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.

 

Ron Paul has proven that his "movement" is about Ron Paul, not ideas or a future

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Today, Ron Paul did what I always expected him to do – rule out an endorsement of the only libertarian still in the race, Gary Johnson. Up until now, there were a limited number of people who are willing to give money to libertarians, and he doesn’t want to give up those people.

I predict that more rumor mongering will mysteriously appear that Ron Paul secretly has all these delegates in the bag, and “don’t stop believing” and “keep sending in your money.” Honest Ron Paul supporters will end up supporting Gary Johnson with or without his blessing.

The nuts will still send in their checks. As will the racists like Don Black. That’s okay – a fool and his money is soon parted. Paul will get the gold, but don’t expect the idea train to move out of Paul’s station.

Because the Ron Paul Revolution has always been about Ron Paul, never about Revolution.

Take a look at this article for more




posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Ron Paul has ruled out endorsing anyone who has a policies different from his own.. he's strongly spelled that out more than once.. I don't personally have a problem with that.. Just because the guy is Libertarian doesn't mean they agree on all of Ron's key issues that he's passionate about.

This is why Paul, running as a republican, not a libertarian.. won't endorse any other republicans either.
edit on 5/15/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I view endorsement as an over-used thing in modern politics.. when a person running for office bows out, they are EXPECTED to endorse the front runner usually, it tells their supporters to rally behind the one most likely to take down the opponent .. You should only, in my view, endorse the person who matches your ideology because that is what YOUR supporters supported YOU for in the first place.. Paul is pretty unique, so I don't really feel too surprised.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by miniatus
Ron Paul has ruled out endorsing anyone who has a policies different from his own.. he's strongly spelled that out more than once.. I don't personally have a problem with that.. Just because the guy is Libertarian doesn't mean they agree on all of Ron's key issues that he's passionate about.

This is why Paul, running as a republican, not a libertarian.. won't endorse any other republicans either.
edit on 5/15/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)


Considering in 2008 he endorsed Chuck Baldwin of the ironically named Constitution Party, I think Paul might be looser with his endorsements than he states (Not that 2008 LP nominee Bob Barr deserved it, I didn't even vote for him).



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
My guess is Ron Paul has ruled out endorsing another presidential
candidate at this point, as he doesn't intend on ending his presidential campaign.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Why would he endorse someone that he doesn't agree with? Sounds like you want him to be like people that vote for people they don't necessarily agree with.

I think people have lost the sense of what is virtuous, then they'd see that RP should be looked up to, especially in these times where people are increasingly throughing away their identity for some sort of hive thinking.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Maybe he is going to endorse Jerry White.


He has not ruled it out yet.
edit on 15-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
dang....OP,
do you believe in the momentum of any idea?
I'm curious because your open up there was about a 9 on the dogging it scale


I suspect this RON PAUL kind of thinking will never die out, even in the worst of "hits the fan" scenarios
edit on 15-5-2012 by GBP/JPY because: Yahushua is our new King !!

edit on 15-5-2012 by GBP/JPY because: Yahushua is our new King !!

edit on 15-5-2012 by GBP/JPY because: Yahweh is our new king



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by satron
Why would he endorse someone that he doesn't agree with? Sounds like you want him to be like people that vote for people they don't necessarily agree with.

I think people have lost the sense of what is virtuous, then they'd see that RP should be looked up to, especially in these times where people are increasingly throughing away their identity for some sort of hive thinking.


If his goal is to put country first and reverse the course America is on, then telling his followers to abandon the GOP is what he needs to do. Instead now he's making sure things line up for Rand in 2016 and to keep the checks coming into Campaign for Liberty.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
The second paragraph of the linked article states Paul's reasons for not endorsing Johnson.



"Johnson may be the most ideologically similar candidate to Paul but there are major differences between the former New Mexico governor and the longtime Texas congressman. Johnson is far more rooted in modern libertarianism than Paul, who is many ways a candidate of what his biographer, Brian Doherty, calls the “Old Right.” While Johnson is pro gay marriage and pro-drug reform, Paul is still wedded to bugaboos about gold money and combines his laissez-faire economic approach with a streak of social conservatism."


It simply sounds like he refuses to endorse Johnson because he's less socially conservative, and doesn't back the gold standard. Paul's policies are more rooted in the Constitution than they are in modern libertarianism. Though he believes that the states should be free to decide on the social issues, he personally endorses socially conservative policies, which he hopes would one day be policies held to be just by the people, who would seek to make them the law of their states, or even the law of the land, via constitutional amendment.

Also, I'd only ever vote for Johnson if Paul actually endorsed him. If Paul doesn't endorse him, chances are that I'll just go through with my plan to write him in on the ballot, in the event that he doesn't win the Republican nomination.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
 


WTF are you talking about? Why the hell would he endorse someone else while still running for office? That doesn't even make sense. Why do people post acinine BS about Ron Paul all the time? You can't argue his stances so you blow some retarded subject out of proportion?

Also, if you ever cared to understand the Libertarian Party (which I'm a member of) or Ron Paul, you would know the bad history between them.. Paul wouldn't endorse Johnson even if he wasn't running. He'd endorse the CONSTITIONALIST candidate, like he did in 2008. Because the Libertarian Party and Paul do not get along.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
 


WTF are you talking about? Why the hell would he endorse someone else while still running for office?


The "truth telling" media said he dropped out. Really, people will believe anything they see or hear on television.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
 


What makes you think that Paul supporters would vote for Gary Johnson just because of Paul's endorsement? For me this flawed logic. I like Gary Johnson, but not for President. No matter what, he still wouldnt get my vote.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
uhhh Ron Paul has a better chance of winning than Gary



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
No issues with Gary Johnson and if Ron Paul isn't on the ballet come November, I may cast my vote for him.

We're not one trick pony's here -- we can support multiple candidates with similar ideals.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
 


Why would he endorse another candidate when he is still in the race?

Your argument makes no sense.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Johnson was easily Ron Paul's most credible supporter early on in his campaign, and arguable if Johnson didn't endorse Paul he would've never gotten enough steam to even make the debates back in 2008. Now that Paul has outright admitted he can't get the Republican nomination, is it too much to repay the favor?

But hey, I guess he is more concerned with keeping the checks going into Campaign for Liberty than someone who will still be campaigning for liberty.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
wow this thread is awefully short compared to all the other RP threads

Yes you are right OP it's always been about RP



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
I love how all you Ron Paul bashers that ain't paid shills act like there is actually a better alternative than Ron Paul for the US. You are hating on the man who are trying to free you from fascist suppression, what is it that you want to achieve by this?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join