Ron Paul = DISAPPOINTMENT!

Ya, don't get mad at the Republican Party's leadership, or Romney, for cheating Ron Paul out of the Rep. nomination. Paul has been around long enough to know that he had no chance of winning 3rd party. He ran on the Rep. ticket because he knew that he was going to need mainstream support, since so many people did not know about him. There are a lot of Paul followers, but not enough to secure him a 3rd party win. It was impossible, so why should he run?

If you have no chance of winning, why put yourself through the hassle? I understand what you are saying about funding, but what party is he trying to get funding for? And saying that Paul is the same as other politicians is an insult, considering he has what is probably the best track record and voting history in terms of consistency and actually believing in what he is doing. That is hard to find in politics, with all of the lobbying and all, and other pressure and temptations. He is a great man, and I think his decision was partly made from pride. He literally got cheated on the NATIONAL stage, and no one seemed to mind.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
He is a great man, and I think his decision was partly made from pride. He literally got cheated on the NATIONAL stage, and no one seemed to mind.

That's so true. It's a sad commentary about what our country has become. Our leaders are the lowest of the low. It's hard to find an honest man at any level of leadership. The MSM is total propaganda. TPTB have an easy time keeping us in the dark, and divided. We the people are just along for the ride now, and you better hold on, because I think it's going to be a bumpy one.

He is a great man,

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


No, he ain't! Great men would remember what is written in their newsletters, and they would also take responsibility for it. It is alarming what passes for "greatness" these days ...

reply to post by TheTimeIsNow


really!?!?....just stop it right now!!! i cant believe people sometimes. what are you trying to do? he was the most believable candidate ive ever seen and just because your upset with the out come does not mean you have to be so extreme. and you say.... "my support for you is near its end"...thats sad. who are you going to support then? he was the best weve had in a long time. maybe...just maybe im wrong, maybe, but really who knows? but i dont think i am!

reply to post by cavalryscout


Hopefully that's sarcasm but with how gullible the right is I can't doubt anything now.

Not to rehash umpteen threads on the topic, but the Republican leadership absolutely screwed him... In Washington State, I attended my local caucus and we, the RP supporters were disenfranchised by our local Republican precinct leaders. We had the numbers, but they kept changing the rules until they had the candidate they wanted.

If the Republicans really wanted to take the presidency in 2012, they would have gone with RP. He appeals to more independents and fence sitting Repub/Dems than people like Romnuts or Santorum... You can always count on the vast majority or either party to just vote party line. Since there is a near 50/50 split in the country, those independents and fence sitters would have totally pushed him over into the presidency.

I came of voting age when Reagan was running... While I don't agree with everything he did, during his presidency it became cool to be a United States Citizen. We could be proud of our country, again... It took me Bush Sr's entire first term to wise up to the fact that all Republicans weren't the same and that his policies didn't represent my beliefs in any way shape or form.

Being an idealist, I voted Perot thinking his approach, although not nearly as charismatic as a Reagan, was what America needed after a disastrous Bush Sr. presidency.

Damn my naive idealism!

However, something good came of it... The Republican leadership actually paid attention to the fact that many party members jumped ship and voila - we had the "Contract with America" which resulted in a budget surplus (read this as NO DEFICIT - gasp!!! It really is possible) due to the Republican control over the House of Representatives. Clinton's hands were tied. He gets credit for it, but it wouldn't have existed without them holding the line.

How soon the Republican leadership forgot... and so here we are - about 50% of the populace got stuck with a president they didn't want for a broad variety of reasons.

Republican party leadership are idiots!!! I will not support the Republican party going forward - UNLESS they return to conservative values. Actually maybe not even then... Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me...

As for Ron Paul running as a 3rd party candidate, that may have been a nice consolation for those of us who are fairly hard core RP supporters, but it ultimately would NOT have proven anything. It is doubtful that 5% of the population would have voted for him. Perot was more popular and he barely garnered that much.

So let's not be naive about RP and his culpability in where we stand as a nation... He is but one man.

If you want to be mad or disappointed - look to the easily deceived sheep from both sides of the political spectrum who can't be bothered with becoming educated about the candidates and the issues at hand...

Long diatribe... Sorry.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by TheTimeIsNow
Also even with Pauls own perspective his not running is still a dissapointment

Well, he did run. Saying he did not run is a big misrepresentation. He did run and he failed to secure the Party Nomination.

While I think I understand your sentiment, your wording caused me to cringe. It's not that he failed - the party and MSM stole it from him. I know we both agree - He was legit. End of story.

Originally posted by zatara
Me, as an outsider, not american citizen, I see it and always considered RP part of the theatre you call presidential elections. The US government is hi-jacked for decades now and TPTB will decide who will be the next president. With other words... its a scam.

If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and walks like a duck it is most certainly not a cow.

edit on 12/11/2012 by zatara because: (no reason given)

Unfortunately, as a United States Citizen I agree with your sentiment. However, the farce may not be long in continuing.

reply to post by cavalryscout


Totally off topic but that is a great avatar...

2nd line.

Originally posted by kreator666
reply to post by TheTimeIsNow

 

really!?!?....just stop it right now!!! i cant believe people sometimes. what are you trying to do? he was the most believable candidate ive ever seen and just because your upset with the out come does not mean you have to be so extreme. and you say.... "my support for you is near its end"...thats sad. who are you going to support then? he was the best weve had in a long time. maybe...just maybe im wrong, maybe, but really who knows? but i dont think i am!

Yeah I won't stop it, I still believe in his msg, my support is waning cuz I feel that he is not going to run anymore, his son is tooo tied in with the TEABAGGERS so I will not throw my support behind him

Just stop... really I mean really? How dare I show my displeasure with a politician YES EVEN THE GREAT RON PAUL who do I think I am!


You are allowed to criticize Ron Paul ya know--he is not a messiah either.

Ron Paul allowed me to justify that it was perfectly fine to obsess over the Federal Reserve and educate those I love around about dangerous monetary policies implemented with keynesian economics. QE3, anyone? I'm a college student who isn't taking out these outrageous student loans, even if it means sacrificing a semester to save.
After watching the media blackout in the past, the RNC, the rule change that hurts grassroot activists, and the Maine delegates, I have even more respect for the man. Speaking of, his farewell speech to congress is sometime this week.

So I emailed the local supervisor of elections about why the writein votes my wife and I made for Ron Paul did not show up in the election results, and got this as an answer:

On 11/12/2012 11:09 AM, Henry Wells wrote:
> Mr. Zuchowski,
>
> Good morning, the answer is that Mr. Ron Paul was not a qualified
> write-in candidate. There were six WRI candidates for president per
> state list as follows
> David C. Byrne and Taralyn Treat Harris
> Andrew Charles Coniglio and John William Walsh
> Richard Duncan and Ricky Johnson
> Stephen G. Durham and Christina Lopez
> Erin Kent Magee and William Thomas Harney
> Jill Reed and Tom Cary
>
> If we can of further assistance please contact the office and have a
> great day.
>
> Buddy Wells
> WCSOE

So what in the world makes a write-in candidate "qualified"? So much for any right we thought we had to write in whoever in the heck we wanted to actually vote for. Apparently even those candidates have to be people APPROVED by our friendly and helpful government officials.

Seriously, Roseanne Barr was more qualified to be eligible to be voted on for president of the USA than Ron Paul?

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with this country.

Originally posted by TheTimeIsNow

Originally posted by kreator666
reply to post by TheTimeIsNow

 

really!?!?....just stop it right now!!! i cant believe people sometimes. what are you trying to do? he was the most believable candidate ive ever seen and just because your upset with the out come does not mean you have to be so extreme. and you say.... "my support for you is near its end"...thats sad. who are you going to support then? he was the best weve had in a long time. maybe...just maybe im wrong, maybe, but really who knows? but i dont think i am!

Yeah I won't stop it, I still believe in his msg, my support is waning cuz I feel that he is not going to run anymore, his son is tooo tied in with the TEABAGGERS so I will not throw my support behind him

Just stop... really I mean really? How dare I show my displeasure with a politician YES EVEN THE GREAT RON PAUL who do I think I am!


You are allowed to criticize Ron Paul ya know--he is not a messiah either.

Allow me to help you out here:

It amounts to $75 million from two election cycles consisting of mostly individual contributions. And for what? To get the word out you say? Again, Zeitgeist and here recently the Thrive movement reached larger audiences. I'm not going to waste my time on 2000 pages of filings in order to figure out what he paid his family/ extended family. Pretty sure it's in there though. No telling what the 1.2 M surplus will be used on. I wouldn't make such a big deal about burning through cash as a politician, but it's not Karl Rove and Super PAC's... It was hardworking Americans that sent in whatever money they had left - striving to make an impact.

Thread

One word "Nepotism".

Jesse Benton his son-in-law, that arrangement has all kinds of questions ?

Did Ron Paul hold back from pushing harder, like many would have wanted him too, to ensure his son a more favorable positions in the future ?

Did Rand Paul get and receive approval from Ron Paul to endorse Mitt and get a speech at the RNC in order to enhance his political opportunities within the GOP?

And my own observation from my life, many an honorable man has let nepotism effect his integrity.

I still respect Ron Paul, I just think he realized his time was done before any of his supporters were willing to admit to, and so he took actions that would put his son in the best position possible for the future, knowing that perhaps he was the best hope for America's future.

One last footnote is how do you think Ron Paul feels if he knows he was betrayed by his son-in-law, it will be interesting to see if that marriage stays together.

Despite all that the Ron Paul delegates worked so hard to get where they were, Ron should have given them more support, and Rand too, but politics prevailed, and that is disappointing.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
One word "Nepotism".

Jesse Benton his son-in-law, that arrangement has all kinds of questions ?

Did Ron Paul hold back from pushing harder, like many would have wanted him too, to ensure his son a more favorable positions in the future ?

Did Rand Paul get and receive approval from Ron Paul to endorse Mitt and get a speech at the RNC in order to enhance his political opportunities within the GOP?

And my own observation from my life, many an honorable man has let nepotism effect his integrity.

I still respect Ron Paul, I just think he realized his time was done before any of his supporters were willing to admit to, and so he took actions that would put his son in the best position possible for the future, knowing that perhaps he was the best hope for America's future.

One last footnote is how do you think Ron Paul feels if he knows he was betrayed by his son-in-law, it will be interesting to see if that marriage stays together.

Despite all that the Ron Paul delegates worked so hard to get where they were, Ron should have given them more support, and Rand too, but politics prevailed, and that is disappointing.

Various sources show Ron did not know of the endorsement's timing (one source said Ron didn't even know until 30 minutes before the endorsement happened live ont v) although he and everybody knew Rand Paul was ultimately going to endorse the GOP's nominee (of course 80+% on ATS wanted Ron)

Ron's wife and Rand's mother, Carol, sweet old lady she is, was on record of saying that she didn't know the endorsement was coming either.

Here is Rand Paul on the Peter Schiff show, about a week after his endorsement. Peter even labeled the video: Rand's Romney Strategy.



Did Ron hold back for Rand? In my opinion yes and I don't blame him for it, I would've done the same and I was part of a major project to get Ron to run third party but like I explained in the past, the fruits just were not ripe for the picking. Let the grassroots go underground for the next 3 years to build up their presence in all local GOP's and then come back for another fight in 2015. Various grassroots have already begun preparations.

I can't really what I'm personally doing at the grassroots level even though I've hinted at it in the past but we are soon looking at a MAJOR victory for the liberty movement here in the great blue state of California.

Originally posted by TheTimeIsNow

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Originally posted by TheTimeIsNow

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Originally posted by r2d246
Don't be mad at him....


Ron Paul was set up by TPTB to be the 3rd party alternative for all the freedom loving red necks, as a way to funnel and control all of those people under one party. That way they don't go trying to set up anything real on there own. Possibly like the tea party had tried (that's if they're real). They wanted one person dictating policy and agenda to those holdouts so Ron Paul was a good choice. People actually believed that he was trying to buck the system when infact he was working for them all along.

Oh? which internet character told you that?

Just more rumors and hearsay...

IS this your MO just insult people with your "know it all attitude"

Where I come from we call those people D*CKS!

Facts are facts but rumors are...well, rumors.

Sorry but thats just how things work.

Again, I asked what experience do you have to 'know' how the LP and Ron Paul camp situation worked? Are you going by rumors? or the facts?

The fact was the Ron Paul stated several times he was not running 3rd party and he was not a 3rd party candidate for any of the parties--are those facts or just rumors?

Which IMHO was a huge mistake and a genuine dis service to the American people

Just to make things clear, I wanted him to run third party as much as you did. I was very vocal about it here on ATS.

But I don't think you understand why Ron Paul basically had to state over and over and over and over and over again why he did not 'WANT' to run third party, did not 'INTEND' to run third party, and was not 'PLANNING' on doing it.

He stated his words VERY clearly and always left the option open for his grassroots pushing him into a third party run. Now, ask yourself WHY he was forced to answer the question so many times? Why did the MSM ask him that question EVERY SINGLE time as their FIRST question to Ron? Why did they keep drilling him with that question? They wanted to make him out to be the spoiler, the sore loser that loses the nomination and goes on to run third party to ruin it for everybody. Ron had to word his statements so clearly that he didn't lead the msm and the msm audience to believe he would play a spoiler and also leave room for a third party run if the political circumstances allowed it.

The grassroots fought hard, they got all the way to the RNC despite all of the fraud, after the RNC, there was NO time to prep and there talks between both camps just didn't work out. Like I said earlier, I would know, I was there working to make it happen.

So unlike what you just stated, Ron never clearly said I am not running third party, there was always room to make a comeback to a third party run if the circumstances allowed, it was part of the strategy from the beginning.

Don't believe me? go back and watch all of the interviews he had where they asked him about a third party run and see how he worded it.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Don't get me wrong, I just try to see the other side. there are two extremes to this:
1)Ron and Rand can do no wrong ever....
2)At the first sign of strategy disagreement, people call him a traitor who sold out and burn their Ron Paul gear.

There is middle ground to this discourse. But there are many that gave it there all, blood,sweat, tears and cash and perhaps they feel they should have been repaid with loyalty to the bitter end, even if it was a losing cause it was the principle of it all, especially for Ron Paul delegates, what they had to endure by the GOP/RNC was brutal.