Magazine Poll, he's the most influential in the entire WORLD ....by FAR! Poll Results - The 2012 TIME 100 Poll - TIME

Agreed, Ron Paul does very well in online polls. I'm sure news of this poll spread like wildfire thru forums and message boards with names like "liberty forums" etc. and the votes came flooding in.

[stycotl]

Originally Posted by LauraC

And he hasn't done it and that's why he has no accomplishment. After 22 years in the House he still can't influence people.

you're not much for doing any research before talking, are you?

just in case you didn't click on emily's linked article, here is the synopsis:

Originally Posted by time staff

The leader of a vibrant libertarian movement, Paul has drawn huge, passionate crowds throughout the Republican presidential campaign. But on his third and final bid for the White House, Paul is again poised to come up short. Even so, the retiring 12-term Congressman has reshaped the national political debate and left behind his imprint on his party — not to mention an heir, Senator Rand Paul, to inherit his army.

just the very fact that the political doctrines that he has been preaching for decades finally became popular enough that the GOP decided to back off of its usual slander against him, and what's more, decided to jump on his bandwagon at least to a degree, in order to capitalize on his message, tells me his influence is doing its job.

so much for your claims then. of course, we know you're just going to keep on insulting and hating anyway; truth doesn't matter to the political zealots that would like to shut ron paul up. that's all right, though. every time paul meets one of your challenges, and you guys backtrack and move the goalpost in order to claim that he is still a lone, delusional kook that can't influence anyone and doesn't have a chance in hell at achieving his goals, i have the utter satisfaction of knowing that you guys couldn't recognize a fallacious argument if it hit you in the face.