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: 9
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:12 AM
Here in Canada we have our own Election fiasco intelligently placed now during your (American) election... I really hope that the NDP get elected here in Canada, Jack Layton isn't much of a fan of The North American Union, he's not fond of Afghanistan as far as I can remember, and he's for internet freedom, making sure it isn't regulated and destroyed...

[edit on 9/11/2008 by PuRe EnErGy]

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:54 AM
Another globalist war mongering enemy of the people is going to be President. The plan is already in place. Brace yourselves for another round of tyrannical legislation, illegal wars and the systamatic tearing apart of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 01:04 AM
Don't you just love the 1st Amendment?

Please do not vote because you don't want the other guy to win. The "lessor of two evils" argument is beyond comprehension to me. Vote your conscience. If the other guy wins, so be it. Work harder next time for your guy and get him a few more votes.

Can you imagine there actually being another choice besides the Big Two? I can. It WOULD happen if we stopped believing that we had no other choices. No one I know is entirely happy with either parties. It would be more accurate to say that aren't really happy with them at all. But they keep pulling the levers for them. Once again, mainly so the other guys won't win.

If enough people would let their dissatisfaction with the status quo be known via the ballot box, REAL change would happen. Even if the third party didn't surpass one of the Big Two, the fact that they were losing supporters would force them both to change. Even if your candidate didn't win, your voice would be heard and that would get what you were wanting accomplished anyway.

We don't vote for people. We vote for ideals. We don't care about the WHO. We care about the WHAT.

If voting for Ron Paul gets Obama to pay attention to what I want, then my goal has been accomplished. Not the best scenario, but one I can live with.

Don't Tread On Me,


posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 01:14 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!

I would really like to know why it is that posts such as the one by Leo here aren't considered a direct violation of ATS's T&C policy, specifically the following:

1 e.) Recruitment/Solicitation:

i) You will not use your membership at The Above Network, LLC site(s) for any type of recruitment to any causes whatsoever. You will not post, use the chat feature or use the private message system to disseminate advertisements, chain letters, petitions, pyramid schemes, or any kind of solicitation for political action, social action, letter campaigns, or related online and/or offline coordinated actions of any kind.

You're pandering for political action, namely soliciting votes for Barack Obama. Not only that, but you're doing it via baseless (or at least unspecified by you) fear mongering.
"If you are young you will be sentencing yourself to some extremely harsh political times if McCain wins the election."
What the hell kind of crap is that? You're making it sound like John McCain has a vendetta against the youth of this country and I have never seen that claim made anywhere by anyone. If anything, I've seen Obama spend far, far more time critiquing and kevetching about the activities and attitudes of today's youth. Learn the difference between just stating who you're supporting and why & soliciting votes for one candidate or the other, please.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 01:32 AM

Originally posted by Unit541
The number of people here with "wasted vote" syndrome is truly sickening. No vote, as long as it's cast by ones conscience, is a wasted vote. Voting for someone purely because they have a "better chance" of winning, is much more of a waste than voting for who you truly feel should be running this country. The election is not intended to be a "contest" to see who can get the most votes, it's a decision.

What really gets me, is none of the Ron Paul detractors, who so fervently admonish his supporters, can give a reasonable explanation of their views of Ron Paul. None of them can express what it is that they detest so thoroughly about him. Most of them don't have the slightest clue about his stances on the issues. If you're going to take the time and energy to sling mud at people for supporting a particular candidate, the least you could do is actually be able to make a point, as to why you think the candidate is a poor choice.

What a GREAT post, thank you. I am facing the same thing with friends and neighbors. They are so freaking brainwashed it's pathetic, but in reality, it's just truly sad. Two of my neighbors said they probably wouldn't vote this election!?!?!?! WOW!! One of my employees, when I placed a vote Nader sticker at the store, didn't even know there were any other options other than McLame and Oblabber. WOW!!! Seriously, he that you could only vote for one of the two parties running!!

So, I'm voting, for anyone other than the two purchased and paid for talking heads. People, listen... We CAN swing this election to the good, unpaid for side, by educating one person at a time. What I find works the best to open the closed mind, is to ask a fun question. To open conversation, I ask...

"What branch of OUR government is in charge of the FEDERAL Reserve?"

LOL!!! Try it!

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 08:09 AM
Ron Paul is NOT running for president please do not write him in....
If you want RP's ideas in office vote for one of the 3rd parties.... Ron Paul's supports Bob Barr and Barr has asked RP to be his running mate...

Please help us deny ignorance there is such thing as a wasted vote... if you write in a man that isn't running you are wasting your power to change the country..

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 08:24 AM
No political candidate has ever mirrored my every desire.

Also for all the talk about "it doesn't matter it's a rigged game" etc etc.

What do you think will happen to the elite if Ron Paul is elected. Will they turn in their money and power and dissappear??

I lke Ron Paul on foreign policy but I do not support the libertarian platform which calls for deregulation and the dismantling of all goverment programs. I think there is a place that government can do good. Unbridled greed in the private sector seems to be a far more serious problem for our country. Greed, the MIC, the federal reserve (not a government entity by the way a private enterprise)!

I know Obama represents corporate interests. The FISA vote was disgusting! I do not support redeploying our troops to Afghanistan and more drug/oil/energy wars. But looking at the entire group of candidates before me I will vote for Obama. I think he is my best chance for reform.

As always I reserve the right to change my mind!

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 08:40 AM
reply to post by SectionEight

25,000pts for -->SectionEight

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 09:32 AM

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
The topic title needs to be changed since it's been misleading. I have not seen ANY confirmation from ANY sources about anything stated in the topic title.

If it was true, that'd be great, but don't put it up until it happens.

i agree. very misleading.

In any case,,,this would be good, but we all know the outcome,,,as much as we would like to see Dr Paul as the pres, it will never happen. Debates will be fun tho.

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 09:39 AM
Ron Paul should be in the debates any ways. He'd mop the floor with McCain and he'd joust pretty well with Obama.

Of course the only people who remember RP still exist are his supporters and MSNBC. Lately its like they're trying to give him a spot with Joe Scarhoweveritspelled. Same with Bob Barr. He was on 2 shows yesterday.

Yeah, that's right, those evil liberal MSNBC people keep letting Ron Paul and Bob Barr, two conservatives, actual ones to not Neocons, on. Could it be they support people who aren't Neocons?

Now theres a ticket, Barr/Paul 08!

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:32 AM
If anyone has looked into the candidates running, even a little bit, they would know that the only sensible vote should go to Ron Paul. I will be voting for him, and I will work to get everyone one I know to vote for him too. I don't care how "frail" he sounds in interviews, he has the smarts to run the country correctly. He seems to be the ony candidate to really know what it means to be the leader of the greatest country on earth.


posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:37 PM
3rd party time!


i havnt done any research on them yet..

but i'm going to have to vote for one of em

F@#K the mainstream politics

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by ...and justice for some

Hi, this is my first post here, and my favorite topic!

I read several sources yesterday including one that said emphatically Ron Paul DENIED Barr's offer to be his VP. I'm feeling pretty sure that RP was as diplomatic and respectful as always to his fellow congressman Barr. But he isn't endorsing anyone OVER anyone. A revolution may take place just by American's votes this year. We can ONLY believe it possible if we know all are involved in sharing RP's message of hope all over this country! And in TWO MONTHS! Can we do it? You betcha we can! But will we???
I hope so.

I tend to think Ron Paul DOES know more than what he is saying, as another poster stated. We aren't being Herded by Dr. P, we ARE being DIRECTED! If we are fighting our own peaceful war for freedom, and feel our lives and freedoms are being stripped and downgraded, then maybe we SHOULD be LISTENING to HIM. Sorry for the caps, and I'm NOT yelling, promise, just lifting my voice to be heard because I have laryngitis, lol.

I do believe a LOT will happen withing the next two months, that may also affect how people will vote. Unfortunately, a GOOD DOSE of Fear Mongering could cement an outcome. I believe THAT is the biggest thing that could override TRUST in believing RP, AND believing IN him, that we might all of a sudden NEED to go back to voting in a War president. And that is both Mc and O, but Mc most definite.

So what DO we do??


posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:08 AM
As almost always how to enable third party candidates is not discussed. If some of the following five 'simple' measures are implemented third parties will be enabled thus giving the US something akin to actual democracy.

1: Proportional representation is democratic; winner takes all is NOT. The US House of Representatives is thus about as democratic a 'breaktrough' as was ever made in the US.

2: A third party can only begin to receive federal funding ( in the next election ) when it gains 5% of the popular vote in a national election. This is obviously meant to keep third parties from gaining sufficient funds to stage media campaigns and thus a deliberate effort to keep a non representative two party system where both parties propagandize citizens by using their taxpayer funds. Parties can either receive proportionally allocated funds or , more democratically perhaps, non at all.

3: Campaign finance reform should be restricted to individual donations which should be be subject to audits with serious restrictions for those who are owners or board members of listed ( depending on degree by means of national referendum ) companies. They should in my opinion at least be on a separate list for closer inspection.

Obviously there are hundreds if not thousands of books/articles dedicated to campaign finance reform so those are some very basic ideas.

4: Ballot access. There is no democratically viable reason why 'third' party candidate should have to pay to be on a given states ballot in a national election. This cost would easily be carried by the federal and state taxes that are normally levied on those voters. In fact there should be as few as possible measures to prevent candidates from running as paper and, especially, ink are not nearly as expensive as some corporations have decided to make it.

5: The US senate should be outlawed. There is no reason for it to exist beside serving as a way to interfere with or block any progress made in the far more democratic workings of the House of Representatives.

So there's five 'steps' that will enable the formation of a more representative system. Far better to work on that than to just 'vote your consciouns' ( something i support) hoping to get the ear of the one party with two representatives. Sure some of that 50% that isn't voting wouldn't start voting now but a very significant proportion would if they could find candidates that might gain power enough to affect some changes.


[edit on 12-9-2008 by StellarX]

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:44 PM
Thanks for posting this. I now wounder what happen....

Did ron paul accept to run?????

I don't see anything on cnn or foxnews haven't seen anything that confirmed that ron paul will run since you said he will make an annoucment on the 10th and todays the 12 I havent' seen anything yet.

I am 19 and I haven't voted and didn't plan too until hearing Ron Paul might run again independent.

This now makes me want to go out and vote I have to register by oct,03,08 .

I just want to know if he is offically running yet. If so then I will register to vote if not I will not vote then.

I would of voted for nader but he can't really get alot of people to vote for him so I assume my vote is a waste.

Keep us informed about the latest stuff about Ron Paul.

He was on wed 10th on glen talk show on cnn and I watched it. He told about the crookedness with the IRS and the Federal Reserve bank that it's all criminal I was surprised to hear this on cnn.

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:41 PM
If Ron Paul doesn't run, I'll definitely vote for one of the third party candidates even though I know none of them will win against Obama and McCain. As far as I'm concerned, as long as I feel like the choice I made was right and I was able to vote for the person I truly felt could best run this country rather than simply pick a "lesser of two evils", so to speak, it's not a wasted vote in my eyes.

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:53 PM
When McCain brings back the draft and has you and your loved ones in some god forsaken desert fightin for their oil you may think back to your choice here today and regret it bigtime! When Roe v Wade is overturned and your out lookin for a back alley abortion or your in Tijuana you'll wonder if your vote might have made a difference. When you accept the fact you no longer enjoy the right to privacy you may just wish you had taken the "lesser of 2 evils". If people had not voted for Nader in 2000 we would not be in Iraq today and may have been well on our way to energy indenpendence today but alas we are not...

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:24 PM
reply to post by Leo Strauss

Interesting response!
But for all we know, Obama might make a worse president than McCain, or the latter could actually cause things to turn out better than anyone expected. It's really impossible to know sometimes until the new president is actually sworn into office.
And this goes for the past, too...for all we know, Kerry or Gore winning against Bush could have caused the country to go into an even worse situation. Or a much better one. Like I said, it's impossible to truly know.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by greenjuice

We all should vote our conscious and get the word out. The interent is the perfect and 'free' medium to achieve this. Why don't the candidates pool their resources, promote a new 'independence' channel on the tele and promote Ron Paul's 4 step plan to restore the Constitution? I can't think of a better advertising campaign for the new cable/satellite channel. All citizens would be in support to a return to the hijacked Constitution and the advertising generated would more than pay back the cost of getting a new televison channel up and running or rather they could buy out a channel of which is struggling and get moving to mass promote Ron Paul's campaign in the public eye. We need to take back the media here in the US and away from the international banking cartel.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 05:03 PM
Ron Paul would be lucky to even get on the ballot in any state. In the entire US, he has less than 100,000 supporters.

The man is a senile nutcase. He has no real conception of the U.S. Constitution, he knows virtually nothing about Federal laws, and he displays his abysmal ignorance every time he opens his mouth.

He's much like those "Militia" types, that are so ignorant that thye blame everyone else for their failures in life. It must be the fault of - - - - - - - - - - - [fill in the blank with your favorite scape goating group].

Rpn Paul's version of America would fit in well with the old confederacy. He would really like to get back to owning other people, raping the slaves, and no recourse for the common man from the rich and powerful. That's what would actually happen if his version of American law were ever to come into being.

Onl;y the most ignorant could possibly support this man.

Just who do YOU blame for your absolute and complete failure to make it in life?

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in