U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-23-2012, 03:24 PM
 
1,031 posts, read 1,033,244 times
Reputation: 579

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
But the sheeple were too stupid to see it. Obviously, any of the white male Republican candidates would have gotten basicly the same white vote that Romney got... Santorum, Perry, Gingrich. The anti-Obama vote was a givaway to any white male candidate. But the only candidate that could have pulled a sizable number of voters away from Obama was Ron Paul.
Austrian economics is an epic fail. Ron Paul wants to take us back to the Gilded age. If American wanted another Harding or Coolidge they would have voted that way. Libertarians are completely clueless in regards to infrastructure and any any sense of the needs of the many. He would have been a God-awful president. A compassionate man, he is not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-24-2012, 06:38 AM
 
Location: Armsanta Sorad
5,660 posts, read 6,613,819 times
Reputation: 2429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
I asked because I guessed you were basing your points on yourself and not on the rest of the country. Good for you that you are better off and although for you, it's about you, the big picture isn't. Looking at the big picture the economic climate here stinks. The policies put in place have destroyed the equity the lower and middle class had built up. The one percent and members in Congress saw their wealth increase though. It's good to be King.

The system has to change or the inability of the poor to better themselves will continue to wallow in failed policies. Good you recognize that people are slighted. Bad you want to keep business as usual. Throwing my money at it doesn't work.
As far as society, since when does your neighbor have the authority to force you to do something "legally" using threats unless you are stepping on rights? Not liking you because of your skin color or wealth? Yes that's bad but how does that stop one from bettering themselves? If anyone thinks society has made them a loser they only have to look in the mirror to see whom to blame.
Most of the mainstream population will never get the picture. And I keep saying, it's unfortunate that most are used to political corruption and having the government make the decisions for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 12:13 AM
 
Location: Austin
758 posts, read 479,350 times
Reputation: 185
If Ron Paul was the only one who could've defeated Barack Obama, he would've won the GOP ticket. Ron Paul is inept and ultra-conservative. We can't cut off foreign aid when there's a global economy, and we're the world superpower. That's not feasible. The guy means well, but he's not fit to lead this country plain and simple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:35 AM
 
113 posts, read 83,646 times
Reputation: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephistopheles View Post
If Ron Paul was the only one who could've defeated Barack Obama, he would've won the GOP ticket. Ron Paul is inept and ultra-conservative. We can't cut off foreign aid when there's a global economy, and we're the world superpower. That's not feasible. The guy means well, but he's not fit to lead this country plain and simple.
So....it's conservative to pull all troops out of the Middle East? To legalize all drugs? To pardon all (largely minority) nonviolent prisoners? To oppose the Patriot Act? To shut down Guantanamo? To oppose E-Verify? He may be "ultra-conservative," but at the same time is "ultra-liberal." That's why he would appeal to groups that no other Republican would have.

The election would have been the craziest in a long time. Compared to Romney, I think he would have done more poorly among old people (on SS and Medicare), around the same among middle aged, and a whole lot better among young people. When you look at the early primaries, he was pulling about 50% of the young vote. That's 50%, when there were several other candidates. He would have still pulled all the safe states. NC and Virginia still tossups. Florida probably an L because of old people. Ohio probably not in play, due to him completely opposing all bailouts. Maybe had a shot at Iowa, as people knew him a lot better than other places. I do think that he would have had a decent shot at every Western state except California and Hawaii. Especially Colorado and Washington due to the marijuana issue. Probably wins New Hampshire.

I'm not saying he definitely would have won, but it would have been amazing for the country, as people would have been exposed to ideas that they rarely (if ever) hear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 03:21 AM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,845,239 times
Reputation: 1302
i support ron paul, but i do not actually believe that he would have won the election against either mainstream candidate. my goal for this election was for him to get enough votes and enough screen time that people would begin to understand what he actually wants to reform, and that they might wake up and realize how corrupt and ineffective the system is.

maybe in a few decades the system will have loosened up a bit, but right now the democratic and republican parties have a stranglehold on everything and they are fighting dirty to keep it that way. the libertarian party didn't even get the 5% that they would need to get a head start in 2016. maybe someday, but not anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2012, 05:28 AM
 
Location: Austin
758 posts, read 479,350 times
Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by majinkoola View Post
So....it's conservative to pull all troops out of the Middle East? To legalize all drugs? To pardon all (largely minority) nonviolent prisoners? To oppose the Patriot Act? To shut down Guantanamo? To oppose E-Verify? He may be "ultra-conservative," but at the same time is "ultra-liberal." That's why he would appeal to groups that no other Republican would have.

The election would have been the craziest in a long time. Compared to Romney, I think he would have done more poorly among old people (on SS and Medicare), around the same among middle aged, and a whole lot better among young people. When you look at the early primaries, he was pulling about 50% of the young vote. That's 50%, when there were several other candidates. He would have still pulled all the safe states. NC and Virginia still tossups. Florida probably an L because of old people. Ohio probably not in play, due to him completely opposing all bailouts. Maybe had a shot at Iowa, as people knew him a lot better than other places. I do think that he would have had a decent shot at every Western state except California and Hawaii. Especially Colorado and Washington due to the marijuana issue. Probably wins New Hampshire.

I'm not saying he definitely would have won, but it would have been amazing for the country, as people would have been exposed to ideas that they rarely (if ever) hear.
It's conservative to be a strong anti-abortionist, against gay rights, and to deregulate businesses and even allow them to discriminate against minorities. Don't let those other dispositions fool you. Most of those "liberal" ideas Paul has Obama already proposed. It's also conservative to disband FEMA, AmeriCorps, FEMA, and other social programs. Social Security has a $2.7 trillion surplus which the GOP cut funding for to fund the damn war.

Ron Paul also wanted to privatize it and let Wall Street gamble with everyone's retirement once again. Barack Obama has been wanting to shut GTMO as well, but Congress won't let him. Ron Paul like Mitt Romney will tell the constituents what they want to hear, but the guy is inept when push comes to shove. He'd been in Congress 30-plus years and only got one piece of legislation passed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2012, 05:50 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,095,638 times
Reputation: 5600
The right-wing bubble is astonishing. Ron Paul is a fringe national candidate that couldn't even win his party's nomination. He has little following beyond ultra conservatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2012, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Texas
23,941 posts, read 10,136,774 times
Reputation: 5363
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The right-wing bubble is astonishing. Ron Paul is a fringe national candidate that couldn't even win his party's nomination. He has little following beyond ultra conservatives.
The big government bubble is disgraceful. Obama and Romney are horrible national candidates that couldn't even turn around the economy or protect our borders. One look at policy tells us that. They have little success beyond appeasing the one percent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2012, 09:21 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
1,991 posts, read 3,409,155 times
Reputation: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephistopheles View Post
Ron Paul is inept and ultra-conservative. We can't cut off foreign aid when there's a global economy, and we're the world superpower. That's not feasible.
Yes it is- Rand Paul's way. Make it contingent upon the behaviors of the governments which are receiving the aid. Act like an ally and not an adversary or else- no aid to your government. That is completely feasible.

And how is it exactly that people who can't stand welfare to Americans can so happily cheer for American welfare to other nations? What, folks are all for welfare as long as it's not Americans who are getting it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2012, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
69,616 posts, read 79,942,863 times
Reputation: 38974
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The right-wing bubble is astonishing. Ron Paul is a fringe national candidate that couldn't even win his party's nomination. He has little following beyond ultra conservatives.
I doubt many would think of him as an ultra conservative: maybe fiscally, which is what the country needs, but he was more out there someplace, not necessarily conservative. I do not mean out there as a put down, but his policies crossed over both lines. That is why I would not call him an ultra conservative. Paul Ryan is an ultra conservative, so is Perry on most issues and Santorum, not Paul.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top