Ron Paul Black Out Campaign

[a500lbgorilla]

Ron Paul announced that he supports werewolf. You should see what all the buzz is about. http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...et-189740.html

[givememyleg]

The two biggest reasons for this man to not be elected president:

1. The people of the U.S. would still rather vote for him than any republican.

2. He's not well spoken and thus does not come across as a very confident person.

wat

[Roid_Rage]

He's a pretty passionate speaker about the causes that mean the most to him. For example: repealing all drug laws at the federal level and letting states choose their own regulations. Getting rid of the Fed, Department of Education (again at the.federal level), and just reducing the.size.of.the.federal government as a whole. States rights and all that jazz.

[Roid_Rage]

Also reducing foreign aid to ZERO (joygasm) and closing the 900+ bases we have overseas and focusing more on our own borders.

[JKDS]

But Newt Gingrich promised us a moon base! A FREAKIN LUNAR BASE!!! Ron Paul cant do that

[eugmac]

I think Drew said that mainly because he seems to not have a strong opinion on things he is unsure about/doesn't know about. And guess what? That's a frickin' virtue. The rest of them (basically every modern politician) are "well-spoken" in the same way a snake oil salesman is.

[Roid_Rage]

I have a friend that is a pretty big Obama fan. I showed him some clips on youtube of Ron Paul and he's going to vote for him when the primary comes to Michigan. Another converted by the voice of reason!

[JKDS]

A LUNAR. BASE.

[bikes]

M A R S MARS BITCHES
THE UNITED STATES OF SPACE

[boost]

I have a friend that is a pretty big Obama fan. I showed him some clips on youtube of Ron Paul and he's going to vote for him when the primary comes to Michigan. Another converted by the voice of reason!

lol, whether you agree with the video or not, you should not be proud of your friend.

[Roid_Rage]

Why is that?

[bikes]

Why is that?

some clips of one candidate over the span of a mebbe 30mins to an hour at best should not make someone so easily flip flop. esp without knowing where ron paul stands on a lot of issues other than, military action and states rights

[Vinland]

^ agreed, unless the only reason he voted for obama was b/c he watched a 10 min clip of Oprah praising him.
30 min clip > 10min clip = easy vote flip flop....go democracy!

[wufwugy]

Politics is one of my favorite things. I have been analyzing guys like Obama and Paul for years, and I still keep reforming my thoughts. It can be wince inducing when people get a slice of something then support it. We all do it though

A flip from Obama to Paul is specifically weird because the reasons for liking either are due to opposite positions from the other



Also, I'll update a couple things

Paul is a racist. Well, maybe not, but he certainly has done too much with that newsletters and some of his policies are simply racist (while some are extremely anti-racist). I've spent a lot of breath defending Paul and his policies like private business discrimination, I still don't know exactly where I stand, but I think it's reasonable to say that he "indirectly endorsed" the racist rhetoric in the newsletters, at the least. Those basically made his career and bank account. Also his (and his son's) ideas about civil rights and private property are a big step back racially. However, the anti-drug war and foreign war stuff is very anti-racist. In a way I give him a pass on this stuff. It's more along the lines of I'd rather analyze what he does from here on out instead of getting hung up on ambiguities

I would fully acknowledge that this position might be insulting to some, as the guy has supported some serious racist rhetoric. I just don't know exactly what to make of it all, I guess is my point. He will never win the presidency over it though. Never ever ever. It's too bad, too much, and his responses are too stupid. It has been said that all the good positions Paul holds, he holds for the wrong reasons. Which is true, he's not a particularly smart person, just somebody with some serious convictions. Half of them happen to be good and the other half terrible


Also, the NDAA indefinite detention thing is not as bad as it seems. While indefinite detentions should be abolished altogether, Obama didn't really change any law here. The short of it is that a 9/11 specific law that defined the pertinent terminology (terrorist, enemy combatant, etc) is about to expire, we would then go back to a very vague pre-9/11 terminology, but instead have split the difference and are now less vague than pre-9/11 yet more broad than 9/11-specific. This is a slippery slope problem though, but what isn't. Obama has been drawing down military power, and that's important


I adored the State of the Union. I understand every ounce of hate for Obama coming from progressives, but he never gets credit for what he does well. If this speech was at the beginning of his presidency, people would be going crazy with how he is gonna be the GOAT pres. He had some serious swagger which showed he is becoming more in charge of the children in Congress, he spoke about as strongly as he could, he made several definitive statements about what bills he wants passed and what his administration is unilaterally doing about important issues, and he brought up several extremely big issues that have been lost in the national dialogue

He also explained why he never wanted a public option (the Lincoln quote). I'm not somebody who worships the public option. Other nations do just fine with private insurance markets, just as long as the proper regulations are in. Things along the lines of competition in coverage, inability to drop the insured, and administrative cost controls are basically what's needed, and the law passed has them. It will take over a decade, but the US health care system will rival any some European ones eventually

[a500lbgorilla]

some clips of one candidate over the span of a mebbe 30mins to an hour at best should not make someone so easily flip flop. esp without knowing where ron paul stands on a lot of issues other than, military action and states rights

I'm rather impressed by his constitution to have resisted the charm of Ron Paul for so long. 30 seconds of Ron Paul talking shop about the Constitution and I feel like I'm being fellated by Truth.

[wufwugy]

Truth or truthiness?

[a500lbgorilla]

Feels like Truth to me.

[Roid_Rage]

repped for use of that pic

[Roid_Rage]

some clips of one candidate over the span of a mebbe 30mins to an hour at best should not make someone so easily flip flop. esp without knowing where ron paul stands on a lot of issues other than, military action and states rights

You make it sound like a young person's political affiliation/beliefs should be set in stone, and should never be open to new ideas regarding politics. He, like myself, has very little knowledge on politics and different stances on various issues. For example, I had no clue we had 900 military bases overseas. Assuming 30 men per base at an average salary of 20k a year (all very low.estimates im pretty.sure) thats $540 million a year just in salaries alone. Doesnt include equpiment, maintenence, etc. Throw in foreign aid and Paul's stances on federal drug laws that would potentially release hundreds of thousands, if not millions of nonviolent prisoners and you start thinking about.the.kind of money that.would save, youre not too concerned what his stances on gay rights or immigration are, or whether or not hes a racist.

Fwiw, ive looked over his views on some of the 'major issues' and nothing sticks out as OMG WTF so the dudes got my vote. Not tko hard to believe that he would persuade others. After all, thats what campaigning is for, yes?

[bikes]

Ignoring his stance on racism and gay rights is easy when you are straight and white. Same with immigration. It's easy to massively overlook or not care about things you take for granted.

[boost]

Racism and homophobia are two of the worst memes to have ever existed. To brush them aside as unimportant minor issues is an egregious mistake. Yes, these other issues are important, but sacrificing in the realm of civil rights... well, it can't be said better than this, so:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I was Protestant.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

-Martin Niemöller

edit: by the way, I'm not saying that Ron Paul is going to commit genocide, I am simply responding to your nonchalant dismissal of these all too important issues.

Also, I think what clicks with many people, as far as Paul's message goes, is that they agree that there is something wrong with millions and millions of non violent young men being incarcerated, foreign aid being given to civil rights abusing theocracies and dictatorships, American imperialism, etc. But just because someone is good at shining the spotlight on the important problems does not mean they have the correct solutions. I am personally against prohibition (against things that do not do harm to others) in almost all forms, however I think the issue of non violent offenders being locked up is far deeper than prohibition. The issue, imo, is more along the lines of the prison industrial complex abusing it's lobbying power by way of influencing institutionalized racism. Maybe you agree, maybe you don't, but simply pointing out where the important problems lie is only half the battle, and the easy half if you ask me.

[Roid_Rage]

Bikes obv nailed it. Being straight and white is a massive advantage.

As that regards to his stances on gay rights, immigration, racism, etc. I still haven't seen any glaring leaks in his game there. Get rid of the illegal aliens, if possible. Use recently brought home troops from said 900 bases from overseas and use them to bolster our borders, and build new bases to increase national defenses.

And the dude is actively protesting how blacks are punished at an insanely higher rate than any other race, even though whites are more likely to use and distribute illegal drugs. Don't really see what anyone's problem is with him. He advocates states picking their stances on pretty much every controversial issue, which is the correct line imo. Can't know what works until you have 50 solutions to weed out the shitty ones.

[wufwugy]

Paul certainly has a bunch of terrible positions. He's a disaster on nearly everything, but he's also the only person talking about a couple hugely important things i.e. the drug and foreign wars.

I do not think he's a smart person. He doesn't believe stuff because it's right, he believes it based in some rigid and silly ideology. He appears to be unable to examine himself, or doesn't feel like he should. On civil rights and economics, he's a fool. Those positions are also very weird and convoluted

For examples of where Paul is the worst, look to disease prevention and health care. If he had his way, there would be no way to combat an outbreak of a disease or virus. This is quite literally an example of where we need government "intervention", but Paul doesn't care because he thinks the government is always the problem. On health care, he has a list of tenets on his site, a couple are all right, but most of them are utterly insane.

An example is he wants to give payroll tax cuts to people with a terminal illness. That has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Seriously, it's stupider than thinking you can put wings on a car and fly away, or that a good way to save up to buy a house is to not lose your pocket change. It is mind-bogglingly stupid, and Paul supports it because of his infallible, rigid ideology that says payroll cuts are magic. At least when other Republicans promote tax cuts, it's because they want more money for themselves and their rich buddies, but Paul's idea would have zero effect on the rich, it would have no effect on anybody

Paul's policies are good for drugs, war, and internet; most everything else pretty much sucks

[BankItDrew]

Paul's policies are good for drugs.... and internet

I'm game.

[Roid_Rage]

Considering drugs and war are two massive issues atm, VOTE FOR RON PAUL!

Worst case scenario is he gets elected, gets the ball rolling, 4 years later we vote in his kid to clean up dad's mess on the other stuff. EZ PZ LEMON SQUeeZE

[boost]

Considering drugs and war are two massive issues atm, VOTE FOR RON PAUL!

Worst case scenario is he gets elected, gets the ball rolling, 4 years later we vote in his kid to clean up dad's mess on the other stuff. EZ PZ LEMON SQUeeZE

oh, that doesn't sound familiar at all-- wait a second...

[bikes]

you sir win an internet.

[Roid_Rage]

It doesn't count cuz he's not from Texahhh...shit nevermind.

[dranger7070]

BOB DOLE

[wufwugy]

looks like massive electoral fraud in maine. romney/establishment gop stole the caucuses from paul

The BRAD BLOG : More on The Maine Republican Party's Stolen 2012 GOP Caucuses - And How It Appears They Did It...

[dranger7070]

Shocker.

[BooG690]

Ron Paul gaining momentum:

"I Think Ron Paul Just Won Iowa!" Rachel Maddow April 23, 2012 - YouTube!
Ron Paul wins Minnesota and Iowa - Romney lollygags along as the media darling

[dranger7070]

Lol, seems too little, too late, no?

[dranger7070]

Snap. Just read your link. Haven't been paying much attention to this stuff the last 6-8 weeks and didn't realize Santorum dropped out. ONE TIME RON PAUL.

[wufwugy]

It's partly an inside joke. Paul isn't a contender, and nobody really knows what he's doing. Perhaps he's looking to get stronger placement in the RNC through delegate acquisition, but he's not gonna get that far even then

[BooG690]

Brokered convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ONE TIME!

[a500lbgorilla]

Paul v Obama would break our entire generation.

[kiwiMark]

Did you guys know Obama's black?

[a500lbgorilla]

He's a well-melanined white, bro.

[kiwiMark]

Having dark skin doesn't make somebody malign, that's totally uncalled for.

[wufwugy]

hu, paul only got 40% against romney in virginia

paul has no chance whatsoever in any national primary or general. ive defended him more than just about anybody other than his diehard paulites, but i still wouldnt vote for him against obama. i would very much like to see some places the debate would go, but not others. besides, the gop would sabotage paul if they had to; they will not let him or his opinions be the majority position of the party. the gop is pro-fascism (business/government merger), pro-war, pro-racism, pro-evangelical, pro-inequality, and pro-ignorance. paul is only like half of those, so he's never getting anywhere nationally

don't forget the quote "that which paul believes that is right, he believes for the wrong reasons". he is very much a paleoconservative whose ideals are not much similar to anything remotely progressive and cultured. it's really wild west stuff

also dont forget that his ideologies are not logistically applicable either. libertarians have a lot of these problems too. one example is the idea of private property. the right-wing stops there, all they say is "private-property", but don't understand what it takes to actually enforce private property. what it takes, in the real world, is some extremely expensive and intrusive government. waaaaaaay more than what is found in socialism. so you can't have ideas like private property and small government at the same time.

[wufwugy]

Ron Paul wins Maine : politics

[BooG690]

Ron Paul wins Maine : politics

<sarcasm>This has restored my faith in the American election system</sarcasm>

[JKDS]

[kiwiMark]

don't you guys have to choose a new bossman, like, this year though? would've thought your teams had to pick captains by now so they can debate for my pleasure and such

[wufwugy]

i think the final primary date is in like june or july. and if they dont actually get somebody with a majority of votes (ahem, delegates), then all bets are off and anybody can be chosen

It'll still be Romney though. The only way it couldn't be is if the disease that kept propelling each new "not-Romney" up the ladder is still at play, at the delegate level, and technically able to keep Romney from getting a majority of state votes

I don't think there's any way Paul can win because enough of the big states are winner-take-all, where Romney will win

This could get interesting if there are a couple key things happening. Paulites would think of it as a huge victory for their agenda, but reality is it would still be a huge part of the not-Romney thing

[wufwugy]

BTW, Romney can't win the General. I'm not sure why he has the rich donors he does. Actually, I am sure: they have way too much money, and they're all buddy buddies. This is a game at the country club for them.

But anyways, Romney can't win because he is simply not popular enough. We would need another financial collapse at be losing a ton of jobs for Obama to not get reelected IMO

[Renton]

Romney up 3 and 5 points in the latest polls. I basically agree with you wufwugy but it's hard to ignore that Romney has steadily been climbing in the GE polls in the past few weeks.

[wufwugy]

I don't think GE polls this far out are reliable. Plus Romney got a post-confirmation boost

Anyways, the key states polling is a bit different. Obama is doing quite well in places like Ohio and Virginia

I have Obama winning every state he did last time except Indiana, North Carolina, and Florida. The Southwest is shifting blue quite swiftly by way of regional influence of the West and Hispanics. It's possible that Arizona will actually be a swing state.

The same can be said for the entire North (except redneck Indiana). Virginia looks like they have some crazy demographic shifts that may have made them lean blue, and Ohio is in the process of becoming a blue stronghold, I think.

Another sort of polling that is more important to look at is favorability among women. While Obama has lost some of his enormous lead in young voters, he's gained enormously in women. And as Woody told Ed Harris in Game Change, Romney couldn't win if he lost women by 5 points. Which he's gonna do. The Dems were pretty brilliant on the whole contraception thing, they let the GOP make women fucking hate them. Like the GOP has done their racist/religious Southern Strategy, the Dems seem to be picking up on a Womens Strategy (plus minorities, youths, urban, and North)

I'm trying to keep this short, but just one more point I want to make is that regional influence is such a huge deal. It's why Santorum did so well in the MidNorth states. Anyways, Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado are becoming like the West and the Hispanics; Iowa has always been rather reasonable in the GE, but the stuff Barry has done with Michigan is making that whole region a bit stronger, and I think the stuff with women is making states like Iowa and Ohio much more powerfully blue; and Virginia may be shifting blue. On the flip side, Florida is fucking crazy because they should be much more blue than they are, but they get a ton of encroachment from the South (and old people), so it's possible they eventually become a somewhat solid red. But every other state that is shifting is doing so on the blue side

GOP is in loads of trouble. Especially when you consider their politics rely on white men, yet in just a few decades, they won't be able to win one single General due to minorities being the majority


The sense of it is that Obama has many, many paths to win, while Romney has very few, and they're all rather difficult to pull off

[wufwugy]

If you haven't seen it, this site is tight to play around with

2012 Presidential Election Interactive Map and History of the Electoral College

Texas is gonna be a swing state by 2024 IMO. Then it's game over for the GOP, but they won't change because their inbred curmudgeon voters will still be not dead