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.

 

Why I will NOT vote for Ron Paul

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder

Originally posted by openminded2011

So, because I disagree on 3 of his positions, and that is enough to remove my willingness to vote for him, why is that a such a problem for you?


...Waiting for a response to my last post again.


Oh Mr. Shark_Feeder...for someone who likes to demand immediate responses to their replies...you seem to have ignored my reply to you.





posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
[
Oh Mr. Shark_Feeder...for someone who likes to demand immediate responses to their replies...you seem to have ignored my reply to you.



Oh my, you're right... sorry about that. I got caught up a bit. Give me a minute to respond.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 



If he were to be Elected our next President , this Bill , which has Now become Law , would be repealed by a newly elected President Paul along with it's enabler the Patriot Act by Executive Order .


So he would overturn the vote of our Constitutionally elected Congressman based on his opinion alone???

No thanks...I don't want a dictator.

So much for following that Constitution...huh???



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
 


Ron Paul would " Jump The Shark " that wants to Enslave us , but it seems some Americans don't Mind just being CHUM ...........


i297.photobucket.com...



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


If you read my post, you will see that I have chosen not to vote for Obama.


You just want to convince everyone to NOT vote for the one canidate who wants to fight the corruption in our country.


Can you point out where the OP has tried to tell anyone else not to vote for Ron Paul.

His thread is clearly titled Why "I" will NOT vote for Ron Paul....not Why "YOU" should NOT vote for Ron Paul.


It is increasingly disturbing that Ron Paul supporters attack those that disagree with Ron Paul...someone can't even state their reasons for not supporting him without being accused of being a troll, uninformed, and now accused of trying to convince everyone else not to vote for him.

Ron Paul supporters need to calm down.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
 


We differ in philosophy. I believe the Federal Government is needed to set a minimum level of regulation and let the States do more if they choose.

You want to strip that minimum level of regulation...the only reason I can see for that is to allow States to lower that regulation for their own profit.


Do you disagree that the States could enforce more regulations if they wanted to???


I agree with about everything you said here. I simply believe that the federal government has failed us, and overstepped it's delegated authority. I think the best way forward at this point to avoid violence is to begin scaling back the federal government, and put power in the states hands.

I agree with you that corruption exist everywhere, but history has shown that it most easily combated at a local and state level.

As I said in an earlier post, it's like have 1 police department to fight all the crime in our country... I think we all know that would go badly.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder


Ron Paul wants to put the descisions in the States' hands. Decentralizing authority and all that.


When people like yourself get upset and suggest I am being disrespectful, do you ever take a moment of introspection? How much respect should one give to those who use dishonesty to attempt to persuade? How much do you offer?

How much respect am I shown by being lied to? Seem rather disrespectful and it starts with you. Paul does not want a state run EPA. You are just making things up.


Just noticing that you were using my arguments of common law to imply that I have no knowledge of the water cycle, and to question my intelligence. All on the basis of another topic, that is ignorance my friend.


Actually none of that happened. It was your bold claim that AS A BIOLOGIST, you had knowledge that you then went on to demonstrate you did not. It had nothing to do with common law. I never mentioned it.

So now dishonesty, braggadociery, and this indignant response to something you NOTICED that does not exist. Just keeping track.


Hence the need to local enforcement...Imagine if there was ONE police department to contact for all crimes in the USA... seems silly huh?


local enforcement of WHAT???????????

How are you missing this? What would be LEGALLY ENFORCED? According to Ron Paul they will be well within the law. In fact he wants to protect them. That is the first half of your argument for him. Private property rights etc. etc. etc.




My argument is that he is reducing the UNCONSTITUTIONAL reach of out corrupt Federal Government.
Can you argue that the FED has not overreached it's Constutional authority?




With regard to minimum wage, something you argued has no power anyway. Yay Ron Paul is going to save us from a federal program that does not effect anyone or cost us anything. Where can I donate a kidney?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
 


No I want to convince people that they should look at BOTH his foreign AND domestic policy before endorsing him. I agree with some of his positions on foreign policy, but I strongly disagree on his domestic positions. With regards to Obama, I will not vote for him because he caved to the republicans on every issue and just signed a defense bill with provisions for disappearing Americans. If I am given a valid third choice I might vote but I will not vote for Either Paul or Obama. I have stated why I don't want to vote for Ron Paul specifically. Please look at those points again and research them and get back to me.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
 


The States are allowed right now to put their own regulations in place, their own punishments, and their own crack down on corruption. They just can't go lower than the Federal regulations.

So if you believe that the States would do this once the EPA is gone...why haven't they done it already???



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher


Ron Paul supporters need to calm down.


Exactly. I have never once tried to tell anyone who they should or should not vote for but I would really love it myself if Ron Paul worshippers understood the damage they do their cause and the reason they need to robo vote in online polls. Paul would probably have more actual support if his fans were not about attacking anyone that does not automatically have their own set of Ron and Rand pillows to cuddle up with at night.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
 


The States are allowed right now to put their own regulations in place, their own punishments, and their own crack down on corruption. They just can't go lower than the Federal regulations.

So if you believe that the States would do this once the EPA is gone...why haven't they done it already???


The Ron Paul philosophy at work. All corporations want to just do good things for people. Right now, there are all these rules making them do less bad things so in reaction, they try to do lots of bad things. Take away all those rules and they will start just doing good things.

I mean it is all so simple. At least once you end the drug war, this stuff will make sense to a lot more people.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Algernonsmouse
When people like yourself get upset and suggest I am being disrespectful, do you ever take a moment of introspection? How much respect should one give to those who use dishonesty to attempt to persuade? How much respect am I shown by being lied to? Seem rather disrespectful and it starts with you. Paul does not want a state run EPA. You are just making things up.


As I have said numerous times, and as RP stances make clear... he would leave these descisions to the States. See he wants to let us handle our own business.



Actually none of that happened. It was your bold claim that AS A BIOLOGIST

I am indeed a Biologist, your opinions change nothing.


you had knowledge that you then went on to demonstrate you did not.


Where did I demonstrate lack of knowledge friend?


local enforcement of WHAT???????????


The many things discussed in this thread maybe?
Work regualtions, enviromental laws(by state now), minmum wage...see violations of these things are crimes. Hence my comparison to a PD.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The OP has not IMO, presented his Case in a convincing fashion taking into account All the reasons Why he feels he would not Vote for a man like Ron Paul for President . His lack of familiarity with Ron Pauls Stance on the Key Issues facing our Country today is obvious . I was just trying to see if he was open to a broader Reasoning in seeing that .



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by naraku
"I know a lot of people like him because of his isolationist position on world affairs and his willingness to legalize weed,"

He is a non interventionist. He does not want weed to be legalized, he wants to leave it up to the states. How much do you know about Ron Paul again?


I'm really getting annoyed and tired of the state rights argument.

Now - I am no expert or student of the constitution - - - but how many states were there when it was written - - and how big were those states? And how diversified were those states?

I do try to use logic and common sense in by opinions. Most of Arizona is agriculture. Why should it be governed (laws made) by more populated areas such as Phoenix - which is more like Los Angeles or New York? That makes very little sense.

If Arizona took charge of itself - - it would have people like Sheriff Arpaio in charge. That would be insanity.

While I can understand geographic locations have specific difficulties and having rights to govern the needs of those specifics. There is no logic in states governing civil rights.

Equality Civil Rights should be Federal for the entire country. Those rights should include: marriage - abortion - discrimination - etc.

Can someone provide a real logical answer why marriage should be a state right?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The OP has not IMO, presented his Case in a convincing fashion taking into account All the reasons Why he feels he would not Vote for a man like Ron Paul for President . His lack of familiarity with Ron Pauls Stance on the Key Issues facing our Country today is obvious . I was just trying to see if he was open to a broader Reasoning in seeing that .


The OP has not, in your opinion, made his case for his own opinion well enough to you? Are you people serious? Holy crap. Can I not like pink if I do not make an argument for pink that qualifies as convincing to you? So now, people need to prove why they do not want to vote for Ron Paul.

Holy #.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Algernonsmouse
 


I have asked this over and over to Ron Paul supporters...no one seems to have an answer as to why the States currently aren't above and beyond federal regulation. And if they are...then what is exactly the issue???

There is only one reason Ron Paul would want to remove the Federal minimum regulations...to allow the States to lower their regulations. It's a move to make things worse...not better.

This is the same for anything Ron Paul claims is a "state issue". He wants to remove federal discrimination laws...because he says it's a "state issue"...but to what end Mr Paul??? The only motive you have for doing this is to allow the States to legalize discrimination if you want. Again...moving backwards.


Sorry Ron Paul...I see through your lies.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


If you read my post, you will see that I have chosen not to vote for Obama.



Then who do you feel best represents your Choice for that Office ?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Lol the confusion in this one is strong.

You dont seem to understand. If he is cutting the tax rate to 10%, then why does it matter if he eliminates a tax credit? You dont need a tax credit with a lower rate. As these people will be keeping more of their money to begin with. You dont seem to understand that when we put our tax money through the government, a lot of that money gets funneled/syphoned out of the system to pay for its own ADMINISTRATION. As in, the administration of that program. Do we really need to pay extra taxes to the government so they can give it back to us in the form of a credit? Where as with an extremely low tax rate, people will have more of their own money to use, and we dont have to pay unneccessary government workers to hand our money back to us..




you and others place their faith in the State governments....I don't. I think the Federal Government is necessary to oversee and set a minimum set of regulations.

This one made me laugh. You really believe this huh?


Why should people in the federal government more trustworthy than at the state level? That I find laughable.



If I'm looking to bribe someone and I either have the choice of trying to bribe one organization that controls everything...or I have a choice of 50 organizations...I would pick having the system where I could bribe one of 50. The odds are much better that I will find someone.

And you fail to see the reverse problem with this. There will always be the ability to bribe people. However, if you want nefarious agents to get control through bribing, youd rather have them control the FEDERAL government, which controls the whole country, rather than a state, which would contain that element there?
Regardless, if we dilute the power into our state and local governments, we will have a much better chance at affecting our government. Our power of self determination will be increased.




I think you forget that the States are just as broke as teh Federal Government

And you fail to think its not possible for states to run an appropriate budget? Its been quite obvious for sometime now that our states and country are being pushed over the edge of endless debt. Debt is big money for a certain group of people. More than likely what is happening is people who are loyal to this cause, of creating more debt, are being thrusted into positions of power. And that is what is happening with our state governments. Its the same mentality as our federal government at the moment and its the same type of people who are in power. Those loyal to the elite.

If we start diluting the power of the federal government into local and state governments, we will be better off. We will have a louder voice. We will be able to enact more change.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The OP has not IMO, presented his Case in a convincing fashion taking into account All the reasons Why he feels he would not Vote for a man like Ron Paul for President . His lack of familiarity with Ron Pauls Stance on the Key Issues facing our Country today is obvious . I was just trying to see if he was open to a broader Reasoning in seeing that .


The OPs reasoning for not wanting to vote for Ron Paul could be as little as that he doesn't trust people with the two first names.

It's his right...respect it.

The three points he did point out though are true...those ARE Ron Paul's positions on those issues. After that, it comes down to if an individual agrees if that policy would help or harm the country. Obviously the OP thinks it would harm...as do I.

Why do you have such a hard time respecting someones opinion???



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join