It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ron Paul to Run For President! [UPDATE: He Will Not]

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by ...and justice for some

That's actually not a bad ticket. Barr does have some flip-flopping issues to contend with, however. I honestly can't see the man surviving the slew of "he voted for it before he voted against it" accusations. I also would hesitate to vote for a man who backtracked and appologized for supporting such legislation as the Defense of Marriage Act. That act was a conviction related issue and I am left to question why he would appologize for something he supposedly held a conviction about.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:30 PM

Originally posted by ...and justice for some

Bob Barr just asked Ron Paul to be his VP

Atlanta, GA – Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party nominee for president, has invited GOP Congressman Ron Paul to be his running mate in the upcoming election. In a letter sent to Paul, Barr called Paul one of the “few American patriots” who exist in today’s society, and asked him to “seriously consider this final offer as an opportunity to show true, lasting leadership beyond party politics.”

Ron Paul for VP

Pfft why would he be VP when he could be P and get more votes and money than all of them put together. Im ticked...this was RPs chance to make a difference and run and instead he let this chance go. It wont come again for him. Im ticked.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:33 PM
I also see that the MSM except for CNN is not even mentioning this story. Look on the front pages of fox, msnbc, cnn and tell me that only one has this story. Disgusting I will only watch CNN now Im dont with the other 2.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:34 PM

Originally posted by mybigunit
Pfft why would he be VP when he could be P and get more votes and money than all of them put together. Im ticked...this was RPs chance to make a difference and run and instead he let this chance go. It wont come again for him. Im ticked.

Yeah well its better than nothing. maybe he knew that while he would take votes from both sides all he would do would be to make it a closer race... maybe even put the worst of the the wrong two candidates into office

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:57 PM
I am a Ron Paul supporter but I believe this would give obama the win. There is no way for RP to overcome the vote fraud that will take place. I for one will take the McCain nightmare over the Obama nightmare. At least McCain is an American (of sorts). Like it matters anyway, we are all screwed, go RON PAUL!

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:12 PM

Originally posted by ScienceDada
Then why didn't this work in 1992 to send a message? No, we just ended up with Clinton who made a mockery of the Presidency.

Because the Democrats and the Republicans cut a deal to keep Perot out of the debates. Out of sight, out of mind. Perot scared the crap out of the establishment in 92. It's not that he didn't have supporters, just like Ron Paul, the majority of those who would support him didn't know he was running. They turn on the tube, see a democrat and a republican, and feel like they must choose between the two of them.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:50 PM
I support Ron Paul but if i had to choose between Obama and McCain I would go McCain, but the fact remains I was planning on writing in Ron Paul anyways.

Hope they do end up doing something to get RP some publicity. Even if he has no chance to win the election, it is really about educating people to fact that our country is heading in a bad directing and needs some real "change" and not the type Obama claims to want.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:27 PM
I am truly glad I will have company voting for Dr. Paul. The offering from the
GOP is a maverick of sorts. Like Mr. Garner, he is a paid actor. I am morally
obliged to vote the best candidate in a country purportedly under God. I am
ethically obliged to vote the best candidate to other Americans.

As hope springs eternal, I hope and pray my fellow voters stop voting lessers

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:23 PM
reply to post by ScienceDada

I guess I should have taken the time to look up the numbers Ross drew down for the '92 & '96 elections. But without doing that I can remember how the MSM made him look like a fool.
You sound as if you voted for Ross and yes so did I.

Ok this '08 is it really 16 / 12 years later? and what do we have? The MSM making anyone talking about the budget or freedoom issues into a fool. Same old story, only difference is 16 / 12 years ago we were a whole lot better off.

What happened to us after 92' /'96 ? We lost something more than an election we lost hope. Can we afford to go hopeless for another 4 or 8 or 12?

So here is our answer....

Ron Paul Statement to the National Press Club
September 10th, 2008 by Don Rasmussen
The American Majority

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope

The coverage of the presidential election is designed to be a grand distraction. This is not new, but this year, it’s more so than ever.

Pretending that a true difference exists between the two major candidates is a charade of great proportion. Many who help to perpetuate this myth are frequently unaware of what they are doing and believe that significant differences actually do exist. Indeed, on small points there is the appearance of a difference. The real issues, however, are buried in a barrage of miscellaneous nonsense and endless pontifications by robotic pundits hired to perpetuate the myth of a campaign of substance.

The truth is that our two-party system offers no real choice. The real goal of the campaign is to distract people from considering the real issues.

Influential forces, the media, the government, the privileged corporations and moneyed interests see to it that both party’s candidates are acceptable, regardless of the outcome, since they will still be in charge. It’s been that way for a long time. George Wallace was not the first to recognize that there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the two parties. There is, though, a difference between the two major candidates and the candidates on third-party tickets and those running as independents.

The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state. They both are willing to abuse the Rule of Law and ignore constitutional restraint on Executive Powers. Neither major party champions free markets and private-property ownership.

Those candidates who represent actual change or disagreement with the status quo are held in check by the two major parties in power, making it very difficult to compete in the pretend democratic process. This is done by making it difficult for third-party candidates to get on the ballots, enter into the debates, raise money, avoid being marginalized, or get fair or actual coverage. A rare celebrity or a wealthy individual can, to a degree, overcome these difficulties.

The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.

This system is driven by the conviction that only a major party candidate can win. Voters become convinced that any other vote is a “wasted” vote.


[edit on 10-9-2008 by lunchmanstan]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by lunchmanstan

It’s time for that conclusion to be challenged and to recognize that the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard.

We cannot expect withdrawal of troops from Iraq or the Middle East with either of the two major candidates. Expect continued involvement in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Georgia. Neither hints of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Do not expect to hear the rejection of the policy of supporting the American world empire. There will be no emphasis in protecting privacy and civil liberties and the constant surveillance of the American people. Do not expect any serious attempt to curtail the rapidly expanding national debt. And certainly, there will be no hint of addressing the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationship with big banks and international corporations and the politicians.

There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority.

This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction—the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice. Just think of how much of an edge a Vice President has in this process, and he or she is picked by a single person—the party’s nominee. This was never intended by the Constitution.

Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own “election” by starting a “League of Non-voters” and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess.

Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign.

The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates—Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically)

Yes, these individuals do have strong philosophic disagreements on various issues, but they all stand for challenging the status quo—those special interest who control our federal government. And because of this, on the big issues of war, civil liberties, deficits, and the Federal Reserve they have much in common. People will waste their vote in voting for the lesser of two evils. That can’t be stopped overnight, but for us to have an impact we must maximize the total votes of those rejecting the two major candidates.

For me, though, my advice—for what it’s worth—is to vote! Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the other issues.

A huge vote for those running on principle will be a lot more valuable by sending a message that we’ve had enough and want real change than wasting one’s vote on a supposed lesser of two evils.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:33 PM
something else of intrest from blogs

We Agree
September 10th, 2008 by Don Rasmussen
The Republican/Democrat duopoly has, for far too long, ignored the most important issues facing our nation. However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul on four key principles central to the health of our nation. These principles should be key in the considerations of every voter this November and in every election.

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

can we agree? I can.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:01 PM
I have voted 3rd party in the past. I have no problem with 3rd parties and would support automatic runoff and "none of the above" on all ballots.

That aside I will be voting for Obama and supporting democratic congressional candidates this election.

I feel this election will be a referendum on Roe v Wade and the war on terror as determined by future Supreme Court appointees. I want our pre 9/11 civil rights restored and feel Obama offers the best chance for that to happen. Not to mention that I think Palin is unqualified and a religous nut.

I fully support the idea of gutting the MIC "defense" budget by at least half.
Bringing all of our troops home from everywhere around the world. Restoring tariffs and trade barriers and protecting our borders. Investing in renewable energy and complete and total energy independence. Investing in our country, in our workers and businesses, in our families in peace and prosperity at home!!!

Now do I think I will GET any of that...Nope.

So I am one of those lesser of 2 evil voters. But I will say this is my last chance for the democratic party. If they fail to deliver on the basics I will be leaving the party for good. Last chance Dems!!

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:50 PM
Finally found a link to Pauls speach. watch a humble man change the world! what can you (I) do to make ourselves as great?

or you tube

[edit on 10-9-2008 by lunchmanstan]

[edit on 11-9-2008 by lunchmanstan]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:53 PM

Originally posted by ATruGod

Originally posted by Karlhungis
90% of the country doesn't even know that Nader and Barr are even running. So I don't think that their endorsement would change things very much. Ron Paul has my vote, but if he is still unable to generate any media support, my vote will be nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

I guess a bunch of us here wound be making symbolic gestures.

I'd like to see what would happen if he indeed got a majority of the popular vote...all hell would break loose I'm betting.

I agree with you totally, some people are worried about Obama being shot if he becomes president because of racial issues, as if that would happen Obama is a company man hand tailored to be the NWOs next figurehead, but I'm 100% certain Ron Paul would be if he became president. We all remember what happened to the last president that was against the federal reserve, CIA and IRS.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:23 PM

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 10:47 PM

Originally posted by Echtelion
But frankly, anyone voting for Paul is just throwing his/her vote away...

Heh. If we vote for a Demorepublicratan, our vote goes to NWO. If we vote for Paul... It may not make a difference - with Diebold's help, even if Paul gets a majority, a Demorepublicratan will win anyway - likely McDrugAddidict.

But on the off chance most of us vote for Paul and the votes are properly counted, maybe we should stop this old hat "throwing our vote away" creppola, and go for it.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:12 PM
Definitely GO FOR IT... there is nothing to say that if EVERYONE who knows EVERYONE voted for Ron Paul that they won't, not want to, stand up for their rights no matter who illegally gets elected into office?

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:26 PM
I would encourage you RP & 3rd party voters to consider voting for Obama!!
If you are young you will be sentencing yourself to some extremely harsh political times if McCain wins the election.

Al Gore was right if he had been elected in 2000 we would not be in Iraq right now and things would be VERY different.

My plea to you is to vote for Obama in this cycle then go from there. If you are not satisfied with a more moderate position from the corporate party then move on. I will move on with you if that is the case!

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:32 PM

I understand your plea, but you have to understand that Ron Paul supporters believe in SMALLER government, both FOREIGN and DOMESTIC. Obama has made no such claims that he would end the welfare warfare state. I as a Ron Paul supporter have to vote with my conscious, and write in the MAN who I know will not keep those two things going.

How will I look at myself in the mirror a year from now; when it is certain that these two WILL attack IRAN. How could I possibly allow myself to play a complicit role in that? No way!

Think of this way, when the BOMBS start falling and killing innocent people in Iran and say your Obama is in office, it is YOU not US Ron Paul supporters that will have blood on your hands. And if I foolishly follow your advice by me voting for the lesser of two evils; will make me have as much blood on my hands as you Obama supporters.

If you want to change things, then start by voting for someone that reflects your views....don't support the status quo!! I rather encourage you to vote for a 3rd Party, if you want change.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:01 AM

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
I would encourage you RP & 3rd party voters to consider voting for Obama!!
If you are young you will be sentencing yourself to some extremely harsh political times if McCain wins the election.

Al Gore was right if he had been elected in 2000 we would not be in Iraq right now and things would be VERY different.

My plea to you is to vote for Obama in this cycle then go from there. If you are not satisfied with a more moderate position from the corporate party then move on. I will move on with you if that is the case!

Obama is in favor of police state policies like FISA.

Obama never mentions leaving the 130 bases we have world wide.

Obama has no problem with the federal reserve and will do nothing about it.

He doesn't deserve to be president with these stances. The federal reserve especially. If he actually cared about the people of this country, then he would be against the federal reserve and the economic slavery it brings to this country.

The ONLY reason I would ever consider voting for Obama is so that in 4 years we have a chance at a real republican getting elected, where as if McCain is elected he will get a free pass in 4 years and it will be 8 years before we have a chance of getting an actual republican elected.

Of course, then the media would spin that off as being a "mandate" from the people, which is BS. So I will be voting 3rd party.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in