For the Ron Paul Supporters

[RLENT]

Well I think Paul would better than Obama part II or Gingrich who seems to lack some ethics.

Yup - you only have to look at where the funding is coming from to support the above two (.... or even the long-legged Mack Daddy his bad self) .... these guys are already bought and paid for ....

As for swingin' Newt .... yeah, he might have few ethics problems ....

I would give him more of a chance that what we have now or what we could have with what's there in the GOP.

There is absolutely zero chance with any of the others .... they've already proven themselves to be thoroughly corruptible.

 

[witness23]

As for swingin' Newt .... yeah, he might have few ethics problems ....

I see you've read the same stories I have. What a douche!

There is absolutely zero chance with any of the others .... they've already proven themselves to be thoroughly corruptible.

Yep, four more years of Obama. Nice going Republicans

 

[Turtle]

Did you do know that ships have bow thrusters?

Ships can turn 180

I had a houseboat without bow thrusters, and it could spin like a top. Two independently controlled props powered by two inboard 440 cu Pontiac engines made getting into the slip unaided a snap.

Be that as it may, regardless of the courses laid in or the course corrections to be made, all of Leo's boats are still headed for the same rocky destination. We need more than a simple course correction or two or twenty. We need a new destination port, and a new ship.

 

[witness23]

Yes, it is failing because your analogy uses a compass with only two points. A ship doesn't do a 180 like the spinner for Twister. Sure, it would be great to do the 180 and be on the right track. That would be the ideal. It isn't that way. There are more than two specific outcomes.

There's voting Obama and staying exactly on the same course.

There's voting for M(r/s). X which makes a turn of xx degrees in the correct direction.

There's your desired option of a 180 with Ron Paul, in itself questionable since what he wants and what he gets from Congress etc. are not guaranteed identical.


We know what option 1 does since we're already on that disaster course.

Option 2 turns us away from disaster to some degree. It isn't enough but it's a start. It slows the disaster. It gives us more time to work for more change in the right direction.

Then there's your option which is option 1 running under another name. It produces the same result and it keeps us headed directly toward disaster with the least time available to create change and find a positive resolution.

The whole all or nothing thing is the I'm taking my ball and going home since we can't play the game I want thing. Writing in, not voting, whatever other than voting for the best, most likely option to defeat Obama is all the same.

After reading the above all I could think of was that LDB must have been the Captain of the Costa Concordia

 

[RLENT]

We need more than a simple course correction or two or twenty. We need a new destination port, and a new ship.

I think it's high time we set sail for home port .... you know: ...the place that we're originally from ....

 

[chefdennis]

I have said Ill vote for Paul in the Ohio Primary and if he gets there, I'll vote for him for President to beat barry...that being said, I will vote for the republican that gets the nod if not Paul..unless Paul goes 3rd party...then I'll vote 3rd party.

All of that being said, even with Paul elected, I don't look for the country to be turned back to where WE want it in my life time...yes we will see change and improvement, but we are sooo far from what the founders set for us as a nation that it can't be turned back in the rest of my time here...It will be up to our kids and grand kids to insure that what Paul would start is continued to right the course of our nation.

Ron Paul is by no stretch of the imagination the best in all positions for me, but he is the closest to getting us headed back to where we need to be going to fix what ills our country....

 

[greg334]

I think it's high time we set sail for home port .... you know: ...the place that we're originally from ....

I think that's nearly impossible to do at this junction in time. I mean look around and see what's going on in the media and how much BS is being spread and how many people want to believe something is very wrong.

Take this idea that there is 50% of the people receiving welfare, something I even heard that Irish guy say on his radio but he and others like him don't actually tell it like it is - there is 50% of the population getting something from the government and out of that 50%, it includes all the workers in the government, all those TSA agents who feel up little girls and all them others who receive vet benefits that some didn't deserve but get anyhow. When we put those people into the mix, the story changes drastically and as people like Rush seem to confirm that Obama is the food stamp president, I have to wonder what planet I'm on sometimes.

The funny thing is that those 50% actually pay taxes, some shouldn't but they do and because they are putting back into the system, the argument that this is a bad thing because of the food stamp president has been at the helm, it seems that they are speaking on the same lines as defining marriage and outlawing abortion through congress.

The same goes for this class warfare thing, thanks to people gates and buffet, they make it out like the rich can do amazing things with their money but neither of them have actually created jobs or helped people out when we needed it. When people attack them, it is considered class warfare. I don't mind that someone makes money, but there is a limit to what is rich and what is not. Not to knock what people thought was capitalism either but it isn't what we have been living under since 1934 when you come down to it, especially when we tax people's labor and have for now going on 100 years - a little backwards there. I say if buffet is claming we need more taxes, I have to wonder why hasn't Obama gone after him as FDR went after Mellon?

 

[RLENT]

Dave,

If you want to understand the sentiments of a good many of Dr. Paul's supporters, try Googling some articles about him - then go and read what is in the readers' comments. Generally what you will find are (in no particular order):

1. Detractors
2. Supporters

No. 2 breaks down further, into those who are unwilling to support any other candidate and those who are.

My guess is that you will find that the former outweigh the latter ..... on the order of 8 or 9 to 1 ......

 

[LDB]

You're looking at a photo of the Obama ship of state. Harry Reid first mate. Nancy Pelosi cruise director.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

If I'm on route X and it's 50 miles to the next U turn spot with no way to reverse 180 until then or it's 5 miles to an exit that puts me on a road going less wrong direction I'm making a partial correction. Then I'm not blindly following that road forever, I'm looking for the next correction. The reason your analogy is failing is because the premise is flawed and fails.

A journey of 1000 miles begins with one step. Rome wasn't built in a day. Take your pick of those or many others. Just don't delude yourself that not voting or writing in or otherwise re-electing Obama by whatever means the Paulbots choose is doing the right thing.

No, Leo. It is you who is deluding yourself into believing that anyone currently running, besides Ron Paul, is not going to take away your rights as fast as Obama is. None of them give a flying crock about the economy, other than what their handlers tell them. Ron Paul's handlers have been dead for 200+ years. He is still loyal to them and their hallmark document.

You talk about supporting the Constitution, yet you consistently vote for stooges who wipe their arses with it. I don't know what you call it; but I call it the blind leading the blind... the ignorant leading the willingly ignorant.

 

[LDB]

If that's what you call recognizing degrees of evil so be it. If Paul runs and polls as beating Obama I will add one more to the count. If he runs and polls as beating Obama provided it's a full moon with a total lunar eclipse the night of the election followed by a total solar eclipse the day after I will reluctantly add one to the count of the less evil than Obama candidate whoever that may be. I will not assist Obama in winning another term just to make a statement, just to be all touchy feely and able to pat myself on the back. I like Ron Paul and have voted for him and can/will again so long as it doesn't also vote for Obama. I can not and will not vote for Obama directly or indirectly.

 

[Turtle]

I don't know what you call it; but I call it the blind leading the blind... the ignorant leading the willingly ignorant.

I think his favorite term is fools, so it would be the fools leading the fools, if that is case, so to speak, as it were. Not that I'm calling anyone a fool, you understand.

 

[AMonger]

If Ron Paul was to win the nomination, I would vote for him. But I think most will go with just replacing Obama with whomever is left standing. A vote for "hermit the frog" may make a personal statement but will have little value outside of that.

How about helping him win the nomination?

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

 

[AMonger]

If that's what you call recognizing degrees of evil so be it. If Paul runs and polls as beating Obama I will add one more to the count. If he runs and polls as beating Obama provided it's a full moon with a total lunar eclipse the night of the election followed by a total solar eclipse the day after I will reluctantly add one to the count of the less evil than Obama candidate whoever that may be. I will not assist Obama in winning another term just to make a statement, just to be all touchy feely and able to pat myself on the back. I like Ron Paul and have voted for him and can/will again so long as it doesn't also vote for Obama. I can not and will not vote for Obama directly or indirectly.

That's the thinking that brought us where we are.

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

I think his favorite term is fools, so it would be the fools leading the fools, if that is case, so to speak, as it were. Not that I'm calling anyone a fool, you understand.

Calling someone a fool makes them offended. Calling someone willingly ignorant makes them offended - but likely makes them think about it.

 

[Ragman]

And then there were four ..... Perry is set to hold a press conference in a couple of minutes to announce he's withdrawing from the race.

 

[Pilgrim]

Latest South Carolina Real Clear Politics poll results show Ron Paul at 14%, less than 1/2 the votes received by Gingrich and Romney; nationally, he's about the same.

See All South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary Polling Data

It's rather obvious that he's not going to win the nomination, or even a primary for that matter - and knows it. He's thinks he's going to accumulate delegates and become a power broker at the GOP convention and impose his positions into the party platform regardless of the adverse consequences. An article by Kimberly Strassel in today's WSJ makes some very good points about this strategy:

"...
It seems not to matter to Mr. Paul that the complex issues on which he pronounces have in fact long been the subject of vigorous debate, and that the GOP has come by its positions honestly. It seems also not to matter that exit polls show that much of Mr. Paul's support comes from outside the Republican party, from left-leaning independents or even Democrats. Mr. Paul will see his particular views adopted by the GOP, or he will rebel.
Perhaps the better question is not what Mr. Paul wants, but what he hopes to accomplish. In the unlikely event he is able to scare the ultimate nominee into adopting his demands, the subsequent revolt from conservative voters will only hurt the party. If, as is more likely, the GOP nominee refuses to renounce the Patriot Act or presidential power, and Mr. Paul defects for an independent run, that too would hurt the party.
Either way, the end result is a re-election boost to Barack Obama, whose views are as far away from Mr. Paul's as any candidate now on the stage. And it's hard to imagine how Mr. Paul could want that.

Strassel: What Ron Paul Wants - WSJ.com

In all likelihood, if this scenario actually plays out and he does get a few of his pet issues into the party platform they'll be ignored by the eventual candidate as inconvenient platform planks often are. Hopefully this will be the last election year we have to put up with this guy and his son Rand will emerge in 2016 or 2020 with a combination of conservative economic positions combined with a realistic and reasonable view on foreign policy - that would make a d*mn good candidate.

 

[AMonger]

Ok, let me get this down: Pilgrim...another reason we're in the mess we're in today. Got it.

2012: Ron Paul or not at all.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.

 

[RLENT]

Latest South Carolina Real Clear Politics poll results show Ron Paul at 14%, less than 1/2 the votes received by Gingrich and Romney; nationally, he's about the same.

Well Halleujah !

RCP has issued it's decree .... so it must be true !

Of course, if one goes here:

RCP NH Republican Presidential Primary

..... one can see that RCP underpolled Dr. Paul by 5.4% in New Hampshire.

Dunno if that will happen in SC, but it wouldn't entirely surprise me if it did ..... bottom line though: the longer that race continues the better off it is for Dr. Paul .... and even more importantly: the movement ....

Anyone who thinks poll numbers are locked in and are unchangeable is suffering from delusions of the worst type .... especially in this day and age, and particularly in this race ....

You should think of his support like a ratchet - it pretty much only goes up. While the others' supporters are flip-floppin' around (witness Erick Erickson of Red State and his throwing Perry under the bus) trying to figure out what flavor of the moment they are going to get behind, we are working to change hearts and minds ....

It's rather obvious that he's not going to win the nomination, or even a primary for that matter - and knows it.

Of course - that's why you're posting here ....

ROTFLMAO ....

It was also "obvious" (to some ) that Romney had it all sown up .... I think back before Iowa ....

Considering the fact that it seems increasingly unlikely that Romney will win South Carolina, that certainty seems to be somewhat less likely at this point if ya wanna go with the conventional wisdom .... particularly given the fact, that the more time Robot Romney has to spend in the limelight, the worse he looks ....

And Gingrich and Santorum ain't going anywhere (in the general) .... even if by some bizarre happenstance they manage to secure the nomination ...

He's thinks he's going to accumulate delegates and become a power broker at the GOP convention and impose his positions into the party platform regardless of the adverse consequences.

Well, if that's all you can take out of what is going on, then we can all breathe a large sigh of relief ....

An article by Kimberly Strassel in today's WSJ makes some very good points about this strategy:
In all likelihood, if this scenario actually plays out and he does get a few of his pet issues into the party platform they'll be ignored by the eventual candidate as inconvenient platform planks often are.

Oh, I wouldn't be making any bets that Ms. Strassel of War Street Journal actually understands or even knows the entire strategy at this point ....

Hopefully this will be the last election year we have to put up with this guy

If it should happen that Dr. Paul does not win the Republican nomination, he will certainly have earned an enjoyable retirement with his family for his long and exemplary service ..... however, based on a recent of interview of Carol Paul (his wife) I wouldn't be getting my hopes up as far as him fading from the political scene any time soon ......

If you're paying attention and got sharp eyes, that's already been made completely clear, even though it probably shouldn't have been (you'll have to do some real diggin' to figure that one out)

and his son Rand will emerge in 2016 or 2020 with a combination of conservative economic positions combined with a realistic and reasonable view on foreign policy - that would make a d*mn good candidate.

You should take note of what the foremost conservative voice in the United States Senate (Senator Jim DeMint) is saying in this regard (US foreign policy)

He has very carefully endorsed Dr. Paul's position (that the type of foreign policy we have been practicing is economically unsustainable) ... without directly coming out and saying it. He understands the peril we face.

Yeah .... heheheh ..... I can tell ya this:

If anyone thinks "a realistic and reasonable view on foreign policy" in any way includes an adoption of the (neo) Communistic view of foreign policy, their really suckin' on some seriously strong Leo Strauss-brand Kool-Aid™ .....

No, what I think some will have to put up with is continuing to be marginalized due to the ongoing exposure of the unethical and morally-bankrupt philosophy of Neoconmunism™ ....

We understand that the two-part system is inherently corrupt at this point ..... we understand why that is so .... and there are many out there (whose numbers are increasing on a daily basis) who are quite receptive to our message - which shows how we got to where we are today .....

We ain't goin' away .....

The future likely holds some very unpleasant events .... all the better for us ..... all the worse for the neoCommies™ .....

Whether the GOP survives that as a relevant party still remains to be seen ....

Sad it will have to come to that, but it is what it is .....

 

[Pilgrim]

Ok, let me get this down: Pilgrim...another reason we're in the mess we're in today. Got it.

It's just a matter of harsh reality - Paul is not going to win any of the primaries, just like in '08. Regarding the mess we're in: the Labor Force Participation Rate continues to be stuck at 64% and will not show any improvement until Obama is defeated and the Democrats are marginalized in the Senate. If Paul runs as a 3d party candidate Obama wins - it's that simple. So Paul needs to be placated at the GOP convention, and it won't be the first time that's happened.