Is ATS Endorsing Ron Paul?

Originally posted by nyk537
However, those positions have not been advocated as the "official positions of ATS". Therefore there really is no bias if it isn't promoted as such.

Also true, to an extent.

As an analogy though, if aliens were to visit the forum, and that one only, the impression would be that it was a politically sponsored site.

Everybody is allowed their opinion, but when lies, spin, deceit and name calling take over, for me, it's time to stop posting there.

Whats so wrong in voting for the ONE Presidential Candidate who actually looks BELIEVABLE???

I am truly confused at the RuPaul type of logic as far as pointing insults and NOT ACTUALLY LISTENING TO THE MESSAGE....it seems to me that Ron Paul is NO ROSS PEROT.

Ron Paul is a REAL FREAKING PERSON not some Robot up on stage acting in a movie. Don't you see the difference just in that type of comparison??? I mean lets be real, I have followed history and have also followed every Presidential election since 1980...not that long but at least it gives me some incite on what were facing in this election as this could be the election that gives us this....Bush1 4yrs - Clinton1 8yrs - Bush2 8yrs - Clinton2 4yrs and counting..

For the people on this board who are supposed to be the Moderators, wouldn't you at least understand that Ron Paul is releasing a untold number of Voters of there apathy??? I haven't voted EVER just because of the fact that none of the candidates in the last 20+ years are worth a damn!!!!

To the point of duplicate threads...from my understanding duplicate threads in different portions of this web site are OK. There could be a thread in "Breaking News", "Current Events", "Below Top Secret.com", "Above Politics.com" that covers the same topic and it would be OK as far as I know.

Note: Edit on following elections since 1980...oops

[edit on 6-11-2007 by hoochymama]

I wonder, would there be this much negative reaction if Ron Paul had not raised so much money in a single day? Just upstream I saw a post about how the whole thing was just us nuts on ATS-so did ATS members alone pony up these millions of $$$$$ ?

Because there are a lot of threads on him is due to the fact that he is not only the best "outside" candidate around, but there is an active drive to keep him from mainstream attention. Most of us would follow much more silently if there did not seem to be such a vocal anti-Paul movement. Even here on ATS.

Gee, let's cry because people here want to talk about him instead of the "flavor of the day" news story that will NOT determine the future of our nation.

reply to post by NGC2736


Au contraire, I feel that Ron Paul is another political fad. So far we've had Taft, Goldwater, and Perot who all essentially promoted the same ideals but were more or less forgotten once they failed to become president.

Perot, at least in my lifetime IS NOT ANYTHING LIKE RON PAUL.......

If you would like to debate this specific statement lets do it.

reply to post by totalvigilance


And where does the chimera of ideals fade to if we have no knights to speak of better realms? If they fail to ignite the populace, is it their fault or ours?

reply to post by NGC2736


I was too harsh in my labeling of politicians as fads. True, none of these men ever became president, but they did help promote useful ideals and, while I don't agree with most of Ron Paul's beliefs, some of them are good and I would like to see those implemented. It's good that he's promoting discourse on those.

reply to post by nyk537


I've liked Ron Paul's point of view since his speech last year February. This was a long time before he announced he was running for president.

The End of Dollar Hegemony

Originally posted by jsobecky


Wow, that's a lot of attention to a rather mundane topic. But it brings up the question: is ATS breaking with tradition, and supporting a particular candidate? The sheer number of what could arguably be called duplicate threads would lead one to believe so..

just wanted to know how having two national records broken (most donations to a presidential candidate in one day, and having the most individual donatees in one day,) having shown the potential legitimacy in numbers when it comes to the internet ,proving the mainstream media wrong, and ofcourse validating the potential (in solid numbers) of the legitimacy of what was thought to be a no-chance-in-hell candidate, is a mundane topic.

Because it isn't, it's pretty serious business. And if you don't realize that, to rehash an already far too overused catchpharse, your not denying ignorance.

Wow Totalviligance, you really backed up your point there as far as labeling Ron Paul as a Ross Perot, Goldwater, etc.

This is the real problem in our country and this board, it seems that some posters and some people in America just don't seem to be able to separate their desire to try and stop something that could CHANGE THE WORLD!!!!!

[edit on 6-11-2007 by hoochymama]

reply to post by hoochymama


I do believe that Paul would change the world. He would finally cement the world's belief that America was a lunatic state, and rightfully so. Let's save our debate for another pro/anti Paul thread, however...so far we are off topic.

I just want people to know what they're getting when they vote for Ron Paul.

Here's a link to the Libertarian Party on the issues. I don't know for a fact that Ron Paul agrees with all this, but he probably does agree with a fair share of it. I'm a Kucinich supporter, I think Paul's a nutbar.

[edit on 6-11-2007 by Raoul Duke]

The funny thing is, that you link to the Libertarian party but don't link to the Constitution???

Ron Paul is for the states making there own laws which don't TRUMP THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LAWS....AKA MEDICAL MARIJUANA, ABORTION, GUN RIGHTS, ETC.

Don't confuse the FACTS and don't confuse the actual things that a candidate is trying to propose......

reply to post by Raoul Duke


Agreed. I don't like any of the candidates, but I think RP has the most potential for making well-meaning, but very dangerous "reforms".

reply to post by Raoul Duke


Saying he "probably does agree" doesn't make it so. So unless you're going to provide proof to back it up that he does, please don't make assertions to subtly promote your candidate of choice.

In this post I laid out the arguments against Ron Paul and gave a response to each. I don't mind how you take my responses. Believe it, don't believe it, doesn't bother me.

But what it displays is how weak of an argument anti-Ron Paul people have. They have nothing solid against him, because all he does is promote freedom, peace, and security. All he does is vote for the constitution. All he does is stand for what this country should stand for.

It seems as Ron Paul's popularity rises, so does the anti-Ron Paul camp. It's becoming a race. The more people that support the man, the more immature people you have paying attention, trying to be different, and looking for any excuse to bash him. These people spend more time trying to bash a guy who just wants America to go back to how it should be than they do bashing this current administration who is leading us down a path to dictatorship. That's a clear very disturbing imbalance mentally for these people.

It's like a game to some. They're more concerned with being different than trying to fix this nation, as if we have some endless amount of time to do so.

We don't. It needs to change now, and only Ron Paul can do such a thing.

We need a candidate who FULLY supports the constitution of this country. The constitution in it's ORIGINAL form is the ONLY way we will remain free and prosper in the nation that our founding fathers envisioned.

Kucinich isn't a full constitution supporter. He has made it clear he is anti-2nd Amendment. Taking away a people's guns is equal to, if not worse, than taking away a people's right to free speech. Both are absolutely essential to a "free" nation.

Anyone trying to interfere with the constitution's original intent does not deserve the vote of any American. To this point, only one candidate has proved he fully supports the constitution.

Ron Paul

Totalviligance, it seems once someone comes to the thread with some kind of "like mind" you want to "gravitate" towards their opinion?? This link to Libertarians views is NOT WHAT RON PAUL BELIEVES IN!!!!

Ron Paul believes in the OLD SCHOOL REPUBLICAN views....

Ron Paul BELIEVES in the STATE LAWS....NOT THE FEDERAL LAWS...

reply to post by hoochymama


I've listened to Ron Paul's positions from his own mouth. Don't try to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

Totalviligance, LINKS????

The bottom line is that ATS doesn't, but a good portion of its membership does.

Hey, we're not all going to agree on anything. The point is, do you want another four to eight years of the same kind of BS we've had? It doesn't matter if it's the Hero of New York or the Woman of the Future, both are just a clone of everything that's went on for years.

I would rather have new ideas, new chances a new outlook, than keep on with the same old mistakes.