50 delusional Ron Paul supporters.

I'm one funny youtube video away from beating Ron Paul in the primaries.

So basically what you're saying is that Thompson is pretty much "lying" right? Well that just helps to illustrate my point that most of the candidates are flat-out liars and will say anything to get elected... just look at the shit Hillary Clinton says. Ron Paul believes in everything he says, and he is consistent as can be.

You must be delusional, did you forget how to count?

There were a reported 100,000 donators. There are 300 million Americans. I don't think I have to elaborate on what I'm trying to get at.

Ron Paul is not the only candidate rejecting money from corporations and lobbyists. You would be a fool to think so.

Holy shit, that's funny

:1orglaugh O.K you got me there.

I can count to 19-0 though. :winkwink:

Oh god, don't bring that fucking gay ass team up again... :Oh crap

LOL LOL LOL

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That's an idea not a solution.

And going back to the states/people values is what he pushes and that isn't always a good idea. And if he plans on restructuring the mass screwed up mess the gov is in then I would love to hear his "solution" to the problem and how he plans on achieving such as massive task.

Otherwise, I do support many of his ideas.. I can and so can the masses of America but that doesn't mean shit until those 3 states say it does first.

I will never forget that fucking snow game... :mad: :helpme :error

For Ron Paul to get elected the Democrats in favor of him and I know quite a few. Need to register as republicans so the can vote in the primary and get him nominated or the republicans will stop it in the primary.

This guy is the only guy that has made any since in as long as I can remember. He want to hold to the constitution and as far as his Abortion issue unless I am mistaken he wants that to be decided at a state level. This country was never supposed to have so many national rules it was supposed to have states that decided what the occupants of thats thought was acceptable. Then you would have very conservative states and very liberal states and people could live where they felt most comfortable.

And he is the only one smart enough to see what a scam the Federal Reserve Bank and IRS is and wants to do away with it. Which would bring this country out of debt. For those that don't know The FED is not part of the Govt. it is privately owned bank our Govt. borrows all it's money from and pays interest on which is why we are in debt forever.

i only see the same 2 guys in all these Ron Paul threads wasting their time tryint to cause dissent among his supporters. TWO or Three haters isnt bad.

rules are rules :upsidedow

A) Only 60 million of 300 million voted in the last election. Of course 60 million are under 18 so they can't vote or donate.

B) Just because you don't donate doesn't mean you won't vote for a guy. I've never donated to a candidate, but I vote tough.


C) 100,00 THIS time. How many donated when he raised $4.2 million a month ago? How many have donated total since he began his campaign.

A couple of weeks back I was at a wal-mart in a town about 50 miles from me and there were some Ron Paul supporters standing outside with signs trying to encourage people to vote for Ron Paul. This is the first time I've seen any support for any candidate within a 50 miles radius from my house. So I'll give him that much. I have not passed by even ONE house with a sign supporting ANY candidate from either party so far.

In my county there isn't any decalartion of party when you register to vote so anyone can vote in any primary. Hopefully John Edwards will still be in it when my state's primary is held and he'll get my vote. If not then I'll vote for Paul.

God, why cant the abortion issue go away already. The stupidest issue to vote for president on, period. Its fast food politics for people who dont pay attention. Just look at a candidates view on abortion and let that make the decision for you.

It would make more sense, if the president actually had any kind of power to change abortion. As it stands, he doesn't. He can try and stack the courts, hope the get the biased judicial appointments through congress, and hope to get a case before the SCOTUS that will require a judicial review of roe v wade, and hope after all that, that the judges overturn it.

A pro-life candidate could practically murder an adult on stage in front of a pro-life crowd, and they would still vote for him, because he tells them, "This time we'll finally stop those baby killers!". Then on the flip side, a pro-choice candidate can do wtf he wants, just as long as he convinces enough gullible pro-choicers that the Christians are gonna take their abortions away, unless he's elected to stop it.

If any of you actually vote for president based on their stance on abortion, please just dont vote anymore.

/threadjack

If he does not get the nomination, the amount of $ he has raised will still allow him to press on as an independent candidate. He is catching on lately, i think you can count on seeing him in the debates like Perot back in the day.

He's said many times he wont run as an independant if he doesnt win the nomination. Probably because of the Perot effect, where he basically sealed the win for the democrats by siphoning votes from the right.

He has done well, but not that well. whoever wins the nomination will spend around 150-250 million on the presidential campaign alone. To compete he would need a lot more money then he could ever raise on his own.

I agree, but abortion is one of those hot button issues. If you come out pro-life or pro-choice you instantly alienate a large selection of the popluation.

Yea.... sad but true.

How is he planning on pushing all these changes through? A president that doesn't abuse his power isn't really that powerful. Doesn't he have to get all these changes pushed through some court/branch bs?

I have heard him speak, but I'm really interesting knowing 'how' he plans on getting things done. He can spew ideas all day - I want to know what action will be taken to make those ideas to to life.

Radical as in he wants to pretty much do away with everything the govt run and let big business do it. We see how well big business runs health insurance and how Halliburton overcharges tax payers.

Yet Ron Paul somehow thinks that big business would do a better job than the govt for pretty much everything. Things liker the Post Office.. Schools.. Dept of Transportation ect ect.. He wants to get rid of it all and let big business run it.

One thing that Big Business has shown me is they will always worry about profit first then what service they provide. We don't need every thing in our country based on that idea.

He has some good ideas but he just goes way the fuck overboard. If he would stick to a few key things like standing up for our Constitution and running a organized govt, well then he might be a front runner.

Does all of this mean the revolution will not be televised, but will be shown on youtube?

I'm going to say you won't see it on Fox News.

Slight correction... he thinks the "free market" can handle things better, not necessarily big business. In true free markets (at least as true as they can ever be), business have a much harder time getting as big as they do, now.

Bureaucracy and big government provide a much bigger opportunity for the intermingling of business and government. It can help prop up big business while killing the little guys through over burdensome regulation. Businesses simply buy the bureaucrats and buy regulations.

Who said he wanted to give health to big biz? You of course are showing your ingnorance to his past and present. he wants the failure of what we call the federal goverement, which is BIG BIZ, and give it back to the states like the consitution was intended.

You guys and your post sound much more like something a wacko would say than anything Paul is talking about. Expand your mind. Educate yourself, and then form a real opinion. Spitting out the same shit they say on Cnn does not make you smart on issues.

He's just going to have to work with congress. Even if he couldnt accomplish anything, it would be awesome to put a guy like Ron Paul in the oval office, simply for the veto power.

If he can keep his approval ratings above that of congress, they will really have no choice other than to work with him on some of his goals.

Oops, in that last post I meant to quote:

Didnt mean to quote you crockett

Because raising hemp is not legal yet.

What I find amusing about the Ron Paul supporters is their belief that the President of the US has the power to "just do things."

It doesn't really work like that. He could win by a landslide, but it doesn't make him dictator with the power to make the sweeping changes he talks about.

Even the simple shit like leaving the UN would be difficult, much less getting rid of the IRS "immediately."

Who said doing the right thing should be easy? You sound like a quitter to me. Always have an excuse why it wont work.

Well appearantly he's not to fond of the republican field since he's chosen to run. If he was satisfied that one of the other 8 guys could do the job he would be supporting that guy not running against him.

ABout him saying he won't run as an independant? That's BS he will. first of all he HAS to say he won't. He still thinks he's got a shot at the GOP nomination. You don't say "Well if you fuckers don't support me I'll just run as an independant anyways".

The people that are suporting him now will DEMAND he run as an independant. If he believes in what he is doing so strongly how can he NOT run. Also there is the posibility of the Libertarian Party nominating him which would actually make it easier for him to get on the ballots in all of the states.

Siphoning votes from the right? If only 5% of republicans suport him now how many votes from right could he possibly siphon off in a general election?

This guy begs to differ

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ge-W-Bush.jpeg

Health care is already run by big biz and this country's helth care system sucks unless you are rich. I used that as a perfect example as to why the "free market" can't be trusted to run essential things. Free Market in this country pretty much means Big Business.

Who do you think would end up taking over that kinda stuff? It damn sure wouldn't be Uncle Joe's small company from hillbilly town in Kansas. It would be the giant corporations that have already fucked everything up in this country.

Can't believe I read the whole thing. I will try to be nice.

You should be his campaign manager.

That is because you don't understand the meaning of the word in the context it was used.

:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh I just know you are going to be fun.


There is a difference between pleasing constituents in a district and convincing a country.

It isn't like he has been holding office non-stop there even. he has represented Texas districts in the U.S. House of Representatives (1976?1977, 1979?1985, and 1997?present).

I have a question . . . are we supposed to think you are a Republican trying to save the White House from those pesky Democrats?


Can't wait to see how much air time he gets here.


I like you, but this is why the used to not let women vote. He does not have the power to eliminate taxes, and yes, as a matter of fact, we need taxes.

I am wondering why we need a President at all. Why don't we all just become independent nations, like Europe, South America, Africa and Asia?

You do realize that Ron Paul is lying too, right?

Okay, sorry . . . so why are people like rebel so adamant that Ron Paul can win?

More than that.

Okay, see that is the problem. I would hope he is lying to us, because if he actually believes he can make the changes he wants then he is delusional.

ummm, how would that work? Eliminate the IRS and taxes and debt disappears? Can you explain that so I can utilize it at a very local level?

Thank you in advance.

Yeah, just what we need, four years of nothing being accomplished. Are you a Republican?

Pay attention. He said he would immediately get rid of the IRS. That is just one thing. Just how immediate do you think that is in reality?

*shrug*..... and I have none myself.

That doesn't even make sense as a response. I will take that as a sign of submission.

If I was going for a post count, wouldn't I have answered each individually?

Solid point and thank you.

However, I'm only 32 and a pretty disgruntled and apathetic as a US citizen. I just want to know the actual downside to what the RP people speak of. You seem against a lot of RP (Ron Paul) bullshit on this board which is lovely; makes the board fun.

Some thoughts: Has he ever spoke of disbanding everything he says he wants to immediately or over a period of time? How do you vote; you go candidate or party?

Blah blah blah.

I must agree with many in this thread, though, RP has a snowball's chance in hell doing anything, other than spending funds he got in a dying chance while college interns working for him eventually move on to being the lobbyists / politicians elected into office and doing nothing for me.

I'll just leave this thread now.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh hilarious

Chris Dodd > Ron Paul

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1193/...26bccad87e.jpg

because you're a fucking reatrd that can't read.
Let me expalin like you're a small child

"What I find amusing about the Ron Paul supporters is their belief that the President of the US has the power to "just do things.""

Ummm hasn't Bush been "just doing things" for 7 fucking years now?

http://www.clemson.edu/newsroom/spec...ll_details.htm

Regarding the thread's question. Here is a poll from a few months back.

Q1. Please tell me if you have ever heard of the following candidates for president and if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of him/her?

Republicans Heard of Favorable Unfavorable

1. R. Giuliani 99% 63% 25%

2. J. McCain 97% 52% 35%

3. N. Gingrich 95% 54% 27%

4. M. Romney 87% 62% 14%

5. F. Thompson 83% 65% 7%

6. M. Huckabee 69% 48% 8%

7. S. Brownback 57% 33% 10%

8. R. Paul 40% 24% 22%

9. D. Hunter 32% 37% 14%

10. T. Tancredo 30% 38% 12%

So there you have it. 99% of those polled have heard of Giuliani. Only 40% have even HEARD of Ron Paul. Then compare favorability. Giulani is 63% favorable, Paul is 24%. Most people who've heard of Paul don't even have much of an opinion about him.

Paul has two problems. Large numbers of people haven't even heard of him and of those who have they don't seem to know enough about him to form a strong opinion. Paul's 22% "unfavorable" isn't a good sign either. Higher than the average candidates un favorability.

Yea, I'm pretty sure thats just what we need actually. How many new laws do we really need? I'm registered independent, but will be switching to republican to vote for RP in the primaries.

Getting the government to live and spend within its means is all part of his plan to get rid of the IRS. Getting rid of the IRS is the last step in a very long , arduous process, that would only happen in the first place unless congress works with him.

This is part of Ron Paul's problem... people just don't comprehend or actually bother to listen to what he *actually* says.

hey baddog, since you put in the effort to do multiple quotes like that you deserve a reply to your main points

things Ron Paul can do immediately:
A President has carte blance over foreign policy, as commander in chief Ron Paul has not been directed by the Congress through a declaration of war to fight in any foreign nation, as such he would order the Generals to formulate withdrawal from Iraq, Korea, Germany etc. and start to massively scale down bases

He can tell the DoJ/DEA (or whoever it is) to stop going after medical marijuana patients and leave people and businesses in states like CA who have legalized it alone

there are lots of other things he can do immediately but as you know there's lots of things he needs the congress for and may not be able to do or would take a lot of time, he will also have the Veto pen and can veto any legislation the Congress passes that he see's as unconstitutional

alot of big businesses in America are reliant on "corporate welfare", Haliburton is one of those, they would stand to lose alot under a Ron Paul presidency as he would try and limit the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned against.

before you go knocking that #, why don't you get us a sample of the # of supporters who have donated a median of $50 per household from any other politician this year

think its much over 100,000?

The other thing to think about too... is with such a strong and large federal government, we've really streamlined the process of government corruption. The federal gov is our single point of failure. If big business wants to buy influence of government to squeeze out competition, they only have to go to one place to do it.. washington.

Putting more regulatory power back into state government hands, now makes it much harder and far less likely for one corporation to corrupt policy that affects the entire country. It will also make it much less cost effective for companies to purchase government influence, and much harder for them to actually see a return on the investment.

In cases where corruption happens, it will be far easier to mobilize movements of people within your state to clean up the mess, rather than trying to mobilize the entire country to clean up washington, when bad policies become entrenched.

wow 18.4 Million .. well this guy is doing something right
lol