I no longer support Ron Paul

reply to post by LDragonFire

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

No, as the primaries and caucuses have not started yet, people have not shown up at the polls to vote for him or anybody, what is your point?

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?

Please provide proof of him being affiliated with a racist organization. *hint hint* there is no proof. How much money does the GOP give him? why don't you tell us since you seem to know about the GOP giving money to Ron Paul more than any of us. Where is the proof? Where is the documented amount of money given to Ron Paul by the GOP? Of any candidate, why would they give money to him? Romney raised 10 million questionable dollars in the last fundraising quarter, Ron Paul earned 4.5 million documented dollars. Please refute.

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?

So he lost in 2008, he runs for the people, they wanted him for 2012 so he did it. What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? and where is the proof?

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??

What the hell are you trying to say?? what is the point you're making?

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

Jesus Christ, first you say the man has integrity and you like him but you can't vote for the lesser evil, the man apart of the machine now you want to get on the 'Ron-Paul-can't-win-bandwagon' too?

Its his associations and those who are giving him money that are evil.....

No, it has nothing to do with his associations because you have no proof Ron Paul is affiliated with any evil organizations, you're just making things up with NO HARD EVIDENCE. Just like there is no evidence that Ron Paul is illuminati or ate over 4000 newborn babies as he delivered them fresh from the womb.

Currently your only response to reason are unfounded ramblings about a good man trying to bring back the traditional values our founding fathers laid down for us.

reply to post by aching_knuckles
I'm not speaking of just tax rates, I'm speaking of wealth distribution. At the moment I don't have information handy on the past 60 years, but on this site we've got a 24-year range that we can use to likely extrapolate roughly the last 30 years based on total and net wealth distributions (since 1983). I would assume foreign policy plays into this, and would assume the years from 2008-to current will likely show acceleration of this trend due to our corporate bailout and other domestic policies, all of which are the opposite of what Paul presents for consideration

As you can see from the first two grids, there's been some bobbling around over this time, but the trend especially since 2001 has not been good. The bottom 80% of US wealth holders has been losing share to the top 20%.

If you have the historical information covering a longer period (or know where to direct me for it?), I'd love to take a look, but my assumption - granted - is that this is a long-term trend that has widened the wealth distribution gaps between the vast majority of the US as compared to the top 20% with overseas adventurism coupled with government intervention in the economy.

Tax rates are a lovely thing to look at, but don't account for how much of said income was considered taxable, let alone accounting for how much wealth was actually in whose hands at any given point. If anyone's got more information for further review on this, it would be appreciated...but I'm forced to assume just from the history you yourself refer to as well as what's typically presented as american history and how good things were in the past that less government intervention on all fronts leads to something more akin to the ability of us all to live the american dream.

Thanks.

reply to post by aching_knuckles

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....

Hmmm...no. What I'm saying is that if we had to spend about 30 million less taxpayer-funded salaries, EVERYONE in the US (not just corporate controllers who you've already indicated don't have to pay much in taxes anyway) would have more to invest in themselves and the economy since the government wouldn't be sucking up all that money from us on various levels to pay their bloated workforce of tax-feeders (and what exactly have all those government workers actually done for us? Most things they're more or less responsible for seem to just keep getting worse...), as well as about 30 million more people either looking for new/expanded private-sector jobs or brand new start-up businesses.

Our involvement in NAFTA, WTO, and whatever else was just a bad idea in the first place - AND coincidentally - firmly against the advice of Ron Paul. We don't NEED stupid agreements and limitations like this to have free trade, as Perot warned us back during his run for office. As I recall, a lot of people treated him pretty much the same way Paul is, and I think we'd be a lot better off had we listened - or even elected the guy.

I may not like the comparison too terribly much, but it's time for a big change in thinking along those lines, and Paul's the only one I see presenting it.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

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

No, as the primaries and caucuses have not started yet, people have not shown up at the polls to vote for him or anybody, what is your point?

Ron has run for president several times. Historically speaking Its easy to say anything about the guy, until the people show up to the polls and vote for him, has this happened yet??? in any election other than his congressional election?

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?

Please provide proof of him being affiliated with a racist organization. *hint hint* there is no proof. How much money does the GOP give him? why don't you tell us since you seem to know about the GOP giving money to Ron Paul more than any of us. Where is the proof? Where is the documented amount of money given to Ron Paul by the GOP? Of any candidate, why would they give money to him? Romney raised 10 million questionable dollars in the last fundraising quarter, Ron Paul earned 4.5 million documented dollars. Please refute.

I asked would you vote for him if he was apart on a racial organization? I didn't say he was apart of one.

Most of Paul's money comes from individuals and PACS (political action committees). I don't know how much comes from the rnc if any.

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?

So he lost in 2008, he runs for the people, they wanted him for 2012 so he did it. What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? and where is the proof?

What proof??? this is all opinion. I'm starting to think you might have a reading comprehension issue.

I stated in this thread I no longer support Ron Paul for president, I even stated why I don't support him.

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??

What the hell are you trying to say?? what is the point you're making?

Ron Paul Does Not Have Nor Has He Ever Had Popular Support.

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

Jesus Christ, first you say the man has integrity and you like him but you can't vote for the lesser evil, the man apart of the machine now you want to get on the 'Ron-Paul-can't-win-bandwagon' too?

Did you read the thread title?

No, it has nothing to do with his associations because you have no proof Ron Paul is affiliated with any evil organizations, you're just making things up with NO HARD EVIDENCE. Just like there is no evidence that Ron Paul is illuminati or ate over 4000 newborn babies as he delivered them fresh from the womb.

He is a member of the republican party.

Currently your only response to reason are unfounded ramblings about a good man trying to bring back the traditional values our founding fathers laid down for us.


He might get 10% of the vote. Slavery and no rights for women were apart of traditional values of our founding fathers....

reply to post by LDragonFire

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.

I've never been a fan of guilt by association, and this very much brings the phrase "cutting off your nose to spite your face" to my mind, even if it's not the proper one for this case.

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.

hah...how have those two-party players drawing larger percentages for the US worked out for us? It's not necessarily fair as a good many people are simply misled or lied to, but I've always looked at it as "Since when has the majority ever been right?".

Just because the party establishments and media can lead public perception a certain way does not have anything honest to do with the validity of a candidate or their ideas - in fact, in the modern era they usually fall under the truism "We always kill the heroes". You're going to HAVE to expect a tough fight for anyone truly representing change to make a big impact, and it's going to take things getting very rough for everyone to shake the general public out of their reverie and realize they can't keep playing the same games and picking the same kind of people and expect to get anything good out of the deal...and this time around, for this early in the election cycle with a lot of people to still find out about him, Paul's looking good. Currently running about where Mccain was last time around, and the realities favor what he's been saying for a long time now.

I was once a die hard Paul supporter.

You were supposed to bring balance to the Force, Anakin, not destroy it!

Aside from the guilt by association you already mentioned - which is one of the most necessary factors for Paul to even have a shot at winning (look into history of 3rd party runs, please - seriously) - I'd like to know why you quit, and how on earth you can expect any real change otherwise. Have you just decided to opt-out and remove your aid to one seeking to shake things up? If we all think like you do and just sit the game out, I can guarantee you that the establishment followers won't, and we'll have absolutely no hope or reason to expect anything other than what we've been getting.

Best wishes.

Hopefully though Ron Paul will won. BTW please reply to my thread guys. www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Northwarden


Oh, you mean the T Party was fine as long as it was just libertarians and a few left leaning Dems, but as soon as the conservative Repubs joined in, suddenly it's "infiltrated" with ( fill in the blank). How disingenuous is that! The more people who join in with the frustrated crowd, the more infiltrated it becomes...is that how it goes? How about looking at it as, more and more people are realizing the truth of corruption in govt, and taking a stand? It's just that conserv Republicans just never protested publicly before. It doesn't mean they didn't care.

reply to post by Praetorius




Oops that should have been a response to Dragonfire, my apologies

reply to post by LDragonFire

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?

I'll vote on principle first, and not vote for the selection. I did not vote for Dole, neither did I vote for McCain. I left them blank and voted my local races. The Repubs hate me.. to bad, they have to do better than that for my vote.
I trust them no more than the Dems. You may not like the other names I put out, but just take a longer look at what they have stated in the past. I'll take Santorum over Perry with his illegal immigration status anyday.

Very great thread and posts! Keep it going!

Originally posted by LDragonFire
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.

I'm tired of settling for the least of these evils in elections.

The main reason I no longer support Ron Paul is he is still a Republican, and I don't feel that Republicans have the nations or its citizenry best interest at heart. I don't trust the neo conservative/teaparty led Republican party. They have had too much power in the recent past and all they do is blame Democrats for the shape were in yet they do preach alot about being responsible for ones self. The Republicans controlled the congress from 94 to 06 and aren't things better? or worst?

Besides being Republican there are no others running for the gop that I like.

I didn't vote for Obama, and I'm waiting to see what happens on the Democrat side of this upcoming election.

There are no party lines any more. IMO the only time there are Democrats and Republicans is when they are running for an office. When in congress or running in any type of office. Dems and Rep can be swayed to vote to the other side. Whether it be for money, a political favor. Once in office they can vote anyway they want too. Whether it's in the house or the senate. Doesn't really matter if the Pres is a Dem or Rep because the congress are the ones to eventually push through all legislation. Even if the Pres. veto's a bill the house and senate can still push it through. Party lines are part of the corruption in our Gov. Paul would run independent if he thought he had a chance that way. When is the last time you saw an independent win a public office position?

How many times have you seen a Democratic state senator vote for a Republican bill. Even though he comes from a Democratic state? It happens a lot more than you think. I believe that Dems and Rep are swayed by corporations for campaign financing and political favors. This is not talked about publicly but it is going on inside congress and the White House. Look at Tax Free General Electric and the position that their Higher ups hold in the white house.

Open Congress.org

Take a look at some of the bills and laws that have been passed. Who voted for what. Dem and Rep really do not matter except during an election year or in the MSM. That's it.

This is the true corruption in our Government. Believe what you will but there is more going on in Congress and the Oval office than we will ever see. Dem or Republican.


Vote Ron Paul he is the only "independent" Republican out there.

reply to post by Hessling


I understand what you are saying about Ron Paul's stance on social issues causing concern. However, Ron Paul has publicly stated that he does not intend to cut off social programs if elected President. While his ideology is against such social programs he is cognizant of the fact that Americans have been put into a rough situation and forced to accept social programs as their buying power has decreased over time. He has stated that his focus as President would be on foreign policy and giving people at home a chance to opt out of social programs, but still fund the social programs for people that have not gotten back onto their feet. He wants to return sound and honest money to the people so that they no longer have a need for social programs, but is not going to cut people off that need assistance.

Unlike many of his supporters, Ron Paul has a realistic approach: return honest money to the people, cut overseas spending, bring the troops home, use the money saved to fund entitlements, allow people to opt out of social programs, and then help people understand that endless government ruins the country in the long run.

I think you might be listening more to Ron Paul supporters that are dead set on ideology and not on the practicality that Ron Paul as President would have no power to just overturn legislation enacted through congress. So if you are worried about social spending, you need not worry. Ron Paul has made it clear his focus will be overseas spending to ensure those citizens that rely on government support continue to get the help they have been promised.

So first Ron Paul was unelectable, then he was crazy, then a racist, and the finally the Antichrist. After all that failed now we can't vote for him simply because his running as a republican? Its a strategic political move, hes a libertarian at heart but nobody would even consider voting in a libertarian. Its a two party system after all!

Look He's an honest man who's selling the ideas of peace and liberty, of bringing back the free market and enterprise and lifting the stranglehold the elite have over us. Take it or leave because after this election I doubt it'll be on the market again for a long time.

Edit: I would like to clarify even if he did become POTUS, he won't be able to fix it all but it will be a start.

reply to post by LDragonFire


that is a ridiculous stance to take...

wouldn't you agree then that Ron Paul embodies the best that the Republican Party has to offer then?

It doesn't matter what Ron Paul's affiliations are. We've seen this all before ... again and again and again ...

Ron Paul is a politiican.

And therefore a liar by trade.

reply to post by LDragonFire


First you say you like him and what he stands for but he is not getting your vote as a GOP candidate, but he can't possibly win as an independent candidate. You say he takes money from the GOP but you cannot provide proof, why is it bad to be running under a so-called 'racial organization'? Can you say with 100% confidence that there is zero racism in every political party in America? Am I automatically evil because I registered to vote republican?

But that wasn't enough, you couldn't convince anybody here so you went with how he can't be president because he isn't popular enough. If that was your concern (which I know it isn't because you made it up halfway in this thread) then why don't you put it up in the OP?

I find it ridiculous you associate Ron Paul with evil because he runs under a party that he wants to win for the people.

Something doesn't add up in this thread.
"I no longer support Ron Paul" means that you used to support him, right? But, he has been a Republican for a long time, so you supported a Republican.
But, Republicans are evil, aren't they? Did you just come to that conclusion and thus drop Ron Paul?
It doesn't add up.

reply to post by area6


Actually no, as stated probably thousands of times on ATS alone, Ron Paul's record gives him the best credibility to do this job.

So, please explain. How is Ron Paul a liar? or is he only a liar because he is labeled a politician?

If you watch the GOP debates, Ron Paul is the only candidate NOT using talking points to soothe America, he speaks from the heart because you don't need to rehearse the truth.

reply to post by LDragonFire


The man is just playing a game of wits. He knows he has the voice of reason, but he needs to get as close to them as possible to get the right exposure. I believe he knows what hes' doing, and that he will liberate us, not lead us to enslavement...

Listen, he wants to tear down a whole structure, and leave it to us to rebuild it.. You know how amazingly revolutionary that is? Don't hate on the man, support him. Because, if he's such a republican, why is he being denied access to mainstream? Hidden from polls? You think that could be disinformation? What about, he's reminding us that we have rights and to take them back.

Imagine, legal medicinal herbs, that can cure cancer. Benevolent bio-technology/medicine that can influence our environment. Free culture..Greater systems of law and education..
I believe Ron Paul will bring forth the foundation for all these things to bloom over....

reply to post by LDragonFire


Least of evils in the election? Ron Paul is the truth! even he has said that the republican and democrats "the two party system" is a joke! He will make a change in every day lives like you and I, and along with most the people on this forum. Matter a fact he will probably make more change in his first week than obama has made in his whole presidency......

"Im trying to change the course of History" Ron Paul