• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

I want Ron Paul to win; please tell me why I'm wrong

TK0001

Muse
TK0001
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
593
I make the mistake of appealing to authority quite a bit in my internet travels, and I consider this place one of the most intelligent discussion groups on all of the interwebs.

I voted for Obama because I bought his message of Hope and Change, which is now a punchline. I was duped, completely. I'm embarrassed about that now, but I voted with my heart.

My heart is still the same - I want things in Washington to change. They have to. Cronyism and corporate money has brought us to the brink of global economic collapse and I see Romney and Obama as the exact same thing - mouthpieces for special interests. Romney's biggest campaign contributor is Goldman Sachs, which was one of Obama's biggest campaign contributors. In my opinion, nothing at all will change and things will only get worse for the overwhelming majority of American citizens if Romney or Obama get elected in 2012.

So I look to Ron Paul and agree with his policies of smaller, less intrusive federal government. He makes sense to me, and he seems to be the only candidate who clearly states his positions. I don't agree with everything he has to say, but most of it, I do.

Then I come here and learn that I'm a "Paultard", that Paul has no chance, and that watching all the Paul supporters lament about the failure of their candidate will be entertaining.

I guess I don't understand. Please educate me. Why am I wrong to support this man? Why am I "stupid" to do so? I fully expect Romney to win the nomination, so if someone smarter than me can point out anything at all that he would do that is positive for the country, please inform me of that as well.
 
I think Ron Paul is highly naive when it comes to the ability of charity to deliver, is extremely misguided on the notion of self-responsibility, and harboured incredibly racist views many years ago.
 
Last edited:
TK0001 said:
I voted for Obama because I bought his message of Hope and Change, which is now a punchline. I was duped, completely. I'm embarrassed about that now, but I voted with my heart.
Click to expand...
What did you suppose Obama was going to do if not manage to get the massive amounts of legislation passed that he did?

[ETA: I have no problem with people saying they disagree or disapprove of what Obama did, but I do have problem with people claiming he failed to get things done or deliver on the promise of change. Perhaps the biggest criticism is that in the interest of getting things done, he compromised too much with his opposition. But there's a philosophical/pragmatic question: is it better to get some of what you want or none? But saying nothing changed or that he accomplished nothing doesn't line up with the facts.]



I guess I don't understand. Please educate me. Why am I wrong to support this man? Why am I "stupid" to do so? I fully expect Romney to win the nomination, so if someone smarter than me can point out anything at all that he would do that is positive for the country, please inform me of that as well.
Click to expand...

OK. Many of the policies Ron Paul advocates are far outside the mainstream, sometimes baldly contrary to core Constitutional principles, and he seems oblivious to these facts.

He's got a lot of baggage* wrt whacky positions and beliefs (bizarre conspiracy theory stuff). Although he means to appeal to libertarians, he has also associated himself with extremely conservative organizations and people (John Birch Society, racists). That sort of thing might work on a smaller stage, but nationally, it won't.

I don't believe he has much of a history of working with others in politics. I don't think his outsider/maverick approach to politics would make him a good executive at all much less the head officer of that branch.

*ETA: One reason I object to the name-calling of people like yourself as "Paultards" (aside from the simple fact that it's name-calling), is that many people, like you I suspect, are unaware of Ron Paul's history. You're impression of him is based on a somewhat sanitized image of himself he's presenting to people nowadays. I think the more you learn about him, the more difficult it will be for you to support him.
 
Last edited:
TK0001 said:
I guess I don't understand. Please educate me. Why am I wrong to support this man? Why am I "stupid" to do so?
Click to expand...


You forget that these forums are dominated by the left. That's the whole point.

TK0001 said:
and I consider this place one of the most intelligent discussion groups on all of the interwebs.
Click to expand...


Well, the intelligent part stops at the two politics fora. ;)
 
TK0001 said:
I voted for Obama because I bought his message of Hope and Change, which is now a punchline. I was duped, completely. I'm embarrassed about that now, but I voted with my heart.
Click to expand...

Multiply that by about 100, and you´ll see what you´re going to feel like if you vote Ron Paul and he gets elected.

The parts of his position that aren´t just there to dupe the gullible (and there are a LOT of gullible libertarians and other Ron Paul fans) are either not going to pass because they´re blatantly unconstitutional or are going to fail spectacularly because they´re either based on a simplistic misunderstanding of economics and human nature, or on conspiracy theorist paranoia.

Either Ron Paul would deliver what he promised, in which case the US is absolutely, terribly screwed in so many ways, or he doesn´t deliver, in which case you have replaced a dishonest sane politician with a dishonest nutcase politician. Either way, don´t come crying to us and tell us we didn´t warn you.
 
TK0001 said:
I make the mistake of appealing to authority quite a bit in my internet travels, and I consider this place one of the most intelligent discussion groups on all of the interwebs.

I voted for Obama because I bought his message of Hope and Change, which is now a punchline. I was duped, completely. I'm embarrassed about that now, but I voted with my heart.

My heart is still the same - I want things in Washington to change. They have to. Cronyism and corporate money has brought us to the brink of global economic collapse and I see Romney and Obama as the exact same thing - mouthpieces for special interests. Romney's biggest campaign contributor is Goldman Sachs, which was one of Obama's biggest campaign contributors. In my opinion, nothing at all will change and things will only get worse for the overwhelming majority of American citizens if Romney or Obama get elected in 2012.

So I look to Ron Paul and agree with his policies of smaller, less intrusive federal government. He makes sense to me, and he seems to be the only candidate who clearly states his positions. I don't agree with everything he has to say, but most of it, I do.

Then I come here and learn that I'm a "Paultard", that Paul has no chance, and that watching all the Paul supporters lament about the failure of their candidate will be entertaining.

I guess I don't understand. Please educate me. Why am I wrong to support this man? Why am I "stupid" to do so? I fully expect Romney to win the nomination, so if someone smarter than me can point out anything at all that he would do that is positive for the country, please inform me of that as well.
Click to expand...
I have never met a Ron Paul supporter who didn't fit at least 1 of these 3 categories:
1. Racist/anti-semite
2. Conspiracy theorists (do you think Oswald alone shot Kennedy? Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?)
3. Anti-Fed/anti-fiat money goldbugs.

Are you the first?
 
WildCat said:
I have never met a Ron Paul supporter who didn't fit at least 1 of these 3 categories:
1. Racist/anti-semite
2. Conspiracy theorists (do you think Oswald alone shot Kennedy? Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?)
3. Anti-Fed/anti-fiat money goldbugs.

Are you the first?
Click to expand...


Did you met more than 3? ;)
 
WildCat said:
I have never met a Ron Paul supporter who didn't fit at least 1 of these 3 categories:
1. Racist/anti-semite
2. Conspiracy theorists (do you think Oswald alone shot Kennedy? Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?)
3. Anti-Fed/anti-fiat money goldbugs.

Are you the first?
Click to expand...

I think there are people just generally ignorant of Ron Paul whose only exposure to him are a couple of his current campaign speeches and/or sound bites. I'd add category 4.: the ignorant.
 
Say what you want about Obama, but at least he doesn't go on the Alex Jones show. Can you imagine, Alex Jones interviewing the President of the United States? The last time he went on that show was December 13th, 2011 "Ron Paul speaks on MSM blackout, Iowa, False Flags. NDAA bill" Why the hell would you go on a show like that if you didn't sympathize with the major themes? I have seen stuff like "GO RON PAUL! INFOWARS.COM!" spammed all over the internet and on facebook for years.

There are too many reasons to list why he's a kook and his ideas are out of touch but this forum has a lot of paul threads.

His former driver coming out saying that he absolutely is lying about the newsletters is also believable.

The guy is so easy to make fun of it's ridiculous

 
Joey McGee said:
Say what you want about Obama, but at least he doesn't go on the Alex Jones show. Can you imagine, Alex Jones interviewing the President of the United States? The last time he went on that show was December 13th, 2011 "Ron Paul speaks on MSM blackout, Iowa, False Flags. NDAA bill" Why the hell would you go on a show like that if you didn't sympathize with the major themes? I have seen stuff like "GO RON PAUL! INFOWARS.COM!" spammed all over the internet and on facebook for years.
Click to expand...

I suspect this is exactly the sort of thing our OP wasn't aware of. (Our OP may not even know who Alex Jones is.)

Just because it's what I think our OP is looking for, I'll put that yt video in yt tags for quicker/easier viewing here:

 
The problem with Ron Paul is that he fundamentally disagrees with the Constitution. Even if by some miracle he was elected president, he would be completely worthless, as neither party would work with him and the Supreme Court would overrule any of the major changes he's proposed. He could, of course, be vindictive and veto every piece of legislation sent to him. If you think we had governmental gridlock in the last four years, you'd find it mild compared to what you'd see under a Ron Paul presidency.

But this is all a moot point. The Repubs are not going to nominate him and he would come in third in a three-way election.
 
Consider the fact that Ron Paul endorsed a white separatist for POTUS in 2008. That's Chuck Baldwin, a frothing whackjob who's trying to establish something called The American Redoubt, a white libertopia comprised of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, eastern Oregon and eastern Washington states, with it's own currency no less.

Or consider the fact that Paul praised David Duke for fighting for the rights of all Americans. :boggled: (And how nice that Duke now endorses Paul.)
 
The reason why Goldman doesn't give heavily to Ron Paul, is that they don't need to. Paul would give Goldman the exact same wild west environment they want.

Also, if Paul was really successful with his "economic plan", it would sink the entire economy, and I doubt Goldman wants that.

Personally, I'm still an Obama supporter. I just want him to get a congress that is willing to do the right thing. Based on today's recess appointment to the Consumer bureau, I'm hoping that he is done trying to appease the Republicans.
 
I was seriously asking the question. I keep hearing how I'm an idiot to want Paul as president, but I haven't heard many reasons as to exactly why.

I am not a conspiracy theorist (I've been fighting against 9/11 conspiracies for years), and I detest Alex Jones, and I'm also not a racist. I find the fact that certain people had to rush to try to categorize me rather humorous.

I just chose to ask the question so I could educate myself. When so many people have a problem with the guy you gravitate toward, I think it's important to find out if those people and their views have merit. Basically, if I'm being stupid, I would like to know. And I'm not afraid to ask to be straightened out.

So I would fall into the category (for those keeping score at home) of People Who Are Sick of Washington, Who Want Real Change, Who Are Admittedly Uneducated as to Ron Paul Outside of the Past Few Years. Or the gullible, take your pick.
 
TK0001 said:
I was seriously asking the question. I keep hearing how I'm an idiot to want Paul as president, but I haven't heard many reasons as to exactly why.

I am not a conspiracy theorist (I've been fighting against 9/11 conspiracies for years), and I detest Alex Jones, and I'm also not a racist. I find the fact that certain people had to rush to try to categorize me rather humorous.

I just chose to ask the question so I could educate myself. When so many people have a problem with the guy you gravitate toward, I think it's important to find out if those people and their views have merit. Basically, if I'm being stupid, I would like to know. And I'm not afraid to ask to be straightened out.

So I would fall into the category (for those keeping score at home) of People Who Are Sick of Washington, Who Want Real Change, Who Are Admittedly Uneducated as to Ron Paul Outside of the Past Few Years. Or the gullible, take your pick.
Click to expand...


Again, you have to acknowledge that the majority in here is from the left political spectrum. For them Republicans in general are nuts - including their supporters. And most of them probably fear Paul, so they convince each other that he's even more nuts than all the other Republican nuts. :p
 
TK0001 said:
I am not a conspiracy theorist (I've been fighting against 9/11 conspiracies for years), and I detest Alex Jones, and I'm also not a racist. I find the fact that certain people had to rush to try to categorize me rather humorous.
Click to expand...
But you want to support a person with racist views and someone who supports Alex Jones?

Ron Paul's ideas may sound great, but have you really looked at the implications of implementing his ideas?
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
One reason I object to the name-calling of people like yourself as "Paultards" (aside from the simple fact that it's name-calling), is that many people, like you I suspect, are unaware of Ron Paul's history. You're impression of him is based on a somewhat sanitized image of himself he's presenting to people nowadays. I think the more you learn about him, the more difficult it will be for you to support him.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I confess I do like the "sanitized" version, and am thus far largely unaware of the more extreme version of Ron Paul (or the true Paul?)


JoeTheJuggler said:
What did you suppose Obama was going to do if not manage to get the massive amounts of legislation passed that he did?

[ETA: I have no problem with people saying they disagree or disapprove of what Obama did, but I do have problem with people claiming he failed to get things done or deliver on the promise of change. Perhaps the biggest criticism is that in the interest of getting things done, he compromised too much with his opposition. But there's a philosophical/pragmatic question: is it better to get some of what you want or none? But saying nothing changed or that he accomplished nothing doesn't line up with the facts.]
Click to expand...

My problem with Obama is his appointment of former Wall Street execs into positions of power, which is completely contrary to Hope and Change.

Also I can't stomach the fact he signed NDAA into law, that we're only now pulling out of Iraq and remain in Afghanistan, we went into Libya without congressional consent, and seem to be ramping up for a war in Iran. I'm tired of continuous war to the point of exhaustion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom