Why isn't Ron Paul doing better?

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

---

You're obviously too caught up in your Liberal "change" to actually listen to any conservative candidates. This is exactly what is wrong with America. Brand names.

I was discussing this issue with a fellow Democrat the other day. He's voting on issue's like Welfare and Health care. He's voting for a candidate that promises government help. I remember back when Bill Clinton ran on this same platform. The only thing he accomplished was to bring higher prices to the consumer. The same thing will happen if Universal Health care is ever initiated. And if you think otherwise, you're uneducated on the issue. Government mandates and caps produce maximum charges by health care providers. This in-turn produces higher premiums for the consumers. Research it.

He was also saying how he's rather have 9 people milking the Welfare system if it would help out just 1 person that really needed it. That sounds great in Never-Never land, but any sort of logic would tell a person with common sense that it will not take long before those 9 people initiate the collapse of the entire system. Where does that leave that 1 person who really needed it? S.O.L. Just like everyone else.

This country needs change, but there is currently no Democrats that are going to bring REAL change. Change in foreign policy? No. Change in economics? No. Change in Health care. No. They only offer minor tweaks to a system that needs a total over-haul.

The fact that you state that Ron Paul supports the abolishment of ALL taxes tells me that you're ignorant of his actual stance on issues. Maybe you should brush up on your facts before you spout off your political rhetoric. Else, you lose much creditability.

Because a vote for Hillary, Obama, McCain or Huckabee is still a vote for the military industrial complex/corporatism/big pharma/no change in foreign policy/shredding of the constitution/more power to the elite etc. A vote for Paul is not.

I want to know why it is called the 'liberal media'?

I can understand saying the media is 'biased', but I never understand why every conservative 'pundit' refers to the media as liberal? Are they not in fact the media themselves? Or are they referring to the 'media' at large?

I could understand the term 'fascist media' being used easier than 'liberal media'.
To me, the term 'liberal media' is politically charged propaganda. The same for 'vast right-wing conspiracies' and the like. Rhetoric to confuse 'the people' into fighting among themselves.

That being said...

Ron Paul has never gotten a fair shake from the mainstream media in this election. The glorified Q&A sessions fraudulently called 'debates'. The incessant drone of pundits arguing about 'frontrunners' without ever really talking about the candidates platforms. If they did, Ron Paul would be getting top billing. Unfortunately, the media is biased by their corporate masters heavy touch. Ron Paul flies in the face of all the hard work being done to enslave our grandchildren.

Now, with the candidates down to Paul, McCain and Huckabee, even if Paul cannot get the delegates needed to make any real noise, it is of note that he has consistently gotten 5% of the Caucus votes. That 1 in every 20 registered Republicans are fed up enough to let it be known. Hopefully Paul can stick it out a while longer at the very least, forcing Huckabee and McCain to speak on topics of his choosing. Sometimes winning isn't everything, but forcing your platform on your opponents in the minds of the voters.

Ironically, his campaign, and the media blackout surrounding it has only added fuel to the fire that burns in the hearts of true American Patriots. We see clear as day the amount of manipulation handed down from International Corporate overlords, to the lackey slaves in the media. We see the way that the voting process has been tainted with less than truthful practices regarding vote counts and manipulations of the computer votes. Maybe now we will start doing something more about it than letting ourselves get screwed over again and again.

DocMoreau

reply to post by pluckynoonez

---

What a waste of a show. It could have been productive too.

Three reasons Ron Paul isn't doing better:

1. Media bias and blackout: Most candidates don't even need money for advertisements because they are on every news channel 24/7 with free publicity.

2. He is true ani-establishment, pro-constitution and anti-war: This is the opposite of everything modern America stands for. The U.S. is a war economy without war they are finished.

Lastly and most important problem that usurps every other reason because it makes them all irrelevant.

3. Election Fraud. The entire process is artificial. Theater for the masses. The results are predetermined, sometimes in a away to creat a "close one," or "a landslide."

We are the "unwashed" masses and the fate of a country cannot be left in our hands. Elections create the illusion of choice.

Its like discussing the nuances of whether Superman could defeat Spiderman, its fun but not real.

All I have to say is that Ron Paul is placing third and fourth in states where he was projected to get second or first by the polls. I am going off of memory, but I believe he got 0% in Arizona? Absolutely ridiculous that gun grabbing McCain would win Arizona.
From listening to Bev Harris' reports in New Hampshire, there is massive vote fraud going on. Every American I talk to says 90% of the political signs they see are Ron Paul.
He is getting cheated, plain and simple. His supporters were even kicked out when they tried to be volunteer vote-count watchers.

To anyone that knows the answer:
Can RP run as an independent if he doesn't get the Repubilcan nomination?

I know that it was discussed a few years back about bringing in election watchers from other nations to oversee our elections but I really think it is needed now.

Has there been further action in this regard?

The question you should be asking is how come when you compare diebold votes to paper ballots there are huge gaps? Why do RP own in paper ballots and lose in electronic ones? How come every single county that uses paper Obama has beaten Cliton yet she stomps him even in places he was being called a shoe-in with diebold vote? Open your eyes.

reply to post by dark_matter06

---

This is exactly why we need an oversight commitee from another country. I remember Jimmy Carter going to a South America country (can't remember wich one) to oversee their elections. Why should our elections be any different?

it's not just that mainstream media has ignored ron paul, but that when he is mentioned, he is totally demeaned or made the butt-end of a joke, ie in monologues by both leno and conan.

so when the average american sits down and watches these late night shows, they only hear that one view point. that may be the only time they hear about ron paul too.

reply to post by SpectTater

---

Yes. He will run as an independent if he doesn't get the GOP nod. No one will tell you this, but you have to read between the lines.

EVERY single time he's been asked if he plans a 3rd party run his reply has been, "I have no plans to do so." He doesn't want the GOP to crucify him so, he can't say he will. It's an automatic elimination from the nomination.

He may not currently have plans to do so, but if he has the funds and support, you can bet he'll be on the stage with Hillary and McCain ... and probably fare a lot better in national polls once this occurs.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

---

Wow Im not even going to respond to most of what you said but just check your facts on Ron Paul.

He was against the Iraq war not because of the vote its because he doesnt think the US should be policing the world. Is that so bad?

Civil rights what because he doesnt believe in affirmitive action which is about as "racisit" as you can get? He is against the government looking into your life via phone tapping and all the cameras and all the other fun ways your boy GWB is taking a peek in our lives.

I happen to agroo with you on the last paragraph about the elitist welfare programs it does exist and its sick and yes Rush Limbaugh is sick too. I think you need to do a little more research on Ron Paul I think you would agree on a lot what he stands for. Just because he is republican you shouldnt put him in the same category as a lot of the other scumbags out there no names to be mentioned.

My opinion of this, is that anyone saying Ron Paul has somehow been silenced or squelched or etc. are coming up with excuses. Conspiracy-born nonsense that doesn't translate well.

i. There has been no coverage of him on the television relative to the other candidates, the most popular medium for advertisements.

ii. The vast majority disagree with his ideas.

iii. He was expected to be, and performed as, a third-tier candidate. No one took him seriously.

If someone isn't a good choice for President, no matter how much his ideals might appeal to you, or this entire extremely liberal website, they're not going to win.
Stop coming up with excuses, and accept he didn't win because he was a terrible candidate. As both a campaigner and politican.

[Personal Opinion, but, more of you need to be open to those possibilities.]

Who is up for an organized protest of a major news and media studio? That would speak more loudly than a simple march on Washington. Disrupt the media who purposely ignore him, ie CNN, NBC, FOXNEWS, ABC, etc.
But a multi pronged protest on both Washington and the news studios would be the best, provided the manpower can be assembled and pushed forward to achieve the goals.
Edit: STRENGTH IN NUMBERS. And bring the man himself there to the Washington protest.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by spec_ops_wannabe]

reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe

---

I am for it. Only problem is, the people who should stop watching it definitely are not here at ATS, if they were they would already be 'hip' to what is going on. You dig?

I am not sure how we convince 'Gramma Jane Doe' to turn off her Faux Noise, but she should.
DocMoreau

Ron Paul is da man! He's my hero! and being the president or not, doesn't change the fact that he has ALREADY started a revolution. It will never be shut down now, people are speaking up and will stand against this government made prison we call life.

Honestly, RP stands no chance of being elected [period]. Yes he has HUGE support, you can find people who support him in every state. The issue is quite simple, though he has many who support him it is the fringes of society who do. Please don't take this the wrong way, the fringes are great, change tends to come from the fringes, only in this situation there simply are not enough fringe people in each state to give RP the votes he needs to win the election. Sorry to say it guys, but it simply is not going to happen.

The irony of your statement is that you're such a strong proponent of the "brand name" system. You're right, I'm not paying a lot of attention to the conservative candidates, because this year's crop are all twats. Fred Thompson ran on a campaign of Napping for the Future and defeating the USSR. Guiliani was running a campaign that was basically telling voters he thought they were stupid enough to believe him. Hucleberry and Romney spent their time arguing over who could wring more voters out of Jesus, and McCain is like Bush, as Bush was in 2000 and Ron Paul is your typical "taxes are unconstitutional" dillweed candidate.



Bill Clinton ran on this platform, and then Congress changed hands in '94, crippling him. You see, the President is not a legislator nor a ruler. This seems to have escaped both the current chimp in the white house, and Ron Paul, who makes grand spectacles of what he will overthrow and change and twist and declare if he gets into office, as though winning the presidency would grant him absolute control to do these things.



I disagree, universal health care will reduce costs for consumers. And if you think otherwise, you're clearly bought and paid for by the Council of Concerned Citizens.

(Two people can play the "if you think I'm wrong then you're stupid" game )



And by the nature of medical care, it cannot be left to a free market solution, as medical care is not "optional". If you get in a car wreck and lose a limb, you're simply not going to shop around for the cheapest place to get it reattached - you're going to whatever place is nearest.



I'm sorry that you're friends with an idiot, but most of us liberals don't think this way. We'd rather the 9 mooches be found and prosecuted for fraud.



It doesn't need change, it needs repair. And it sure as hell wasn't hte democrats who broke it, but rather the GOP, who's party policy has been based on foaming rabid hatred of liberals since the days of FDR, rather than anything constructive.



Losing credibility among Ron Paul's supporters is sort of like losing your swim trunks at a nude beach. I'll take my chances, thanks.

reply to post by Trauma

---

Well, I'm an American, and I can tell you I have seen one Ron Paul sign, amid a sea of Obama and Romney here in Western Washington. Haven't seen any for Huckleberry, but I just chalk that up to the fact his followers probably think depictions of persons or names are idolatrous.

reply to post by Blueracer

---

You forgot to mention that Ron Paul has the support of American troops by a landslide- which proves beyond a doubt that the electoral is bull$hitt.

Also, Mr. Paul is not a party to anything usually associated with every other candidate. Did you think they would actually allow a real American candidate???????


[edit on 8-2-2008 by dk3000]