Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-22-2009, 11:22 PM
 
Location: Neither here nor there
14,810 posts, read 16,150,153 times
Reputation: 33001

Advertisements

Ron Paul is too old to run for president again but he may well have started something at the grassroots level. Who knows? Someone may pick up his torch and run with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2009, 05:54 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,140,979 times
Reputation: 49244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunucu Beach View Post
Ron Paul is too old to run for president again but he may well have started something at the grassroots level. Who knows? Someone may pick up his torch and run with it.
I am not sure about that, but you could be right...

NIta
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 05:55 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,140,979 times
Reputation: 49244
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCAnalyst View Post
Why isn't anyone talking about him? It seems like given the current state of the economy, and the fact that he is a fiscal conservative, it just makes sense that many Americans would vote for him - if they knew what he stood for!
Because he is going to be too old, he was pushing this last time.

NIta
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 05:59 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,140,979 times
Reputation: 49244
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
I could never get past Ron Paul's statement early in the debates of his last run about preferring to fight terrorists on our soil rather then overseas.

He has some good ideas. I appreciate that he is one of the few who seem to uphold his oath to the Constitution. But for President? Not a chance. Sometimes the guy just comes of as a loon!
Too many have forgotten that, I too couldn't get over it.

Also when people talk about him, how many remember Anderson in 1980 or Ross P? These types of candidates do nothing but stir up trouble.

Though I have said if I had it to do over again, I may have voted for him just to protest, but yes, I think he does seem a little loonie!!!

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 05:16 PM
 
1,340 posts, read 2,794,146 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
Too many have forgotten that, I too couldn't get over it.

Also when people talk about him, how many remember Anderson in 1980 or Ross P? These types of candidates do nothing but stir up trouble.

Though I have said if I had it to do over again, I may have voted for him just to protest, but yes, I think he does seem a little loonie!!!

Nita
Loonie is voting for the two Wall Street parties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 07:22 PM
 
8,754 posts, read 10,122,561 times
Reputation: 1434
He will be a little long in the tooth by 2012 and he is not really attractive as a candidate...sorry that does make a difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 05:59 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,140,979 times
Reputation: 49244
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7 View Post
He will be a little long in the tooth by 2012 and he is not really attractive as a candidate...sorry that does make a difference.
yes, you are right, it does. That is too bad, but we do judge our candidates somewhat by looks, personality, and overall appearance. There are some that just make you feel good, Paul isn't that type at all.

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 06:22 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,739 posts, read 40,793,232 times
Reputation: 61988
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
He also will be around 80 in 2012. And remember the posts here about "Gampy John" and other assorted derogatory comments about McCain's age last year.
I also think his age will be held against him. Not for anything but if Nancy Pelosi is still third in line for the Presidency in 2012, I want some younger/healthier people two steps above her. You don't know how nervous I got when Dick Cheney had health problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,941 posts, read 17,730,252 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
I could never get past Ron Paul's statement early in the debates of his last run about preferring to fight terrorists on our soil rather then overseas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
Too many have forgotten that, I too couldn't get over it.
Nita
He never promoted fighting them here. To say so is disingenuous. He said the terrorists want to fight us over there because it's much easier for the terrorists. By occupying their countries we fulfill the terrorists reasoning for war.
He doesn't pay lip service like so many politicians. If you want to know what he stands for here is a 2 minute clip from the debates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54WFoV-veCM

Here is his foreign policy. Does this seem looney?

  1. American sovereignty from global and globalist institutions
  2. a strong national defense
  3. strict adherence to the Constitution
  4. leading the world by example, not aggression
  5. refraining from meddling in the affairs of other countries.

"1. We do not abdicate American sovereignty to global institutions. The purpose of the United States is to protect the liberty of the American people. We should never allow the WTO, NAFTA, the U.N. or the Law of the Sea Treaty to transfer power from America to an international body. 2. We provide a strong national defense, but we do not police the world. America should be armed with defensive weapons capable of repelling any attack. We should spend all appropriate money to make sure that no country in world can credibly threaten us.
Unfortunately, our foreign policy is undermining our security. We have more than 700 military installations in 135 countries around the globe. We have 50,000 troops in Germany, 30,000 in Japan, and 25,000 in South Korea. Worse, we have our brave men and women bogged down occupying Iraq and Afghanistan in the midst of ethnic strife and civil war.
We spend more than $1 trillion per year on our foreign policy, and our military is stretched thin. We can no longer afford to be the world's policeman. We must bring our troops home from around the world, cut overseas spending and strengthen our national defense.
3. We obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law. The Constitution clearly states that only Congress can declare war. Congress abandoned that responsibility during the buildup to the Iraq war and must never make that mistake again. When wars are undeclared, they drag on with no clear plan or exit strategy. If we must fight, we should do so with overwhelming force, win as quickly as possible and promptly withdraw.
4. We do not engage in nation-building. Conservatives know government is a poor tool to solve problems. It then makes no sense that we would think that our government could build civil societies and solve the tremendously complex problems of a developing country. Nation-building does not work. It places a tremendous burden on our military and takes directly from the pockets of the American taxpayer. The best thing we as Americans can do is offer friendship while setting a good example of what a free and prosperous society looks like. Ronald Reagan wanted America to be a "shining city on the hill." We should make that our goal.
5. We stay out of the internal affairs of other nations. America should conduct trade, travel and diplomacy with all willing nations. Intervention, however, always has unintended consequences and almost always gets us in trouble. For example, in 1953, our CIA helped overthrow Mohammad Mosaddeq, the democratically elected prime minister of Iran and installed the Shah of Iran, a ruthless dictator. The blowback from our actions was in large part responsible for the extremist Iranian Revolution of 1979, the taking of our hostages and the many problems we have had with Iran ever since. So much of our intervention makes no sense. We backed Saddam Hussein for much of the 1980s, and then twice went to war against him. In the 1990s, we bribed North Korea not to pursue atomic weapons with nuclear technology, and Kim Jong-il used that assistance to build several nuclear bombs.
Intervention simply does not serve our long-term interests.
The world is a dangerous place and we should be concerned, but intervention and militarism cannot solve our problems. The answers to our foreign policy problems lie in defending our soil, scaling back our global military footprint and trading with all willing partners. We have strayed far from this philosophy, but we can get back on track by looking to our Constitution, our traditions and the example of our Founding Fathers."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,941 posts, read 17,730,252 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
yes, you are right, it does. That is too bad, but we do judge our candidates somewhat by looks, personality, and overall appearance. There are some that just make you feel good, Paul isn't that type at all.

Nita
Like the Kennedy-Nixon debate where Nixon looked evil, comes to mind. Style over substance. Yes we can.
Ricardo Montalban would have made a great president. Too bad he's dead. America you don't look so mahvelous 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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top