It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Ron Paul is Not Electable.

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   
What a stupid, self-defeating, pessimistic, neurotic, brainwashed piece of propaganda that is.

We all know he is our only chance.

I don't really care to bicker about the finer (and mostly trivial) points about his specific and nuanced libertarian stances.

A simple cost/benefit analysis obviously reveals him to be the only sane choice we have.

He can't possibly be worse than Bush or Obama.

The fact of the matter, is that he is electable in a fair and honest election.

He also happens to be in a rather good position right now too, as foreign policy and the monetary system gains more and more attention in the media and public eye.

Ron Paul will be the next president of the Republic.





posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
People had just as much if not more faith in Obama during his campaign and even he was brought into line once he was in the office, so do you honestly think Ron Paul could withstand the pressure to play ball by Washington's terms? Sure he might run on an awesome platform but you have to look at what happens once they are forced into working with the existing power structure to really get an idea of if they will be able to make good on the campaign promises or not.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
I was coming in for a fight because of the thread title but I agree with you

Ron Paul 2012, he will have my vote.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by beebs
 


I think its a valid question. Is someone who refuses to pander and lie, and just tells you exactly what he is thinking about every issue electable? The answer is: it does not matter. You vote for the best man for the job rather than turning it into a popularity contest of pandering lying circus freaks. "Is he electable?" means the questioner believes elections should be a popularity contest, a charade, and a joke.
edit on 29-4-2011 by civilchallenger because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
His campaign slogan should be I am not Obama or Trump. (LOL)
I am not voting for Ron Paul unless he becomes more liberal and more a humanterian. By the way what is his background? Where did he come from? Did he ever struggle to make ends meet or is he another get rich by shady means or has rich pape kind of candiates? I want a new Abraham Linclon!
edit on 29-4-2011 by dreamseeker because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I saw him on TV this week being interviewed, and I was saddened. His gestures and speech pattern showed his age; Im afraid the voters would get the same impression and decide to write him off their short list.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by beebs
 


He definitely has an uphill battle and that should be accepted by all sane people. His chances are slim but not non-existent. His campaign will require massive people-power on a scale not seen in over a generation.

I am a huge fan of Ron Paul and want him to be the next President of the United States and I think all of those true Liberals would not be too angry if he was elected. Recognizing that things should be decentralized is not a bad idea and I think many rational people will agree. When he speaks of abolishing the welfare state (gradually, and over time) this still leaves the states and local governments to manage welfare type agencies, there is nothing in his program which wants to get rid of them.

Nothing in his policies say the states cannot regulate business, provide retirement, provide universal healthcare, provide public education, or any of the policies and programs that Liberals support. It just will not be managed well, mismanaged, by the federal government anymore.

For example Calvin Coolidge is known as Mr. Liassez-faire because his government regulated virtually nothing and no one, and only 2% of people paid taxes. He let the states manage themselves. Remember as governor of Massachusetts he pursued many ‘Progressive’ policies which expanded the size and scope of the state government to regulate business, work hours, give more benefits to war veterans, etc… Just because someone is a Libertarian on the national level doesn’t mean they are opposed to local and state intervention.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I have a hard time seeing the GOP nominate Dr. Paul.

The GOP has a history of trying to make Dr. Paul look crazy.

"Here comes the old man with that piece of paper".

"What is that stupid thing he carries around with him?"

"Oh, it's that damn Constitution thing again"...



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Haha, I was about to open a can of **** on you. You are totally right. I am ready to throw everything I have into getting Ron Paul elected, even if it means having to deal with republicans (puke!). No matter who we elect we always get more of the same. I'm tired of the same. I think the rest of America is as well.

He's gettting a lot of attention these days, lets hope this "wave" continues to swell and doesnt break too soon.



Ron Paul 2012!!!


Edit: Misoir, well said. Star for you.
edit on 29-4-2011 by ProjectBlue because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Yes he seems to be the best pick and if he has Jesse V. as a VP I not only vote for them I'll do what I can to help them get in. Thanks for the post OP!



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


Yes he's aged but as long as his mind stays sharp who cares? We don't need a President who jogs everyday and plays golf or basketball every chance they get. We need some one who is willing to turn this runaway train around or at least stop it from proceeding. Ron Paul, in my opinion, is our only hope of doing this in the upcoming election.
I am interested in seeing how the media treats him this time. He has gotten a lot of coverage now that the election is over so I'm curious to see if they will continue or black ball him again and not talk about him as much as the others.
edit on 29-4-2011 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
Ron Paul would not change if he was elected. Some of his policies would never make it and he has acknowledged that. I have donated to his campaign already, but the PTB will rig the elections through voting machines. Dr. Ron Paul's only chance to win would literally be, his few hundred thousand supporters must each get at least 100 people to vote for him. I'll say it again....every Ron Paul supporter must actively recruit another 100 people to vote for him. Then, get those new recruits to try to do the same. If your a Facebooker, go to Ron Paul 2012 page and "like" him. Start right now folks. Make a point everyday to send emails, talk to people, or whatever social networks you use. Let people know. espicially those 50 and over. Keep the focus on his foreign policy ideas and helping the economy and his constitution stance. Stay away from legalizing marijuana and what he thinks about Social Security and Medicare. He's even admitted that even if elected he couldn't change those things they way he would like. Maybe we can have a permanent thread on ATS about Dr Paul, where we can network with others about how to help support him.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 

I am not voting for Ron Paul unless he becomes more liberal and more a humanterian. By the way what is his background? Where did he come from? Did he ever struggle to make ends meet or is he another get rich by shady means or has rich pape kind of candiates? I want a new Abraham Linclon!


How about a new Thomas Jefferson? You won't get much closer than Paul, since he basically OOZES the founding father spirit.

What's his background, and where does he come from? Well, his recent history first: he's a former OBGYN and delivered over 4000 babies. He's a former Air Force flight surgeon. He's...what, an 11th term congressman?

As far as I'm aware (not familiar with his parents and neither have wiki pages), he is self-made and does not come from money. He IS NOT a person inclined to get rich by shady means - due to his views on using taxpayer money, he refused to accept medicare/medicaid from his patients and instead offered his medical services at discounted rates (how's THAT for humanitarian?).

You say he should be more liberal? Please clarify what you mean, but you might want to go read this article here from the Dissident Voice explaining why they believe...well, simply put...Paul kicks Obama's arse when it comes to being progressive. He wants to end the drug war, end all our other wars and bring the troops home from EVERYWHERE, wants to get the government out of your life (he voted against the PATRIOT Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, unlike pretty much ALL the other republicans)...I mean seriously, what's NOT progressive about him other than he wants people to have more of their own money (cutting taxes AND government spending) so they can take care of themselves instead of relying on the government treating us like children who can't handle themselves.

He would NOT screw anyone out of social security, etc. - first off, as president, he doesn't have the authority to do so. Secondly, he would just *seek* to open it up for people to opt-out if they want, as well as keep the fund actually viable by directing the money we save from ending the dumb stuff we do that way to take care of those still in the system.

Simply put...Ron Paul is my president. Without someone who shares a lot of his positions getting into a position of authority, you simply will not see any significant improvement in this country. We have fallen far, far from our roots. He is one of the few I can refer to as a statesman instead of a politician. He has not furthered himself with his time in office, as most of it was spent being disregarded as the sole "no" vote on a large amount of legislation. He hasn't pandered or played politics, and it hasn't made him wealthy. He is, actually...a public servant!
edit on 4/29/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
paul doesnt have a chance i am sorry to say it

while i do agree with alot of the things hes says but the current poliitcal climate its just guranteeing another 4 years of obama.

pauls number need to seriously grow to even compete with obama not only that paul needs at least 1 billion bucks to even be a contender.

if paul can raise that capital like obama did well supposedly raised then he may have a shot.

i have no problems with paul running but not even vegas would take those odds.

talk about an underdog if america was still america he would have a shot but that america has long since died.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I've got to disagree here - who do you think has a better chance of actually beating Obama?

Same story as last time around - who out there can outflank the republicans from the right AND any of the democrats, including Obama, from the left? He's more conservative than the republicans yet manages to also be more liberal than the democrats on all the big-ticket issues.

Any other candidates tend to not even really come down to matters of the issues - it's just personality pimping of their charades by the media. Once the media blockade is taken out of the way - which I think have better odds this time as Paul has much more name recognition as well as more-or-less constant appearances on the main media outlets for the last few years (since he was proven correct about the economy...). I simply don't think they can get away with the level of crap they did last time.

We'll see how it goes, but unless Paul steps aside and Rand runs in his place - not my preference but I feel better about him than Gary Johnson - I don't realistically see anyone knocking Obama out.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
I want a new Abraham Linclon!

Abraham Lincoln was a racist totalitarian. We don't need any more of that.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


what paul can and cant do depends on if he can raise that capital to run.

thats the first obstacle and its a big one.

nomination is the second one.

and something needs to happen to marginalize trump,palin,romney etc.


its a big challenge man alot of dominios will have to fall for him even to get in the position to run


like i said i have nothing agianst paul it fact if he runs and wins it will be the sweetest revenge for all those years that he himself was marginalized.

i hope i am wrong.
edit on 29-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


No worries, friend, I understand and also agree for the most part - but I am hopeful.


what paul can and cant do depends on if he can raise that capital to run.

thats the first obstacle and its a big one.

Yarp...we'll see how it goes, but if the last quarter of 2007 is any indication here, I'm expecting a pleasant surprise.


nomination is the second one.

People REALLY need to understand how important the primaries are here. Mobilize, mobilize, mobilize as well as educate the people. Then we need accountability. I don't know if it really ever came to light last time, but there were a LOT of shenanigans with state parties here back in 2008. It was *not* a fair fight.


and something needs to happen to marginalize trump,palin,romney etc.

Give them time, they'll take care of that! I like what someone on the Daily Paul said about Romney being the white Obama - Romneycare bites him here, and he honestly brings nothing to the table other than money and looks. He panders, he flip-flops...worthless.

Trump - I'm honestly concerned about Trump, but he's a clown who bankrupted his businesses, got investigated, has marital skeletons in his closet...and his hair is simply terrible. Ron Paul has been married to his first wife for 54 years and I'm not aware of him having any other related issues here.

Palin - this one should be too easy, but republicans lately aren't sensible. Ron Paul would maul her in debates if it came down to her actually having to think for herself. She's effectively ignorant as to pretty much everything going on here. Her past mentions supporting Paul might also help here.


its a big challenge man alot of dominios will have to fall for him even to get in the position to run

like i said i have nothing agianst paul it fact if he runs and wins it will be the sweetest revenge for all those years that he himself was marginalized.

i hope i am wrong.


It certainly is, and I hope you're wrong as well. Not only would it be a sweet thing to see, but if it doesn't come to pass, I think we have a lot more pain to look forward to. Paul or someone else, we need the actual change he represents.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
Ron Paul will be the next president of the Republic.


WELL said. Certainly you need to get rid of your current Emperor.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Well, as I like to say: They're only unelectable if not enough people vote for them....



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join