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.

 

I no longer support Ron Paul

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Seems like this is what is the new popular thing to say about Ron Paul.

Why would you say you like him and his integrity but you can't vote for him because he is part of the GOP? Then you go on to say you would like to see what the Democrats have to offer you? What was the saying? left, right, all in the same..

Only difference here is, Ron Paul ran on the libertarian ticket before and he lost miserably, independents can't win in America that is why they call it the TWO PARTY SYSTEM. Ron Paul knows this and runs as GOP because he WANTS TO WIN, he is only in the race as long as people support him and donate money to him. He has spoken many many MANY times on how the GOP has lost their ways and how he is going to bring traditional GOP values back to the party.

If you seriously believe for one second Ron Paul is a present day republican, you better recheck your fact-book.


P.S. independent candidates SPLIT THE VOTE, Ron Paul knows this! if he's been right about big government, taxes, constitution, foreign policy, our economy and personal liberties, what makes you think he doesn't know what hes doing when running in the GOP?

And how the hell is Ron Paul a LESSER EVIL? Please explain, I would love to see you explain this.
edit on 5-9-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 





Jimmy Carter, and how did that turn out?


Why compare two different men?

Okay, have it your way, vote for someone with little or no integrity and see how that works out for us.

(Pardon me if I fail to see your logic)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 





And how the hell is Ron Paul a LESSER EVIL? Please explain, I would love to see you explain this.


Yeah, I'm curious about that, too, as I've heard this phrase used more than once in relation to Ron Paul.

I've been waiting to see evidence of said "evil," but so far, I've heard only crickets chirping.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to post by eLPresidente
 





And how the hell is Ron Paul a LESSER EVIL? Please explain, I would love to see you explain this.


Yeah, I'm curious about that, too, as I've heard this phrase used more than once in relation to Ron Paul.

I've been waiting to see evidence of said "evil," but so far, I've heard only crickets chirping.


I dont think he is evil, but his ideas our not conducive to our society. Alright, so slash all government jobs and welfare. Now you have 100 million or unemployed. The government is our largest employer? You know who will fill the gap? Subsidiary companies from already too powerful corporations that get REFUNDS instead of paying taxes, leading to less government spending (except on the military of course), a 2 class system where it is many poor vs a few rich, and no middle class. and all the used to be middle class will be killing each other for a loaf of bread.

Ron Pauls America is no where I want to be.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Seems like kind of a defeatist reason to not support him. But to each his own. Those who don't support him will help us get 4 more years of fascism. Thanks!

/TOA



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 

Alright, so slash all government jobs and welfare. Now you have 100 million or unemployed. The government is our largest employer?

I think the number is closer to 30 million people, but you know what that means to me? 30 million or so fewer people living OFF OTHER TAXPAYERS and now having to get more honest and useful work like getting involved in new companies working to fix the falling-apart US infrastucture or otherwise putting their government experience to good use by way of startups dealing with the services they previously addressed in the public sector, now just either in the private sector or on the state level.

How terrible!


You know who will fill the gap? Subsidiary companies from already too powerful corporations that get REFUNDS instead of paying taxes...

I disagree, and would like to think those former taxpayers who were previously paying these people by way of the federal teat might now be able to afford to expand their workforces, open new locations/job sites, or otherwise finally afford to start their own new business and put some of these people to work, if they didn't start their own jobs or go to work for the states as I previously mentioned.

[quoteleading to less government spending (except on the military of course), a 2 class system where it is many poor vs a few rich, and no middle class. and all the used to be middle class will be killing each other for a loaf of bread.
You might want to go ahead and check how wealth/income distribution in the US *already* falls, and how it's gotten worse since we've moved further and further away from the old policies that Paul still espouses. Given time, the dollar will continue to be worth less on our current path (leading to the loaf of bread scenario you mention), and the profusion a regulations we currently have that really only regulate competition out of existence for big business (since they're the only ones who have no problem affording all the regulations or paying the multi-million $ slap-on-the-wrists penalties levied) merely stifles innovation and competition in the marketplace, as well as market-driven price controls.

In short, I at least already live in exactly the kind of america you claim to be so afraid of, and it seems to be primarily due to moving away from Paul's understanding of how to US should work.

It is also worth remembering what limitations the executive properly has, and what Paul's priorities and abilities would actually be, as well, so it's kind of a silly thing to claim to be worried about regardless as he SIMPLY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT SUCH CHANGES HIMSELF ANYWAY. He would, however, be able to end the wars and bring our troops home, directly work to shrink government and not re-fill appointments, pardon non-violent offenders, and lead the charge on some of his other less-controversial ideas that this country is in great need of.

This country is simply on the wrong track, and for decades we have not put anyone into office with any significant or valid ideas how to get it back on track - things just keep moving the wrong direction. It's time for a change of course, time to quit protecting and subsidizing certain businesses and industries and let them fend for themselves. Time to stop hampering new start ups and innovation. Time to stop stealing so much from the people and wasting so much money, as well as suckling so many on taxpayer dollars when their services could be used elsewhere.

It's time to grow up and stand on our own feet, the same way this nation once became strong and free, and generally approved of by the rest of the world and not merely its vampires and tyrants.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to post by LDragonFire
 





Jimmy Carter, and how did that turn out?


Why compare two different men?


Because you asked:

Originally posted by NightGypsy

When was the last time we had a politician like that, LDragonFire?


So in my opinion the last time we elected a man of integrity it was Jimmy Carter who turned out to be a terrible president.

Oh and sense Ronald Reagan won the presidency he had 8 years to get things right followed by 4 years of George H Bush, then 8 years of Clinton followed by 8 years George W Bush followed by 3 years of Obama....according to my math that's 20 years worth of GOP presidents vs 11 years of Democrat presidents....

So where is this conservative utopia wish for?


Okay, have it your way, vote for someone with little or no integrity and see how that works out for us.

(Pardon me if I fail to see your logic)


Im sick of voting for the lesser evil. I want a candidate that will represent me the average citizen vs a corporate shrill we all keep electing.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 

Im sick of voting for the lesser evil. I want a candidate that will represent me the average citizen vs a corporate shrill we all keep electing.

So...please clarify for me. Your original post didn't accuse Ron Paul of being a corporate shill, and seemed to imply he might be along the lines of what you're asking for here - your only problem was that he's a republican.

So - you don't feel Ron Paul represents or, or that only a third-party candidate can, apparently? Do you know what happens when someone runs on a third-party ticket, even with billions of their own dollars to support them and a lot of good ideas and common sense?

If I recall correctly - nothing.

So, what exactly are you looking for here? Someone who represents you better than Ron Paul? How exactly would they do that, and if they weren't running third-party (which would effectively be doomed), wouldn't you have the same problem with them that you have with Paul now?

I'm confused.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius

You might want to go ahead and check how wealth/income distribution in the US *already* falls, and how it's gotten worse since we've moved further and further away from the old policies that Paul still espouses.


You based 4 paragraphs right here on a lie, something that exists only in your head. 60 years ago, the American dream existed, the american worker was productive and could afford to live a modest lifestyle, and THE WEALTHY WERE TAXED AT 90%. Goo look it up. So are you saying Ron Paul supports this? Income redistrubiton has increased steadily since 1973, when the rich and corporations started paying a lot less in taxes.

Since when has Paul espoused that the rich should pay more taxes?

Everything you said is basically formulated on incorrect information.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


You're picking and choosing pieces of Ron Paul's policies to fit your argument, if you want to argue why Ron Paul will be the fall of America, you have to debate the whole package.

For example, you can't say his plan for cutting government waste and jobs is bad when you don't address his vision for taxes and business regulation.

If anybody feels that I don't make sense, please let me know.
edit on 5-9-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
So, I know you're sick of voting for 'the lesser evil' but in a two party system there is no other way. We can't have multiple interests in Congress or the White House because our only option is Democrat or Republican.

Now, I am not saying this is how it should be, because it certainly shouldn't be. In fact, we should be doing everything we can to change it. At the same time, however, we have to remember that in reality, at this very moment, we have to make a decision.

Support a Tea Party candidate like Michelle Bachman or Rick Perry, who barely know how to tie their own shoes;
Support Obama, who says pretty things but in general leans too far right anyways and doesn't get anything done;
or support Ron Paul, who is pretty conservative but at least he's upfront about it, unlike Obama, and at least he wants to do something about our problems. Plus, he is not a corporate shill, at least, he's the furthest from one we're going to get in this race.

Or, you can simply not vote, which, even if we have crappy options, you're still stupid if you don't vote and then complain about the people in power.

So yeah. Those are you realistic options. Sure, from a liberal perspective you may see Ron Paul may be the least of the evils (like I do) but at this point, we've gotta do something different from what we've been doing and Ron Paul seems to be the only option. (besides he'd still have to get through Congress before cutting all government jobs lol so don't expect anything that drastic to occur.)
edit on 9/5/2011 by spacekc929 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   
You are not supporting him because of his political label? That is silly.

Who you elect should have nothing to do with their label...It should be about their policies. Where they stand on the issues... You said you like him and everything he stands for....

So vote for him....

Republican and democrat are just labels designed to conquer and divide.... Seems like it is working on you... Don't let it.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   



You know who will fill the gap? Subsidiary companies from already too powerful corporations that get REFUNDS instead of paying taxes...

I disagree, and would like to think those former taxpayers who were previously paying these people by way of the federal teat might now be able to afford to expand their workforces, open new locations/job sites, or otherwise finally afford to start their own new business and put some of these people to work, if they didn't start their own jobs or go to work for the states as I previously mentioned.


This is the kind of inexcusable thinking that enabled NAFTA. "If we pay less to have our products made cheaper overseas, we can hire more office workers here! American will be paid better and have easier jobs!". It was also the thinking that allowed Bush 2 to cut all those taxes to "stimulate the economy". Well, did either of those things happen? So why do people like you keep saying that they will?

Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me a hundred times, I will still lie for you....
edit on 5-9-2011 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


To clarify Ron Paul is not a corporate shrill but the Republican party is. I will not support the Republican party, or the Democrat party for that matter.

If Paul quits the GOP I would vote for him, until then he is in with a bad crowd.

BTW Paul has never gained over 10% of votes in a national election. So its not really that easy to take him or his supporters seriously.

I was once a die hard Paul supporter.
edit on 5-9-2011 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


You're picking and choosing pieces of Ron Paul's policies to fit your argument, if you want to argue why Ron Paul will be the fall of America, you have to debate the whole package.

For example, you can't say his plan for cutting government waste and jobs is bad when you don't address his vision for taxes and business regulation.

If anybody feels that I don't make sense, please let me know.
edit on 5-9-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


I dont know how you can argue that putting 10s of millions out of work right now is "not that bad". Insanity. Do you WANT social collapse?



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


I really wish you'd read my post explaining how you might be incorrect in thinking that Ron Paul is some evil GOP politician propped up to keep the illusion going.

post by eLPresidente
 


edit on 5-9-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


Societal collapse? you're not saying that continuously propping up this inflated way of life is sustainable are you? if so, this conversation is over because you're obviously living in some sort of delusional reality.

The system is so messed up that there is no way to make real change without sacrifice, gotta take 2 steps back to go 1 step forward. So how in any realistic situation is government waste a good thing? Please elaborate!



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Seems like this is what is the new popular thing to say about Ron Paul.


Its easy to say anything about the guy, until the people show up to the polls and vote for him, has this happened yet???


Why would you say you like him and his integrity but you can't vote for him because he is part of the GOP? Then you go on to say you would like to see what the Democrats have to offer you? What was the saying? left, right, all in the same..


Would you vote for him if he was apart of a racist organization? Its a guilt by association thing. How much MONEY does the GOP give him?


Only difference here is, Ron Paul ran on the libertarian ticket before and he lost miserably, independents can't win in America that is why they call it the TWO PARTY SYSTEM. Ron Paul knows this and runs as GOP because he WANTS TO WIN, he is only in the race as long as people support him and donate money to him. He has spoken many many MANY times on how the GOP has lost their ways and how he is going to bring traditional GOP values back to the party.


He also lost miserably on the Republican ticket...... So he wants to take the GOP support and money to change the GOP.... How is he going to change the GOP when he is neck deep in there machine?


If you seriously believe for one second Ron Paul is a present day republican, you better recheck your fact-book.


He is in fact a old school republican, but who is going to show up at the polls??? Old School republican voters? or neocon and teapartiers??



P.S. independent candidates SPLIT THE VOTE, Ron Paul knows this! if he's been right about big government, taxes, constitution, foreign policy, our economy and personal liberties, what makes you think he doesn't know what hes doing when running in the GOP?


If losing is his goal then he's doing a outstanding job of it



And how the hell is Ron Paul a LESSER EVIL? Please explain, I would love to see you explain this


Its his associations and those who are giving him money that are evil.....
edit on 5-9-2011 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-9-2011 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-9-2011 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   


I think Ron Paul has integrity, and is a honest man in a crooked game of politics. I like some of Paul's ideas and his interpretation of the constitution. I agree with his voting record for the most part. He is in my opinion the best choice out there when your picking the less evil of choices.


That is the reason I will vote for him over the rest.
Mitt Romney looks Presidential and and has nice hair..by the MSM? That should be a big flag. Perry was a Democrat, and and true Conservative will support him? Why? Perry can not support Illegal alien proposals?
There are only two candidates that support their views, maybe three. Paul, Santorum, Bacchman. The rest are fodder. They are the few I have seen backed themselves with their ideals.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by mugger



I think Ron Paul has integrity, and is a honest man in a crooked game of politics. I like some of Paul's ideas and his interpretation of the constitution. I agree with his voting record for the most part. He is in my opinion the best choice out there when your picking the less evil of choices.


That is the reason I will vote for him over the rest.
Mitt Romney looks Presidential and and has nice hair..by the MSM? That should be a big flag. Perry was a Democrat, and and true Conservative will support him? Why? Perry can not support Illegal alien proposals?
There are only two candidates that support their views, maybe three. Paul, Santorum, Bacchman. The rest are fodder. They are the few I have seen backed themselves with their ideals.


I do see where your coming from, but I don't agree with the names you threw out there. I do wonder about a candidate and all the discussion and debate, when he never comes close to winning. How can he have so much support [seemingly] online but on election day he is lucky to get 1 out of 10 votes? if he gets that much?



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join