Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Chairboy on October 05, 2007, 08:33:32 PM

Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Chairboy on October 05, 2007, 08:33:32 PM
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/05/398701.aspx

After Giuliani spoke for 25 minutes, it was Ron Paul's turn.  But after only 10 minutes, they cut him off w/ music.

That's crap, especially considering how much money he's raised.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: lasersailor184 on October 05, 2007, 08:51:55 PM
The only thing limiting Ron Paul is his perceived "Electability."  Lazs has said that he thinks he's the best candidate, but a vote for him is a wasted vote when the other front runners are too close.  

I believe this sentiment to be mirrored in most people.  Ron Paul is not dangerous now, he's dangerous when he becomes electable.  If he can get air time that the leaders get, he's got a really good chance of taking the ticket.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: AKIron on October 05, 2007, 09:26:40 PM
I think Ron Paul's virtue and his problem is that he just ain't a politician. That and he has two first names and a squeaky voice.   ;)
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Charon on October 05, 2007, 10:50:56 PM
He doing some real interesting stuff. Probably the number one Web candidate, raising money to eclipse McCain, and yet, even though such things are covered he's under reported. No enthusiasm for the underdog that you might typically find with such developments. Not from the ruling class, that one.

Charon
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on October 06, 2007, 06:15:04 AM
We should now judge candidates on how much money they raise?



Excellent.:rolleyes:
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: crockett on October 06, 2007, 06:21:26 AM
I think that's the best thing they could do for him.. After about 10 mins he starts sounding crazy, but for the first 10 he sounds pretty good. :rofl

He has some good ideas and I do like him, but he's kinda like Ross Perot was. Meaning he goes off the deep end real fast if he talks too long.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Reschke on October 06, 2007, 09:05:15 AM
I'm still writing in Ross Perot dammit!
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Holden McGroin on October 06, 2007, 09:09:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
We should now judge candidates on how much money they raise?



Excellent.:rolleyes:


Once they win we judge them on how much money they spend, so why not?
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Gunslinger on October 06, 2007, 09:17:31 AM
Remember in 2004 the dems got stuck with Kerrry because he was supposedly "electable"

I don't think we should put up a canidate just because he's elecectable.....that's a sure fire way of losing.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: x0847Marine on October 06, 2007, 10:11:16 AM
Ron Paul Vs the empire

http://www.lewrockwell.com/latulippe/latulippe80.html
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: lazs2 on October 06, 2007, 10:18:37 AM
He does come off kind of nutty and...  he doesn't seem to have a lot of his facts straight.. like the north American highway deal.

I will vote for him if I get a chance.   laser is not stating the case correctly.

If I get a chance to vote for him I will...  I won't vote for him as a third candidate against hillary tho... that is simply a vote for hillary... the democrats would wet their panties if they could get him to run as a ross perot spoiler..

No democrat will vote for him... he represents the oppossite of socialism.

he doesn't stand a chance of getting the nomination tho even if I vote for him.

he is a bit of a nutter and a wimp like most libertarians

lazs
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: uberhun on October 06, 2007, 10:43:13 AM
Register Republican and vote in the primaries. If Ron Paul is your boy then check him. If your machine is an electronic Diabold forget it you hosed!
:noid
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: lazs2 on October 06, 2007, 11:25:48 AM
I am registered as a republican and will vote for him

The best I can hope for is that thompson will get the nomination tho.. paul has no chance... I would like paul to get a lot of votes in the primary tho to prove that his ideas resonate with smaller government republicans.

lazs
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: uberhun on October 06, 2007, 12:05:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
I am registered as a republican and will vote for him

The best I can hope for is that thompson will get the nomination tho.. paul has no chance... I would like paul to get a lot of votes in the primary tho to prove that his ideas resonate with smaller government republicans.

lazs


Yea that in reality would probably would be the best realistic outcome, from him running.
Unfortunately I just see this Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton Dynasty continuing.
Those two families are the longest serving presidential families in history.....:noid :huh
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: rpm on October 06, 2007, 12:29:50 PM
I definitely think he's the best candidate out there right now, regardless of party.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: lazs2 on October 07, 2007, 10:57:01 AM
rpm.. then you need to look again at what he is saying.  he is the opposite of your socialist ideals.   You could not handle the lack of big government in your, and more importantly, everyone elses lives.  

you wanted kinky because he was gonna extort more money from the people of Texas to give to public schools for instance.

lazs
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: bj229r on October 07, 2007, 11:43:51 AM
If only people VOTED for him too! oops..they dont
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: Chairboy on October 07, 2007, 11:54:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by bj229r
If only people VOTED for him too! oops..they dont
Oh damnit, did I miss the primaries again?

Oh wait...
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: texasmom on October 07, 2007, 11:59:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by uberhun
Those two families are the longest serving presidential families in history.....:noid :huh

[hijack]
I think John Adams & John Quincy Adams may be longer. Pretty sure both father & son served 8 years.
Also, you can't count Hillary in that mix. Her husband has been the only one who's been president.
[end hijack]
Title: Re: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: texasmom on October 07, 2007, 12:03:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Chairboy
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/05/398701.aspxAfter Giuliani spoke for 25 minutes, it was Ron Paul's turn.  But after only 10 minutes, they cut him off w/ music.
That's crap, especially considering how much money he's raised.

Regardless of how nutty anyone thinks he is/is not, it would have probably been a better idea to not cut him off & let everyone else decide just how nutty they think he is/is not.
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: uberhun on October 07, 2007, 12:12:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by texasmom
[hijack]
I think John Adams & John Quincy Adams may be longer. Pretty sure both father & son served 8 years.
Also, you can't count Hillary in that mix. Her husband has been the only one who's been president.
[end hijack]


Your right my bad !
But potentially.................. ........................:O
Title: Anti-Paul Bias?
Post by: texasmom on October 07, 2007, 12:19:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by uberhun
But potentially.................. ........................:O

You're right about that. Scarey, ain't it?