Ron Paul

[Swift456]

Easily the person we need to run this country.......Mitt and Obama are pretty much the same.........Say one thing do the other, basically will get nothing important done. Romney will lose to Obama, Paul could actually beat him.


Paul is winning delegates left and right, yet the media doesn't talk a peep bout him. Probably will win Iowa, Minnesota, Maine, Alaska, Missouri and more.

[MonoxideChild]

Easily the person we need to run this country.......Mitt and Obama are pretty much the same.........Say one thing do the other, basically will get nothing important done. Romney will lose to Obama, Paul could actually beat him.


Paul is winning delegates left and right, yet the media doesn't talk a peep bout him. Probably will win Iowa, Minnesota, Maine, Alaska, Missouri and more.

Ron Paul is fake. Sorry. He says a lot of things, and then says the exact opposite about 5 minutes later. Try actually listening to him talk about global economics. He has NO idea about what goes on outside of his little bubble. I don't think too many "Supporters" actually know all that much about his politics.

[theanalogkid]

Ron Paul is fake. Sorry. He says a lot of things, and then says the exact opposite about 5 minutes later. Try actually listening to him talk about global economics. He has NO idea about what goes on outside of his little bubble. I don't think too many "Supporters" actually know all that much about his politics.

Back it up with some evidence. I've certainly heard him misspeak a couple of times because he talks fast (probably because the media gives him only a limited amount of time).

He couldn't be worse than Obama or Mitt Romney. I find it hilarious that Republican voters are going to try and send them many who signed Romenycare into law to lead the charge to repeal Obamacare. It's not going to happen.

[MonoxideChild]

Back it up with some evidence. I've certainly heard him misspeak a couple of times because he talks fast (probably because the media gives him only a limited amount of time).

He couldn't be worse than Obama or Mitt Romney. I find it hilarious that Republican voters are going to try and send them many who signed Romenycare into law to lead the charge to repeal Obamacare. It's not going to happen.

"After alleging that people who don't support him "don't understand what freedom is all about," Paul made his usual case that government is bad because it makes decisions for everyone, whereas "when you make a bad decision, it only hurts you."

Let's break this down a bit. He says that if you make a mistake, you're only hurting yourself. False. Absolutely false. If I decide to run out into traffic, I'm not only injuring myself, I'm also Causing damages to other people and their property. This is one of his big sayings, and it makes no real sense, it just sounds like something that resembles reasoning.

"The regulations are much tougher in a free market, because you cannot commit fraud, you cannot steal, you cannot hurt people, and the failure has come that government wouldn't enforce this. In the Industrial Revolution there was a collusion and you could pollute and they got away with it. But in a true free market in a libertarian society you can't do that. You have to be responsible. So the regulations would be tougher."

Here, he says that his regulations would be STRONGER. So, basically, everything that he rallies against, he completely supports and admits he'd have more of an iron fist over the public sector.

This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside...

"The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union -- complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether."

That gem is about the "NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY" Which, btw, doesn't exist. He thinks that the highways that connect the U.S. to Mexico and Canada were devised as a plan to annex both countries and make a common North American currency. Roads, which have been in place for almost 60 years. Brilliant. ****ing brilliant this guy is.

HAve you ever heard him talk about 9/11? He says things like "We were never given a reason"...except we were. BY ****ING BIN LADEN HIMSELF! Ron Paul is on a different planet completely.

Just because he's not plastic like Romney or Obama, doesn't mean he's the right guy to hand over the country to.

[theanalogkid]

"After alleging that people who don't support him "don't understand what freedom is all about," Paul made his usual case that government is bad because it makes decisions for everyone, whereas "when you make a bad decision, it only hurts you."

Let's break this down a bit. He says that if you make a mistake, you're only hurting yourself. False. Absolutely false. If I decide to run out into traffic, I'm not only injuring myself, I'm also Causing damages to other people and their property. This is one of his big sayings, and it makes no real sense, it just sounds like something that resembles reasoning.

He probably could have clarified it a bit more, but the underlying message is still valid. When the government makes bad decisions it affects everyone. When you make bad decisions it affects you or only a smaller group of people, and if you're at fault they can then sue you for restitution.

"The regulations are much tougher in a free market, because you cannot commit fraud, you cannot steal, you cannot hurt people, and the failure has come that government wouldn't enforce this. In the Industrial Revolution there was a collusion and you could pollute and they got away with it. But in a true free market in a libertarian society you can't do that. You have to be responsible. So the regulations would be tougher."

Here, he says that his regulations would be STRONGER. So, basically, everything that he rallies against, he completely supports and admits he'd have more of an iron fist over the public sector.

He's talking about the kind of regulations brought about by market forces, not by government. He rallies against government regulations, not market based regulations since market based regulations are a natural occurrence in the free market.

So what if he'd regulate the government more, it should be. There is only one economy, the private economy. The government is a leach on the economy since it only consumes and produces nothing. Keeping the size of government as small as possible is part of his platform.

This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside...

"The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union -- complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether."

That gem is about the "NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY" Which, btw, doesn't exist. He thinks that the highways that connect the U.S. to Mexico and Canada were devised as a plan to annex both countries and make a common North American currency. Roads, which have been in place for almost 60 years. Brilliant. ****ing brilliant this guy is.

He was answering a generalized question about his supporters believing in this, and his answer was mostly about competing ideas of national sovereignty and globalism.

HAve you ever heard him talk about 9/11? He says things like "We were never given a reason"...except we were. BY ****ING BIN LADEN HIMSELF! Ron Paul is on a different planet completely.

I don't know where you pulling this from, but he's talked about Bin Laden's reason for 9/11 multiple times, even getting booed at one of the debate this year for talking about it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuX73Ixqtbg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfBKKh0C2eo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ7Md...eature=related

Just because he's not plastic like Romney or Obama, doesn't mean he's the right guy to hand over the country to.

He couldn't be worse though right?

[MonoxideChild]

I'm completely with you. We produce nothing. Our economy sucks because we don't do anything besides talking people out of their money. I get it. I don't dislike Ron Paul, but I think he gets love because he's a fringe candidate. He just doesn't stand u for what he really believes. I'm all for him if he would admit that he wants completely open borders, but there's not way he would say that publicly. He's just another politician. That's my point I guess. Al Gore was the left's answer to Ron Paul, and he did the same thing. It's easy to campaign when you don't expect to win.

[MonoxideChild]

honestly, Ron Paul's "Platform" is nonsense. All he does is talk about how everybody is ruining the world, but contributes absolutely nothing. He definitely has more common sense than Obama or Romney, I'll never argue that, but so does Nader.

BTW, I think a Nader/Paul debate would be an astonishing piece of narrative for future generations to enjoy.

[TheRealist]

honestly, Ron Paul's "Platform" is nonsense. All he does is talk about how everybody is ruining the world, but contributes absolutely nothing. He definitely has more common sense than Obama or Romney, I'll never argue that, but so does Nader.

BTW, I think a Nader/Paul debate would be an astonishing piece of narrative for future generations to enjoy.

Well...without describing what his platform is (hint: maximizing the freedom of individuals, if you didn't know) and detailing why it is stupid (good luck with that, Stalin...lol), I would have to say that your argument is nonsense.

See how that works?

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

This is a first btw, I agree with Swift on something.

[theanalogkid]

I'm completely with you. We produce nothing. Our economy sucks because we don't do anything besides talking people out of their money. I get it. I don't dislike Ron Paul, but I think he gets love because he's a fringe candidate. He just doesn't stand u for what he really believes. I'm all for him if he would admit that he wants completely open borders, but there's not way he would say that publicly. He's just another politician. That's my point I guess. Al Gore was the left's answer to Ron Paul, and he did the same thing. It's easy to campaign when you don't expect to win.

Is he really a fringe candidate at this point? He polls pretty much as well or better than any of the other candidates against Obama. He's actually won the delegate count in many states. He may even get enough to force a brokered convention because we do not know how Santorum's or Gingrichs delegates will vote.

He's had the same consistent message since he'd been in politics. You can go back and look at his speeches during the 1988 election and it would be the same ideas as what he's promoting today. (except a deficit of billions has changed to trillion)

[MonoxideChild]

Is he really a fringe candidate at this point? He polls pretty much as well or better than any of the other candidates against Obama. He's actually won the delegate count in many states. He may even get enough to force a brokered convention because we do not know how Santorum's or Gingrichs delegates will vote.

He's had the same consistent message since he'd been in politics. You can go back and look at his speeches during the 1988 election and it would be the same ideas as what he's promoting today. (except a deficit of billions has changed to trillion)

He's definitely a fringe candidate. He's the guy that the republicans will say they support right before they go and vote for Romney. My only problem with Ron Paul is that for every brilliant thing he has to say, there's about 10 absolutely insane things right behind it. He doesn't really have any plans laid out and sometimes he just sounds like he's reading out of a Larry Elder book. Like I said before though, I think we'd be WAY better off if we had more Ron Pauls or Ralph Naders or Bernie Sanders in the Senate.

On a side note, why the **** was I called Stalin? The whole personal freedom thing is a lie now. There's no such thing. He just wants minimized government. You're talking two completely different things. (Not you Analogkid)

[TheRealist]

He's definitely a fringe candidate. He's the guy that the republicans will say they support right before they go and vote for Romney. My only problem with Ron Paul is that for every brilliant thing he has to say, there's about 10 absolutely insane things right behind it. He doesn't really have any plans laid out and sometimes he just sounds like he's reading out of a Larry Elder book. Like I said before though, I think we'd be WAY better off if we had more Ron Pauls or Ralph Naders or Bernie Sanders in the Senate.

On a side note, why the **** was I called Stalin? The whole personal freedom thing is a lie now. There's no such thing. He just wants minimized government. You're talking two completely different things. (Not you Analogkid)

Lol, just playin with the Stalin thing...

BUT

Josef, are you saying that expanding individual liberty and limited/no government are mutually exclusive? Please DO explain that one for me.

[theanalogkid]

He's definitely a fringe candidate. He's the guy that the republicans will say they support right before they go and vote for Romney. My only problem with Ron Paul is that for every brilliant thing he has to say, there's about 10 absolutely insane things right behind it. He doesn't really have any plans laid out and sometimes he just sounds like he's reading out of a Larry Elder book. Like I said before though, I think we'd be WAY better off if we had more Ron Pauls or Ralph Naders or Bernie Sanders in the Senate.

That doesn't make him a fringe candidate as a lot of his positions have large support. The MSM has a lot to do with his supposed kookieness I'd really love to see you back your 10 insane things claim. What you gave before was pretty weak examples.

As far as I know Ron Paul was the only candidate to step forward with a plan to balance the budget and shrink the government and he's talked a great deal about what he'd do as President. So there's no truth behind your statement.

[H1tStick]

So disappointed with this year's candidates. It's a lose/lose no matter who you vote for. Obama has proven he can't handle anything but cool speeches though so I guess time to give someone else the turn to **** up.

[Swift456]

He's definitely a fringe candidate. He's the guy that the republicans will say they support right before they go and vote for Romney. My only problem with Ron Paul is that for every brilliant thing he has to say, there's about 10 absolutely insane things right behind it. He doesn't really have any plans laid out and sometimes he just sounds like he's reading out of a Larry Elder book. Like I said before though, I think we'd be WAY better off if we had more Ron Pauls or Ralph Naders or Bernie Sanders in the Senate.

On a side note, why the **** was I called Stalin? The whole personal freedom thing is a lie now. There's no such thing. He just wants minimized government. You're talking two completely different things. (Not you Analogkid)

I think you need to look into Ron Paul further because you have said some very off things regarding him.

"He's the guy that the republicans will say they support right before they go and vote for Romney."

This is very off-base and if you knew anything about Paul and his supporters you would realize that the vast majority of them will vote for Paul and no1 else. Everything Romney stands for is completely different than what Paul does.

And Paul is no phony or fake, this guy is as real as it gets for a politician, He was saying the same things in the 70's and 80's. Plus he has been right about many of things many years before they happened, such as the Iraq War, the recession in 87, the recent housing bubble and our current crisis. Most likely he will be right again about our currency losing it's position as the world currency and it's being severely devalued.

He underground and grassroots support is so big because he sticks to his word and principles.

You say he has done nothing to help this country, another mistake. He has changed today's youth. He has got them reading the constitution, studying the history of our presidents and investigating the federal reserve.

Before Ron Paul, I didn't really know much about Woodrow Wilson, Dwight Eisenhower, Grover Cleveland, the Federal Reserve or the Constitution, but that has changed because I was influenced by him. He drew a passion in me to learn and be informed.

Ron Paul has awoken this country to many things and will be remembered as one of the most influential people in this decade.

He is winning delegates left and right, just won Maine and Nevada today and hopefully he can force a brokered convention and somehow force Romney out. I understand it's highly unlikely, but either way he has changed the Republican party for the better and his son Rand might be President one day because of the efforts of Ron Paul. Paul is continuously going to Colleges around the country and drawing thousands of students, way bigger than anything Romney or Santorum could gather.

IF the Media actually covered it, Paul would gain a ton of momentum, but they don't and it hurts him. He gets no Love from the Mainstream Media, just little tidbits here and there on CNBC and Fox, but still they never take him seriously and tell you the real story.

[sideoutshu]

The thing that attracts people to Ron Paul is that he is a man of conviction, and principle. Even if you don't agree with his politics, it is extremely refreshing to see a candidate that can't be bought and doesn't change sides depending on the direction of the wind.