Are there any issues you disagree with Paul on?

[pen_thief]

I'll put it this way, as I was listening to Liberty Defined (yep, I got the audiobook and listened as I drove around - I highly recommend the practice) I found myself going "Yes! Yes!" in the background

I used to be pro-choice, thinking it made me a bad feminist to be otherwise...not anymore.
I used to think global warming was backed up with unequivocal evidence...not anymore.
I used to think healthcare and education should be free...you get the idea

Some might call me a "sheeple," but I honestly feel like that's what I was before. Learning about Ron Paul and the Liberty movement has taught me to think for myself for the first time in my life - after five years in college where I saw red marks contradicting my every attempt at free thought in the margins.

TL;DR - not really, but knowing his political views would put me at ease even if there was something huge

 

[BudhaStalin]

Global Warming, climate change whatever you want to call it. My "belief" in it doesn't mean that I'm all for government intervention, however. Immigration. Abortion (i know he would leave it up to the states). Evolution. I dont agree with Paul on 100% of the things but its damn close.

 

[papitosabe]

I don't agree with his position on 9/11. The first time he ran I almost stopped supporting him over his views on 9/11 truthers. I continued supporting him because he wants to end the Fed which would end the power behind the 9/11 attacks and their power over America.

I believe he feels as many of us do, but it would destroy him to claim what he really believes in this instance. He's stated that he would approve an independent investigation on the matter. That says alot. When you're at the top like he is, there are some things you just have to turn cheek a little on sometimes. He knows what the hell the gov't is up to and whats going on more so than any of us IMO. Thats why we needed him so much.

 

[IDefendThePlatform]

When I first found out he was running for president in 2007 I wasn't sure I could vote for him because he talked about government regulation of immigration. I got over that pretty quickly cuz he was so effing incredible on everything else. A national politician who actually talks about ending the IRS and replacing it with nothing? honestly is there anyone else who does that? I don't think I've ever heard Rand say it.

And the more I've watched him the more convinced I've become that his immigration stances are mostly just an olive branch to the rest of the GOP. Based on what I've seen Ron is pretty much a voluntaryist, which means he and I agree on basically everything, it's just a question of how to get there.

 

[papitosabe]

I understand that even if he was a truther (which there is no proof that he is), he couldn't say so on the campaign trail because it would ruin him. So I don't hold it against him in any way shape or form. You don't have to be a truther to be pro-peace

guess I should of read ahead before my initial response, but you are absolutely right imo...

I think NASA's funding should be increased.

funding by whom? hard working people or the private sector?

Some might call me a "sheeple," but I honestly feel like that's what I was before. Learning about Ron Paul and the Liberty movement has taught me to think for myself for the first time in my life - after five years in college where I saw red marks contradicting my every attempt at free thought in the margins.

I feel the same..its just that the guy makes perfect sense...we're so bombarded by propaganda in schools, thru tv, etc.. hell, even we're even dumbed down by the additives from foods we eat....then you hear RP, and he's like the guy that snaps his fingers and gets you out of that trance...

 

[No Free Beer]

I take a stronger stance on immigration.

I have some minor disagreements with him on foreign policy.

I believe that the banks should be regulated (to an extent).

 

[otherone]

The fundamental issues are, "What authority does the FEDERAL government have over YOUR life, and, "What authority SHOULD the Federal government have over your neighbor's life?

 

[IDefendThePlatform]

I take a stronger stance on immigration.

I think you mean a "more authoritarian" stance. Strength to stand up for immigrants and freedom of travel is the kind of strength I'm looking for in a politician. Ron Paul, while not perfect in this regard, does usually make it a point to say that without the welfare state immigrants couldn't be scapegoated the way they are now.

 

[Working Poor]

Link is not working.

Please try it again.

http://youtu.be/2eiR_U8vhIo

 

[cajuncocoa]

I'm pretty much in agreement with him on everything.

 

[eduardo89]

I disagree with him on DADT, would be stricter on immigration and I support the death penalty.

Oh and I think $1 trillion in cuts isn't bold enough

 

[rpwi]

Really like Paul...but there are a couple of issues...

* Don't believe we should be cutting taxes while we have a massive deficit and debt. Believe we should repay the debt as fast as possible to reduce future interest payments.

* Believe government (and in many cases the Feds) have a proper role in regulating environmental externalities and promoting conservation. Lawsuits will not protect us from pollution of ground water, surface water, clean air and nuclear pollution. We don't want to be like China...

* Believe the government should scrap it's sub fleet (expensive holdover from the coldwar), while Paul is very pro sub-warfare

* Believe taxation should be progressive. There are quirks in the economy that make it easier for the rich to get money so all things being equal I think they should pay taxes at a higher percentage than then the rest of us

* Oppose the precious metal standard. Like the idea of ending the Fed and to stop dealing with and bailing out banks...but a precious metal standard would be too expensive and would represent government waste on an epic proportion.

All in all, Paul is still light years ahead of other politicians. Even on the issues I disagree with him on, he seems very respectful..and one must remember...he's just running for President of the United States. He's not running to change state laws nor would he control congress which would probably be fighting him quite a bit, so probably that much wouldn't change...but he would help a lot in reducing the power and abuse of the Federal Government.

 

[vechorik]

If you support open borders, view this video how global government = global poverty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE



If you support the green agenda, learn about United Nations Agenda 21:
http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/

Then let us hear what you think. Education is the key to everything.

 

[newbitech]

I disagree with him on targeting davis-bacon in his Restore America proposal. I understand the need to detach Unions from government. I also understand the need to detach the financial markets from government. Financial markets have a far greater impact on the economy than Unions. Why not add a repeal of Gramm-Leach-Bliley and Glass-Steagall in the Restore America plan? Ron Paul opposed this legislation in the late 90's when it was being debated. He was right on about the impact of layered and cascading regulation. This bill was supposed to deregulate and what it ended up doing was piling on more regulation loopholes.

So, yeah, I disagree with Ron Paul including a Union busting repeal, but not including a crony capitalism repeal.

 

[No Free Beer]

I think you mean a "more authoritarian" stance. Strength to stand up for immigrants and freedom of travel is the kind of strength I'm looking for in a politician. Ron Paul, while not perfect in this regard, does usually make it a point to say that without the welfare state immigrants couldn't be scapegoated the way they are now.

I'm not an OBA (Open Border Agent) so that's why. Neither is Ron, despite what you may think. Anyway, I have had enough of debating people on this subject. I had a huge debate with numerous people on this subject in another thread. I am not about to revisit that.

Furthermore, enough with the labeling, "more authoritarian." I am so tired of people putting words into other peoples mouths. I have a different opinion than you. End it.

 

[Jingles]

Probably the usual ancap musings.

His position on abortion is really like mine. I find abortion abhorrent, but I don't really want to government involved in the issue (although he would leave it to the states which is where the issue should be).

If anything I have more disagreement with some Ron Paul supporters, but not Ron himself.

I'm sure personal differences exist between me and him (i.e. he is a Christian and I am an agnostic atheist), but what we do agree on is the role of the state and reducing it as much as possible/eliminating it.

 

[IDefendThePlatform]

I'm not an OBA (Open Border Agent) so that's why. Neither is Ron, despite what you may think. Anyway, I have had enough of debating people on this subject. I had a huge debate with numerous people on this subject in another thread. I am not about to revisit that.

Furthermore, enough with the labeling, "more authoritarian." I am so tired of people putting words into other peoples mouths. I have a different opinion than you. End it.

My issue is the labeling of your position as default "strong", implying Ron's is therefore weak. Authoritarian is a more accurate label for people who wish to restrict others movements through violence(government). Eduardo used "stricter", which I would also consider accurate.

 

[No Free Beer]

My issue is the labeling of your position as default "strong", implying Ron's is therefore weak. Authoritarian is a more accurate label for people who wish to restrict others movements through violence(government). Eduardo used "stricter", which I would also consider accurate.

government doesn't always equate to violence.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

Physician-assisted suicide.

 

[eduardo89]

Physician-assisted suicide.

Ron doesn't support that, does he? I'd be very disgusted if he does.