Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mitt Romney desperate and in panic, spends a million dollars to stop Ron Paul *tricks inside*

page: 7
259
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 5 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Isn't it obvious by now that you have no say in who the GOP candidate will be? How often do you even hear Ron Paul's name in the media. It's been predecided folks, your vote means nothing.




posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
RP is going all the way to the republican convention as a republican. Third party candidates never win nomination. This is because they go “start to finish” as a third party candidate. If he goes all the way to the convention and loses to Romney as a republican candidate, he will than sign on as a third party candidate. RP and all his supporters are not going to roll over and vote for Romney if he wins. Not only will the Republican Party lose a boat load of their base to RP, but RP will also gain the independent voters and most of the Obama voters who will not vote for a republican, but would be will willing to vote for someone else. Most of my liberal friends have told me that they would vote for RP, just as long as he doesn’t stay on as a republican.

If RP was smart, he would let Romney win and then sign on as a third party candidate. Am I the only one who sees the logic in this?



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ToeJamX
Isn't it obvious by now that you have no say in who the GOP candidate will be? How often do you even hear Ron Paul's name in the media. It's been predecided folks, your vote means nothing.


I know,
and it reminds me when my vote does not matter,
it also means,
your or my opinion no longer matters.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by imawlinn
What the hell is the Gop thinking? They are backing the man that lost to the man that lost to Obama? And six pages deep on a Ron Paul thread and outkast hasn't chimed in? Something is not roght.
Give it time. He always manages to sneak in when you least expect it...



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Propulsion
 


I would prefer Ron Paul to win the nomination and not accept the nomination to run third party. That would be news that creates shock waves around the world.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Propulsion
 


I would prefer Ron Paul to win the nomination and not accept the nomination to run third party. That would be news that creates shock waves around the world.

I will vote for RP either way, but don’t you see the logic in RP switching over to a third party candidate?

1. RP would take away all the loyal voters who will not roll over for Romney.
2. He would take most of the independent voters.
3. He would gain all the democrats who will not vote for a republican.

I think he would have a better chance at beating Obama if he switched over at the convention. Don’t you think he would gain a lot more voters if he walked away from the Republican Party?



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
edit on 6-5-2012 by knightsofcydonia because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


We have our convention here in AZ next Saturday, we've gotten a lot of state level Ron Paul delegates elected, myself included. The establishment is already sending emails trying to push for unity behind Romney, and warning of "Libertarian minded activists" trying to push the Libertarian platform, which of course is BS. Ron Paul is a paleo-conservative Republican, not a Libertarian. They're scared, and they should be.
edit on 6-5-2012 by 27jd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Propulsion
 


I was a Republican for 30 years. I will never, EVER vote for another Republican again, I don't care who it is - if he will drop to the level of associating with what the Republicans have become, he simply can't be trusted.

Politically, I'm somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun - I'm so far right I wrap back around to the left. Even if I were still a Republican, I would NOT vote for Romney, because he's as far left as Obama. He's nothing more than a Liberal trying to declare a misleading major.

Paul was an intriguing possibility, but as long as he continues to associate his name with the Republican Party, there's just no telling what else he may stab us in the back with, so if that's the way it goes, I won't be voting for him, either.

Looks like the pickings are going to be slim this time around.

I've just about settled on watching what the various candidates spend on their campaigns, and voting for whoever spends the least, on the theory that there is less corporate money buying him, and that he can run on a shoe string.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by imawlinn
And six pages deep on a Ron Paul thread and outkast hasn't chimed in? Something is not roght.


I know, I'm a little worried...perhaps somebody should file a missing person report...



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   
You can always spot the Romney supporters a mile away...





posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 
Like I said, I think RP would gain a lot more votes against Obama if he switched to a third party. A lot of people don't see that. I'm seeing the....."The only republican who can beat Obama” mentality. That sounds great, but he is going to need every vote he can get to beat Obama…



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Why would you let a simple name deter you? He dislikes what the Republican party has become just as much as you do, and he's made that clear on several occasions. Have you read his letter to Reagan in 1987? He is fighting to regain control of the party and return it to it's origins.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Why would you let a simple name deter you?


Because that "simple name" stands for a party that is no more. They are riding on steam and not much else, having abandoned their philosophy and retained the name in an attempt to fool their base, many of whom have fallen for it, and whom think they are voting (R) when they are voting nothing more than (D)-light.

That by itself bespeaks a level of dishonesty so profound as to be mind boggling.



He dislikes what the Republican party has become just as much as you do, and he's made that clear on several occasions.


No, he doesn't. My level of dislike has gone to the extreme of entirely dissociating with the Party. His has not.



Have you read his letter to Reagan in 1987? He is fighting to regain control of the party and return it to it's origins.


Lost cause. Start fresh. Next new party. The LibCons will never give up control without bloodshed.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Propulsion
reply to post by nenothtu
 
Like I said, I think RP would gain a lot more votes against Obama if he switched to a third party. A lot of people don't see that. I'm seeing the....."The only republican who can beat Obama” mentality. That sounds great, but he is going to need every vote he can get to beat Obama…


I have serious doubts that ANY Republican could beat Obama - there's not enough difference between him and them, and he has the home field advantage.

If Paul were to go third party and divorce himself from the Republicans, I would consider him. If not, I can't. I have to agree with you - if he went third party, even if he had to start another one - he'd stand a far better chance of gaining votes from disenchanted Republicans and Democrats alike, as well as the Independents who are sick to death with the both of them.

Just look at Romney's numbers that got him to where he is... they leave a LOT of pissed-off Republicans who I believe would jump at a viable chance to vote "other than". Add to that the Democrats who are sick of Obama's broken promises, shattered dreams, and spare "change", and there are the makings for a revolution for real, rather than just a slogan.




edit on 2012/5/6 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoonyConservative
Ok so if RP wins the nomination, but doesnt beat Obama... what then?

2nd


The same thing that happens if Romney wins it but doesn't beat Obama... or the same thing that happens if Romney wins it and DOES beat Obama. Either outcome between those two is the same - crash the country into a brick wall, burn it down, and see what rises from the ashes.

I'd vote for Obama before I'd vote for Romney - at least Obama is honest enough to call himself a Democrat, where Romney tries to hide it.

Is Gus Hall still running for the commies? I'd even vote for HIM before I'd vote for Romney, just to watch it all burn in an honest fire.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
Thats the thing, Ron Paul supporters are plugging themselves in in various levels of the GOP from bottom to top.

The party is being reformed from the inside out.

Now we hear of GOP state chairmen and other committee members, even RNC committee members as Ron Paul supporters.

Ron Paul has been able to do something many have not, and he never asked for any of it.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Propulsion
 


I would prefer Ron Paul to win the nomination and not accept the nomination to run third party. That would be news that creates shock waves around the world.
Could you please elaborate...?



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
If Paul were to go third party and divorce himself from the Republicans, I would consider him.


It's amazing to me that a decision can be made like that based off made up boundaries.

Do you like the guy or not? Do his values resinate with you?

Why are we over complicating this?



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by DelMarvel


Oh, give me a break. Now democracy is "mob rule"?


Yes. It has been considered so since the beginning of the United States as a nation.

You sure you really know much about Paul?

In his own words:

[exThe problem is that democracy is not freedom. Democracy is simply majoritarianism, which is inherently incompatible with real freedom. Our founding fathers clearly understood this, as evidenced not only by our republican constitutional system, but also by their writings in the Federalist Papers and elsewhere. James Madison cautioned that under a democratic government, “There is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual.” John Adams argued that democracies merely grant revocable rights to citizens depending on the whims of the masses, while a republic exists to secure and protect pre-existing rights. Yet how many Americans know that the word “democracy” is found neither in the Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence, our very founding documents?


www.lewrockwell.com...

edit on 5-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: ad link


That's the best definition of democracy I've ever seen. It just says what it really is without hiding behind freedom and equity values that aren't really worth for everybody. Barely half of the people. That's just dust thrown at our eyes to me.

Same crap for laws. One does it wrong then no one can do it at all. I'm not really calling this freedom.

Peace





new topics

top topics



 
259
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join