Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: wrag on November 05, 2007, 08:13:31 AM
-
interesting approach?
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/04/ron-paul-report-who-supports-him-and-why-is-november-5th-important/
wonder if it will work?
-
I think of ross perot.
everyone said that he attracted both republicans and democrats but... that was not true.. the democrats who pretended to support him never did..
How could they? he wanted to cut funding to the government.. in the end.. republicans voted for him in just enough numbers to let a scum bag democrat get in.
This is even worse. There is no way that any democrat would support him once they really looked at him... once the lefty media showed all the starving and sick kids he was gonna ignore and all the programs he was gonna cut.
lazs
-
If reality were somehow suspended and Ron Paul took either the Republican or the Democrat nomination I'd vote for him. Anything else is a vote for more socialism.
I meant rather to say the obvious, that to vote for Ron Paul if he is not one of the two major party candidates is to vote for Hillary.
-
lol, took me too long to type my post... hope it doesn't get deleted...
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think of ross perot.
everyone said that he attracted both republicans and democrats but... that was not true.. the democrats who pretended to support him never did..
How could they? he wanted to cut funding to the government.. in the end.. republicans voted for him in just enough numbers to let a scum bag democrat get in.
This is even worse. There is no way that any democrat would support him once they really looked at him... once the lefty media showed all the starving and sick kids he was gonna ignore and all the programs he was gonna cut.
lazs
I see where that could be the case, however, Ron Paul is running as a Republican????
Wondering if enough people pushed for it would the Reps allow him to run as such?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think of ross perot.
everyone said that he attracted both republicans and democrats but... that was not true.. the democrats who pretended to support him never did..
How could they? he wanted to cut funding to the government.. in the end.. republicans voted for him in just enough numbers to let a scum bag democrat get in.
This is even worse. There is no way that any democrat would support him once they really looked at him... once the lefty media showed all the starving and sick kids he was gonna ignore and all the programs he was gonna cut.
lazs
surprise, surprise, more FUD from Lazs. for an "individualist" you sure have that herd mentality down pat...
-
LOL... I am a pragmatic individualist that wants to keep as much socialism out of my life as possible... that does not include letting hillary get in if I can help it.
I have said over and over that if ron paul got the nomination I would vote for him... I will vote for him if I get a chance.
I will not vote for him as an independent tho or write him in.
much as I would rather have him in than any of the others.. the truth is that if he were a front runner and in the race... he would be outed as a nutjob by the media in a month. It would be the joke of all presedential races.
libertarian ideals are not very well understood.. which... is a good thing for people who are scared of freedom.. which... happens to be about most of the people in the world. Once people understand that he wants them to take care of themselves.. well.. the honeymoon with libertarianism is over for 9 out of ten folks who profess to like the idea but have no idea how that particular sausage is made.
lazs
-
you make some good points, Lazs, especially regarding how the media would treat Dr. Paul if he did become the front runner. People ARE scared by freedom, or so it would seem. I've said from the day Paul announced his candidacy that the biggest hurdle will be reaching the dumb masses who care more about Brittney's custody battles than they do about the state of the nation. That's a BIG hurdle to jump, and it might just end up being insurmountable. However, that doesn't mean I stop rooting for freedom and doing what little I can to spread the word.
Saying you'll vote for Paul IF he gets the nomination isn't really saying much. In that case it's Paul or Hillary, OF COURSE you'll vote for not-Hillary. There's time for pragmatism AFTER the primaries, IMHO now is the time for some old-fashioned idealism.
-
Lazs hit the nail on the head. Pretty much how I feel about Paul and his chances, if he actually had one.
-
Pretty ironic when Paul's perspectives and solutions to current problems are most likely the simplest, most transparent and natural ones...
I'd rather attempt a swim to shore than sit still in the water "knowing" sharks are on me.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think of ross perot.
everyone said that he attracted both republicans and democrats but... that was not true.. the democrats who pretended to support him never did..
lazs
Actually the studies proved this statement wrong.
I already posted it in another thread
-
""A detailed analysis of the voting demographics revealed that Perot's support drew heavily from across the political spectrum, with 20% of his votes coming from self-described liberals, 27% from self-described conservatives, and 53% coming from self-described moderates. Economically, however, the majority of Perot voters (57%) were middle class, earning between $15,000 and $49,000 annually, with the bulk of the remainder drawing from the upper middle class (29% earning over $50,000 annually). Politics: Who Cares by Peirce Lewis, Casey McCracken, and Roger Hunt (American Demographics, October 1994, vol. 16, no. 10) p. 23."
-
Ron Paul may be a man who stands by his principles, but in the world of politics, how a candidate is perceived by the voting public is everything.
He's going to have to make a better showing in front of the media public than he did in the last televised Republican presidential debate. Admittedly, one showing, by itself, doesn't mean that much. However, being a dark horse candidate, he can't afford to give vent to statements that appear to be disjointed or ****less.
Of all the candidates in that debate, he came across, at least in my opinion, as the least likely to be able to form a strong coalition of voters which can give him victory. Paul would seem to be the type of candidate who appeals mainly to fringe groups.
Again, perception is everything. He's going to have to do better in the future.
-
Kinda reminds me of an old guy in a nursing home with a wedgie...
Well the voice fits anyways.
:D
Mac
-
Not all liberals are democrats and not all conservatives are republicans, if that is what you were trying to get at Dred.
Leaving now....
-
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/05/post_179.html
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8SNSK800&show_article=1
-
Originally posted by nirvana
Not all liberals are democrats and not all conservatives are republicans, if that is what you were trying to get at Dred.
Leaving now....
but it is pretty safe to say that most of each...are.
Liberals tend to vote democratic and conservatives republican.
Even those without party affiliation
-
dred... I think you prove my point... if only 20% of his vote came from liberals and 27% came from conservatives (rest unknown) then he took more from conservatives and let the scum bag win.
bs.. I will vote for paul in the primaries since the republicans are fielding a very bland group.. there is not much difference in the front runners... no good second amendment guys or cut taxes guys.. rudi is scary but not as scary as hillay... that is all I can say for the guy... I would never trust a guy from new york city in any case.
paul has the same problem as every libertarian I have seen.. they have tough ideas but appear weak and ineffectual.. wimps and eggheads... there is also a certain amount of intellectual arrogance that goes with libertarianism that most people find offputting.
I don't think pauls chances are hurt by britiney... I think they are hurt by the fact that people are afraid to let the government go.. they ***** but...we are becoming your-0-peeeans... we are afraid of freedom and want to run our neighbors life and make someone else pay for all the things we want government to "give" us.
No wimp will turn that around.
lazs
-
You've said it a number of times, but as in the above post it's really undeniable.
Nonetheless his policies are without a doubt the best of the lot. The campaign is to choose a president, not a figurehead.
-
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-11-06-paul_N.htm?csp=34
Looks like it's working.
-
at least now he'll be voting for him in the primary!
The way I see it, Lazs, is politics as a popularity contest isn't a game that benefits the US. I know that's how it works, but I'm just not going to play that way. In a pure popularity contest there's a very good chance that Paul will lose. In a race based on principals Paul has no competition. I'll just keep holding out against all odds and hope that enough Americans are sick of the popularity game as well.
We're around 2 months away from the first primaries, so it won't be long till we see if I'm deluded or not.
-
Pat Buchanan on Ron Paul.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2007/05/18/but_who_was_right_--_rudy_or_ron?page=full&comments=true
-
btw... since there was a tie-in to the movie "V for Vendetta", I figured I'd post its trailer for those who haven't seen it yet. IMO a great movie...
'V for Vendetta' trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XKa8VE7ILI)