# Start Here > Ron Paul Forum >  Official CNN Tea Party Express Debate Thread

## afwjam

CNN is hosting the debate today, Sep 12th from 8-10 PM Est.
Wolf Blitzer will be the host.
The debate will be broadcast live on CNN, CNN International, CNN.com, and CNN Radio. The debate will be available via live stream in the CNN Apps for iPhone, iPad and Android.

----------


## eleganz

Watch it on alternative stream sites like justin.tv, support alternative media as much as possible!

----------


## afwjam

> Watch it on alternative stream sites like justin.tv, support alternative media as much as possible!


Good idea, post any streams you know of.

----------


## Ronpauljones

Ron will do alot better in this debate than last time. Even though I think he did well with what he was given.

He has to answer whatever questions he wants instead of the actual question given to him. Since of course they ask relevant questions of other candidates and give him BS questions. 

Wolf: What was your favorite episode of Charles In Charge?

Ron: We need to end the Fed and bring the troops home. And here is what I would do with social security...

----------


## Hospitaller

*moderators ask Ron an aloof question

*Ron is talking

*Coughing and interuptions by moderators

*ron finishes talking

*Audience erupts in applause

*Wolf/Moderator: Please could we keep the applause to a minimum as we want to give more time to the candidates

Tell me im wrong

----------


## Darin

> From his website:
> 
> "I will balance the budget in the first year of my term.  I will not allow the Federal Reserve to destroy the value of our money by shoveling dollars into the pockets of its banker friends."


Big win for Tea Party. This needs to be brought up.

- Darin

----------


## zHorns

> *moderators ask Ron an aloof question
> 
> *Ron is talking
> 
> **Coughing and interuptions by moderators*
> 
> *ron finishes talking
> 
> *Audience erupts in applause
> ...


I've noticed this happening a lot. Every time Paul talks you can hear people coughing and playing with their mics.

Oh no, Paul is talking truth, *cough* *cough*, don't listen to the man making sense, *cough* *cough*.

----------


## lucky_bg

I have suggestion - everyone with twitter account should tweet tonight with hashtag #rpfs, instead of posting here. Using hashtags #RonPaul and #CNNTeaParty is required. That way we can get Ron Paul trending on twitter. It is much more worthwhile then posting at the official debate thread, and searching for #rpfs on twitter will provide you with a live feed of forums members tweets about debate, just like at the official debate thread.

----------


## KingNothing

> I have suggestion - everyone with twitter account should tweet tonight with hashtag #rpfs, instead of posting here. Using hashtags #RonPaul and #CNNTeaParty is required. That way we can get Ron Paul trending on twitter. It is much more worthwhile then posting at the official debate thread, and searching for #rpfs on twitter will provide you with a live feed of forums members tweets about debate, just like at the official debate thread.


This is genius.

----------


## TexMac

> I have suggestion - everyone with twitter account should tweet tonight with hashtag #rpfs, instead of posting here. Using hashtags #RonPaul and #CNNTeaParty is required. That way we can get Ron Paul trending on twitter. It is much more worthwhile then posting at the official debate thread, and searching for #rpfs on twitter will provide you with a live feed of forums members tweets about debate, just like at the official debate thread.


Great idea.  Please keep it positive if you do this!

----------


## lucky_bg

> Great idea.  Please keep it positive if you do this!


Always positive as we want good Dr to be proud of us as much as we are proud of him.

----------


## acptulsa

> Great idea.  Please keep it positive if you do this!


Except, of course, when you're talking about Wolf Blitzkreig.

----------


## speciallyblend

clearly by cnn polls Ron Paul is now the CLEAR Tea Party Candidate. I would love to see cnn try to sell romney or perry(gop est shills) as tea party!  this debate would be a great way for ron paul to call perry and romney out on almost every issue!!  just my overall suggestion on how the campaign should approach the debate tonight and use talking points calling out their big gov ways and how he is the tea party! along those lines using issues!!

----------


## Bruno

Wondering if Paul and/or Perry be asked about the exchange of words and the laying of hands on Paul at the podium last week?

----------


## Tod

> *moderators ask Ron an aloof question
> 
> *Ron is talking
> 
> *Coughing and interuptions by moderators
> 
> *ron finishes talking
> 
> *Audience erupts in applause
> ...


That is EXACTLY how it goes!

And then the moderators let one of the other participants make some ridiculous claim (and the mods smile and nod in agreement and crack joke with them) and Dr. Paul isn't allowed a rebuttal that would flatten the ridiculous claim.

----------


## Tod

> I have suggestion - everyone with twitter account should tweet tonight with hashtag #rpfs, instead of posting here. Using hashtags #RonPaul and #CNNTeaParty is required. That way we can get Ron Paul trending on twitter. It is much more worthwhile then posting at the official debate thread, and searching for #rpfs on twitter will provide you with a live feed of forums members tweets about debate, just like at the official debate thread.


I have a twitter account but have never used a hashtag.  Do you just tweet and include that text (#rpfs) as part of the tweet?

edit:  oh, and what does rpfs stand for???

----------


## tfurrh

Its a full moon tonight. Perry will probably go into a rage, then turn into the wolfman. Wolf Blitzer may or may not be packing silver bullets.

----------


## Evilfox

> I've noticed this happening a lot. Every time Paul talks you can hear people coughing and playing with their mics.
> 
> Oh no, Paul is talking truth, *cough* *cough*, don't listen to the man making sense, *cough* *cough*.


\

thats pretty spot on

----------


## Jake Ralston

The media hacks are marketing this race as a sort of "Cowboy Showdown" between Perry and Romney. They even put 'em both on center stage last debate.

Now, we know the debate was rigged from the start, but how much extra time were both Perry and Romney given for "rebuttals" and other type of responses to each other's attacks? A lot of time.

I'm calling on Ron Paul to PLEASE get his hands a little dirty and go on the attack to both Perry and Romney next debate. He can't keep standing up there relying on intellectual theories, because he will get left behind.

I hate to say this, but he kind of needs to start acting a little bit more like a politician.

----------


## Chieppa1

I really really really hope they ask Ron and Perry about SS. Hopefully Perry first, then Ron can give an actual answer has to way its a Ponzi Scheme, opt-out, cut over-seas to provide $$. I know the pundits are trying to split the Tea Party/GOP down the SS line.

----------


## JamesButabi

He doesn't need to act like a politician because he doesn't need to lie about other candidates or distort facts.  What he does need to do is elicit an emotional response from the viewers.  He needs to convey his positions to show strength in a time of need (because thats what they are) and yes that does mean he needs talking points.

"You have heard the talking points from every candidate on the stage.  *Look at the records*; These are my positions.  My entire career shows it.  I'm running to save this country from fiscal ruin.  I'm running to protect this country with the strongest defense possible and to put an end to the endless war.  I'm running to save the people dependent on our entitlement systems and release a new generation from their binds.  Im running for peace and for freedom.  The question is are you ready for prosperity and responsibility once again America?

----------


## lucky_bg

> I have a twitter account but have never used a hashtag.  Do you just tweet and include that text (#rpfs) as part of the tweet?
> 
> edit:  oh, and what does rpfs stand for???


#rpfs stands for Ron Paul Forums. That way we can track what people from forums are tweeting. Log in twitter now, and search for #rpfs, and you will see all tweets with that hasgtag, in chronological order. Also, you will see usualy used format of tweets. And, it is in the form of live feed, meaning every new tweet with that hashtag would be added to timeline without need to repeat search.

In tweet you make same kind of statement, suggestion, question, comment, or whatever, and if there are some important words in the tweet, you want to underline or draw attention to, you put # in front of them, making them hashtags that way, so that all other tweeps (people who are tweeting) can track your opinion and comments on the subject.

Also you add additional hashtags at the end of the tweet related to the subject you are tweeting about or directed at the audience you are addressing with the tweet. In this case, #ronpaul #rpfs and #CNNTeaParty is necessary, but you can also add #GOP, #debate, #tcot ( top conservatives on twitter), #tlot(top libertarians on twitter), #TeaParty, #r3VOLution, etc.

The more hashtags you use, the better, and You are only limited with 140 characters maximal lenght of the tweet, so it is good to use words in such manner in tweets to make a statement with words you can use as a hashtags at the same time. It is not so complicated after some practice, and you see other people's tweets so you can compare your tweets to other tweets on the subject. And You can always retweet other people's tweets, meaning that you are sending these tweets to your followers on twitter. You usually retweet tweets you find important, interesting, funny, etc. 

I hope this was helpfull to You. 

_Edit: Here is tweet I sent to promote this:_

JovicicMilan Milan Jovicic 
Please RT this. Join as tonight @RonPaulForums live #CNNTeaParty #debate discussion with #RPFs #hashtag added to Your tweets. #RonPaul #tcot

http://twitter.com/#!/JovicicMilan/s...81290601631744

_If you retweet this tweet, you will help promote it, and we will have more people join us at twitter debate discusion, making it more likely to get Ron Paul trending on twitter and hopefully become one of the hot topics of the day on twitter. (10 most popular topics of the day, listed at the right side of twitter user home page.
_

----------


## C_J_Burns

He can be sure that Rick Santorum is coming after him this time around. He should have the points he wants to make on 9/11 and 'isolationism' written out already. Hopefully he brings up the irony that they want to build a wall around this country, yet label him as the isolationist. Also when talking about foreign policy, try to bring up the emotional appeal the these 'so-called' Christian Conservatives.

----------


## JamesButabi

BTW it is confirmed that Perry and Romney will once again be side by side.  Get ready for the lovefest.

----------


## TheSecretBillionaire

> Wolf: What was your favorite episode of Charles In Charge?
> 
> Ron: We need to end the Fed and bring the troops home. And here is what I would do with social security...


That made me lol... I hope he changes the subject. Also, I hope we get attacked by other candidates because Ron just plain owns them...
Remeber Rudy in the debates?

----------


## afwjam

I am getting the impression that a lot less people will be watching this debate.

----------


## Bruno

> I am getting the impression that a lot less people will be watching this debate.


Why?

----------


## Diashi

Does anyone know how to get an audio stream only for Android so I can listen to it on the way home from work?

----------


## afwjam

> Why?


A lot less buzz

----------


## afwjam

> Does anyone know how to get an audio stream only for Android so I can listen to it on the way home from work?


CNN has an android app that will be streaming it, dunno if you can do audio only.

----------


## KingNothing

> No offense, but that's not that wide of a demographic. 
> 
> If I asked how many people in my circle liked the Philly Eagles NFL team, I'd get a 90% hatred rate. I'm sure they're liked much more nationally than in Dallas, TX.
> 
> Sorry, but I wouldn't spout off a claim that RP would poll higher based on what a few friends and family say.



He's got a point.  Ron is not a perfect candidate.  But he shouldn't say that Paul can't make hay.  This time in 2007, he was polling at 1%.  Now he's polling 14% with a serious shot at winning iowa, and possibly NH if he can get enough independents and democrats out to vote.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Of course not.  I appreciate your analysis.


I agree with Inkblots on this one.

----------


## KingNothing

> Ron getting booed is never a good thing and having it near the end of the debate for a lasting impression is even worse. For some, he getting booed will be the highlight of his overall performance.


Meh.  Not many voters watch the debates, and of those, how many do you think actually care about the response of the crowd?

----------


## AuH20

> If the so-called "conservative base" truly are a bunch of sociopathic nutjobs waxing orgasmic over the thought of Palestinian children being slaughtered by a totalitarian regime in Tel Aviv with the American people's money, then $#@! the conservative base.


Now you're lashing out like a child. The same twits on the other side deride Ron Paulers as adolescents who just want to get high all day. I hate reading crap like this.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

> The GOP sucks but the libertarian party is an utter joke. I don't even think they can collectively agree on what day it is.


Lol, how dare you say such a thing, they try so hard and stuff. If I only retracted my Paul donations and gave it to the LP.. But ya, the LP has been a wash and I'm glad that I gave up on them years ago outside of voting for 'em last time. The highest I'd ever give to an LP prez candidate is like a 100$ but I've dealt a lot more in the gop parade w/ Paul.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> The libertarian movement is a fearsome creature. What's there imprint? 2 to 3 percent nationally? The GOP sucks but the libertarian party is an utter joke. I don't even think they can collectively agree on what day it is.


And I don't see how that was even a response to what I said.

----------


## PubliUS_CorneliUS_TacitUS

> +1
> 
> I was blown away when I saw that a candidate was telling the truth about how many innocents we have killed. I didn't know any congressman was capable of being that honest.


+1 as well

It was Ron Paul's original response in 2007 about Blowback that got me researching.  I doubt that Rudy read his assigned reading but I did and man it opened up my eyes.  Then I couldn't get enough RP news.  Found LewRockwell and Mises.org and the transformation began.

----------


## chudrockz

> Now you're lashing out like a child. The same twits on the other side deride Ron Paulers as adolescents who just want to get high all day. I hate reading crap like this.


If you truly hate reading "crap" such as that Ron Paul's most ardent supporters oppose being forced to pay for mass murder in the Middle East, then there's really no hope for you.

----------


## KingNothing

> Ari Fleisher:  I still think Jon Huntsman has a shot at this thing


If I'm ron paul, I'm pulling a Carcetti and helping Huntsman stay in the race like Tommy did for Tony Gray.

Huntsman is a guy they need to pull support away from Romney.

----------


## specsaregood

> Did you hear yourself say that?  "Paul getting boo'd was a good thing... since it will leave an impression."  Reeeeaaalllyy??


It can be; because every person sitting at home watching that debate that agreed with Dr. Paul just got booed right along with him. that motivates people.  and Dr. paul is in the majority here.

----------


## Standing Liberty

I am not sure why I watch these debates because it just raises my blood pressure. Ron did great when allowed to speak. But it never fails, every single F'n time, they bring up a subject like the Fed or Health care and obviously ignore him. Then ask him a stupid question about school lunch or hot pockets.
As far as the audience booing, did you get a good look at these people. It looked like an audition for the Stepford Wives. Screw these Chicken Hawk Neocons are brainwashed beyond repair. These things is so rigged.

----------


## Feelgood

> I have 5,000 posts. Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders?


Being a forum whore does not make you all knowing. Having every post be about how you think Ron is a screw up, is not something I really wish to see either. One or two posts is more then adequate, for us to understand your seeming disdain for Ron. If you wish to add something constructive to the conversation, great. Would be nice if you could tone down the hate rhetoric you have for Ron. I'm not the slathering fanboy most here are, but damn I'm not going to sit here and just slam the guy all night. By your posts, he lost all his toes long ago, time to let it go now.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

Not that I saw the rest of the debate, but what was the circumstances of which ron got booed?

----------


## turbobrain9

> Here's the thing.  On the one hand you want Ron Paul to be perfect - he isn't.  On the on the other hand I think we all understand for him to get over the top poll wise, his public presentations are going to have to be perfect and on point to overcome the media blackout.  A very tough problem.  But hey, what are you going to do - look at what  4 years of imperfect messaging has brought us - the other candidates parrot all his points, and Ron is in double digits.  I am not jumping ship, and I love Ron, warts and all.  
> 
> Sk


Ron is running for the President of the US...he should be held to a higher standard and he should strive for excellence in his candidacy. He must do better if he wants to win and he has to contend with the media blackout by adopting a new strategy...he has to buck the moderators and answer the questions he wish he was asked just like everyone else does...he doesn't show strenght when he doesn't...

----------


## Badger Paul

*"Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders? "
*
No it isn't nor should it be. But if you referring to the 9-11 answer, the answer he gave is no different than what he told Rudy Guliani four years ago. Not one iota of difference. So where's the blunder? Because he said it? Because some neocons in the audience booed who weren't going to vote for him anyway? Hell, half the people on these forums are here because he did say it back in 2007. 

He's at 13 percent in the latest poll despite every so-called "blunder" in every debate whether it was "heroin" or "Iran" or "border fences".  

Maybe it's two-percenters out there like Rick Santorum who should wise up and learn what many in the foreign policy community have said instead of acting like junior-league Rudy. Yeah, tell us what happened to that fellow!

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Ron's not perfect.  He does have faults.  It's obvious that he doesn't use buzz-words or follow the recommendations of people like Frank Luntz.  I wish he would tie his wonderful message with a slick delivery that plays on the subconscious of the listern.... but he won't.  He will just deliver an honest message, supported by logic and built on a foundation off consistency.
> 
> He DOES win over undecideds, moderate conservatives, independents, and democrats when he speaks as he did tonight.  Nights like tonight... they're what started this whole Revolution!


I for one am happy to be slickified so long as it does not damage the message.  Simply because I want to make an impact.  Slickification takes money though.  I do well enough by being fast on my feet with a sharp response at least.  I can take these complex policy issues and return one-liners pretty easily.  Probably because I Twitter.

----------


## anaconda

> Meh.  Not many voters watch the debates, and of those, how many do you think actually care about the response of the crowd?


Independents cheering Ron at home far outnumber the 2 or 3 frat boy yahoos booing for peace.

----------


## KingNothing

> I just don't want to be banned for completely losing my $#@!...besides, more flies with honey than vinegar, or something like that?
> 
> I just can't believe that I can no longer align myself with the Tea Party!  Some of them are my best customers...I'm going to have to step up and educate those who will listen, and continue to wake those who are ready to be unplugged.  
> 
> As much as I want to give in and give up, I'm just going to have to redouble my collection of Red Pills.
> 
> BTW
> 
> Ari Fleicher is on CNN right now.  Go to hell, Ari, you Clinton administration retread retard has been hack COCK SUCKER



To be fair, the "tea party" you saw tonight is only a small piece of the Tea Party.  All it takes is a group of four or five people to boo or applaud to generate the sort of response we heard tonight to a few of the comments.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> "Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders? "
> 
> If you referring to the 9-11 answer, the answer he gave is no different than what he told Rudy Guliani four years ago. Not one iota of difference. So where's the blunder? Because he said it? Because some neocons in the audience booed who weren't going to vote for him anyway? Hell, half the people on these forums are here because he did say it back in 2007. He's at 13 percent in the latest poll despite every so-called "blunder" whether it was "heroin" or "Iran" or "border fences".  
> 
> Maybe it's two-percenters out there like Rick Santorum who should wise up and learn what many in the foreign policy community have said instead of acting like junior-league Rudy. Yeah, tell us what happened to that fellow!


No, it more that he needs to focus less on UBL's rationale, and use the same data from the 9/11 commission report, and Michael Scheurer.  It's the perception issue.  If he drops UBL and talks up the "sanctioned" sources, those boos either stay silent or convert to cheers.

----------


## KramerDSP

Twitter as of right now:




> JesseRoyce007 Jesse Johnson 
> So Ron Paul should just go ahead and say he's a democrat. #switchpartiesdude





> kevibo75 Kevin Pritchard 
> @ @rolandsmartin @andersoncooper didn't ron paul say letting that uninsured person should die just send a chill down ur spine ? I am mad





> cliffordmerin11 Clifford A. Merin 
> during the portion on the fed reserve during the GOP debate, wolf blitzer doesnt ask a SINGLE QUESTION TO RON PAUL WHO WROTE A BOOK ON IT


Love Ron Paul or Hate Ron Paul, he riles people up and everyone has an opinion on him. I'm guessing 85% name recognition now despite a near media blackout. If only he were talked about 24/7 like Perry, he'd easily be the national frontrunner.

----------


## DrN0

> He's got a point.  Ron is not a perfect candidate.  But he shouldn't say that Paul can't make hay.  This time in 2007, he was polling at 1%.  Now he's polling 14% with a serious shot at winning iowa, and possibly NH if he can get enough independents and democrats out to vote.


To win NH, he just needs enough money and well tailored ads...

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Ron's not perfect.  He does have faults.  It's obvious that he doesn't use buzz-words or follow the recommendations of people like Frank Luntz.  I wish he would tie his wonderful message with a slick delivery that plays on the subconscious of the listern.... but he won't.  He will just deliver an honest message, supported by logic and built on a foundation off consistency.
> 
> He DOES win over undecideds, moderate conservatives, independents, and democrats when he speaks as he did tonight.  Nights like tonight... they're what started this whole Revolution!


Again, how is that even a response to what I said?  I never said Ron was perfect.  Iw as talking about people who claim to know what words are best and how much it will increase his support.  It's an exercise in futility to argue over stuff like that.  Ron's not perfect, but neither are we.

----------


## AuH20

> If you truly hate reading "crap" such as that Ron Paul's most ardent supporters oppose being forced to pay for mass murder in the Middle East, then there's really no hope for you.


Mass murder? Saddam, being a brutal dictator was the only glue holding that state together. When the U.S. unwisely decided to remove him, civil war was inevitable when all the hostile factions were unleashed. I don't think they went in there with the purpose of mass murdering Iraqi citizens. That's insane. Of course, they wanted the resources, but the mass murder thing is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY OVER THE TOP.  It's almost as ridiculous as when Hot Air commenters refer to Ron Paul as fervently anti-Semitic.

----------


## wstrucke

> Oh, but I think you underestimate how seriously some people take this.  They're all about "Paul should do it this way and his numbers will increase by X amount!"  It's not about that.  Nobody can claim to know that, and I know not everyone's saying that, but to think you know what will be viewed either overwhelmingly favorably or unfavorably in the eyes of the public is pure hogwash.  I don't need to chill out.  People need to chill out about Ron Paul's "numbers."  Stop thinking it's my way or the highway and realize Ron is doing what he thinks is best.  None of us can claim to know whether or not or how much support any individual statement will bring him.  Again, some people really seem to think that it's their responsibility to tell Paul that their way is the best way, when they should just realize that they can't claim to know these things.  To state otherwise is to be full of oneself.


I will try to speak slowly for you to you can understand.  Some of us have been through all of this before during the last election cycle -- I suspect we all understand the reality of the situation.

I can not understand your reaction to this -- it appears to be completely out of proportion.  Did someone say "it's my way or the highway" and I missed that?  A fairly simple, and mild if I may say so, point was made.  There are a huge number of ridiculous, inflammatory things being said around here that are much more worthy of your criticism and scorn than the simple suggestion that speaking more clearly is more understandable.

As an aside, to your suggestion that "Nobody can claim to know that" -- you know what?  Normally I would err on the side of caution, but in this instance, yes, I will definitely claim that if RP spoke in simpler more understandable terms, he would have more supporters.  There are a lot of people that have no idea they agree with him because they just hear an old man rambling, see him dismissed by the media, and don't bother to do any research on their own.  That's also why I agree with the idea of us raising as much money as we can -- because the only way besides getting Ron Paul in a one on one to truly understand how incredibly intelligent he is, is to present the message well in a paid advertisement (or individual word of mouth).

----------


## KingNothing

> Independents cheering Ron at home far outnumber the 2 or 3 frat boy yahoos booing for peace.



I completely agree.  I can personally attest that every friend I have who watched the debate -and republicans, democrats, teapartiers included (though, all under the age off 40)- was appalled by the crowd's behavior, and receptive to everything Paul said tonight, ESPECIALLY his take on the wars.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> The greatest strength of the RP army is in some respects it's greatest weakness. This strength derived from being the extreme minority sometimes conjures this paranoia in that every dissenting opinion is somehow tied to a more nefarious motive. You can't just disagree with Ron in a civil fashion, but you must be forced to wear the clothes of a bloodthirsty adversary.


The strongest trees grow in the strongest wind.  Regardless of 2012's outcome, if America can hold tight long enough, these last two or three generations of sheeple that represent the majority of the American electorate (retired SSI recipients, greedy baby boomers, 60's retreads) will die off.  Literally, not figuratively - my argument is that someday, the stupid people will simply assume room temperature, leaving nothing but liberty loving, highly motivated, intelligent men and women that supported the latter-day George Washington, Ron Paul, waaay back in 2012.

The battle to wrench American Liberty back from the jaws of the globalist NWO - as well as the ignorant sheeple representing the (seemingly) overwhelming section of the electorate - will go on for decades.

It will go on for decades, if America survives that long, God willing.  I and those I know are ready to go to war to restore Liberty in this country.  For now, we are content to do battle at the ballot box.  This is the path our founders laid out for us in our Constitution.  

All I know is, that long train of usurpations and abridgments of liberty is getting awful goddamn long.

----------


## KingNothing

> Again, how is that even a response to what I said?  I never said Ron was perfect.  Iw as talking about people who claim to know what words are best and how much it will increase his support.  It's an exercise in futility to argue over stuff like that.  Ron's not perfect, but neither are we.


lol hey Mr. Combative, I'm on your side here.

----------


## runamuck

So, according to Santorum and the rest of the brainwashed rats; terrorists attack us because we stand for "freedom and opportunity for everyone around the world". Yet, just moments earlier he was saying how badly we need to erect an enormous fence to keep all those pesky foreigners out. 

Hmm ok...

----------


## Feelgood

Well I think we would all have to agree, the Tea Party as it is, has pretty much been completely co-opted by the Bachmann's, Palin's, Cain's and others that wish to preach under the banner of the Tea Party. We all know who wears the only real shroud of the Tea Party.

----------


## specsaregood

> Not that I saw the rest of the debate, but what was the circumstances of which ron got booed?


motivations behind 9/11.

----------


## KingNothing

> Twitter as of right now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love Ron Paul or Hate Ron Paul, he riles people up and everyone has an opinion on him. I'm guessing 85% name recognition now despite a near media blackout. If only he were talked about 24/7 like Perry, he'd easily be the national frontrunner.



Especially if the talk around him were framed similarly to the media talk around Perry and Romney.

----------


## cavalier973

For Rick Santorum and his ilk:
ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd8jPKwArsM

----------


## FSP-Rebel

I just saw what Ron said and heard the booes. What a Tea Party, Huh?!

----------


## anaconda

I would say Wolf pretty much actively sabotaged Ron. Ron should blow him off same as he did Hannity.

----------


## KingNothing

> No, it more that he needs to focus less on UBL's rationale, and use the same data from the 9/11 commission report, and Michael Scheurer.  It's the perception issue.  If he drops UBL and talks up the "sanctioned" sources, those boos either stay silent or convert to cheers.



Agreed.  He needs to Dumb It Down, as Lupe would say.  That might be the next step for the campaign to take -- start to understand what words and phrases bring out positive responses from the voters, and use that sort of language to describe his stance.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> Mass murder? Saddam, being a brutal dictator was the only glue holding that state together. When the U.S. unwisely decided to remove him, civil war was inevitable when all the hostile factions were unleashed. I don't think they went in there with the purpose of mass murdering Iraqi citizens. That's insane. Of course, they wanted the resources, but the mass murder thing is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY OVER THE TOP.  It's almost as ridiculous as when Hot Air commenters refer to Ron Paul as fervently anti-Semitic.


The CIA put Saddam in power.  The CIA armed him and sent him to war against Iran.  The CIA then sew seeds of discontent throughout the 90's through economic sanctions, via the UN.

The CIA then deposed Saddam.  Then they killed him.  

Remove "Saddam" from my sentences and replace with the words "Bin Laden," and I will still be right.  

Would you like another cup of coffee to help you wake up?  Good evening.

----------


## Razmear

> To win NH, he just needs enough money and well tailored ads...


He's catching on!

----------


## KingNothing

> I would say Wolf pretty much actively sabotaged Ron. Ron should blow him off same as he did Hannity.


It did seem that Wolf cut him  off a few times, but Wolf has been VERY fair to Ron in interviews and Cafferty even more so.  Gotta keep those guys on our side.

----------


## Valli6

> Not that I saw the rest of the debate, but what was the circumstances of which ron got booed?


It was the same circumstance as when he got booed in 2007 with Gulliani, only it was Santorum being an arrogant ass this time. The "You blame America" crap. Remember _Tea Party Express_ people were heavily involved here, and they were created by political consultants and insiders, not real grass roots.

----------


## messana

> Meh.  Not many voters watch the debates, and of those, how many do you think actually care about the response of the crowd?


It was great when Ron got applause for the drug question in Fox's South Carolina debate. It shows independents and the undecided that he was a viable candidate even when promoting his 'unconventional' views. But to turn our backs when the opposite happens would be a mistake.

----------


## JasonC

is there a tube yet? sorry, i'm not lazy.. just have been very busy tonight and missed the debate. I'm still busy... but I'll listen to it in the background on my comp. Thanks in advance.

----------


## Razmear

> I just saw what Ron said and heard the booes. What a Tea Party, Huh?!


We lose some neo-cons who would never vote for Ron anyways and gain many more 'blue republicans' every time this happens, so it's an over all win. 
Any one who believes the 'they hate us for our freedom' BS isn't gonna wake up and vote for Ron in the primaries, but we'll still have their vote in the general. 

eb

----------


## Dorfsmith

> is there a tube yet? sorry, i'm not lazy.. just have been very busy tonight and missed the debate. I'm still busy... but I'll listen to it in the background on my comp. Thanks in advance.

----------


## Razmear

> 


Is 9:54 his total speaking time? that's worse than the last debate.

----------


## AuH20

> The CIA put Saddam in power.  The CIA armed him and sent him to war against Iran.  The CIA then sew seeds of discontent throughout the 90's through economic sanctions, via the UN.
> 
> The CIA then deposed Saddam.  Then they killed him.  
> 
> Remove "Saddam" from my sentences and replace with the words "Bin Laden," and I will still be right.  
> 
> Would you like another cup of coffee to help you wake up?  Good evening.


Yes, cold war rationale that eventually backfired a couple decades later. No one is disputing this. The CIA  is a criminal syndicate. 

But I think Ron Paul and you are irresponsibly holding the U.S. fully responsible for a powder keg of casualties that has been percolating for a years. All it needed was a spark and it became a front line for the WoT with Iran filling the power vacuum. Once again, there wasn't a Pentagon plan to inflict as much humanitarian damage as possible. That's pure hokum. With that said, our empire has long had their sights on their vast natural resources as well as staking a base of operations in the Middle East.

----------


## KramerDSP

> Agreed.  He needs to Dumb It Down, as Lupe would say.  That might be the next step for the campaign to take -- start to understand what words and phrases bring out positive responses from the voters, and use that sort of language to describe his stance.


They're way ahead of you. They have an internal pollster. The thing though is Ron does best shooting from the hip. When he tries to read off cue cards or memorize ways to couch things (i.e., last Wednesday's debate), he comes off poorly.

----------


## Chainspell

my heart aches to see Ron Paul stand alone by himself.. hasn't this man been through enough?? 

and yet he keeps going. hes so incredible

----------


## PaulConventionWV

I thought we were the people who said, "the government doesn't know how to steer the economy because the economy is far too complex for anybody to effectively control it except for itself."  Why are we, then, trying to predict how we could increase Ron's poll numbers by altering his message?  We can't claim to know that stuff.  It's the same ignorance of the complexity of the subject.  Neither you nor I know what kind of tailoring or dumbing down would be needed, or if it would be needed at all.  It is pure arrogance to think you can spit out a sentence on a forum and say "Ron's poll numbers would increase overnight if he would just say one thing." 

Yes, Gunny, I'm calling you out.  I'm calling you and AuH2O and anyone who thinks like this.  It's hypocrisy is what it is.  I would also like to add that I don't think Ron lost a single vote overall just because a couple dozen people booed (I'm sure they had their microphones ready for that one).

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> They're way ahead of you. They have an internal pollster. The thing though is Ron does best shooting from the hip. When he tries to read off cue cards or memorize ways to couch things (i.e., last Wednesday's debate), he comes off poorly.


That's why I suggested just hang out and argue with Wead and Woods all day long so you get really sharp, but don't have to worry about cue cards.

----------


## KingNothing

I've had Google Alerts giving me "Ron Paul" since  this time in 2007.  The tenor and tone of the words written about the man has changed DRAMATICALLY.  

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...+-+Politics%29
That's the only "negative" article so far. Everthing else is positive.

----------


## ord33

Seriously, if I was in Perry's camp, I would be absolutely devastated. He really got hammered hard with the average GOP voter on illegal immigrants receiving in-state tuition (and he repeatedly over and over did poorly trying to justify it), got killed on the HPV issue, and sounded like a total idiot saying it would take more than $5k to corrupt him (on the Merck comment by Bachmann). There is no doubt to the average viewer, Perry gets hit the hardest because his real positions were revealed. I think Bachmann actually gains some and Paul up a smidgen.

The media still may say that Perry stood his ground, but I don't even think the media saying this over and over again will resonate with the average GOP voter this time around. The illegal immigration in state tuition will not play well with hardly any GOP voters.

----------


## wstrucke

> Ron is running for the President of the US...he should be held to a higher standard and he should strive for excellence in his candidacy. He must do better if he wants to win and he has to contend with the media blackout by adopting a new strategy...he has to buck the moderators and answer the questions he wish he was asked just like everyone else does...he doesn't show strenght when he doesn't...


This.  He needs to be a bit less polite.  If he spoke like Newt with his own message he would be unstoppable.

----------


## KingNothing

> They're way ahead of you. They have an internal pollster. The thing though is Ron does best shooting from the hip. When he tries to read off cue cards or memorize ways to couch things (i.e., last Wednesday's debate), he comes off poorly.


It's not surprising that the campaign is ahead of me.  They've been aces this entire cycle.

----------


## DrN0

> I will try to speak slowly for you to you can understand.  Some of us have been through all of this before during the last election cycle -- I suspect we all understand the reality of the situation.
> 
> I can not understand your reaction to this -- it appears to be completely out of proportion.  Did someone say "it's my way or the highway" and I missed that?  A fairly simple, and mild if I may say so, point was made.  There are a huge number of ridiculous, inflammatory things being said around here that are much more worthy of your criticism and scorn than the simple suggestion that speaking more clearly is more understandable.
> 
> As an aside, to your suggestion that "Nobody can claim to know that" -- you know what?  Normally I would err on the side of caution, but in this instance, yes, I will definitely claim that if RP spoke in simpler more understandable terms, he would have more supporters.  There are a lot of people that have no idea they agree with him because they just hear an old man rambling, see him dismissed by the media, and don't bother to do any research on their own.  That's also why I agree with the idea of us raising as much money as we can -- because the only way besides getting Ron Paul in a one on one to truly understand how incredibly intelligent he is, is to present the message well in a paid advertisement (or individual word of mouth).


Well said.

----------


## futfut

Did anyone notice how the Ron Paul signs were all over the place in the bars/restaurants?

----------


## AuH20

> I thought we were the people who said, "the government doesn't know how to steer the economy because the economy is far too complex for anybody to effectively control it except for itself."  Why are we, then, trying to predict how we could increase Ron's poll numbers by altering his message?  We can't claim to know that stuff.  It's the same ignorance of the complexity of the subject.  Neither you nor I know what kind of tailoring or dumbing down would be needed, or if it would be needed at all.  It is pure arrogance to think you can spit out a sentence on a forum and say "Ron's poll numbers would increase overnight if he would just say one thing." 
> 
> Yes, Gunny, I'm calling you out.  I'm calling you and AuH2O and anyone who thinks like this.  It's hypocrisy is what it is.  I would also like to add that I don't think Ron lost a single vote overall just because a couple dozen people booed (I'm sure they had their microphones ready for that one).


I don't think it's about dumbing down, but it's about message discipline. You can make the same salient points without pissing off everyone. Interventionism abroad is
(a) wasteful
(b) counterproductive
(c) un-American

You fill in that skeleton with muscle tissue & flesh and don't get caught up on complex, sensationalized details. That's pure idiocy in this type of rapid fire format.

----------


## wstrucke

> I thought we were the people who said, "the government doesn't know how to steer the economy because the economy is far too complex for anybody to effectively control it except for itself."  Why are we, then, trying to predict how we could increase Ron's poll numbers by altering his message?  We can't claim to know that stuff.  It's the same ignorance of the complexity of the subject.


Apples to oranges bro.  Read How to Win Friends and Influence People.  There is a science (literally) to bringing people over to your side of the fence, or at least having a thoughtful conversation on the subject.  Everyone knows Ron Paul is not at his best in the debates, and is often enough easily dismissed because of it.  This is a complete non issue and equating running the economy to bringing voters around is complete rubbish.

----------


## Esoteric

no post-debate poll.  figures.

----------


## specsaregood

> Did anyone notice how the Ron Paul signs were all over the place in the bars/restaurants?


Yes, love those guys.

----------


## Matthew5

I watched the highlight reel again, sorry, but RP nailed this debate. Anyone with half a brain can understand his answers...

As far as the "30 year old in a coma" question, Ron clearly says "NO" when Wolf asked him if we should let him die...it was the audience that laughed and maybe even Bachmann. 

The 9/11 question: He was clear and concise...they started booing before he even got to the Bin Laden comments. Which leads me to believe that they turned him off half way. I doubt the average viewer would have done the same, especially a democratic audience of CNN viewers.

----------


## BenIsForRon

I think he did really well in differentiating himself this time, which I think should be one of the primary goals going into the debate.  And from what I saw, his answer on foreign policy was pretty good until the end, and even then the boos weren't too bad.  He can recover from this with a good answer in the next debate.

And it's good to hear that Perry is self destructing.  Anybody have some video of his particularly bad answers and exchanges?

----------


## parocks

> Did we just witness the fall of perry....to even put that in the back of peoples minds about being bought...jesus his handlers are probably rolling over


There's so much to talk about with Perry.

3 candidates all had very good, and very different reasons for why Perry's Gardasil conduct was so completely unacceptable.

No one has told the Mike Toomey story.  The story about how Crony Capitalism works.  Mike Toomey is the Crony.

1) First he was Perry's chief of staff
2) Then he was a lobbyist for Merck
3) Now he's in charge of Perry's Super PAC.

Here's a debate question "since you said that $5,000 was an insufficently large sum of money to bribe you, do you think Toomey will get the job done for you."

I was struck by the idea that doing terrible things as a governor was thought by John King to be the type of thing that Bachmann will stop talking about if Perry apologizes for it.  As if forcibly vaccinating girls in Texas wasn't that at all, but was actually a personal insult to Bachmann.

The media has no interest in watching all Republicans tear apart Perry like a pack of hyenas, because Perry's their guy, he's a Bilderberg.

We haven't gone there yet.  Or the Trans-Texas Corridor.  So, Ron Paul brings up Bilderberg.  Then the next debate, Bachmann proclaims that under no circumstances
would she attend that terrible Globalist conference, and anyone who did is, I dunno, a traitor.  And Perry gets ripped down until he's no longer the front runner.  I'm pleased that we can share the attacks with others.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Apples to oranges bro.  Read How to Win Friends and Influence People.  There is a science (literally) to bringing people over to your side of the fence, or at least having a thoughtful conversation on the subject.  Everyone knows Ron Paul is not at his best in the debates, and is often enough easily dismissed because of it.  This is a complete non issue and equating running the economy to bringing voters around is complete rubbish.


I don't think it's apples to oranges.  It's the same attitude of "I know what we can do that would make everything better with this one little line."  And of course, it's always your line, not anybody else's.  Don't claime to know how any word stew would magically make everyone like Ron Paul and increase his poll numbers overnight.  It's absolutely the same thing and it's very arrogant.  We are not helping by nit-picking over this stuff when we could be far more effective by campaigning for the guy instead of spitting out lines on a message board.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> ...I think Ron Paul and you are irresponsibly holding the U.S. fully responsible for a powder keg of casualties that has been percolating for a years. All it needed was a spark and it became a front line for the WoT with Iran filling the power vacuum.


Alright.  

America sets up the dictator Saddam.  Remember that photo of he and Rumsfeld on the tarmac at Baghdad International airport?  We set up a custom-made stand for said powder keg.  Then we lit the fuse, by enforcing UN sanctions that crippled and debased the quality of life of the average Iraqi.  

It's time to recognize the true horror of the War on Terror: America, despite all her good intentions, was her author.  

Do you not suppose that Iran stepping in to fill the power vacuum is the next logical step of this evolution?  

Is it even possible to fix this?  Or will we only $#@! up the situation even more?

The time has come for America to admit that we have allowed our "intelligence" departments and various military agencies run amok, unchecked, for several decades - since at least 1954 with our deposing of the Iranian government - and to that end, we now invite the rest of the world to get $#@!ed and $#@! off, while we focus on more important things - for example, our own goddamn business.  This includes electrocuting those in government responsible false-flag terror attacks on our own people, closing Guantanamo bay, addressing our out of control deficits, revocation of the Patriot Act, and the end to this ridiculous war on drugs.

In other words, when it comes to the middle east, America has been fist-$#@!ing the entire area all the way up to our elbow for many decades, and it's time for it to end.

My cat gets this stuff, and he can't read English.  I think he's here illegally.  Damn cat.

----------


## AuH20

> Alright.  
> 
> America sets up the dictator Saddam.  Remember that photo of he and Rumsfeld on the tarmac at Baghdad International airport?  We set up a custom-made stand for said powder keg.  Then we lit the fuse, by enforcing UN sanctions that crippled and debased the quality of life of the average Iraqi.  
> 
> It's time to recognize the true horror of the War on Terror: America, despite all her good intentions, was her author.  
> 
> Do you not suppose that Iran stepping in to fill the power vacuum is the next logical step of this evolution?  
> 
> Is it even possible to fix this?  Or will we only $#@! up the situation even more?
> ...


Agreed. But exploitation is a far more accurate term than "mass murder", as if there were termination camps set up ala the Nazis. That type of ridiculous rhetoric really debases our argument.

----------


## wstrucke

> I don't think it's about dumbing down, but it's about message discipline. You can make the same salient points without pissing off everyone. Interventionism abroad is
> (a) wasteful
> (b) counterproductive
> (c) un-American
> 
> You fill in that skeleton with muscle tissue & flesh and don't get caught up on complex, sensationalized details. That's pure idiocy in this type of rapid fire format.


Right on.  Ron's greatest strength is his complete unblemished purity and consistency despite the longest political history of any candidate.  A little more polish in his debate speaking could potentially do wonders for the campaign.  I suspect he's worried about coming across as another disingenuous politician if he's coached but I don't think that would be the case.

----------


## BucksforPaul

> The CIA put Saddam in power.  The CIA armed him and sent him to war against Iran.  The CIA then sew seeds of discontent throughout the 90's through economic sanctions, via the UN.
> 
> The CIA then deposed Saddam.  Then they killed him.  
> 
> Remove "Saddam" from my sentences and replace with the words "Bin Laden," and I will still be right.  
> 
> Would you like another cup of coffee to help you wake up?  Good evening.


How dare you point out the truth?  Don't you know that for a neo-con (lite) history begins whenever it's convenient for them?  These brain dead twits will resort to equating the occupied with the occupiers and the best argument they can come up with is that their acquaintances don't like the message of freedom because they believe in tyranny.  The same people would support big government Rinos who talk a good game even though a champion of the Constitution is standing right in front of them.

I also love how most of the negative nancies would agree that the media outright lies about Dr. Paul and our movement, but yet continue to believe everything else from the same media about other subjects.  lol

----------


## AuH20

> Right on.  Ron's greatest strength is his complete unblemished purity and consistency despite the longest political history of any candidate.  A little more polish in his debate speaking could potentially do wonders for the campaign.  I suspect he's worried about coming across as another disingenuous politician if he's coached but I don't think that would be the case.


There's a fine line between being classified as a drooling kook and a concerned statesman. And sometimes Ron ventures into the former category with just poorly conceived word selection.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> Agreed. But exploitation is a far more accurate term than "mass murder", as if there were termination camps set up ala the Nazis. That type of ridiculous rhetoric really debases our argument.


I apologize, sir - I don't recall writing of "mass murder."  I believe I described the good, long, hard ass $#@!ing our country has given the middle east in general -  and Iraq in particular.  The collectively asked question by the American people is, "Why do they hate us so?"  I wonder if they are mentally capable and prepared for the answer.  I fear that they are not.

Part of why I like Ron Paul so much is that he is unafraid of recognizing - and speaking clearly about - what reality actually is.  You've lost me, sir.

Perhaps another glass of rum is in order...for me, that is.

----------


## BucksforPaul

> Agreed. But exploitation is a far more accurate term than "mass murder", as if there were termination camps set up ala the Nazis. That type of ridiculous rhetoric really debases our argument.


A million children dead all under the age of 5 is not mass murder due to sanctions?  You have got to be kidding or was the price worth it?

----------


## AuH20

> I apologize, sir - I don't recall writing of "mass murder."  I believe I described the good, long, hard ass $#@!ing our country has given the middle east - and the collectively asked question by the American people, "Why do they hate us so?"
> 
> Part of why I like Ron Paul so much is that he is unafraid of recognizing - and speaking clearly about - what reality actually is.  You've lost me, sir.
> 
> Perhaps another glass of rum is in order...for me, that is.


I apologize for the error. Someone mentioned mass murder, which I took offense to. I'm not excusing the criminal behavior of the U.S. government, but mass murder is inaccurate.

----------


## DrN0

Has anyone else notice odd anomalies with these forums tonight? Posts appearing/disappearing, posts not posting, misquotes, etc.?

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> Has anyone else notice odd anomalies with these forums tonight? Posts appearing/disappearing, posts not posting, misquotes, etc.?


it must be NWO chicanery

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> There's a fine line between being classified as a drooling kook and a concerned statesman. And sometimes Ron ventures into the former category with just poorly conceived word selection.


As you can plainly see, sir, I am one of those individuals who give $#@! all of a concern with the misconception of minds that are not my own.  Another way to put it?  If folks cannot recognize the vital importance and essential nature of what Ron Paul has to say, no words will change their minds.  

On some brains, the only option is the Blue Pill.  It's okay, though - our Constitution was written in such a fashion as to protect the rest of us from them...well, back when the Constitution was the law of the land, of course.

----------


## pauliticalfan

Thanks Rick Perry for letting us know that it takes a minimum of 5k for you to be bought.

----------


## Working Poor

> my heart aches to see Ron Paul stand alone by himself.. hasn't this man been through enough?? 
> 
> and yet he keeps going. hes so incredible


All of our hearts hurt for him but he knows people need to hear the truth he truly loves his fellow man and understands do unto others as you would have them do unto you. He is a great man ad we really love him for how he stands up for us.

----------


## Suzu

> Is 9:54 his total speaking time?


No, it was quite a bit less. Subtract the times of Blitzer and Santorum out of the total time in that clip. It probably leaves about 6-7 minutes of Ron.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> Thanks Rick Perry for letting us know that it takes a minimum of 5k for you to be bought.


I loved that line.  I hope the internet goes all LOL on that.  Rick Perry, the $5,001 political whore.

----------


## GovMatt

I really think that the boos may enhance Ron Paul's message far more than the cheers for any of the other candidates. It highlights are shard divide that Dr. Paul was willing to discuss. From the media perspective, it will be an interesting story to cover. From the followers/voters' perspective, it certainly shows the quality of his convictions.

----------


## DrN0

I say he did well. He did a better job of focusing, being as simple and to the point as possible, and just plain telling the truth. As conditioned as the public is, you're going to run into resistance when sharing the truth. And just like I saw someones say, as long as he keeps telling the truth, he will win support.

Just put your money where your mouths are come moneybomb day. The only way to get his message out in a palatable way is to package it in a swallowable pill. That takes money and savy campaign ads. We're hummin' right along. 

Good night ladies and gents. 

Piss on CNN and the 9/12-ers.

----------


## parocks

> I watched the highlight reel again, sorry, but RP nailed this debate. Anyone with half a brain can understand his answers...
> 
> As far as the "30 year old in a coma" question, Ron clearly says "NO" when Wolf asked him if we should let him die...it was the audience that laughed and maybe even Bachmann. 
> 
> The 9/11 question: He was clear and concise...they started booing before he even got to the Bin Laden comments. Which leads me to believe that they turned him off half way. I doubt the average viewer would have done the same, especially a democratic audience of CNN viewers.


Paging napoleon's shadow.

The people who liked what Ron Paul had to say there are not typical Republican Primary voters.  Yes, independent males in their 20s love that stuff.  But they don't vote.
So Ron Paul should stop saying that and start saying things that older Republicans who always vote in primaries like.

Because the grassroots has to round up those people who like what you have to say, get them registered, and teach them about voting,  or something, but it's harder GOTV work.

Paging napoleon's shadow.

I'm not serious with what I'm saying, but you see how it might not be so easy to just get a whole bunch of old Republicans to vote for you if you don't say things in debates that they like.   We have to find the people who liked that - and there were a lot - and get them to vote for us.  And it will be harder to get them to vote than it is to get a 75 year old to vote, who has been voting in the same place, every single election, for 30 years.

We might want to have a "My Voters" project.   We're going to want to make sure these people vote, and perhaps one good way to do it is for the person who registered them, makes sure they know what they need to know, does everything they need to do, knows what they need to know.  Makes sure they voted. And if they didn't, gets them a ride to the polls.  The people I register are "my voters"

----------


## parocks

> I really think that the boos may enhance Ron Paul's message far more than the cheers for any of the other candidates. It highlights are shard divide that Dr. Paul was willing to discuss. From the media perspective, it will be an interesting story to cover. From the followers/voters' perspective, it certainly shows the quality of his convictions.


I see you're new.  Welcome. But, "an interesting story to cover"?  

It's almost like you think that the media will be covering Ron Paul favorably, or, really, at all, if only there was something interesting happening.

----------


## Suzu

> I really think that the boos may enhance Ron Paul's message far more than the cheers for any of the other candidates. *It highlights are shard divide that Dr. Paul was willing to discuss*. From the media perspective, it will be an interesting story to cover. From the followers/voters' perspective, it certainly shows the quality of his convictions.


What does that second sentence mean?

----------


## Fr3shjive

> I really think that the boos may enhance Ron Paul's message far more than the cheers for any of the other candidates. It highlights are shard divide that Dr. Paul was willing to discuss. From the media perspective, it will be an interesting story to cover. From the followers/voters' perspective, it certainly shows the quality of his convictions.


Shows he has much more convictions in his beliefs than the other candidates. Perry flip flopped on the social security issue in less than a week. Hopefully your average vote will pick up on that and see that he's just and empty suit.

----------


## silentshout

> Sadly, we just lost the election.


I sometimes wish RP was running in the Democratic Party. I think he'd have a better chance after what I witnessed tonight. Anyway, I will never vote for any of those yahoos on the stage, except for Paul. I'd rather have Obama than any of those other fools. The tea party sucks. I feel disgusted to have to register as a Republican to vote for him. I will, but, bleh..

----------


## LinuxJedi

Was it just me, or was Ron Paul the only one who was told "your time is up" when he spoke?

----------


## Simple

Bachmann's laugh haunts me. When she's not laughing she sounds more and more like Ron Paul.
Santorum still looks like he's in pain half the time.
Huntman looks like he's in pain all the time.

Ron Paul looks like he is just starting to get warmed up. The crowd was rowdy and Ron seems to feed off that energy. I'm waiting to see what Jon Stewart does with the footage of tonight's crowd.

----------


## pipewerKz

Ron still gaining Facebook likes - been over 100 since I've been reading this thread.

----------


## tremendoustie

> I sometimes wish RP was running in the Democratic Party. I think he'd have a better chance after what I witnessed tonight.


That's untrue. About 30-40% of republicans are anti-war. About 0-5% of democrats are anti domestic spending (e.g. nationally socialized education and medicine)




> The tea party sucks. I feel disgusted to have to register as a Republican to vote for him. I will, but, bleh..


Yes, I went to a couple tea party rallies recently. Both were disturbing, and one was downright creepy. They were literally singing worship songs to the military and the flag.

----------


## ProfNo

Ron Paul did awesome.  He is a monument to truth in a society of false prophets.  

The only travesty in the debate was the lack of time, and the clearly loaded questions.  They way he answered the question about the 30 year old without insurance was epic.   Notice Bachmann ignored that question; there is no way she had the brains to come up with a coherent answer.  

If only the media would be objective....all this "bachmann front runner" and post debate poll without Ron Paul.  If only the facts were presented, and Ron Paul was given his time. I have no doubt he would lead the polls.

----------


## Fr3shjive

> Ron still gaining Facebook likes - been over 100 since I've been reading this thread.


Isnt there a thread or a person here, that keeps track of all the candidates followers on Facebook?

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> I see you're new.  Welcome. But, "an interesting story to cover"?  
> 
> It's almost like you think that the media will be covering Ron Paul favorably, or, really, at all, if only there was something interesting happening.


While I agree that Ron Paul's media coverage is awful, I find comfort in the fact that, more and more often, frothing-at-the-mouth liberal retards can no longer make any substantive arguments against our favored candidate.

Further, those frothing-at-the-mouth conservative retards are being forced to re-think their perception of America's geopolitical role.  I should know.

I used to be one.  I went to see Dr. Paul, and I chose the Red Pill.

At any rate, choke down the article for good measure, then peruse the comments section of the article located here.

If those of us that are awake, we, the active Ron Paul supporters, do our job, we can transcend the far-right/far-left paradigm.  

$#@! the media.  We can have a much larger impact on the course of this nation than we used to believe we were capable of.

----------


## wstrucke

> Was it just me, or was Ron Paul the only one who was told "your time is up" when he spoke?


He was.  Wolf also said "Hold that thought, we'll come back to that" then proceeded to avoid Ron for the next 45 minutes or so.

----------


## pipewerKz

> Isnt there a thread or a person here, that keeps track of all the candidates followers on Facebook?


I don't know, is there?

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Yes, I went to a couple tea party rallies recently. Both were disturbing, and one was downright creepy. They were literally singing worship songs to the military and the flag.


They're just waiting for the worms...

----------


## anaconda

> Perry patted Romney on the back when Blitzer told Romney to give Perry credit for job creation. Stop touching people, Perry!


We don't know where that hand has been!

----------


## neverseen

Was there, had fun, Ron did great.  

We raised all sorts of ruckus:

----------


## Matthew5

> Was there, had fun, Ron did great.  
> 
> We raised all sorts of ruckus:


+1 rep, great job guys!

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> We don't know where that hand has been!


Neither do I, but I'm sure it smells of Santorum.

(I just couldn't help myself.)

----------


## SilentBull

I just finished watching the debate and was quite nervous when I got to the foreign policy rebuttal, because of what I read in here. I gotta say it wasn't bad at all. I think Ron made his point clear that we need to understand the motive, and that as long as we keep ignoring that, we will keep being attacked. I don't think it was a bad answer. He explained his position, which is what we expect him to do.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

I loved Ron Paul's response to Perry's governorship along with his point afterward about how the statement 'raising money for tax cuts' is a misnomer. The crowd got a good laugh as well, just splendid! Thank God he's up there.

----------


## Emmitt2222

At times like this, I almost don't care if we win.  In the face of obvious resistance, Ron Paul stood up proudly on that stage and spoke the straight truth.  He got booed and I cheered.  Sometimes the public won't agree or see the truth, but the truth must still be spoken.  

I think it may turn some away who were wary of him, but I think it could also convince some to get on board.  If that were the first debate I ever watched, that answer would have hit me hard because it was brazen truth.

tl;dr - I loved that debate start to finish

----------


## parocks

http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23cnnteaparty%205%2C000

retweet these

----------


## Dave39168

deleted double post

----------


## SilentBull

This might be the best I have ever seen Ron do in a debate, and yes I am including the foreign policy answer!

----------


## ronpaulitician

Just saw the highlights. Always hard to compare answers in a vacuum, but that seemed like a very solid performance.

----------


## Bruno

65,000 views

----------


## Dave39168

hxxp://www.baynews9.com/

hxxp://www.wepolls.com/p/2422093/Who-won-the-9/12/11-CNN/Tea-Party-Express-GOP-Presidential-Debate-in-Florida

hxxp://ipollnews.com/

hxxp://online.wsj.com/community/groups/election-day-684/topics/following-debate-do-you-now

hxxp://reddogreport.com/

hxxp://online.worldmag.com/2011/09/12/online-poll-who-won-mondays-gop-debate-from-florida/

hxxp://theswash.com/2011/09/12/poll-who-won-tonights-debate-9122011/

a few polls I found listed on another site

I think Ron Paul did great tonight. Several of his responses were homeruns. Plus watching the others attack Perry was fun. It is becoming more and more blatantly obvious to the average person that RP is being ignored by the media. This is making more question why he is being ignored. If the media switches from ignoring to attacking, it will just bring more notice to the real issues.

Compare our numbers now to Sept 2007!?!? When a new supporter is won over, they (practically) never go back. I am encouraged by the momemtum we have now!

----------


## parocks

> Agreed.  He needs to Dumb It Down, as Lupe would say.  That might be the next step  to take -- start to understand what words and phrases bring out positive responses from the voters, and use that sort of language to describe his stance.


That's what focus groups are good for.  messages are often tested in focus groups.

I had an interesting "focus group" talk in a bar.  21 year olds.  Some didn't know who Perry or Paul are.  They heard the Gardasil story and they don't like Perry now.
"I like Ron Paul, but you really have to hear what a bad dude Rick Perry is.  The people I was talking with - 3 of 4 college grads - didn't seem to understand the primary system.  Obama is pretty much running unopposed in the Democrat Primary, but that doesn't mean that he's going to be President again.  That's what we're dealing with.

----------


## wstrucke

> 65,000 views


What has 65k views?  The highlights video posted here says 304 right now, though I do believe that's around the number youtube typically stops counting pending review when something is unusually popular.

----------


## kylejack

> I sometimes wish RP was running in the Democratic Party. I think he'd have a better chance after what I witnessed tonight. Anyway, I will never vote for any of those yahoos on the stage, except for Paul. I'd rather have Obama than any of those other fools. The tea party sucks. I feel disgusted to have to register as a Republican to vote for him. I will, but, bleh..


The social liberties and war stuff would play great, but entitlement spending discussion would be a disaster.

----------


## TER

Sounds like our man did great!  Any tubes yet??

----------


## Bruno

> Sounds like our man did great!  Any tubes yet??


He sure did!  Highlights from another thread.  Lotta Ron Paul gems in there.  I think his "Rick Perry might raise my taxes!"  line got the most sincere laughs of the debate and was a great moment for him.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wkh3A...layer_embedded

----------


## TER

> He sure did!  Highlights from another thread.  Lotta Ron Paul gems in there.  I think his "Rick Perry might raise my taxes!"  line got the most since laughs of the debate and was a great moment for him.  
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wkh3A...layer_embedded


Sweet!

----------


## slamhead

I love the WSJ poll. Romney, Perry, the hot chick, or someone else....laughable.

----------


## parocks

> I wonder who is really funding Gingrich, Santorum and Huntsman. It is like they are there to distract from Ron and keep the focus on Perry, Romney and Bachman.


Gingrich is the most famous candidate running.  He's the McCain of this year.  Not saying the McCain / HuDole type candidate is likely to win, but Gingrich most likely
fits that bill.

Santorum - dunno.

Huntsman is a styrofoam heir, and Lady Rothschild has had a fundraiser for him already.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

A few selected texts from my mom (she's a lukewarm Ron supporter):

"Why aren't they asking Ron any questions about the Federal Reserve? You had me read that book he wrote about the Fed. Shouldn't they turn to him for an answer?"

"Ha! I actually laughed when he talked about Rick's record as governor."

"Wow, he's very thoughtful. He doesn't sound like the other candidates at all. The difference in substance between him and Bachmann on the healthcare question was jarring."

"I don't like how they set him up on that last question. The crowd was very rude in booing him. He is a very nice man, they shouldn't do that to him."

This is basically what Ron had me doing all night with his answers:



I'm a guy and all, but yeah.

----------


## Bruno

> A few selected texts from my mom (she's a lukewarm Ron supporter):
> 
> "Why aren't they asking Ron any questions about the Federal Reserve? You had me read that book he wrote about the Fed. Shouldn't they turn to him for an answer?"
> 
> "Ha! I actually laughed when he talked about Rick's record as governor."
> 
> "Wow, he's very thoughtful. He doesn't sound like the other candidates at all. The difference in substance between him and Bachmann on the healthcare question was jarring."
> 
> "I don't like how they set him up on that last question. The crowd was very rude in booing him. He is a very nice man, they shouldn't do that to him."
> ...


This is very encouraging!

----------


## helmuth_hubener

The debate is here:

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vpQzh3hbGI
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk8ME...watch_response
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xnpl...watch_response
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb6aA...watch_response
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77_h1...watch_response

It was recorded with a toaster oven (and the toaster missed the introductions at the beginning).  But I wanted to watch the whole thing.  I just finished watching all five parts, and Ron Paul did a fantastic job.  Maybe he _has_ finally been getting coached and practicing debating after all.  In any case, he really did a very good job.

As far as telling the oldsters what their stupid, voting heads want to hear, his concession to that idea was his answer to "would you repeal the prescription drug entitlement program?"  Obviously the answer to that I would have liked to hear, as a young independent male, especially after hearing the other wafflers say "oh no, I wouldn't do that!!  Now that we have it we need to keep it forever, of course," was: "Yes!  I'd immediately end it.  It's socialist, it's wrong, we're going bankrupt, and we got along fine for over 200 years without it.  We should end Bush's prescription drug boondoggle immediately".  He didn't say that.  Instead he said "...that sure wouldn't be on my high list.  I would find a lot of cuts a lot of other places."  So to me, that was his worst answer.  But from a savvy political perspective of "say whatever you need to to keep the old-and-senile bunch happy", maybe it was his best answer.

----------


## TheTyke

What a fantastic debate! Ron was on point, concise, handled gotcha questions masterfully, and was sufficiently at ease to get the crowd laughing several times. Probably the most solid performance this year... and I saw signs of newly gained supporters all over.

Oh and the guy who stabb- err complained about our liberty candidate the most is a Beck fan. Just saying^^

----------


## afwjam

As far as I saw Paul did not make one mistake. This debate is going to grow our support.

----------


## LawnWake

Alright, he performed very, veeery well, first of all.

Secondly, he should've phrased his answer to the last question differently. I fully agree with it, but he should've immediately said that America didn't 'cause 9/11, but that the foreign policy IS inciting hatred, but that anyone who attacks this country should be held accountable.

He should've been more demanding of airtime when it comes to fed. The moment he got a question he should've demanded additional time noting that no one would even be asking questions about the fed if it wasn't for him and counter Romney when he said that they should be allowed to regulate the money supply.

Overal, he did great, but I'm mildly worried about everyone taking his positions and running on them.

----------


## TER

The position none of them will take from him is foreign policy, and that is precisely where he should (as he is doing) put most emphasis.

Also, I think he needs to start reminding people that 

1) only he has the record to prove that  when he makes an oath to the Constitution, he obeys it

2) when it comes to protecting the rights of the people against a growing tyrannical government, his pledge to root out the corruption in D.C. is unparalleled

3) that he gets the most military donors than any other person running

4) that he was the only one on that stage who was against the bailout from the beginning and that because of the knowledge he has of Austrian economics, he was the only one to predict the collapse and knows the best ways to once again prosper

----------


## messana

Maybe somebody else pointed this out but I just noticed it. Happened right after Ron joked about Perry raising his taxes.

----------


## pacelli

> Maybe somebody else pointed this out but I just noticed it. Happened right after Ron joked about Perry raising his taxes.



What else would you expect from a globalist??

----------


## Paulatized

> A few selected texts from my mom (she's a lukewarm Ron supporter):


Ron Paul has lukewarm supporters???   Might want to get her to take another nibble on the red pill....

----------


## anewvoice

> People are donating their scarce earnings in a attempt to change things.


Yes I am, and things have changed and they will continue to change.  Yes, this is a campaign to win, and Ron Paul is a flawed messenger.  The man himself has said as much, but it is the message.  What's more, I challenge you to find a more honest and principled man to support who has BEEN to the Beltway and come out the same.

You are free to do or not do as you choose, but Ron Paul is doing what he knows to do.  I support him for it.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

SECupp and her globalist tweets


> secupp   S.E. Cupp                                                                 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ron Paul just lied through his teeth about why bin Laden attacked us. And got booed for it.*
> 
> 
> 10 hours ago





> Nick_Rizzuto   Nick Rizzuto                                                                _by secupp_ 
> 
> 
> 
> *Does a jihadist open up a copy of the New York Times when he becomes a jihadist? Or a copy of the Koran Dr. Paul?*
> 
> 
> 10 hours ago

----------


## AdamT

> SECupp and her globalist tweets
> 
> secupp S.E. Cupp
> 
> Ron Paul just lied through his teeth about why bin Laden attacked us. And got booed for it.
> 
> 10 hours ago


"Lied through his teeth" lol that's a good one you twit. RP doesn't lie.

----------


## kylejack

> Maybe somebody else pointed this out but I just noticed it. Happened right after Ron joked about Perry raising his taxes.


Cute screengrab, but he was just tapping his chest asking for a chance to respond.

----------


## KingNothing

> SECupp and her globalist tweets


Or does he arrive to his home, only to see that it is completely destroyed and his children are dead?  
It's true that there are muslim nutjobs that want to do us harm, but it's also true that we do a lot of things that make it easier for them to recruit helpers.

It's so painful to read tweets like that.  They completely lack empathy, logic and common sense.

----------


## OpiateoftheOne

Obviously most of us here love Dr. Paul.  That said it's a shame that he got any boo's at all.  I hope that he will be able to answer that question again in the next debate with a full explanation. What he said was certainly true but perceived to be blaming the victims.  We know that is in no way what he was saying.  

If perception is reality, our first goal should be to eliminate the perception that "Ron Paul can't get on the Republican ticket".  Anything that might detract from that goal is a negative and to be avoided.  We don't need to lose any support and certainly not any because of misunderstandings due to limited response times.  Let's hope Dr. Paul gets an outlet to set the record straight real soon.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

I saw a few post-debate polls a couple pages back...none of them were from the Big Three networks, or MSNBC, or even CNN.  

I've been looking for CNN's poll for a while now, and cannot find it.

Does anyone know where it is?  Is CNN stifling the voice of the internet?

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

I found this, it's interesting.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/im.../11/rel15a.pdf

----------


## anaconda

> I can't believe Michele BAchmann just kissed Romney.  Did she forget she wasn't at a rally.  Pretty strange if you ask me.


Any tongue?

----------


## Bruno

> I found this, it's interesting.
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/im.../11/rel15a.pdf


+ rep for the data.  

They actually call it a "horse race" in their own poll results.

----------


## sailingaway

> Obviously most of us here love Dr. Paul.  That said it's a shame that he got any boo's at all.  I hope that he will be able to answer that question again in the next debate with a full explanation. What he said was certainly true but perceived to be blaming the victims.  We know that is in no way what he was saying.  
> 
> If perception is reality, our first goal should be to eliminate the perception that "Ron Paul can't get on the Republican ticket".  Anything that might detract from that goal is a negative and to be avoided.  We don't need to lose any support and certainly not any because of misunderstandings due to limited response times.  Let's hope Dr. Paul gets an outlet to set the record straight real soon.


Welcome to the forums! 

I agree he was doing great right up to where he started quoting bin Laden's motivations. He should quote the head of the CIA bin Laden force instead.

----------


## clackforronpaul

Ron Paul!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXAf97RL_Sw

----------

