I'm a witness to democrats planning to (unintentionally) sabotage Ron Paul

Let me preface this by saying I'm non partisan, but I am black so the majority of my community is either democratic, or non partisan.

Over the past few weeks, at various community functions, and even on some local talk radio, people have been discussing how they're gonna get Obama reelected. I try to be present so that I can speak my part and try to explain how Ron Paul's ideas cater to both republicans and democrats in their own respective manners. But over the last week a new tactic has sprung up.

Democrats vote in the republican caucus and vote for either Bachmann, Huntsman, Santorum, or Gingrich - saying that the people would rather want Obama, than a police state supporting fool like one of them.

I do see the logic behind their tactic, but what they'll be doing if this truly catches on, is damning Ron Paul to the nowhere bench. This is bugging me because at this point, my voice is drowned out by "GET A LOSER NOMINATED" calls.

Suggestions on what I can do anybody?

The Republicans do this every election cycle. They were advocating people switch their affiliation to "D" to vote for Hillary in the primaries. It's an old tactic.

The Ron Paul crowd needs to be a bit less paranoid, and realize there's no conspiracy. Truth is, Ron Paul is not as widely regarded as a savior as they like to think.

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


Why pretend Obama got elected? He didn't get elected. He bought the idea of being elected from the American dupes. Get over it. Were gonna have 4 more years of Obama. Its gonna be a bumpy ride but we'll get through it.

I survived Reagan and three Bush presidencies. Can it get much worse than that?

reply to post by jtap66

The Ron Paul crowd needs to be a bit less paranoid, and realize there's no conspiracy.

Actually, what the OP is describing and what you yourself recounted is - by definition - conspiracy. Not necessarily against anyone other than republicans in general, but it's somewhat funny to reference a conspiracy and then say it doesn't exist.

What exactly was the point of you posting this, anyway? I didn't see OP claim a wide-ranging conspiracy against Ron Paul in the first place, beyond this tactic he's witnessing with his own eyes. Did you have something more on-topic to add?

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine
Let me preface this by saying I'm non partisan, but I am black so the majority of my community is either democratic, or non partisan.

Over the past few weeks, at various community functions, and even on some local talk radio, people have been discussing how they're gonna get Obama reelected. I try to be present so that I can speak my part and try to explain how Ron Paul's ideas cater to both republicans and democrats in their own respective manners. But over the last week a new tactic has sprung up.

Democrats vote in the republican caucus and vote for either Bachmann, Huntsman, Santorum, or Gingrich - saying that the people would rather want Obama, than a police state supporting fool like one of them.

I do see the logic behind their tactic, but what they'll be doing if this truly catches on, is damning Ron Paul to the nowhere bench. This is bugging me because at this point, my voice is drowned out by "GET A LOSER NOMINATED" calls.

Suggestions on what I can do anybody?

edit on 8-12-2011 by My.mind.is.mine because: (no reason given)

Pray, honestly, and keep working. I would try to get them to understand that we are very likely to see a worsening of the economy coming up to and beyond the election, and that - fairly or not - will likely fall disproportionately on Obama's shoulders. At that point, the "anyone but Obama" meme kicks into overdrive.

I would strongly suggest that any involvement on their part is to make sure we have the BEST available option there in line, so we're not left with more of the same or even worse at that point. I'd also continue to work on sharing Ron Paul's policies and beliefs to find out what exactly Obama offers that Ron Paul doesn't. More war? More debt? Greater chance of retaliatory attacks by either nations we've occupied or groups of people we've pissed off in related ventures, or hostile action by those we've cheated on an economic front (chinese, etc.)?

How do they feel about the drug war and the american proclivity to lock up people - usually being minorities in unfair share? Obama doesn't seem to mind, and under his watch, things have continued to become every MORE militarized & aggressive against the people.

Obama simply doesn't offer much of anything when you seriously look at it - as with most politicians, honestly. Things aren't working, justice isn't blind, and we're robbed.

It's time for someone to take a stab at real change, for once - with a record to back up their intents.

reply to post by RightWingAvenger

I survived Reagan and three Bush presidencies. Can it get much worse than that?

I've learned never to ask questions I don't sincerely want to know the answer to, since it usually ends up not being the answer I wanted to hear!

Seriously, though...it doesn't have to get much worse. Not getting better is almost as bad. So much wasted money, so many lost lives and ruined families amongst our troops, those caught up in police & policy aggression, and in the nations we've ruined. Multiple hundreds of thousands of lives ruined for no good reason, and that's a VERY conservative estimate. A once truly-prosperous nation with flowering cities, not all merely built on debt, now decaying. The jobless masses and the debt-burdened, cities and states shutting off vital functions for lack of funds, with cries to raise taxes as a result.

The captives and the blood of those lost cry out...and speaking only for myself, I very much fear being held accountable for not doing more to fight against the injustice and continued offenses against both men and God.

reply to post by jtap66


This isn't paranoia... This is something that is happening.

I didn't say there is a conspiracy against Ron Paul, I said there is a conspiracy FOR Obama...

I asked for suggestions on how to get through to my community, and you replied with a message about not being paranoid.

OFF-TOPIC

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine
If the average American voter wakes up, and sees that the current slate of republican poll leaders are just more of the same, then this could be the biggest landslide ever. RP is the only man who can change things.

The only candidate I feel that has any chance whatsoever to beat Obama is Huntsman....as he's the only one who isn't incredibly extreme in his views and doesn't carry near as much baggage as the other candidates....not only that...he actually seems SANE.

He won't get the nomination though....the rest are guaranteed wins for Obama...including Ron Paul.

Of course...this is all my opinion....

They must be really scared that hes going to be the front-runner.

They know if they put Obama up against Paul, that Obama will get smashed, so they feel it is somehow their duty to get that fraud elected again.

and btw- whoever it is that wants to re-elect Obama needs their head examined.
I KNOW it cant be his policies that keeps people behind him.
I believe it has more to do with race than anything else.

People can deny it all they want, but thats what I see.

Greatest Bumper sticker ever =
"If you voted for Obama to prove you arent racist, then you need to vote for someone else to prove you arent a moron"
or something to that effect.

reply to post by Common Good

They know if they put Obama up against Paul, that Obama will get smashed, so they feel it is somehow their duty to get that fraud elected again.


I KNOW it cant be his policies that keeps people behind him.
I believe it has more to do with race than anything else.

People can deny it all they want, but thats what I see.

Yes, put Ron Paul, who has stated he wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights act because if the business aspect of it, up against Obama.

Have to watch where you step with this one, it's easy to step in a pile of S with your argument....just sayin'

reply to post by David9176
I always get a kick out of the different definitions of 'extreme' you and I seem to operate under. I'd also say is entirely likely we'd see some skeletons come out of Huntsman's closet if he started coming up significantly in any polls, but I'll agree I tend to have somewhat fond feelings for him as compared to the rest of the lot, excepting Paul and Johnson.

As far as guaranteed wins for Obama, I have to disagree. Paul pulls a good bit of independent and even democratic support - better with independents than Obama, even - and has polled quite competitively against Obama for many months now. Better than Huntsman on a regular basis, if I recall correctly.

reply to post by David9176
That's an easy enough argument to settle. CRA '64 wouldn't have been necessary as repealing Jim Crow laws would have taken care of the issues well enough, and the states were already in good part moving the right direction anyway.

You shouldn't mandate what someone can do with their own property or business, even if that means there's a chance they might do stupid things. Besides, it was only based on a perverted understanding of the interstate commerce clause, and as far as I'm aware, Paul - like most libertarians, has no problem when any of the other civil rights acts. Even Goldwater fought FOR the previous bills, but couldn't support '64 for the same reasons Paul discusses. It's simply not a race issue, it's an issue of if the government can control your personal business.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by Common Good

 

They know if they put Obama up against Paul, that Obama will get smashed, so they feel it is somehow their duty to get that fraud elected again.


I KNOW it cant be his policies that keeps people behind him.
I believe it has more to do with race than anything else.

People can deny it all they want, but thats what I see.

Yes, put Ron Paul, who has stated he wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights act because if the business aspect of it, up against Obama.

Have to watch where you step with this one, it's easy to step in a pile of S with your argument....just sayin'

edit on 8-12-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)

so you are saying(and ill be careful not to step in poo) that somehow Paul wouldnt stand a chance because Obama is black and Paul wouldnt have voted for the civil rights act?

So in plain english, what you really mean to say is that Paul is racist, and cant beat a black man cause of his views on the civil rights act.

hmm.

I tried not to step in poo, but I think you brought the poo.

reply to post by Praetorius

I always get a kick out of the different definitions of 'extreme' you and I seem to operate under. I'd also say is entirely likely we'd see some skeletons come out of Huntsman's closet if he started coming up significantly in any polls, but I'll agree I tend to have somewhat fond feelings for him as compared to the rest of the lot, excepting Paul and Johnson.

I agree about Huntsman...time will tell on that one...but as of right now that's my opinion.

What would you consider of Ron Pauls views that my be extreme by the general populace?

As far as guaranteed wins for Obama, I have to disagree. Paul pulls a good bit of independent and even democratic support - better with independents than Obama, even - and has polled quite competitively against Obama for many months now. Better than Huntsman on a regular basis, if I recall correctly.

Time will tell. Ron paul hasn't lead national polls either, and all of his views will come full focus....and IMO that will be the end of his Presidential hopes.

Again...just my opinion. We'll see what happens. Still a long way to go...

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


Ask Sean Hannity why is a registered Democrat sometime. None of this is new.

reply to post by Common Good

so you are saying(and ill be careful not to step in poo) that somehow Paul wouldnt stand a chance because Obama is black and Paul wouldnt have voted for the civil rights act? So in plain english, what you really mean to say is that Paul is racist, and cant beat a black man cause of his views on the civil rights act.

No sir, you brought up the racial aspect....i was only making the counterpoint based on your post. I did not say he was racist...and as I have stated countless times before in other posts...his views are based on the business aspect of the amendment. Regardless, to think that this will not be viewed in a bad light with the general public is a bit foolish...especially amongst minorities..don't you think?

Be realistic.

reply to post by Praetorius

That's an easy enough argument to settle. CRA '64 wouldn't have been necessary as repealing Jim Crow laws would have taken care of the issues well enough, and the states were already in good part moving the right direction anyway. You shouldn't mandate what someone can do with their own property or business, even if that means there's a chance they might do stupid things. Besides, it was only based on a perverted understanding of the interstate commerce clause, and as far as I'm aware, Paul - like most libertarians, has no problem when any of the other civil rights acts. Even Goldwater fought FOR the previous bills, but couldn't support '64 for the same reasons Paul discusses. It's simply not a race issue, it's an issue of if the government can control your personal business.

Again, I understand his explanation.....do you think the vast majority of voters are willing to accept it? Because should he truly take a lead in national polls, it's all going to come out...and he will absolutely be on the defensive...on this one...and far more many things.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by Common Good

 

so you are saying(and ill be careful not to step in poo) that somehow Paul wouldnt stand a chance because Obama is black and Paul wouldnt have voted for the civil rights act? So in plain english, what you really mean to say is that Paul is racist, and cant beat a black man cause of his views on the civil rights act.

No sir, you brought up the racial aspect....i was only making the counterpoint based on your post. I did not say he was racist...and as I have stated countless times before in other posts...his views are based on the business aspect of the amendment. Regardless, to think that this will not be viewed in a bad light with the general public is a bit foolish...especially amongst minorities..don't you think?

Be realistic.

I did bring up the racial aspect- because a good majority of voters voted for him just for that reason.
That was the whole point of me bringing up the race issue(actually the OP did) but we dont wanna drift.....

The reason it may be viewed in bad light is because his (obamas)supporters will latch onto anything they can to try to get this DISASTER re-elected, even if that means lying to themselves and everyone around them. I know there are those people out there, but they are not the majority.
And I doubt Paul would worry about such an attack.
His character is already on the table, cant change it as much as one would like.

I know you dont think he is a racist David. I still remember back in the day when you were on our side supporting this man. Somehow, your views have changed, maybe because of personal reasons, I dont know,not my buisness.
But I think that deep down, you still have hope for him.

Hes the only Jedi we have at the moment to get this country back on the right path.
Obama has proved himself to be a failure, Paul hasnt.

Six months ago Trump was my hope for change because I thought he could win, and he's a guy who would get things done. But as time has shown me Paul is the guy 'they' fear the most, the one who could really pull the rug out from under them. Paul / Ventura in '12 !