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.

 

More bad news Paul supporters: Ron Paul polling low in his home state of Texas

page: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I wonder who they polled to get those numbers. They probably polled Romney's HQ and still found that Ron Paul gets 9%


I'm voting Paul. Count all the paul supporters in this thread compared to Romney supporters.

We win here.




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   


Someone said anything about stopping an election? Where?

Do you honestly believe this garbage that you type, or do you just think that if you type nonsense and empty accusations someone reading it might believe you?


Well...I cannot press criminal charges. You keep claiming that you aren't advocating any sort of civil action. You tell me...what sort of "legal action" ARE you speaking about? An injunction to cease and desist the electoral process until an investigation can be concluded is about the only tool remaining...and even that is obtained in civil court. I figured I would just cut you some slack on splitting hairs between an injunction and a plain old civil suit.

So...tell me Counsel...what do you advise?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Dont expect a whole lot of responses on this....there is a definite pattern for RP followers to simply ignore anything that challenges them on the subject.


Exactly.

These people can't handle any facts about Paul that are negative.

"He can't be losing!! He's God!!"

No, kiddies. He's just a politician who won't be the next President.

Get over it.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by The_Zomar
I wonder who they polled to get those numbers. They probably polled Romney's HQ and still found that Ron Paul gets 9%


I'm voting Paul. Count all the paul supporters in this thread compared to Romney supporters.

We win here.



Of course you win here. Paul supporters win the internet. Romney supporters win mansions and indoor swimming pools.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Why cant you respond without personal attacks? You do it in nearly every post....

no one said anything about civil damages. If you have evidence that proves that RP is being defrauded, present it to a constitutional lawyer. It would be in your best interests, as it would support that which you assert-that RP is doing better than is being let on.

So what is the downside? Oh, right...it would be laughed out of court.

I dont need to compose one, as I am not the one claiming it is rampant. I cant compose a complaint about something that I am calling BS on. Logic....its your friend.


There are no personal attacks here. Have I called you any names or slandered your character at all? No. I have simply observed and pointed out that you are utterly ignorant and would do well to read a book of some sort....a fact which you continue re-proving again and again.

For example:

1. Finding a "constitutional lawyer" simply means that you will find a lawyer. All lawyers are constitutional lawyers given that it's the supreme law of the land, all attorneys are bound by it. This is probably the reason why law schools and bar exams are typically so concerned about the matter.

2. You certainly DO need to compose a Summons & Complaint for the legal action you are referencing, given that the legal mechanisms which you are referring to are solely your invention. Any attorney I found, "constitutional" or otherwise, (LOL) would likely not be privy to this entirely new form litigation which you willed into existence from the aether.

3. "No one said anything about civil damages"- Yes...you did...you are simply too uneducated to REALIZE that you did. What other remedy to allegations of election fraud are you aware of other than criminal charges and civil damages? Another one of your inventions? I've already stated numerous times that I am not a District Attorney or Federal Prosecutor. Perhaps I should have specified that I am not Attorney General of any of our 50 states either.

4. "..it would be laughed out of court"- At least we agree on something. I really can't imagine any other response when a guy files a civil suit for allegations of election fraud, in a non-affected district, for an election still in progress.

In fact...I can pretty easily imagine the judge would laugh me, toss the case out, and advise to me to read a book of some sort. Seriously...any kind of book at all.



At least your calling him ignorant and uneducated wasn't like name calling! LOL
Try making your point with facts rather than resorting to emotional responses.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   
I'm starting to get worried about Paulbots getting to hopefull that he'll win. It's gotten to the point now that Ron Paul losing the repub nom. could cause mass suicides amongst the Paulbots. It's starting to get pretty scary on these boards.



edit on Mon May 14 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I bet you that Ron Paul will rock Texas. Time will tell! You never count your chickens before they hatch.

Our commitment to Dr. Paul and America is unwavering!

Ron Paul 2012!

edit on 12-5-2012 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
--Ron Paul is not doing well in the polls listed in the OP.
--Those same polls are not current.
--Polls are not an accurate representation of what is happening, even when they ARE current, and thus, even if they WERE current, it wouldn't really mean much, except for the fact that it gives those who are anti-Ron Paul a way to say "Ron Paul is not doing well." in order to stir up the more fervent Ron Paul supporters, knowing all the while that it absolutely WILL stir them up, and as a result give people their chance to go "Oh, here come the crazy Ron Paul supporters again!" like it was a pre-orchestrated plan to call them out in order to point fingers.

That's what I see when I look at polls. If a poll is against someone, the only thing it's good for is being used as fuel to stir up the opposition.

Cheers



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by whywhynot

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Why cant you respond without personal attacks? You do it in nearly every post....

no one said anything about civil damages. If you have evidence that proves that RP is being defrauded, present it to a constitutional lawyer. It would be in your best interests, as it would support that which you assert-that RP is doing better than is being let on.

So what is the downside? Oh, right...it would be laughed out of court.

I dont need to compose one, as I am not the one claiming it is rampant. I cant compose a complaint about something that I am calling BS on. Logic....its your friend.


There are no personal attacks here. Have I called you any names or slandered your character at all? No. I have simply observed and pointed out that you are utterly ignorant and would do well to read a book of some sort....a fact which you continue re-proving again and again.

For example:

1. Finding a "constitutional lawyer" simply means that you will find a lawyer. All lawyers are constitutional lawyers given that it's the supreme law of the land, all attorneys are bound by it. This is probably the reason why law schools and bar exams are typically so concerned about the matter.

2. You certainly DO need to compose a Summons & Complaint for the legal action you are referencing, given that the legal mechanisms which you are referring to are solely your invention. Any attorney I found, "constitutional" or otherwise, (LOL) would likely not be privy to this entirely new form litigation which you willed into existence from the aether.

3. "No one said anything about civil damages"- Yes...you did...you are simply too uneducated to REALIZE that you did. What other remedy to allegations of election fraud are you aware of other than criminal charges and civil damages? Another one of your inventions? I've already stated numerous times that I am not a District Attorney or Federal Prosecutor. Perhaps I should have specified that I am not Attorney General of any of our 50 states either.

4. "..it would be laughed out of court"- At least we agree on something. I really can't imagine any other response when a guy files a civil suit for allegations of election fraud, in a non-affected district, for an election still in progress.

In fact...I can pretty easily imagine the judge would laugh me, toss the case out, and advise to me to read a book of some sort. Seriously...any kind of book at all.



At least your calling him ignorant and uneducated wasn't like name calling! LOL
Try making your point with facts rather than resorting to emotional responses.



"ignorant" and "uneducated" are simply the adjectives which properly describe his understandings of how the law works. It's not mean or derogatory...it's just accurate. He's ranting and chastising people to "take legal action" without understanding anything at all about the law.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Three words: Electronic voting machines



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 




1)my bad grammar? Here, so you can go downstairs and tell your parents you learned something today:
education-portal.com...
And it's not even a school day!

2)so basically you are saying that, in your mind, the only way to pursue legal action on something is to A)file a suit yourself or B)file a civil suit? Interesting.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Same challenge as always: please quote where I have "ranted" or "chastized". empty accusations get you nowhere.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Speaking of bad news.......

Looks like Romney supporters just got some from Oklahoma.





posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Ron Paul fans remind me of the cult following and worship that Kim Jong-Il received in North Korea.

Only a matter of time before they stop using "Dr. Paul" and they start using "The Dear Leader"

Ron Paul can do no wrong! He's the savior of humanity!



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Ron Paul fans remind me of the cult following and worship that Kim Jong-Il received in North Korea.

Only a matter of time before they stop using "Dr. Paul" and they start using "The Dear Leader"

Ron Paul can do no wrong! He's the savior of humanity!


Come on, its not like they resemble a cult or something. I researched it:

Cults have unquestioning loyalty to their leader, no criticism is allowed. We all know that isnt the case with RP supporters.
edit on 12-5-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
Speaking of bad news.......

Looks like Romney supporters just got some from Oklahoma.







posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   



1)my bad grammar? Here, so you can go downstairs and tell your parents you learned something today:
education-portal.com...
And it's not even a school day!

This isn't even coherent.


2)so basically you are saying that, in your mind, the only way to pursue legal action on something is to A)file a suit yourself or B)file a civil suit? Interesting.


No...not all. "Basically what I'm saying" is exactly what I've already said. Now, please Counselor...answer the question like a big boy. What sort of vaguely defined "legal action" do you advise?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder



1)my bad grammar? Here, so you can go downstairs and tell your parents you learned something today:
education-portal.com...
And it's not even a school day!

This isn't even coherent.


2)so basically you are saying that, in your mind, the only way to pursue legal action on something is to A)file a suit yourself or B)file a civil suit? Interesting.


No...not all. "Basically what I'm saying" is exactly what I've already said. Now, please Counselor...answer the question like a big boy. What sort of vaguely defined "legal action" do you advise?


ITs not coherent that "constitutional lawyer" is a perfectly recognized TYPE of lawyer, complete with its own EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS?

Well, if you cant get that, Id say we are done here. Its not worth trying to debate someone who is all about personal attacks, ad homs and comments about others intelligence when they cannot simply admit they are wrong about something as trivial as this.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 




"ignorant" and "uneducated" are simply the adjectives which properly describe his understandings of how the law works. It's not mean or derogatory...it's just accurate. He's ranting and chastising people to "take legal action" without understanding anything at all about the law.



You have got to be kidding me, right? Are you really so ignorant that you believe what you are saying? I am rolling on the floor LOL




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
If only Austin represented the whole state of Texas.

Unfortunately the rest of Texas is so Neo Con Right Wing they see Ron Paul as no less than the antithesis to the Republican Party.

If they only knew how wrong they are.
edit on 12-5-2012 by sdocpublishing because: Spelling and grammer



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join