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.

 

Even the MSNBC Pundits admit Republicans irrelevant without Ron Paul factor.

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   
After yesterday's devastating loss for Republicans, many blamed Romney's flip flopping, many blamed the party for letting him be chosen, many blamed typical social conservatism, MANY blamed Ron Paul and the Libertarian wing of the GOP.

Now we're hearing the same thing from the left.



Chris Matthews went on a tirade as well bashing third party choices, trying to fear-monger people into voting ONLY for the two party duopoly. Because if you don't conform, you are an "idiot" and...."hoity toity"??? uh.....




Well ain't that a B!

The GOP is changing from within and the 2012 election shows it to be true.
edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


The classic adage applies here in doubles. First the republican party shot itself in the foot by abandoning the 2010 signs of victory established by basic Tea Party principles - then they shot themselves in the other foot by doing the very same thing to Ron Paul. The treatment of him and his principled libertarian political ethics was beyond shameful as they threw him ignominiously under the train.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Well as soon as they stop picking the guy that's "best for business" (Romney) and start picking the guy that was the best candidate ( Ron Paul) they will start seeing a vast improvement in their numbers.

The good doctor killed in the debates, and I mean it, he mopped the floor with the others, and yet they did everything possible to silence him, and minimize his message. Including dismissing him outright at every turn, and flat out cheating at the convention.

I think all the delegates should have voted for him anyways, and dumped Romney where he belonged, the same place he went in 08, the bottom of the stack.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Ron paul needs to go to a nursing home.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Ron Paul is irrelevant. At best he would get a little more votes than Gary Johnson.
edit on 8-11-2012 by hououinkyouma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by hououinkyouma
Ron Paul is irrelevant. At best he would get a little more votes than Gary Johnson.
edit on 8-11-2012 by hououinkyouma because: (no reason given)


Sorry 'bro' Ron Paul polled 18-21% NATIONALLY with Romney and Obama in the mix.

He often tied with Obama in a one on one match up and beat Obama several times in national match ups when Romney couldn't.

Let's just stop with all the 'making things up' nonsense please.

If you want to make statements like that, back it up. Just because the thought came to you in bed or you heard someone else say it, doesn't make it true.



edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
Ron paul needs to go to a nursing home.


Why? because of his age? I do recall him challenging the other 2012 GOP candidates to a 20 mile bike ride in Texas heat. Nobody took him up on that offer.

Maybe Ron Paul can bike his way to the nursing home, then do an hour long unscripted stump speech on civil liberties, free markets, the Constitution, states rights, and integrity, to his peers in wheel chairs. Then bike home in time for dinner with his wife of 50+ years.


edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
It is so cute to see the Ron Paul trolls back on the job.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


Paul is irrelavent now, because he will be far too old in 2016.

BUT, the Ron Paul, Libertarian, Constitutional ideology is the only thing that can save the Republican Party, or start a new party. Romney did lose because of his flip-flopping. His base was not energized, his key platform points were not solid. He flipped back and forth on abortion, he flipped back and forth on repealing Obamacare, even his economic plan seemed like it was never gonna happen, and would probably get stripped down before it ever saw the light of day.

We need someone like Paul, who has strong convictions, and strong opinions, and is unwavering in their ideals. Even if I don't agree with them 100%, I will respect their convictions. I don't agree with Paul on the selling off Federal Lands and trusting the National Parks system in the hands of private investors.

Still, the only way the GOP survives, is if it realizes people are looking for leadership, not someone that follows popular opinion. The biggest criticism of Obama was his weak style the first 2 years. He has somewhat corrected that in the last 2 years, and it has helped. The GOP would have crushed him in 2010, but by 2012 his on-the-job learning has benefitted him and turned him into an actual leader. The GOP needed someone strong, resolute, decisive, and with real ideas that were not up for compromise. The GOP failed, that is all there is to it. It isn't Ron Paul's fault, Obama was just a better candidate than Romney.

Given a choice between only those 2 men, I would choose Obama over Romney, even though I am a Tea Partier, registered Republican, and Ron Paul Libertarian fan, but I won't vote for a limp sock, even if it is all polished up and well-funded.

I would have voted for Huntsman, Cain, Huckabee, Paul, Guilianni, but no way I was voting for Santorum, Bachmann, Gingrich, or Romney. Religious right does not equal Conservatism, and weak convictions and hypocrisy are not good qualities in a leader. Mistakes are fine. Disagreeing in certain areas is fine, but flipping what you stand for to meet the polls is not fine.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   
The problem wasn't Romney, well at least not by any conventional measure. The country has changed socially and now the Republicans are not only becoming socially backwards they are becoming a social embarrassment. It is time to wake up and realize more and more Americans are becoming pro-choice. It is time to wake up and realize most Americans feel it is okay to be gay. It is time to realize they do not want God shoved down their throat. It is time to realize that more of them know either directly or indirectly people that are here illegally like them and do not want to see them deported.

Fiscal conservatism can win, I won't lie about it it can. But the people want it directed in the correct direction. And most people want the cuts to start at the Pentagon. And they don't want those cuts to be to veteran benefits and services either. When the GOP starts realizing these truths, they will become relevant again. Right now in Republicanland they are looking at everything but the things that are really wrong with the party. Now they are facing a sure but slow death started by Reagan when he brought the "moral majority" into the fold to win. Come to think of it why the hell do they idolize this man again? He gutted the country's future for short term gains and gutted his own party for short term gains.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
Ron paul needs to go to a nursing home.


Ron Paul is nowhere near in need of elderly care, but in his older more fatherly years he certainly has done well in preparing his son to carry on with the banner of liberty - besides that, the Constitutional concerns that Ron Paul and his son Rand espouse are universal and transcend incidentals such as age to even go well beyond the persons themselves - his son Rand Paul included.

The American people were robbed of an excellent presidential candidate by the PTB.....

EDIT.......

Originally posted by darkhorserider
Paul is irrelavent now, because he will be far too old in 2016.
BUT, the Ron Paul, Libertarian, Constitutional ideology is the only thing that can save the Republican Party, or start a new party.


Not only is Ron Paul not irrelevant because of his advancing years...............His morally responsible Constitutional ethics are what can - and hopefully one day will save - not just the republican party, but the Republic itself, which when compared to "parties" (elephants and donkeys) pales in significance - The Republic is what is in peril and in need of saving.

GOP in Deep Trouble, Ron Paul Looking Good
edit on 8-11-2012 by gmonundercover because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Here's what I see Ron Paul. He has this huge following with the people that are liberatarians, red necks, freedom lovers, Alex Jones lovers etc etc. So he knows he can't win, maybe because he's not part of the establishment who runs things, so instead he uses his position as his celebraty status to milk it for all it's worth, from books, speaking engagements, appearances, interviews etc etc. Each one he makes money on so it's like become his cash cow. Not that a blame him but if it's that big of a lost cause then why not fin a different profession.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
Here's what I see Ron Paul. He has this huge following with the people that are liberatarians, red necks, freedom lovers, Alex Jones lovers etc etc. So he knows he can't win, maybe because he's not part of the establishment who runs things, so instead he uses his position as his celebraty status to milk it for all it's worth, from books, speaking engagements, appearances, interviews etc etc. Each one he makes money on so it's like become his cash cow. Not that a blame him but if it's that big of a lost cause then why not fin a different profession.


Its not about money, SILLY.

Ron Paul invested in gold and gold mining stocks since the SEVENTIES (70s) He doesn't NEED money and is likely to be worth MILLIONS because he believed in gold and knew that the federal reserve had horrible monetary politices, he writes books because he wants to spread ideas and doesn't even bother to put his face on the cover like all the other EGO-MANIAC politicians do (selfless, ANYBODY?).

He speaks to large crowds of people because THEY want to hear the message from the messenger.

Have you even seen or heard a Ron Paul speech before?
-He NEVER ONCE asked for a vote while he was running for president.
-He doesn't brag that he returns congressional money to the U.S. Treasury.
-He doesn't brag that he personally drives to the airport with his grand daughter to greet combat soldiers that come home.
-He doesn't brag that he opens car doors for college journalists that shadow his presidential campaign asking him questions.
-He doesn't brag that he eats value meals on the campaign trail to save money and makes the campaign count every dollar while the national FEC requirement is every twenty five dollars.

Which Ron Paul are YOU talking about? because that doesn't sound like the Ron Paul I already know.

You want to come on ATS and pretend like you know something about somebody that you either made up or heard from an unreliable source? Go for it, but don't be surprised when the truth comes back to bite you in the ass.


Maybe you need to go to a nursing home, and stay there.




edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Ron Paul invested in gold and gold mining stocks since the SEVENTIES (70s)



edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


And in case you people out there were wondering why Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, you now know. That is all.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Eh, devastating? Hardly. We can do better than Romney. Can the Democrats do better than Obama? They better have a plan because minus 9 million people is a pretty big deal. He didn't even get what Bush got in 2004. Time to regroup? Yea. Would outreach be helpful? Hell yea, I want a landslide after 8 years of Obama. But is there a new majority in town? Pfft. Don't be dumb.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Ron Paul invested in gold and gold mining stocks since the SEVENTIES (70s)



edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


And in case you people out there were wondering why Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, you now know. That is all.


Well the best part is, even if a gold standard or a mixed commodities backed currency is achieved, he still won't sell.

Also, he doesn't need there to be a gold standard for his gold investments to be worth something, the federal reserve is single handedly handing him his investment with their policies yet he's trying to fight them.

Actions speak louder than words. Much, much louder.
edit on 8-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Agreed, if anything the fact that he's investing in it shows that he believes what he's saying. He's apparently judged very correctly the relationship between gold and the rest of the economy...perhaps we should assume he knows about other stuff too.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Eh, devastating? Hardly. We can do better than Romney. Can the Democrats do better than Obama? They better have a plan because minus 9 million people is a pretty big deal. He didn't even get what Bush got in 2004. Time to regroup? Yea. Would outreach be helpful? Hell yea, I want a landslide after 8 years of Obama. But is there a new majority in town? Pfft. Don't be dumb.


Sure Romney may not look devastated on the surface but future meetings with his campaign investors (notice how I didn't say donors haha) are going to be extremely awkward.

303-206 is a pretty bad loss...he couldn't even beat Obama when Obama received 10M less votes than he did in 08.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Yea, it's not a good loss. But the point remains, the GOP can do a heck of a lot better than Romney - who I liked alot - but who had trouble even winning his primaries. Can the Dems do better than Obama? Ask yourself that. Because if Obama can't match Obama, who will? Apparently the narrative this year is "Republican Party Doomed forever." But I find that strange. We have the first President in modern history to receive an anti-mandate. His supporters are obviously right to be happy that he won. But to rest on some notion that you're now the permanent majority because of 'demographics'? Be my guest DNC, by all means. How a 9 million gap can be ignored when growing your coalition has been the norm for every President since Eisenhower (and probably before)? Beyond me. But hey, not my party. My party is busy reflecting right now.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Rob Paul is a relic from the era of "Farra and Flip, Joan Fonda and Joe Namath". He needs to be turned into hamburger meat and fed back into the system.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join