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 12-01-2012, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
69,596 posts, read 79,920,399 times
Reputation: 38963

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Uninformed and those with a twisted agenda would think that. He knows his policies inside and out and has never been afraid to discuss the issues. He's the informed person. He's one of those who warned us to not manipulate the free market in the housing industry or a boom followed by a bust will occur. And it did. He was the one of those who warned us our foreign policy would make us less safe. And it did.
He's not the one making race, or sex, or if a dog is on a car roof the issue. He is the one who makes the issue, the issue.
But those who support the status quo will of course shy away from discussing the issues and the policies surrounding those issues, since the policies they back have failed time and time again.
It's time people woke up.
you are missing the point because you are such a Paul supporter: I have not said a word here about his policies, my point, he had no desire to be Pres, just to get his message out: if he had gotten the nomination he would have been dumb founded. This is not saying he is or was or wasn't qualified...

I know you will never understand or accept this, but that is how I see it. My opinion only, you have yours!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2012, 09:07 PM
 
4,480 posts, read 3,994,899 times
Reputation: 1481
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
Personal responsibilty, ending wars, which includes ending the drug war that is a massive failure, as well as fiscal responsibility, such as cutting spending, is draconian? Wow, who knew?
Don't you know that Americans just LOVE war? That's why Bushie-boy wanted to be our 'war president' - he knew how bloodthirsty Americans are. That's why there are so many Chicken-hawks that love to preach the virtues of war without actually having to BE in one. Ron Paul actually served in the military - maybe that's why he is so adverse to the stupid unnecessary ones.

And the 'war on drugs' - don't you realize what a great success that has been - of course only if success is measured in terms of piles of dead bodies and billionaire drug lords.

Ron Paul was stupid enough to give free medical care to his patients who couldn't afford it - including blacks. How's that for a solution to the healthcare crisis - compassion?

He wants to cut spending, especially on the war-machine. Doesn't he realize that the saying 'no guts - no glory' applies? (but only to Chickenhawks).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 09:30 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,388 posts, read 8,129,235 times
Reputation: 4070
Default Ron Paul was the only one who could have defeated Obama

If that's true, why didn't he ever come close to getting past Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 09:42 PM
 
755 posts, read 614,584 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
If that's true, why didn't he ever come close to getting past Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich?
Amazing, isn't it?

Ron Paul got fewer votes than Newt Gingrich...

Who got fewer votes than Rick Santorum...

Who got fewer votes than Mitt Romney...

Who lost to President Obama ...

... but Paul would have defeated Obama?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 10:16 PM
 
Location: Orlando
8,221 posts, read 10,990,136 times
Reputation: 4022
Why do people think this way?

This is simple.

RP<MR<BO

RP is therefore <BO and would have had no chance of winning.... but it would have been a more interesting race and a far more honest campaign.

When you have the likes of Adelson shoveling millions in to MR pockets so he can get the gov from prosecuting him.... There was no chance anyone but MR would win the Rep side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2012, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,203,513 times
Reputation: 3949
Paul couldn't even secure the Republican nomination, and you think Democrats would have voted for him?

Are you high?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2012, 05:14 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
2,080 posts, read 1,381,964 times
Reputation: 437
All these experts coming out of the woodwork. Its hilarious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2012, 11:57 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
19,528 posts, read 13,163,464 times
Reputation: 14237
Quote:
Originally Posted by RebelYell14 View Post
All these experts coming out of the woodwork. Its hilarious.
Institutions are full of people who giggle continuously over a joke no one but them understands.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2012, 04:33 AM
 
Location: Texas
23,935 posts, read 10,131,721 times
Reputation: 5361
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
you are missing the point because you are such a Paul supporter: I have not said a word here about his policies, my point, he had no desire to be Pres, just to get his message out: if he had gotten the nomination he would have been dumb founded. This is not saying he is or was or wasn't qualified...
I am not missing your point. You made it up how he had no desire to be President. That's media fluff. Many times he said he was in it to win and of course he wants to get his message out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
I know you will never understand or accept this, but that is how I see it. My opinion only, you have yours!!
If there was something that supported you opinion I'd understand but there is nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2012, 08:20 PM
 
12,870 posts, read 12,817,943 times
Reputation: 4446
logically, why ron paul could have won:

he would have received the republican vote because most don't like obama's anti business policies at all.

he would have received some of the democratic vote because some democrats still don't like wars, loss of freedom, or big in-your-face government-particularly younger voters.

he would have received some independent votes because he was not a fan of illegal immigration or foreign aid, and would have put america first.

he would have received the vote of those who don't like obamacare and what that is going to represent in terms of job losses going forward.

he would have received more of the jobless vote this time, simply because there are more of them.

but, of course, it's too late for that now.
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