Ron Paul can NEVER be President
 

He's very abrasive. He's not a leader. He's aging rapidly and looks like a Star Wars character. He has very few election cycles left in him anyway. He is neither a democrat or republican which is what the vast majority of voters identify as. He will never have popular support in the House and Senate to pass any of his radical ideas. His positions (whether you agree with them or not) are not widely popular or important to voters. Bush got elected the second time because of Terrorism. Obama got elected by mindlessly chanting "hope and change" in the middle of a financial crisis. No one gives a shit about real issues and real problems like the Fed, the role of Government, whether or not we need a Department of Education or whatever. In American politics, he is nothing more than a sideshow - and one that has proven to be of very little interest in the media in the past.

At the end of the day, he might be right about everything.... 100%. But he still needs the House and Senate to get anything done as President. This is what you just don't get. He will never have that support because he's too radical and he's too abrasive and he's not a republican or democrat. Neither party has anything to gain by working with him in any way, shape or form. No one is going to align themselves in the House and Senate with his ideas.

Now please proceed to tell me how i'm brain washed - because really you've got nothing else other than "he's right" and "if you don't agree, you're sheep that can't think for yourselves". That's how you've earned the nickname "PaulTards" - for your shortsighted and irrational thinking and unwavering position, supporting a candidate that is so obviously not electable.

You're a Foxnewser!

He doesn't have to be president to cause others to lose an election.

Politics. Learn about it.

Your correct, The majority of the voting public choose who they vote for, for all the wrong reasons. Thats why he will not be leader.

Great post, and very true.

He is the Ross Perot of this generation.

There's only one person in the race who isn't cherry picked by the bankers to do their bidding and keep their thousand percent track record intact.

How could you want anyone but Ron Paul to win? Every other candidate is just a talking head.

He's is against the Republicans and Democrats and what they do/stand for.

He will not stop a Republican or Democrat from getting elected.

He will not get elected.


Deductive reasoning and simple logic.

Learn about it.

A) It doesn't matter.
B) Wrong.
C) Right.

He can't stop Obama from getting re-elected, but he can certainly cost a republic the 2012 race. Without question. And like I said, it's not about him getting elected or not. He won't. Americans are too stupid to vote someone like him into office. But he can steal a shit load of votes from someone else.

When he doesn't get the republican nomination and runs as an independent, he will be a force to recon with. Every vote for him is one not given to someone else.

Regardless of your opinion on Ron Paul's positions he most certainly will never be elected as President.

I meant that the next president will be a Republican or Democrat, regardless of Ron Paul.

Regardless, he is a non issue.

He has some good points.

He is a side show.

He does little more than rile up a bunch of naive kids or people with issues with authority who see him as an alternative to that which they don't like or don't trust... but that are also wholly incapable of viewing the issues at hand as being multifaceted and very complex and as such, require very complex solutions. They see things that can be fixed, eliminated or turned completely inside out really easily and without the support of the House and Senate because some old wrinkly dude thinks that's what needs to happen.

The current President of the United States got elected by chanting "Hope" and "Change". Nothing more. That was his message. That was what he burned into peoples minds. A simple, clear, "feel good" message. That's what got him elected. Let's not pretend that voters are more clever than they are. They don't want to be told and continually reminded of whats wrong, they want to be told about a great future full of free balloons and cotton candy and pony rides.

Ron Paul :1orglaugh:1orglaugh ..... Next you'll be talking about a black president :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

.

Not in our lifetime.

He's 76 how is he supposed to look?

Not being either is not a bad thing actually

Actually most voters identify themselves as independnants. I do.

Now I want to vote for him because he seems like an underdog and Americans love underdogs... Look at Raiders fans...

Uhmm.. i'd love to see the proof of that.

you make some good points. in particular the part about congress not working with him. congress is such a shithole i dont think they will work with anybody until 1 party has 2/3 of the senate & the house. Obama had the perfect congress until this year & the dems utterly failed him.

i wouldnt count him out yet. the public is mad again, this is the 3rd election cycle (06, 08, 10) that the public will be going in mad about the direction of america. Everyone says the voting public is stupid but i disagree. most dumb people dont vote at all. a handful vote for who they are told to vote for. But by & large the public that makes the effort to vote, also makes the effort to make the best decision they can. Thats why there are so many independents. because they are not fooled by the shenangans of politicians & pundits.

there are so many hats in the republican ring now, the candidate who is really energizing his/her voters has a great shot. dont need 50% + to win an 8 way race. Just needs his people to show. Its clear ron paul has an energized base. At some point, this has to result in a primary victory. If he can steal the win from the establishment, he can give obama a really hard time. thats is, assuming the davos/illuminati/mossad dont assasinate him first.

:2 cents:

Obama was poised to do whatever he wanted and he could have done some good things for the country, but he got sidetracked and then the democrats lost their spine and would not stand up to the republicans. I'm not saying what he could have done would have been good, but he missed a golden opportunity for his party to set the table for long term dominance.

As much as people say they want change they really don't. They look around at their life and they take inventory. If they have a good job, a decent house and a good outlook on the future they tend to choose the candidate who is least likely to fuck that up for them. however, when things aren't going good they vote for the person who promises the best change so long as it ins't too radical. If you say to the voters:"I'll help you get a job and get your life on track." they will listen and vote for you. If you say: "I'll make some tough decisions that are going to hurt us all in the short term, but make us stronger in the longer term and those who are willing to work hard will thrive." you are likely not going to get votes. Paul is using that second message. He wants to make some drastic changes that would be catastrophic right out the gate. Hopefully we would then rebuild from those ashes and be stronger for it, but the idea of it scares the hell out of a lot of people.

His major issue will be how much money he can raise. Right out the gate the primaries start in bible belt. I think it is something like 8 of the first 20 states to vote (going up through Super Tuesday) are bible belt states. He likely will not win those states because they will be controlled by Perry or Bachmann who the evangelicals favor. That leaves him about 11-12 states left that he could have a shot at. If he wants to make some noise he would likely have to pick 1 or 2 of these states (like bigger states with more delegates) and focus his efforts there. If he could win one or both of those he could make some noise. It would cause others to drop out and put him in a position to raise money and force the media to consider him a legit challenger. The question is will he have the money and resources to do this? And if he does will he choose to do something like that? In the last election he had $20 million on hand. The race was down to just him, McCain and Huckabee and Huckabee was on the ropes. He could have picked a state that he had the most support in, dumped a bunch of that money into it and made some noise. If he would have won that state he could have changed the course of the election. He chose not to do that. Instead he sat on most of the money and used it for other PAC stuff after the election.

Here's the thing. It's all true, yes. US society has degraded to the point where legitimate candidates who actually care about improving the country and the lives of its citizens have no chance. But why keep bringing this up? People continually saying that is partially why nothing ever changes - because the sea of positivity about a candidate like him then gets diluted by "oh he'll never win", and the sea of negativity about a Michelle Bachmann gets diluted by "people vote for fucking idiots like that, she'll probably win" or just simply going overboard with talking about her at all so that she's all anyone ever hears about. It's a travesty that she's a viable candidate and he's somehow not, but it's a collective effort by more than just the people that like her and/or dislike him that causes it to happen.

It's just like anything unfortunately - most things of merit in pretty much every aspect of politics, business, innovation and other news rarely ever get known because OMG JUSTIN BIEBER, OMG SARAH PALIN SAID SOMETHING STUPID, OMG CHARLIE SHEEN IS SUCH A COKE HEAD. The more attention, positive or negative, we give to this shit, the worse it gets, and the more dismissive statements we give to the legit people and news, however true in nature the statement might be, the more we hurt that sort of thing.

The funny thing is it's not just better for society as a whole if people started to shift their attention towards the legit things that really matter, but it's better for each person doing it.

How many of you said John McCain was too old and Palin would inherit the office?

Paul is even older.

If candidates who really want to affect change are serious they should take a page out of the tea party book. I'm not a Tea Party fan. I think it was an interesting idea at first, but it got corrupted by the republican party. However, they did it as it needs to be done. You can't make wholesale change as one person who suddenly appears on the radar and makes claims. What you need to do is build a grass roots organization and start locally. Big change scares people. However, if you can get local and state officials elected using your platform then you can slowly build up the familiarity with your policies and ideas and you can even be working to put them into action. You then move up and get congressmen and senators elected and eventually you have enough power that you can put a presidential candidate out there and they would have a legit chance of winning.

damn it, i cant stop staring at your sig. what did you say? :pimp

His cardio and health is better than anyone else running for president. He is a republican, the ones that have hijacked the party are neo-cons.

He has the best plan to bring the left and right together.... THE CONSTITUTION

He just raised 1.6 mil :pimp


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wash...-in-a-day.html


When it comes to donations, Texas Rep. Ron Paul believes small is beautiful.

In a 24-hour fundraising push over the weekend, GOP presidential candidate Paul scooped up more than $1.6 million in small donations. It was Paul's 76th birthday and his loyal band of dedicated campaigners came through again for the inconoclastic Texas libertarian.

This happened despite a cyber-attack on the campaign Website, announced on Paul's Facebook page, that shut it down for a few hours.

LOL the sig is a little hypnotic. I need to figure out how to put some kind of subliminal message in it.