Ron Paul

[ralphtheplumber]

snipped from the wiki:

Paul regularly votes against almost all proposals for new government spending, initiatives, or taxes.[162] He has pledged never to raise taxes,[156][48] and states he has never voted to approve an unbalanced budget. Paul believes in abolishing the individual income tax while trying to achieving revenue neutrality, by scaling back the federal budget to its 2000 spending levels.[163][164] He would substantially reduce the government's role in individual lives and in the functions of foreign and domestic states

Paul supports elimination of most federal government agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service,[163] the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Administration, and the Interstate Commerce Commission,[166] calling them unnecessary bureaucracies.

Paul opposes political organizations that he believes override U.S. sovereignty, such as the International Criminal Court, the United Nations, North American Union (NAU) the World Trade Organization, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. He supports withdrawing funds from and ending participation in such organizations.[21]

Paul believes the size of federal government must be decreased substantially. He supports the abolition of the Internal Revenue Service, most Cabinet departments and the Federal Reserve.[45]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul

www.ronpaul2008.com

[BigJon3475]

Sounds like he's totally against America. Maybe even go as far as saying he's all for Anarchy.


That's great let's cut everything and then try and figure out why will be in such a mess when all the after effects of it kick in. With all due respect this guy is a lunatic IMO.........Remember I said with all due respect :D

[ralphtheplumber]

actually, I was thinking exactly the opposite.

[BigJon3475]

The ideas sound great I guess.......But in reality do you think he will be able to change things in (lets say) 8 years that were founded since 1862 (IRS) and be able to do it without destroying the way America is?

I'm all for making government smaller but only to a certain extent and it sounds like he wants to "scrap" everything and start over from scratch.

[dna]

Ron Paul is too far "out there" to get the nomination. Although he has some great ideas, he does not appeal to the mass of Republican voters. This upcoming presidential race is about who can beat Hillary. Ron Paul can't, Rudy can.

[chillbilly]

Apparently, it will take someone like Ron Paul who prefers change on a large scale, for America to realize even some small change in the right direction.

[wolfstrike]

i'm voting Ron Paul, no one else

[k-fridge]

i'm voting Ron Paul, no one else
Then who will you vote for in the general election? Paul won't be on the ballot.

[chillbilly]

Then who will you vote for in the general election? Paul won't be on the ballot.
Of course he wont, if we all dismiss him before a candidate is nominated.:rolleyes:

[mrs reb77]

i'm voting Ron Paul, no one else

Well now, that's an impressive endorsement.

[oloenneker]

We see as the grains of sand pass through the hour glass, Ron Paul is revealing his true libertarian side, and it looks like that might be the nail in the coffin for his chances for the office.

[BigJon3475]

That's the most extreme libertarian I have ever seen.

[chillbilly]

You can charachterize him any way you wish.
He's a conservative republican if you ask him.

American voters are too busy arguing semantics with sound bytes fed to them and disregarding the man's platform.

If an extreme change candidate is not elected and radical change is not a part of any future agenda, it's reasonable to assume that nothing good will come from any future presidential election.

[oloenneker]

You can charachterize him any way you wish.
He's a conservative republican if you ask him.



Of course he is going to identify with conservatives and the republican party. It's a good strategy, since Libertarians are such a minority party, his chances for gaining any sort of office is a wast of time running with them.



American voters are too busy arguing semantics with sound bytes fed to them and disregarding the man's platform.

If an extreme change candidate is not elected and radical change is not a part of any future agenda, it's reasonable to assume that nothing good will come from any future presidential election.


It's more like: America is not ready for a "radical change candidate". Not now nor in the near future. Americans will elect another "middle of the road" centrist base candidate, regardless of which party affiliation they claim.

[chillbilly]

Of course he is going to identify with conservatives and the republican party.
You've got it backwards. His policies haven't changed. Conservatives identify with him.

It's a good strategy, since Libertarians are such a minority party, his chances for gaining any sort of office is a wast of time running with them.
From what I have read and seen from Ron Paul's voting record and speeches, he's not strategizing.
Any conclusions that his time is wasted running for president on what he believes will help the country defies what real politicians are all about.
Unfortunately, they have few real voters that take the time to study their platforms on issues important to the country.


It's more like: America is not ready for a "radical change candidate". Not now nor in the near future. Americans will elect another "middle of the road" centrist base candidate, regardless of which party affiliation they claim.
That would be the consensus of the intellectually challenged and the lazy, uninterested electorate but thankfully, not everyone.;)

[phxurs]

Ron Paul (um two first names)

I’m not Republican (sic) but at least find him Honest – kind of out there though
That’s why he wont Win primary (anyone remember Buchannan) Last republican I thought as a democrat – I could vote for

As far as republicans – they wont (and don’t) approve of honesty!

If he was a democrats! He would do allot better – still would not get nod (because Gov, would be wiped out – instead of bush/plan to privatize it to the point of wiping it out – but at least they would not brush him off…

[BigJon3475]

Ron Paul (um two first names)

I’m not Republican (sic) but at least find him Honest – kind of out there though
That’s why he wont Win primary (anyone remember Buchannan) Last republican I thought as a democrat – I could vote for

As far as republicans – they wont (and don’t) approve of honesty!

If he was a democrats! He would do allot better – still would not get nod (because Gov, would be wiped out – instead of bush/plan to privatize it to the point of wiping it out – but at least they would not brush him off…


:confused: Are you serious.......and democrats approve of honesty?? Monica?

[desto1]

GO RON PAUL:cool:

[wolfstrike]

when the republicans stab Paul in the back for one of their liberal candidates, it's only a natural move that Paul will take is funds and run as an independent

[k-fridge]

when the republicans stab Paul in the back for one of their liberal candidates, it's only a natural move that Paul will take is funds and run as an independent
Which will split the Republican vote and elect Hillary.

[phxurs]

Did I say – I was voting for Clinton

I said the only Republican? I would Vote for is an Honest ONE and yes – Ron Paul seams like one I could (but would not/ever – because to far out there…IE one for all and none for any/Philosophy) but won’t pass the stink (Litmus) test the Republicans Hold there own too….

Hell – I even respect Him and I’m Liberal – even got more ball’s then Clinton (witch by the way I don’t support) but will support whomever? Is opposite (even a degree) of current traitors! (Crooks / bubbling dittos) crop, cheerleaders, or very similar of what we have now (Bush just ask for 200 mil, plus for Mongolia, what a joke) and are fore fathers got to be rolling in there (look what is going on) graves, and just stick to a principals of are constitution Please

[phxurs]

Did I say – I was voting for Clinton

I said the only Republican? I would Vote for is an Honest ONE and yes – Ron Paul seams like one I could (but would not/ever – because to far out there…IE one for all and none for any/Philosophy) but won’t pass the stink (Litmus) test the Republicans Hold there own too….

Hell – I even respect Him and I’m Liberal – even got more ball’s then Clinton (witch by the way I don’t support) but will support whomever? Is opposite (even a degree) of current traitors! (Crooks / bubbling dittos) crop, cheerleaders, or very similar of what we have now (Bush just ask for 200 mil, plus for Mongolia, what a joke) and are fore fathers got to be rolling in there (look what is going on) graves, and just stick to a principals of are constitution Please

[wolfstrike]

Which will split the Republican vote and elect Hillary.


so make sure you don't split the vote, you need to vote for Ron Paul

[BigJon3475]

Did I say – I was voting for Clinton

I said the only Republican? I would Vote for is an Honest ONE and yes – Ron Paul seams like one I could (but would not/ever – because to far out there…IE one for all and none for any/Philosophy) but won’t pass the stink (Litmus) test the Republicans Hold there own too….

Hell – I even respect Him and I’m Liberal – even got more ball’s then Clinton (witch by the way I don’t support) but will support whomever? Is opposite (even a degree) of current traitors! (Crooks / bubbling dittos) crop, cheerleaders, or very similar of what we have now (Bush just ask for 200 mil, plus for Mongolia, what a joke) and are fore fathers got to be rolling in there (look what is going on) graves, and just stick to a principals of are constitution Please


No you said "As far as republicans – they wont (and don’t) approve of honesty! "


You can rethink it or take it back but to call all republicans out and say they only support crooks is a joke at best. You have the right to believe what ever you want.....but a blanket statement like that deserves to be called out. Especially when there is just as much corruption on the democratic side or is it a do as I say not as I do type thing?


I have to try and make out what you write since it's incoherent... so if there is a misunderstanding sorry....

[dna]

The other Republican nominees love when Ron Paul opens his mouth. Even they know he doesn't stand a chance. Alot of Americans make up their minds within the first ten seconds after one of these candidates starts to talk. Trust me, even Ron Paul knows he isn't going to get the nomination.

[oloenneker]

so make sure you don't split the vote, you need to vote for Ron Paul


Uhh... If he runs as an independent, then the people voting for him will most likely not be voting for the Republican candidate. Did you not pay attention to what Ralph Nader did to Al Gore's votes in 2000? Actually, if Nader did not run, Al Gore would most likely beaten Bush by a significant number.

[The Doctor]

The libertarian side of Ron Paul is what America could use--and the message is solid. We should be free to live how we wish, without expecting any favors from the gov't as a result of our liberty. And his words are backed by a stellar voting record which matches the speeches. I have been studying this man for about six months, and his words do line up with his votes.

I know a lot of "values voters" who won't vote for him though. THey are the kind who want to vote for Huckabee--whose platform is a libertarian nightmare. bigger gov't, more health care, more behavior regulation through constitutional amendment.
Thanks but no thanks. I just want the gov't to leave me alone.

Ron Paul is going to get my vote if I have to write him in.

[k-fridge]

The libertarian side of Ron Paul is what America could use--and the message is solid. We should be free to live how we wish, without expecting any favors from the gov't as a result of our liberty. And his words are backed by a stellar voting record which matches the speeches. I have been studying this man for about six months, and his words do line up with his votes.

I know a lot of "values voters" who won't vote for him though. THey are the kind who want to vote for Huckabee--whose platform is a libertarian nightmare. bigger gov't, more health care, more behavior regulation through constitutional amendment.
Thanks but no thanks. I just want the gov't to leave me alone.

Ron Paul is going to get my vote if I have to write him in.
While your desire for smaller government is understandable, your intent to vote for Paul no-matter-what is illogical. Though I'm not happy about this, we have a two party system and outsiders aren't welcome. If Paul runs as an independent he will pull from the Republican vote and the Democrats will win by a landslide. This the one scenario where Hillary could be elected.

If you really want to change government, start a grass roots effort to force congress to amend the constitution to require that a candidate have over 50% of the vote to be elected. Under rules like that a third part candidate could actually be viable. Until then a strong third party candidate is nothing but a spoiler.

Sucks yes, but that's reality.

[The Doctor]

While your desire for smaller government is understandable, your intent to vote for Paul no-matter-what is illogical. Though I'm not happy about this, we have a two party system and outsiders aren't welcome. If Paul runs as an independent he will pull from the Republican vote and the Democrats will win by a landslide. This the one scenario where Hillary could be elected.

If you really want to change government, start a grass roots effort to force congress to amend the constitution to require that a candidate have over 50% of the vote to be elected. Under rules like that a third part candidate could actually be viable. Until then a strong third party candidate is nothing but a spoiler.

Sucks yes, but that's reality.

Not sure what this is about. You might want to check Ron Paul's current party affiliation--he's running as Republican. And he did say that he will NOT run as a third party.

As for the grass roots, I think that the true test for Paul supporters will be when the fever from this dies down, will there still be energy to stay involved in local politics? As for me, there is and there will be, should the Lord give me life.
I had said that we need to run for local offices, like dogcatcher and school board, etc. to make a case for limited gov't and for individual liberty. We can't expect one man among 300 million to be the one.
I'll conclude this post as I concluded the other one about running for local offices.




Here Rover.... here Fido... :D

[k-fridge]

Not sure what this is about. You might want to check Ron Paul's current party affiliation--he's running as Republican. And he did say that he will NOT run as a third party.

As for the grass roots, I think that the true test for Paul supporters will be when the fever from this dies down, will there still be energy to stay involved in local politics? As for me, there is and there will be, should the Lord give me life.
I had said that we need to run for local offices, like dogcatcher and school board, etc. to make a case for limited gov't and for individual liberty. We can't expect one man among 300 million to be the one.
I'll conclude this post as I concluded the other one about running for local offices.




Here Rover.... here Fido... :D


I'm well aware that he's a republican, but he has a snowballs chance at getting the nomination. I wasn't aware of him ruling out a third party run, apparently a lot of people aren't aware of it because it's commonly thought that he will do just that. There was even mention of it earlier in this thread.

I hope you're right about him not running as an independent, he would only be a spoiler. That's what "this is about". ;)

[oloenneker]

I think it would be a good thing for America if Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate.:D:D:D

[icchvac]

because that's the only chance Hillary has?

[oloenneker]

because that's the only chance Hillary has?

You think so? I doubt it, seriously.


I don't want it to be true, but I cannot ignore the truth.

Hillary is most likely gonna be the next President of The United States.:o

[icchvac]

I really hope you are mistaken on that. I'll have to turn the news off for 4 years if that happens. :eek:

[oloenneker]

I really hope you are mistaken on that. I'll have to turn the news off for 4 years if that happens. :eek:

You and me both...:eek:

[Swabby]

I don't care if he has less chance of surviving than a chicken in Ethiopia I'm still voting for him because I know a vote for anyone else is just going to be more of the same Bush / Clinton years.

[oloenneker]

I don't care if he has less chance of surviving than a chicken in Ethiopia I'm still voting for him because I know a vote for anyone else is just going to be more of the same Bush / Clinton years.

Whatcha gonna do if he is not on the ballot?

[The Doctor]

Whatcha gonna do if he is not on the ballot?

Write him in.

Then those of us who are interested in the next chapter of his ideas (which are not new, and are not strictly his--it's not really about Ron Paul)
will have to get involved in the process. If larger numbers of folks really want the gov't telling them how to live their lives, then that's what they'll choose (i.e. Hillary).

But it shouldn't be due to them not knowing that they could get off their asses and take care of themselves in order to make their country better.

Ron Paul would be able to meet liabilities like social security and taking care of our citizens(who may not be able to take care of themselves) by saving LOTS of dough in the myriad of unnecessary agencies.

Seems to me he'd need the help of the Congress to phase out even a portion of our leviathan gov't, so it really looks like a long-term project anyway.

In the meantime, I'll write him in.

[bogart219]

Do you watch the debates, both Dems and Repub's? They are all a bunch of stooges except Ron Paul. All of them with the exception of Paul are frauds who will say what ever they have to get elected. Their after power which will lead to more money. Paul got my vote.

[mrs reb77]

Once Mr. Paul is elected and he does away with all these government agencies...where are those people going to work? Also, how will all the things they have done get done? We won't need them any more? Will they all be on unemployment or will that not exist either?

It's all well and good to say do away with "big government" but people must realize, this country is MUCH LARGER than it was when our constitution was written. It can't be run the same way as then...

[The Doctor]

Once Mr. Paul is elected and he does away with all these government agencies...where are those people going to work?First of all, the Congress will have to help him do this. It will be the beginning of a long-term project, albeit let's hope that it's much shorter than the current rate..:p Next, they can work in the private sector. Remember??? generating actual dollars into the economy, not just milking on the teat of tax revenue and projected growth.

Where are any of us going to work? Who cares? How about "not on your and my dime"? That would be a good start.
Also, how will all the things they have done get done? Name one.
We won't need them any more? In all fairness, it remains to be seen.
Will they all be on unemployment or will that not exist either? Now that's a good question. But at some point in history, necessity was the mother of invention. Chances are, it still is...


It's all well and good to say do away with "big government" but people must realize, this country is MUCH LARGER than it was when our constitution was written. It can't be run the same way as then...Checks and balances. We rely on them in much the same way as we ever would. After all he is only a human.

[Twilly]

Twilli like Paul too. Elton John did song with Paul.

Twilli likes the tall ones



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDqPpbqSnAI

[bogart219]

Twilli, your one cool dude. If you run for president I will vote for you!