MERGED--> So...Ron Paul + Vote Ron Paul

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Infinitum98 said:


He didn't say any of those quotes.



Yeah, but here is one of his biggest supporters-so you do the math:

dukepislogan400.jpg


That Ron Paul hasn't tried to distanced himself from David Duke is troubling.

Ron Paul is a whacko.

dbs
 
It is Duke who supports Paul, not Paul who supports Duke. Ron Paul knows that he himself is not a racist. And he is confident that his supporters know that he isn't.
 
Fox News is biased. After the debate tonight there was a guy on Hannity and Colmbes with a group of people, the guy asked the group who lost the debate, and everybody said "Ron Paul." It was so staged. Fuck Fox News. Our country will never fall again to this neo-con agenda!!!!!!!
 
Infinitum98 said:
Fox News is biased. After the debate tonight there was a guy on Hannity and Colmbes with a group of people, the guy asked the group who lost the debate, and everybody said "Ron Paul." It was so staged.


Wow. :|

Maybe Ron Paul lost because his positions suck. You really think the people there were coerced into saying that? Perhaps you can't face reality, my friend.
 
Infinitum98 said:
Fox News is biased. After the debate tonight there was a guy on Hannity and Colmbes with a group of people, the guy asked the group who lost the debate, and everybody said "Ron Paul." It was so staged. Fuck Fox News. Our country will never fall again to this neo-con agenda!!!!!!!

There are plenty of reasons why Fox News is biased ... this isn't really why.
 
2861U2 said:



Wow. :|

Maybe Ron Paul lost because his positions suck. You really think the people there were coerced into saying that? Perhaps you can't face reality, my friend.

No, his positions are true Republican positions, my friend. Maybe Fox News gathered only people who are pro-war, I would expect that from such a biased bullshit network.
 
Infinitum98 said:


No, his positions are true Republican positions, my friend.

No, they're not.

Infinitum98 said:
Maybe Fox News gathered only people who are pro-war, I would expect that from such a biased bullshit network.

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. :|

So because your guy wasn't the "winner," you think there's some sort of scam? Looking at the polls, it appears most Republicans do not like Ron Paul.
 
2861U2 said:


No, they're not.



Yes, they are. Ever heard of fiscal conservatism? Ever heard of non-interventionalism? Maybe you are too young and ignorant so the only bullshit that you know about is the whacko George W. Bush dictator agenda.
 
2861U2 said:


Yeah, I'm sure that's it. :|

So because your guy wasn't the "winner," you think there's some sort of scam? Looking at the polls, it appears most Republicans do not like Ron Paul.

No, not because he wasn't the winner.

I'm just saying, he certainly wasn't the loser. And why don't we look at the amount of $ raised. He probably raised the most or nearly the most out of any candidate from either party in the fourth quarter.
 
No need to get condescending about it...this place is for debating, not trading insults.
 
phillyfan26 said:


There are plenty of reasons why Fox News is biased ... this isn't really why.

Well Hannity has been known to be a Paul hater. I don't see how a group of people in a room can all say "Ron Paul" is the loser at the same moment.
 
Infinitum98 said:

And why don't we look at the amount of $ raised. He probably raised the most or nearly the most out of any candidate from either party in the fourth quarter.

Yes, his fundraising is impressive, but that clearly doesn't translate to votes. If he can pull off a 4th place in just one state, I will be quite shocked.
 
By the way. Fox News online poll says that Ron Paul is the winner with 35% of the vote. Huckabee is the closest 2nd with 18%. So for anyone who thinks he is not liked, take a look at this.
 
Well Fox does not like Paul, that's a given, so it's not suprising that their audience hates him as well... I wouldn't really consider that staged.

Yes some of Paul's positions are much more conservative than most current Republicans, but there are also many that don't line up with even the older Republican party.

Face it, the Republican party has changed, voters like 2861 are too young to remember what the party was really like pre neo-con. Parties evolve, some for the better some for the worse, your party has evolved towards the worse. The Republican party isn't the party you remember.
 
2861U2 said:


Yes, his fundraising is impressive, but that clearly doesn't translate to votes. If he can pull off a 4th place in just one state, I will be quite shocked.

We've only done 3 states so far, we have time left.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Well Fox does not like Paul, that's a given, so it's not suprising that their audience hates him as well... I wouldn't really consider that staged.

Yes some of Paul's positions are much more conservative than most current Republicans, but there are also many that don't line up with even the older Republican party.

Face it, the Republican party has changed, voters like 2861 are too young to remember what the party was really like pre neo-con. Parties evolve, some for the better some for the worse, your party has evolved towards the worse. The Republican party isn't the party you remember.

I believe that one day the true Republican party will return. I believe that in the future, when we realize how Iraq was a waste of time, money and lives, neo-cons will vanish from our party.
 
I hope so too. But don't worry. Most of the people who supported going into Iraq in 2002 don't anymore. Support of the war will only get less as time passes.
 
Infinitum98 said:
And why don't we look at the amount of $ raised. He probably raised the most or nearly the most out of any candidate from either party in the fourth quarter.

Because the amount of money raised is an irrelevant figure.

[Lyndon] LaRouche entered the primary elections for the Democratic Party's nomination in 2004, even though as a convicted felon he is not even a registered voter. The Democratic Party did not consider his candidacy to be legitimate and ruled him ineligible to win delegates. LaRouche gained negligible electoral support. However, according to the Federal Election Commission statistics, LaRouche had more individual contributors to his 2004 Presidential Campaign than any other candidate, until the final quarter of the primary season, when John Kerry surpassed him.

Sound familiar? Just because you have an active, cult following does not mean it translates into mainstream popularity.
 
melon said:


Because the amount of money raised is an irrelevant figure.


So poll numbers are relevant? What happened to Obama's guaranteed win in NH? And if they are so relevant, FoxNews.com poll says that Ron Paul won the debate tonight by a vast margin.

Realistically, I don't think money raised or poll numbers are either that relevant.
 
Infinitum98 said:
So poll numbers are relevant? What happened to Obama's guaranteed win in NH? And if they are so relevant, FoxNews.com poll says that Ron Paul won the debate tonight by a vast margin.

Realistically, I don't think money raised or poll numbers are either that relevant.

Online polls? Statistically, they are wholly unreliable. There's a decent chance that a Ron Paul supporter found the poll, then brought it to the attention of a web forum full of his supporters to skew the vote in their favor. That's why nobody uses them for serious statistics gathering. All the credible polls show Paul with single digit support, and both Iowa and New Hampshire have ultimately confirmed that to be the case.

Regardless of whether Obama's poll numbers were correct in NH or not, Paul's poll numbers seem to be correct, so far.
 
Infinitum98 said:


No, his positions are true Republican positions, my friend.



:up:

:up:

An undated solicitation letter for The Ron Paul Investment Letter and the Ron Paul Political Report contains this, from Paul himself: "I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove--perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica."

"A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism" analyzes the Los Angeles riots of 1992: "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided."
 
^He is not racist. He said he's not racist on his website. He is more for liberties and freedom than most of the candidates.
 
Infinitum98 said:
He is not racist. He said he's not racist on his website. He is more for liberties and freedom than most of the candidates.

Except if you're homosexual.

States' rights and sodomy laws

Ron Paul has been a critic of the Supreme Court's decision on the Lawrence v. Texas case in which sodomy laws were ruled unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. In an essay posted to the Lew Rockwell website he wrote:

"Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights – rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards."

...

In 2004, he spoke in support of the Defense of Marriage Act (passed in 1996) which limited the U.S. Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause by allowing states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states if they so choose. He co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would have barred judges from hearing cases pertaining to the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Then the state is free to trample all over your rights, according to Ron Paul.
 
melon said:


There's a decent chance that a Ron Paul supporter found the poll, then brought it to the attention of a web forum full of his supporters to skew the vote in their favor. That's why nobody uses them for serious statistics gathering.

That's probably right. Does anybody really care who came in first in a Fox News text message poll? I doubt it. The only people who would care about something so trivial are the Ron Paul supporters who want to make it look like he won the debate, and are desperate to make it appear that he has a ton of support.
 
melon said:


Except if you're homosexual.



Then the state is free to trample all over your rights, according to Ron Paul.

Yea, we've gone over this on the forum. He is still for states rights to decide on gay marriage, which is a more liberal position than the other Republican candidates. He is also for the equality of gays and straights serving in the military.
 
2861U2 said:


That's probably right. Does anybody really care who came in first in a Fox News text message poll? I doubt it. The only people who would care about something so trivial are the Ron Paul supporters who want to make it look like he won the debate, and are desperate to make it appear that he has a ton of support.

Well, he did win the debate, according to the poll.
 
melon said:

There's a decent chance that a Ron Paul supporter found the poll, then brought it to the attention of a web forum full of his supporters to skew the vote in their favor.

If there is a good chance for that, there is also a decent chance that a Giuliani supporter, McCain supporter, Thompson supporter, Huckabee supporter or Romney supporter could have found the poll, then brought it to the attention of a web forum full of their respective supporters. You can't have it both ways. Why assume that only Ron Paul supporters skew the vote?
 
Infinitum98 said:


Well, he did win the debate, according to the poll.

Internet polls are meaningless.

Also, if Ron Paul is not racist, then what's your explanation for this?

"Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided."
 
Back
Top Bottom