Forget Ron Paul - The USA needs Romney, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 12:51 PM by BlueRaja

I understand that, but if you're running for office- are you gonna have people who've worked with/for other candidates/supporters, or folks with no track record/background? I imagine if you look at every candidate, they have people who've workded for numerous people in the RNC/DNC.

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 12:56 PM by Ketzer22

reply to post by Alxandro

lmao.. that was comedy gold my friend.

I hate listening to Romney talk. He's such a jackass. I would hate to see him as president. As big of an idiot as Bush is at least its funny when he talks due to all of his errors. But Romney just seems arrogant, and I can't stand him.

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 01:02 PM by kattraxx

reply to post by mazzroth

Vote for what you don't want and get it? That is the true definition of a "wasted vote".

Where has that gotten us?

Don't be herded behind the leading candidates--- vote your conscience.

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 01:12 PM by EntitySeed

reply to post by kattraxx

Personally I say, "VOTE FOR KATTRAXX!" Hey but that's just me. By the way, I still think Romneys an IDIOT!

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 01:19 PM by jtma508

reply to post by dawnstar

You cannot be serious. You honestly believe that Ron Paul is a 'status-quo, business-as-usual' candidate? If you do you haven't read or understaood a thing he has said. You might want to try again. People can say what they want about Ron Paul but one thing you absolutely CANNOT say is that he would maintain the status quo.

reply posted on 28-1-2008 @ 09:12 PM by Grizzly Bear

reply to post by kattraxx

Exactly. There is only one candidate of those remaining in either party that I would actually place my faith in leading this nation back to peace, prosperity and freedom and that would be Ron Paul. I'm placing my vote for him regardless of whether or not I have to write it in (if that's even possible with the electronic ballot!), because frankly voting any other way to me would be a wasted vote. It's strange when all these candidates are preaching change when the only one with ideas of change is Ron Paul.

P.S - Am I alone when I say that watching Obama after each primary seems a little like deja vu? I was watching him for the second time one night and suddenly I started laughing because I realized where I know his speech style from - Morpheus from the Matrix!!! When he is speaking to the residents of Zion in I think the second or third installation. All I can hear when he speaks after a primary or caucus now is "The machines have forgotten one thing... CHILDREN OF ZION... WE - ARE - STILL - HERE!!!" haha lmao, check it out next time and let me hear what you think.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 12:05 AM by runetang

It doesn't matter who the republican candidate is.

I come from a deeply Democratic family on both sides, meaning the family I live with, and also my family back in the state I was born in, coincidentally the state that Obama is a Senator from.

And I also have friends with Democratic families, and it seems that the Democratic base is on fire. We want change like never before. And considering how made up people's minds are on the party vs party, it doesnt really matter if Obama or Clinton take it because .. whichever does, will win the Presidency.

Hillary vs Mccain = Hillary wins by 5-8%

Hillary vs Romney = Hillary wins by 5-13%

Obama vs Mccain = Obama wins by 2-5%

Obama vs Romney = Obama wins by 4-10%

That is how I feel about it. Right now the Democratic base is divided between Clinton and Obama, but once the battle is settled, they'll all unite under one, trust me.

I'd like to see Clinton as Obama's Vice Pres. Then, when he gives his State of the Union addresses, he'd have two women behind him, the speaker Pelosi, and the VP Clinton. I can picture the "Obama and his hoes" flash comedy movies already...

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 01:01 AM by ancient5121

His probably a cut throat cut of the leg to save the body. If so he probably would be bias. He thinks sacrifice is always required. He won't see a problem with out thinking about sacrifice. One state must be in flux to help another. _javascript:icon('

')
_javascript:icon('

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 04:38 AM by TheWalkingFox

reply to post by ModernAcademia

Strangely our economy did pretty well during the rest of our imperial endeavors - Asia, Latin America, previous forays into the Middle East, etc.

What's different now is the economic approach of the people running the show. Deregulation, "reaganomics," outsourcing, corporate kickbacks... thesee are what are what's killing our economy.

The prevailing theory is that deregulation increases competition and thus leads to lower prices and higher quality goods for the consumer. But we can plainly see that this is untrue. Deregulation in the production area has led to cheaper, less reliable products, tainted food, and toxic inclusions, all at the same price. Deregulation in the outlet / consumer angle has led to monopolization, unemployment, lower wages and higher shelf prices due to LACK of competition. It had led to increased competition for employment, but unfortunately we're supposed to compete with people who work for pennies to the dollar overseas. Basically, deregulation sets every possible obstacle in front of the CONSUMER, and makes them the ones competing, allowing greater profits for the businesses.

Which rakes us to trickle-down, or "Reaganomics"... It just doesn't work. Increased profits to a company aren't recycled. They're put into personal overseas bank accounts. Those dollars are not put towards research and development - you';re raking in profit hand over foot NOW, why spend all that money when you already have a good thing going? Tax break after tax break does not have the stated effect of increasing wages for workers or lowering costs of products, it just adds to the CEO profit margin and retirement package.

What the GOP - INCLUDING Ron Paul - have done for the last several decades, is strive to make a completely consumer-unfriendly market that nevertheless garners record profits for their friends and donors in the big businesses and the banks. The removal of worker's rights, the fighting against wage improvement, constant, CONSTANT removal of any oversight from all parts of industry, paired with an anti-welfare crusade that only compounds all of the issues... these are what's causing our economy to stink.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 04:43 AM by TheOracle

so basically you are saying that a corporate, backed by GW Bush, is what the US needs?
I guess he is still better than mccain

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 05:13 AM by Maya432

The country needs romney about as much as they need herpies.
I think he`s a crook,liar,N.W.O Puppet.

RON PAUL 2008

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 05:19 AM by mazzroth

Ron Paul comes across as a winey whinger and seriously needs to get a public make over in his demeaner. That aside he is the man for the Job once you have had Martial Law declared and would be the man to restore the Cosntitution...that hasn't happend yet.

The current problem is the growing homeless and foreclosure on home owners..your slipping dollar and the fact the Looney has gone past the USD in value and uber-inflation about to come. To fix a financial problem you need someone with economic skills and Romney is the standout plain and simple. If you needed to go and make more war then the stand out is McCain who to put it simply is a war mongerer and is too old to lead the worlds most powerful nation.

Hillary and Obama are simply propagandist's trying to represent minorities and cater to the politically correct.

I stand by my original statement that Romeny is the man to fit the current problems the US and ultimately the world will face in the next 2-3 years....financial mayhem.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 05:38 AM by forestlady

There is more, much more to being a good president besides being good at corporate successes. One needs diplomacy, intelligence, the ability to quickly assess personalities and situations, integrity, the list goes on.

Just because someone is good at making corporate profits doesn't mean he would make a good president. You ahve to look at HOW that person made the profits - did they layoff alot of workers? Did they spend the company blind? Just because they are a good corporate raider doesn't mean he's a guy that is going to have the best interests of the American people at heart.

THe whole economic system at least in the U.S., needs to be overhauled. I don't mean a few changes, I mean revamped, using a new system. The Federal Reserve is the worst thing there is for our economy and nothing will change much until we don't have a Fed Reserve any more. The only candidate that wants to dump the Federal Reserve is now Ron Paul, since Kucinich is not in the race any more. Ron Paul also wants to get rid of the IRS. I think these kind of huge changes are what is needed. Nor is he owned by the corporate masters, which most of the other candidates are; they are dependent on them for campaign contributions. I think we need to have the govt pay for elections so that corporations don't have a hand in who runs our govt.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 05:40 AM by lifestudent

reply to post by mazzroth

The current problem is the growing homeless and foreclosure on home owners..your slipping dollar and the fact the Looney has gone past the USD in value and uber-inflation about to come. To fix a financial problem you need someone with economic skills and Romney is the standout plain and simple. If you needed to go and make more war then the stand out is McCain who to put it simply is a war mongerer and is too old to lead the worlds most powerful nation.

Romney, like other corporate shills, wants to enable banks, who were tempting people with all the simplicity of loan sharks when government money was cheap and easy, to take people's homes away, then use our tax dollars to bail out those same banks. Plain and simple, swindling of the American people to funnel money into the pockets of their friends and supporters.

Obama has already suggested a more economically sound option that does not bail out the banks, and does not violate the 5th amendment by nullifying valid contracts, but provides options that can help homeowners get out from under their current situation. You can read about it here:
www.barackobama.com...

[edit on 29-1-2008 by lifestudent]

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 06:06 AM by MrWendal

How is the view from the cheap seats? In your opinion the economy is the biggest problem in the US and you live in .... Australia?

I agree the economy is a huge problem, but it is nothing in comparison to the way the Constitution has been shredded over the last several years. Civil Liberties in the US are a non existent joke, our Government is broken and corrupt. I live here and you will just have to take my word for it when I say we have bigger problems than the economy. To make a decision for the next President based on ONE side of the argument is nothing short of completely short sighted, narrow minded, and foolish.

If you think Romney is the only choice based on Economics, than you clearly have not done ANY research into the various Candidates. Ron Paul has served on the House Banking committee, House Committee on Financial Services as well as the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, let's not even mention that he has studied Economics for over 30 years!!!

Mitt Romney would be great if I was looking to broker a deal with Raytheon! However we are talking about the next President. Someone who can lead this nation from it's corrupt ways, break away from Special Interest and big business and put his country and the people FIRST. Mitt couldn't do it as a Governor and he will not do it as a President. Mitt is not looking to change anything, he is looking to make a profit...that is what a businessman does. Anyone who has stopped to actually WATCH and LISTEN to the debates has seen Romney flip flop on every issue. He only says what he thinks the people want to hear. Of course we also can not forget how during the Debates in Michigan he was asked if he were president, would he get Congress's authorization to take military action against Iran's nuclear facilities? Romney's response? "You sit down with your attorneys" which is a far cry from the type of decision-making process you want in a time of potential crisis.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 07:42 AM by jtma508

reply to post by runetang

The roots of our problem, I believe, is the prevalent thinking that there is somehow a fdifference between the Democrtas and the Republicans in the broader view. There clearly is not. Perhaps once but no more. Look what happened in the mid-term elections. The mandate of the people was clear: end the war, stop the madness. The Democrats, particularly that nazi Pelosi, echoed that sentiment saying that the people had spoken. What did we get? Nothing.

Until people wake up and begin to realize that as long as the Republican/Democrat Mafia ruin the politics of this country we are forever and truly screwed.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 07:42 AM by Razor1

I like Ron Pauls message, but isn't Mitt Romney the only candidate with Masonic credentials? I believe that gives him a huge advantage.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 07:51 AM by dirtonwater

Ron Paul is obviously a hologram created by the secret government. He was put into politics to amuse the people around him. This is obvious the way everyone around him smiles or snickers when he talks. After the election they are going to 'pull' him by controlled demolition.

The thing that tipped me off to discover this truth is they screwed up on his voice. They gave him a whiney voice and his answer to every question is 'thats not what the constitution says'.

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 08:01 AM by Quasar

Yeah, thats what we need, a(nother) radical Christian in the White House.

[edit on 1/29/2008 by Quasar]

reply posted on 29-1-2008 @ 08:55 AM by DisabledVet

ROMNEY= CFR POLITICIAN

Ron Paul = Citizen Statesman

I DARE Anyone to prove the following statement untrue:

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate running for president that has NEVER violated his oath of office and has NEVER violated the constitution.

Think real hard before you try and answer, as there is a reason the MSM ignores Ron and only attacks his supporters.... his record is immaculate..both personally, militarily and politically.

Edited for spelling

[edit on 29-1-2008 by DisabledVet]

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^