It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Ron Paul safe? Let's say he does win in 2008...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 01:17 AM
link   
Okay, let's say Ron Paul does somehow pull out the election in 2008.

Since he is a huge opponent of the Federal Reserve and Big Government, will he be safe?

There are still those to this day that whole heartedly believe that J.F.K. was assassinated because he wanted to do away with the Federal Reserve System.

Don't get me wrong RP supporters, I'll definitely be casting my vote for him. However, do you think he'll really be able to change things without being shut down? Even for those of you who are whole heartedly convinced that the Fed and The Gov. have our best interests in mind, do you think that the largest monopoly in the world (The Fed Reserve--maybe not the largest..but def. huge) will just let some guy from Texas tear apart their system and make their money and power worthless?

This is something that nags at me.


Jasn




posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I lost you at the first sentence. He wont win, theres no hypotheticals here, unfortunately


KTK

posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Peering up from down under I have wondered this myself. Any of your past presidents that think the same way have come to an ugly demise.



In saying that i have often wondered if the powers that be are smart enough to make Mr Paul the puppet. If he does make it in as president i would be more inclined to think this is the case. and if that is the case then we are all screwed



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by KTK
Peering up from down under I have wondered this myself. Any of your past presidents that think the same way have come to an ugly demise.



In saying that i have often wondered if the powers that be are smart enough to make Mr Paul the puppet. If he does make it in as president i would be more inclined to think this is the case. and if that is the case then we are all screwed


If that were indeed the case, then I would have to agree.

However, I don't believe this to be the case and my original question still stands. As you said, past presidents with a similar train of though (IE: Those that think for themselves and stand up for what they think is right) have tended to meet their maker rather prematurely.

Jasn



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   
If Ron Paul is elected at the head of some kind of radical social revolution in this country, I think he'll be safe. Despite the fact that his core issues directly impact the relationship big business has with the government, he also supports things that will help those same corporations keep more of their own money. For example, Ron Paul would like to do away with income tax. This would save big business LOTS of money. Whether it's enough to offset the compensation they currently get from the government is a question for someone more informed on that particular matter.

Ron Paul believes in a free market economy with less regulation imposed by the Federal Government. This would mean more freedom for big business, which means they wouldn't NEED to be as closely tied to the government as they are today. Personally, I think big business would learn to love Ron Paul rather quickly. The only reason big business is in bed with the government today is because the government forces the relationship with all these regulations.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Exactly The Cyfre, I agree with your post. Ron Paul is one of the better candidates we got, but he not without flaws. A lot of individuals seem to bypass or are not too informed about his free market and income tax philosophies.

His stances on these subjects would significantly improve the health of big business -- something we should be trying to get away from. I personally agree he is a good candidate, but not the be all "savior" some people make him out to be.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Hey Douglas. I'm glad we agree that Ron Paul would benefit big business. Where we must differ, however, is that I believe a privatizing things like healthcare, education and social security will ultimately lead to more money in the hands of Americans as well as less government oversight. I think it's very important that we get back to the core beliefs this nation was founded on.

I also agree with you that people are, for the most part, unclear as to how he feels about these important issues. I'm concerned that while he has a great deal of "grass roots" support and a lot of exposure on the internet, many of his supporters may not be as educated as they need to be in order to convince the throngs of undecided voters.

I just believe we've added onto this old house too many times. We need to strip it back down to the basic infrastructure and go from there. Ron Paul can begin that sort of necessary change.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Ron Paul is the only "Safe" candidate out there! The rest of them would sell your mom for a dollar to any 3rd world sweat shop in the world for an extra state come '08.

I think Ron Paul is the most intelligent and honest of all the candidates. He is as selfless as the Pope. Paul follows and respects something the majority of Americans use as a punch line, the Constitution.

For the times they are a changing, Ron Paul in '08!



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
Ron Paul is the only "Safe" candidate out there! The rest of them would sell your mom for a dollar to any 3rd world sweat shop in the world for an extra state come '08.



Hmm, that's not really what I meant. I meant is his life in danger?



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 10:39 PM
link   
He is as safe as Osama bin Laden here is why; by killing him you only help to spread his message and vision of what should come, how was that?


KTK

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 01:51 AM
link   
Simius D,


Have you ever looked into the security precautions Ron Pauls team makes?

Does he have security?


Do any Ron Paul following ATSers know what his security precautions are like?

I imagine Hillary Clinton would have quite a security team at all times, is his anything like hers?


This is the first thread that has ever brought up this topic and i have never come accross any tidbits that may answer these questions.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
I think Ron Paul is the most intelligent and honest of all the candidates. He is as selfless as the Pope. Paul follows and respects something the majority of Americans use as a punch line, the Constitution.

For the times they are a changing, Ron Paul in '08!


I agree that he seems the most genuine and honest. I can't help but wonder though. Look at all the people that voted for Bush in 2000 (and 2004 as well, but we all know that was rigged) They all genuinely thought he had our best interests in site. I didn't think anything of the president until 3000 people died on 9/11... then I looked it up and realized the horrible truth... it just never seemed right. I think that Ron Paul could give this country some hope, he shares some of the principals I do, and seems very ma and pa like =) But he could be a vicious extremest that wants to take away our freedoms... lol just kidding.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by douglas2k4
His stances on these subjects would significantly improve the health of big business -- something we should be trying to get away from.

Yes, we should try and weaken American business. We should work real hard at making sure they go to China and India instead.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 05:51 AM
link   
I think we should focus on getting him to win, because it's going to be a hell of a battle. Ron Paul, unlike our recent presidents, will be working for the people who put him in office, us.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
Yes, we should try and weaken American business. We should work real hard at making sure they go to China and India instead.


Judging from your signature, you are Ron Paul fan. So with that in mind, let me ask you -- what would big business gain under the Paul administration, and what would it lose?

Ron Paul is a great candidate, but I tend to look at the entire issue that a candidate brings to the table. A candidate may seem like the "uber politician" at first, but a more in depth look always changes my opinion. Let me rephrase yet again, Paul is a great candidate, but some of his stances on issues I have to question, like any good American citizen should do before they cast their vote (unfortunately, a lot don't).



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amelie
I think we should focus on getting him to win, because it's going to be a hell of a battle. Ron Paul, unlike our recent presidents, will be working for the people who put him in office, us.


There's definitely something you can do to help Ron Paul win. Educate people about his policies. In order to do that, however, you'll need to educate yourself on his policies first. Big ideas and flashy slogans about how Ron Paul has a vision for the future, or how he's going to save America are just going to alienate ALL those people who have formed their opinion of him based on what main stream media thinks.

So get educated and engage people in political discussions. Rather than convince people that Ron Paul is the answer, try showing them that he IS a legitimate candidate who has legitimate ideals. Common sense has always appealed to people. He just needs positive exposure in mediums beyond the internet.



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Ron Paul is the Anderson/Perot/Nader of the next election cycle...he exists only to siphon off the nut jobs and keep the election running along clearly defind party lines.



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   
To the poster who was curious about the security measures of Hillary Clinton v. Ron Paul - candidates are usually not given secret service protection until they win their party's nomination (unless a credible threat has been made against them). Hillary still has secret service protection, however, because she was a first lady. As for what private considerations they've arranged, who knows.

As for Paul's platform, it's somewhat palatable. As for his safety - that'd all depend on who he chooses as his veep and also (just in case) who's speaker in 2009, now doesn't it?


Paul's stances: taxes-correct, fed-wrong, independence/sovereignty-correct, foreign policy-wrong, pro life-correct, guns-correct, social security - 1/2credit, borders-correct, privacy-1/3credit, eminent domain-correct, health freedom-correct, home schooling-wrong. IMO, of course.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join