Here's some ammo for anyone who claims Ron Paul and the Libertarians threw the General Election

page: 1
7

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   


In light of the Romney loss, some people are really mad at Ron Paul supporters and Libertarians. But really, we wonder what goes on in the mind of a person who can vote for such an unprincipled man like Romney, or Obama – since after all – they’re practically the same candidate. Not to mention, Romney has actually signed into law assault weapon bans, and the health care law when he was a governor of Massachusetts. And in light of this misguided anger, we’d like to provide you some links and images to share freely. fire at will.





GOP Loses election and blames Ron Paul Supporters and Libertarians




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ninepointfive
 


-Assault weapons..I couldn't care less. Hunting stuff though, don't touch it.
-Forgery what the heck?!?!
-I would of stuffed that ladies papers down my pants and make sure I got a couple of pubes with it and give it back.
-Assault!!
-Militarized Police state at it's best.

-Question? What did Heford do for this to happen. They didn't just tackle him or what ever happen just for kicks.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
If Romney couldn't win without the liberatarian vote, then he couldn't win, bottom line. No one is guaranteed a vote. It could have easily gone the other way, lets say if Romney had spent his last day campaigning, scratch that, visiting the hurricane stricken east coast that last day instead of in PA. I heard lots of people voted for Obama because he was nice to the east coasters the few days before the election.

Maybe they should equally blame Rosanne Barr too while their at it.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ninepointfive
 

Romney was supposed to lose. The shadows do not want change. Remember? Two sides of the same bird... now a very visible raven. Death is upon us.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirjunlegun
reply to post by ninepointfive
 

Romney was supposed to lose. The shadows do not want change. Remember? Two sides of the same bird... now a very visible raven. Death is upon us.


Yes, this too, of course. I played the game, voted GJ, but it is a game certainly.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirjunlegun
reply to post by ninepointfive
 

Romney was supposed to lose. The shadows do not want change. Remember? Two sides of the same bird... now a very visible raven. Death is upon us.


I think you may have something here. I felt the GOP was supposed to lose in 08 as well so the power elite could swing everything Progressive and bring in the One World Totalitarian govt without struggle from the US.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by sirjunlegun
reply to post by ninepointfive
 

Romney was supposed to lose. The shadows do not want change. Remember? Two sides of the same bird... now a very visible raven. Death is upon us.


I think you may have something here. I felt the GOP was supposed to lose in 08 as well so the power elite could swing everything Progressive and bring in the One World Totalitarian govt without struggle from the US.


I said this same thing when they were trying to groom Rick Perry for the part.

The GOP candidate had two purposes. Keep Ron Paul out. Lose to Obama.

Ron Paul was the only GOP candidate who even had a slim chance of beating Obama.
If, somehow, Dr. Paul had become the GOP candidate, the gloves would have come off
and the election would have been a mud wrestle--with TPTB doing all the slinging in one
direction only....



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ninepointfive
 


I love when the two party system blames a loss on the third party, as if third party voters would have voted for their platform and there is no way they would have voted for the guy they lost against anyway....completely retarded.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ninepointfive
 


I openly admit to being one of "those" that the republicans wanna point to and blame, I didn't vote, as I would rather urinate razor blades than vote for Obama, and would sooner do that followed by lemon juice than vote for Romney.

They have only themselves to blame, it was obvious since the very first debate that Paul had a large and loyal backing, all they had to do was give us a candidate worth voting for, and we would have gladly done so. They gave us their "yes man" and we rejected him outright on principle.

If they would stop only allowing people that will float their fail agenda, and instead give us the cndidate we all wanted, things would have been different.

Let them complain, I will laugh in their faces, and stand proudly defiant, I will not be bullied into choosing which kneecap they get to break, I will spit on their attempts, and laugh off their requisite failure, as it is theirs not mine.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I'm all for firearms and that but an Assault Weapon ? only reason you would need one is if you intend to kill other Humans right ? they aren't a typical Hunter/target weapon are they ? I shoot competition Pistol and if some dick rolled up with a non-target style firearm it would take only a few shoots out of it before they would put it back in its box never to bring it out again on the range.

Ive seen this time and time again with members buying "TV" guns, they look cool for about 30 seconds until they realize it "Don't Shoot Straight" so they park it up to save further embarrassment. To use the argument that its my "Right" to buy what ever I want well that's true but we all know their are total idiots out there that get behind the trigger and do stupid things.

Yeah I don't want Assault Weapons issued to the morons out there in the public just because "Its Their Right", if one got in the hands of just one of these total idiots innocent lives in big numbers can be at risk. Whereas with smaller capacity less damaging weapons you have less chance of mass casualty and a better chance of survival if hit by target type rounds instead of the military ones.

If you think its your "Goddamned Right" to own one then I would posture that its probably people with this attitude that are the ones that should be kept from them.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
if there are any other items which were overlooked, feel free to post the information here.

also, the assault weapon thing is for the GOP voters who voted for Romney and somehow thought he was an honest candidate. The second amendment isn't for hunting either - unless you consider it open tyrant season.

There are a lot of people just looking to cast aside blame for the loss. Ron Paul was about as close to the GOP platform as you get, but there's some kind of wild cognitive dissonance going here.

this is a good example starting at three minutes:

www.youtube.com...
edit on 8-11-2012 by ninepointfive because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mazzroth
 


Your premise would hold weight, if the reason we are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms were target practice and hunting, neither of these were the reason though were they? We are guaranteed this right, so we can always fight off any government that attempts to overthrough the rights of the people to rule themselves, you know to fight off the dictator wannabes.

If you have the best target pistol on earth, and I have any AR-15 on earth, your worm food at 250 meters every time. The people using pistols and regular arms, cannot fight back against "army guns". It is a fact, we should be able to keep and carry any weapon carried by any law enforcement agancy inside the US.

If they were limited to only pistols and such, I would agree, they are not, so it is only right that we are not.

Make no mistake, the police state is coming, it inches closer by the day, we have a right to defend ourselves from it on equal footing with equal arms.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by mazzroth
I'm all for firearms and that but an Assault Weapon ? only reason you would need one is if you intend to kill other Humans right ? they aren't a typical Hunter/target weapon are they ? I shoot competition Pistol and if some dick rolled up with a non-target style firearm it would take only a few shoots out of it before they would put it back in its box never to bring it out again on the range.

Ive seen this time and time again with members buying "TV" guns, they look cool for about 30 seconds until they realize it "Don't Shoot Straight" so they park it up to save further embarrassment. To use the argument that its my "Right" to buy what ever I want well that's true but we all know their are total idiots out there that get behind the trigger and do stupid things.

Yeah I don't want Assault Weapons issued to the morons out there in the public just because "Its Their Right", if one got in the hands of just one of these total idiots innocent lives in big numbers can be at risk. Whereas with smaller capacity less damaging weapons you have less chance of mass casualty and a better chance of survival if hit by target type rounds instead of the military ones.

If you think its your "Goddamned Right" to own one then I would posture that its probably people with this attitude that are the ones that should be kept from them.


You are the reason for the "assault weapons" ban. Go back to pistol shooting, as you obviously have zero clue about rifles.

There is functionally zero difference between a Browning BAR chambered in .308 and an Armalite AR-10 chambered in .308. As a matter of fact, the Browning is likely more accurate. Please stop fanning the flames of ignorance. Especially if you think your competition pistol is safe from Dianne Feinstein. Because it isn't.

OP: Romney stole the Republican nomination, and the Republican Party helped him do it. They claim to be different than the Democrats, but the road they take leads to the same place: theft of liberty. It won't change until the stranglehold is broken, and as long as corporations have power in D.C., things won't change.

/TOA
edit on 13-11-2012 by The Old American because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

I think you may have something here. I felt the GOP was supposed to lose in 08 as well so the power elite could swing everything Progressive and bring in the One World Totalitarian govt without struggle from the US.


Really? If that was the case, in '08 the GOP would have won. They are the ones who are behind the Corporate destruction of the Earth. Ole St Ronnie started it.

Don't believe me, look at their record w/o left vs. right mindset.

Derek



posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Dr Ron Paul is Sir Ian McKellen
As "Dr Ron Paul" played 1988 candidate, like Obama (the first christian Hussein) 20 years later entering the stage out of the blue and without footage except from the previous couple of years, what was the first gay sir doing, about 7 years after the role of "Dr Ron Paul" was created, in the early 1980s?
www.christianforums.com...
===
xdisciple.blogspot.ca...



posted on Mar, 8 2013 @ 07:58 AM
link   
The GOP threw the election by not electing Paul as their candidate.





top topics
 
7

log in

join