Ron Paul: the revolution lives on

lol. Yeah, these people aren't "asleep at the wheel" or anything...



How are people such as those in the above video supposed to make an informed decision when all their choices aren't given, explained, and repeated?

Originally posted by nyk537
This is exactly why I was hesitant to get into a Ron Paul thread after all this time. No matter what I say here, you are never going to believe that Ron Paul simply didn't have the support you think he deserves.

in other words, you don't want to have a rational conversation, but just to hear echoes of your own thinking?

look, i am not ron paul supporter, not even american (altho my avatar is very patriotic, no?). since this caravan started rolling - i'll be meaningn the pre-elections - ron paul have been blatantly excluded from media coverage. you can't just come here to whine about something that isn't even true, then whine about why people won't take heed of your words? what are you? some kind of retard? (NOTE: this is not personal slander, it is a sincere and honest question, because someone here seems unable to understand anything)

well, actually, no need to reply on that, you just ended on ignore list - k thx bai

other than that, i am very pleased to learn that mr. paul havent given in yet.

reply to post by Unit541


LOL great post that is what I was trying to say in my earlier post but hey a video works just as good These are the people electing our politicians. I love the video where Paul nailed Cavuto...see even smart people on money have no sense of history and if you dont know history I dont see how people can make intelligent decisions on our future...

Originally posted by nyk537
I really hate to go back and visit a Ron Paul thread,

Then please stop doing so.

as I feel this horse has been beaten to death. However, sometimes the sheer magnitude of the whining just gets to you.

Talking about whining? Are you reading a word your typing?

One day some of you Paul supporters are going to realize that this was not "taken" away from him by any grand conspiracy. The fact of the matter is that people did know who he was, and decided they didn't agree with him enough to nominate him for President.

I am sure a few Ron Paul supporters will become Ralph Nader supporters when they figure out that the conspiracy that keeps Ralph Nader from reaching a wider audience is just less true in Ron Paul's case. The fact of the matter is that few Americans are aware of what these people stand for as few are aware that they even exist! Without main stream coverage and hype it's quite hard to get anywhere in the American electoral 'system'.

No matter how much you refuse to believe it, if he really were the best candidate, he would have won. Period.

Do you believe that the candidate that would do the most for the American people have so far always won? ( if you say yes your never going to hear the end of it)

Originally posted by nyk537
That is the same argument I always heard from Paul supporters and I simply don't believe it.

I don't think many Ron Paul supporters care what you believe! That may be because you seem to believe that the best candidates wins!

I'm not sure who these people are that never heard of Ron Paul, but where I'm from there aren't too many people who didn't.

So why would they know about them? How on Earth are people supposed to know about Ron Paul? If they know something what is the odds that's it's something he said instead of something being said about him?

You see the majority of American citizens are not the gullible sheeple some people make them out to be. The average citizen does get a lot of news from the MSM, but also do a lot of research on their own.

Actually the majority of American citizens are not in fact gullible sheep and that's why they have stopped taking part in the corrupt and generally stupid process that rarely gave them what they asked for. The average citizen in the US either doesn't know much about politics at all ( because it's largely a waste of time they have no time for working ten or twelve hours a day as they are) or tries to be informed but is largely saturated by the MSM. The few that do 'research' will probably be voting for Ralph Nader so that means that less than 3% of the 50% that votes are either good investigators or are in fact researching at all.

I know it's hard to believe that most people are not drooling idiots you make them out to be, but it's true.

You don't have to be drooling idiot to be taken in by a well orchestrated scam. Are the average investor who losses money, as they almost all do, in the stock market above average intelligent?

Ron Paul received all the attention his support warranted. The simple fact of the matter is that his views are not in line with the majority of America, whether you like it or not.

Why not allow the majority of American to hear what Ron Paul has to say? Can you please tell me how Ron Paul managed to get his message to the majority of voters that apparently decided not to vote for him? What do you think you know about the average wants and needs of Americans and why do you think they are different from civilized people elsewhere who seem to be voting for better protection from economic predation?

Originally posted by nyk537
So then you would consider yourself to be vastly more intelligent than the "average American" then? Why, because you're a Ron Paul supporter? Please.

I think that's a pretty good indication that his better informed than the average American voter. Not as smart as the Nader people but pretty smart.

Just because the majority of America doesn't support your candidate doesn't mean they have been "asleep at the wheel", or that they are uninformed. It just means they don't agree with you. Deal with it.

If we knew that they wouldn't pick Ron Paul had they actually known something about him!

Originally posted by nyk537
No, I won't be lying when I tell you that I do. Time alloted during national debates should be alloted based on the popularity or performance of the candidate. Rest assured if Ron Paul were doing well in polls and primaries, he would have received more attention.

Rest assured? Do you even know that democracy will never work when people 'rests assured'? Does that mean that Ralph Nader should have gotten 3% of the time in the public debates for the 2004 election after having nearly gotten that much votes in 2000? In fact if they just allowed him to show up i would bet he could get 5-10% of the vote in the next election and then get federal funding which will allow him to do even better next time round!

The fact of the matter is that why should someone spend much time listening to answers from a candidate who the majority of people care nothing about.

How could they care about him if they don't really know anything about him? Would they even know about him if he couldn't muster the money to stand for president?

Sure Ron Paul had a large following in places like this, but the majority of people want to learn more about the candidates they care about, and who they feel are viable. Paul just didn't fit the bill.

How do you know? Are you once again ignorantly ( no insult intended) presuming that people do not care about Ron Paul because they don't know about him? Isn't that illogical at best?

Originally posted by nyk537
This is exactly why I was hesitant to get into a Ron Paul thread after all this time. No matter what I say here, you are never going to believe that Ron Paul simply didn't have the support you think he deserves. Your minds are already made up that his lack of support nationwide is the result of some grand media conspiracy.

So you don't think a media conspiracy was involved in handing the last two elections to George Bush after he lost both the popular and electoral votes in two elections running?

And it's a shame too because on some issues I always agreed with Paul. He was never my candidate of choice for some other reasons, but I never dreaded the thought of a Paul run.

Which informed person could pick either Hillary Clinton or barrack Obama over Ron Paul? Sure Obama is a better choice than any of the other major candidates but who the hell IS that Obama guy any ways and why do we even know about him? What has he ever done to get where he is today?

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX


Which informed person could pick either Hillary Clinton or barrack Obama over Ron Paul? Sure Obama is a better choice than any of the other major candidates but who the hell IS that Obama guy any ways and why do we even know about him? What has he ever done to get where he is today?

Stellar

Thats why its undebatable that the candidates are pre chosen. The had Obama out to be a rockstar before he even got to make his first speech....I agree his is the lesser of all the evils in the main stream but I still think nothing will get done regardless of who we choose of the three. It needs to be a guy like Ron Paul. Oh and can we get over this I want to elect someone who I can have a beer with..Im looking for a president that is for the people not a president that is of the people.

Over the last couple of weeks, I decided to ask around my work as to who people were supporting for president. I got assorted answers, but most were either McCain or Obama. Then I asked what issues were important to them and how would thier candidate add something useful to that issue. Of course none of them had any answer of substance. I then asked them if they were familiar with the Patriot Act, as Ron Paul is opposed to such an unconstitutional act, and got some humerous answers to that. None knew what it really is. Only a few of them had even known who Ron Paul is and they probably heard of him from me talking about im daily.

I do not understand how anyone can think of voting for anyone but Ron Paul. He wants real change. He has real plans of acheiving these changes. He wants to pull government back, less regulation, less taxes, better foreign policy.

He is the only candidate that realizes that America's foreign policies in the past has added to the hate that is felt for us in the Middle East and the wreckless game of chess we play with other factions, such as arming one group to get rid of another, helped make things like 9-11 happen.

(I am not saying America deserved 9-11, nor do I think the American people directly caused it (I know someone will respond with that exact statement) but I do beleive our irresponsible and meddling foreign policy helped it along)

Aaron

I think Ron Paul has the messege that the majority of the people want to hear. They just don't listen because he is not a very effective communicator unless he is berating Ben Bernanke and The Fed, rightfully so. RP didn't exactly do a stellar job communicating on CNN with Jon Roberts.

He just doesn't appeal to the voters, sadly to say, I think alot because he does not "look" Presidential enough for them. But that's our society for ya'... based on wealth, power and looks for popularity... not on ideas.

I have urged Ron Paul and Wayne Root to seek each other out. Wayne is running for the Libertarian nomination and will most likely get the nod. Ron ran as a Libertarian on his last Presidential run. Ron has the experience and Wayne has the golden tongue... and they both have the right ideas.

20 minutes of Wayne Root

I honestly think these two could blow away any combo that the Dems. or Reps. can produce at this point. especially in a year where a monkey could win, but he already won (stole) the last two and is not eligible

Originally posted by RabbitChaser
I think Ron Paul has the messege that the majority of the people want to hear. They just don't listen because he is not a very effective communicator unless he is berating Ben Bernanke and The Fed, rightfully so. RP didn't exactly do a stellar job communicating on CNN with Jon Roberts.

He just doesn't appeal to the voters, sadly to say, I think alot because he does not "look" Presidential enough for them. But that's our society for ya'... based on wealth, power and looks for popularity... not on ideas.

I have urged Ron Paul and Wayne Root to seek each other out. Wayne is running for the Libertarian nomination and will most likely get the nod. Ron ran as a Libertarian on his last Presidential run. Ron has the experience and Wayne has the golden tongue... and they both have the right ideas.

20 minutes of Wayne Root

I honestly think these two could blow away any combo that the Dems. or Reps. can produce at this point. especially in a year where a monkey could win, but he already won (stole) the last two and is not eligible

He isnt bad of a communicator he is no Barack Obama for sure but he in the debates did not exactly get a lot of air time though...

Originally posted by Aaron_Justin
Then I asked what issues were important to them and how would thier candidate add something useful to that issue. Of course none of them had any answer of substance.

And that is usually the case. I wonder when will come the time where those who run for President will be voted in by phone like American Idol or America's Got Talent. We can call the show "America's Got A President." Screw the issues: We want juggling and ventriloquists!

Before I heard of Ron Paul I was disinterested in matters economy and politic. Ron Paul has a way of explaining a certain subject that is easy to comprehend and leaves me wanting to know more.



"Today boys and girls, we're going to talk about sound monetary policy!" A lesson from the good Doctor is always welcomed by me.

Maybe that is Ron Paul's gift to the movement he created: Not the possibility that he could become president, although, that would be incredible, but his capacity to spark in those the interest and desire to know as they, hopefully, ignite in others a similar interest.

What I like most about Ron Paul is his ability to speak and make his point. I watched the debates and I felt the moderators rarely let him finish his statement. Many citizens of the United States, myself included see him as politician that is not out to be popular, for the glory, for the fame, ect; but as someone who truly trying to make a difference and wants to serve our country to the best of his ability. Anyone who still thinks he is a 'nutcase' has never listened to a complete statement from the guy. I am proud to have voted for him in the primary and it was not a waste of a vote to me, though many of my peers thought it was and did not vote for him for that reason.

Ron Paul would be my choice for President.

What concerns me though, is that he doesn't seem that much aware of the New World Order and their objectives. Much of what you see going on is by choice in creating excuses for having a North American Union.

You'll see soon that NWO architects will argue that because the Illegal Aliens are already here and the Dollar is worth much less, that a Union should be formed to increase the Dollar value (which will become the Amero). It is by design to form the North American Union.

Ron Paul should beef up the Revolution in noting this and that the American people are methodically being sold out.

There’s something about Root that I don’t trust. I’m all for gambling being legal, but that seems to be his focus, when there are much more important issues to consider. He strikes me as just another slick haired dude to keep an eye on. He couldn’t carry Ron Paul’s copy of the constitution, IMO.