Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Will Ron Paul formally clinches the nomination on May 8?

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 


So you're denying that Ron wants to repeal the parts of the Civil Rights Acts which apply to businesses ?

That's strange, as there is documented evidence that he is against this aspect of the Civil Rights Act (in fact, his mealy-mouthed, PR-driven comments on the Civil Rights Act strongly hint that he is against all aspects of it.)

Of course, he may just be paying lip-service to pander to his acolytes, as most Ron Paul fans are generally racist, paranoid hillbillies.

edit on 28-4-2012 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by openminded2011
 


No actually he wants to devolve power back from the Federal Governement back to the States in accordance with the Consitution: It's a bit different than what you are proposing.

" The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This is different from telling the States what they should do (and what services they should provide), (current system), then it would be up to the population of each State to argue for the services they want their State to provide and regulate.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   


as most Ron Paul fans are generally racist, paranoid hillbillies.
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


As I stated previously:

We're done here x 2.

Double ugh.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 

Of course, he may just be paying lip-service to pander to his acolytes, as most Ron Paul fans are generally racist, paranoid hillbillies.


Resort to insults when you have no facts to back up your statements. Classic approach of someone whom shouldn't mangle with politics.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 


Yet still no denial of the incontrovertible facts which I put forward.

Interesting...


Still, enjoy your 1950's Ron Paul fantasy, because - I can assure you - that the USA is changing so drastically that, in the next 20 years or so, half of your citizens won't even know - or, more pertinently, care - who George Washington was.

I'm lovin' it.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by The_Zomar
Resort to insults when you have no facts to back up your statements. Classic approach of someone whom shouldn't mangle with politics.


What insults ?

It's well documented that Ron gets a lot of his votes from the ''Montana militiamen'' types, in addition to the ex-''Southern Democrat'' and ''American History X'' types.

Still, there's no denouncement of golden boy's (or should that be ''golden grandpa's'' ?) views on the Civil Rights Act, and his tacit support of returning the US to a haven of bitter segregation.

edit on 28-4-2012 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by The_Zomar
Resort to insults when you have no facts to back up your statements. Classic approach of someone whom shouldn't mangle with politics.


What insults ?

It's well documented that Ron gets a lot of his votes from the ''Montana militiamen'' types, in addition to the ex-''Southern Democrat'' and ''American History X'' types.

Still, there's no denouncement of golden boy's (or should that be ''golden grandpa's'' ?) views on the Civil Rights Act, and his tacit support of returning the US to a haven of bitter segregation.

edit on 28-4-2012 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)


That's one of the most ignorant things I've seen someone post on here in a while.
edit on 28-4-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
I'm as likely to clinch the republican nomination on may 8th as Ron Paul.

There's so much misinformation about the Missouri delegates alone that I can't believe the delegate count that any RP supporter or his campaign produces.

So frequently they trot out 152 delegates, without mentioning that it's 152 state delegates in a pool of over 2000. That pool of 2000 will select the remaining 25 of Missouri's 52 delegates. 24 were bound and pledged at the congressional district level regional conventions. Despite the campaign's claim that they won 20 out of 40 that day, only 24 were up for grabs. 12 went to Romney, 7 to Santorum, 4 to Paul, and 1 to Gingrich. The 8 belonging to S/G are bound to S/G until released. I can't believe the RP campaign has a firm grasp on this delegate strategy when the campaign chief isn't even aware that only 24 delegates were pledged, not 40, and RP got no where near 20. Or they have a firm grasp and they lie about it. Take your pick I guess.

The congressional district that contained the 152 RP delegates? Yeah it went 2 for Romney 1 for Santorum. None for Paul. These bound congressional district delegates are voted on by the county delegates. If those 152 from St. Charles County weren't successful as a 152 man block at the district level, why is there any expectation that they will be any more successful at the state level, where they are an even smaller fish in a bigger pond?

Missouri is only one state but I have no reason to believe these types of mistakes and misrepresentations aren't happening in others. If you consider he won 152 delegates that don't count, and 20 out of 40 that didn't even exist, maybe you can make it a close race and he'll clinch it may 8.

Then there's the assumption that 100 percent of the Gingrich/Santorum delegates will go to RP when released and propel him to victory. I'll use Santorum since he has the most. Do you really believe that delegates for a very socially conservative, somewhat fiscally liberal candidate will switch over to the most socially liberal and most fiscally conservative? I just don't buy it, they're concerned about two totally different spectrums and have two very different ways of getting there.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 



Being a delegate is a far greater commitment than just casting your vote, you don't have a clue.

Um, no you don't, not when you think the vote is all that matters.
So, should I rub this in your face like 10 more times since your wrong?



The problem here is that once again, Ron Paul supporters think they know better than what the majority of their neighbors voted for.




That's not a problem at all, that's a quality and an advantage because the problem you fail to see is the majority of our neighbors buy into the propaganda which they are spoonfed by the MSM and other puppets, or just ignore reality all together via the many available distractions and have no idea what's really happening while they try to make a living. So yes, I can see Paul supporters knowing better than "the majority of their neighbors."... especially regarding individual liberties and our constitution, which should be two of the most important issues today, and once were.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by RSF77
 


How so ?

Ron has opined previously how he wants certain sections of the Civil Rights Act to be repealed.

This will inevitably lead to a recommencement of segregation in the more asswardback states of the USA.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


And if people are stupid enough to buy what the MSM will try to sell them on that point, then they don't deserve to vote for RP anyway! He clearly disagrees with the property rights portion having NOTHING to do with the Jim Crow laws. What's wrong with wanting to restore FREEDOM, or do you just want to keep racism around forever?



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by RSF77
 


How so ?

Ron has opined previously how he wants certain sections of the Civil Rights Act to be repealed.

This will inevitably lead to a recommencement of segregation in the more asswardback states of the USA.


Look it up yourself, I'm not your personal educator on off-topic propaganda. You are obviously trying to ride the racist train, anyone who knows anything about this knows its establishment propaganda.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by RSF77
 


He's just trying to pull the same old same old racism card that Obama likes to do while he clings on to the presidency.

Here's Crhis Mathews doing the same thing on this very issue. Anyone with a brain can see quite clearly that this has nothing to do with Ron Paul being a racist. PAY ATTENTION before making ridiculous accusations against Paul.

Edit: Remember, Chris Mathews is the same guy who said he got that "tingly feeling" down his leg when Obama won.

edit on 28-4-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Numbers.

It's bullcrap.

Everyone has proof of who the current victor is, and most people even have credible citations.

The ONLY thing I know at this point is the majority of voters seem to be in favor of Ron Paul, with only small special-interest group backing the other candidates in and viable numbers at all. Now, I'm not sure if Ron Paul is winning in the delegate count or not, but it doesn't really matter, as we all know how much the popular vote really matters. (Bush vs. Gore, anybody?)

That said, I'm still going out of my way to vote for Ron Paul, despite not believing voting holds any sway. Why? Because just in case a difference CAN be made, and popular vote numbers that the public sees are somehow legitimate, I want to be one of those numbers who refused to not have his/her voice muffled.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by RSF77
 


How so ?

Ron has opined previously how he wants certain sections of the Civil Rights Act to be repealed.

This will inevitably lead to a recommencement of segregation in the more asswardback states of the USA.


Look it up yourself, I'm not your personal educator on off-topic propaganda. You are obviously trying to ride the racist train, anyone who knows anything about this knows its establishment propaganda.


I think he's thinking of Rick Santorum.


I'm goin' off the raaaaails on a racist train!!
*Black Sabbath guitar riff*
I'm goin' off the raaaaails on a racist train!!
edit on 28-4-2012 by thegagefather because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-4-2012 by thegagefather because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
I dont know if you guys are really disillusioned or you are trying to get more people hyped up on Paul but you need to come back to reality a bit...

I would like Paul to win as much (well maybe not as much) as you guys and I also believe the msm distorts things, but the facts about delegate counts are facts and I don't think they are just making numbers up to screw with Paul. They don't mention him at all and try to downplay his support, but multiple sources clearly cite Romney is kicking his a$$ in delegates.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 


Yet still no denial of the incontrovertible facts which I put forward.

Interesting...


Still, enjoy your 1950's Ron Paul fantasy, because - I can assure you - that the USA is changing so drastically that, in the next 20 years or so, half of your citizens won't even know - or, more pertinently, care - who George Washington was.

I'm lovin' it.


Facts require citations.

And if you're going to post some now, make sure they're not blogs or MSM articles.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by RSF77
 


How so ?

Ron has opined previously how he wants certain sections of the Civil Rights Act to be repealed.

This will inevitably lead to a recommencement of segregation in the more asswardback states of the USA.


Yes he does your right about him wanting to take certain parts out of the civil rights act out but you are blatantly ignorant to why he want's too. He has stated before that this is because these things are unnecessary and redundant and the constitution already provides them. Most intelligent people understand what it has caused, it has caused a platform on which special interest groups lobby in an attempt to cutoff any social injustice how ever slight or make believe it might be by taking away rights from some,lowering standards for a few, and actually creating social injustice in favor of the special interest groups intentions. The fact that you actually believe we will automatically revert back to segregation days and the only reason we haven't is because of the civil rights act must mean you believe every white person is racist.

Looking at your previous posts I believe I'm correct.When history looks back on these previous decades they will laugh at how blatant some of these civil rights groups attempts at getting an upper hand was and that its main intention was never equality only payback.
edit on 28-4-2012 by digital01anarchy because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join