Dr. Paul's Realistic Chances?

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Omg

Well, my friend, its time for a little straight talk. If you have concerns about my conservative record, just ask my conservative friends Feingold, Kennedy, Lieberman, and Clinton. Also I've recently been endorsed by known conservatives Schwarzenegger and Giuliani.

As far as the economy, I've got Greenspan's book. He had some good ideas, but we should take them a little further. I would like to see Bernake set interest rates at zero.

And I'm not mentally unstable.

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

If I were drinking something when I read this it would have ended up spit all over my keyboard. I nominate this for post of the year lmao

 

[IcyPeaceMaker]

Defeatism is rarely a pretty thing, and your doom & gloom scenario just dosen't add up.

Ron is second tier, behind only one man, McCain. Conservatives hate McCain for a number of reasons, but mostly because he's a stealth liberal. Straight up, McCain can't beat Ron Paul.

 

[Zyphlin]

You believe we should continue to occupy a soverign nation, against their will and to their detriment, for our own good?

One, I don't think its to their detriment.

Two, if their government formally asks us to leave, I have no problem with us leaving.

To my knowledge, that hasn't happened. If you got a link for it, you'll likely have helped change my mind.

 

[IcyPeaceMaker]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/51624/

There is alot more support in Iraq for an immediate w/drawl of U.S. troops.

 

[mahopaul]

"If you got a link for it, you'll likely have helped change my mind."

http://www.everydaycitizen.com/2007/09/79_of_iraqis_oppose_our_occupa.html

 

[Zyphlin]

Icy, thank you for useful links. Maho, linking me to a specifically antiwar website as some kind of "proof" is pointless.

The USA Today poll is telling. That said, they should take it up with their government, as if you note I said when they're government asks us to leave.

The alternet is a more interesting one. Its back from May, it was put forth as nonbinding, and still a binding one hasn't been put up yet.

I would reject any demand by them that WE put time limits on ourselves. What our military and our government puts down should be on us. HOWEVER...if THEY would like to saddle themselves with a time table, saying "By X date we demand that the U.S. military removes itself from the country" then I am completely fine with that.

Likewise, if they say "We demand an immediete pull out of U.S. Troops" i would also support that.

I won't support them telling us "YOU must choose to pull out now." or "YOU must set a deadline". Nope, doesn't work that way. If their governing body decides they no longer wish us there, they can tell us to go.

 

[LEK]

Thank you very much, George W. Bush.

AND: Bill Clinton, HW Bush, and the list goes on...

 

[IcyPeaceMaker]

Ann Coulter would vote for Hillary before McCain
February 1st, 2008 by Matt Hawes
In a move that illustrates the discontent of conservatives over the progress of John McCain so far this primary season, Ann Coulter announced last night on “Hannity and Colmes” that she would vote for Hillary before she would vote for McCain. I don’t think I have to go into detail about how big of an admission this is.

Our job is to remind Ms. Coulter and others that it is still not too late to stop Senator McCain’s rise - by voting for Ron Paul, the consistent limited-government conservative.

Don’t worry, Ann. You don’t have to vote for Hillary - just throw your support behind Dr. Paul and let’s take back the Republican Party!

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

I'd say at this point, either Hillary or Obama will be the next President. McCain has the next best chance, then Romney, then Huckabee, then Ron Paul.

So you're saying there's a chance!

 

[OutsiderJoe]

Where did Outsider Joe go??? After everyone was so polite and receptive to answer "debate" an honest assessment of his guy. Our debate with him was more fair than our guys gotten from the McCain establishment.

I'm still here -- just that, much as I love you guys, I haven't had time to read any of your posts today. Also, although I respect many of your attempts to convert me to Dr. Paul, you're wasting your virtual breath (e-breath?): I'm not settling on John McCain. I'm not rationalizing my vote for John McCain as the best choice to beat Hillary. I'm actually incredibly enthusiastic and excited about John McCain as a candidate. He is a man who I believe has shown himself to be a principled leader who would cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Dr. Paul has some interesting ideas. But ultimately they're taken too far and I think read the Constitution incorrectly. This idea that Lincoln is a villain is, in my humble opinion, fairly far-fetched. I of course understand the arguments made against his expansion of federal power, etc. (in law school I was often, for the sake of argument, voicing those positions just to piss off the liberal big-government professors and classmates), but the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

The world is a very different place than it was in 1787. The world is much more integrated economically, culturally, and militarily. I just do not think it possible or realistic to take a George Washington Farewell Address approach to world affairs. Assuming the Japanese never bombed Hawaii, should we have stayed out of World War II while black boots crushed others? (I just picked that example off the top of my mind; please don't think that I'm trying to pull the old y'all-support-Hitler-don't-you trick.)

I'm happy to discuss any of these things with you and would be quite interested in having a lively debate about this. (Ron Paul supporters -- or at least those on this board -- are among the most intelligent I've come across...as I'm sure those of you with big egos know.) But please also remember that I will not vote for Ron Paul, that I will vote for John McCain, and that I'd prefer to not be inundated with YouTube videos (some actually offensive -- like the Manchurian Candidate trash) and arguments against the man.

(And that's not to say I'm in love with McCain. As expressed earlier, I take GREAT umbrage with his crass appeals to the Religious Right and think the attacks on Romney at the recent debate were ridiculous and low-handed. Along those lines, I also think Paul and Huckabee were treated abysmally by Anderson Cooper.)

Sorry for the very general response.

Joe

 

[FreeTraveler]

If Ron Paul runs 3rd party he loses any support I would ever have given him. One of the big draws for me is that he is an honest candidate, one that doesn't seem to play politics but just honestly has a message and will tell it to you without trying ot pull strings.

I've watched interview after interview where he's said its running as a Republican or nothing else. Where he's said he won't run 3rd party.

If he ends up running 3rd party, and shows that he's just like every other politician...saying what's beneficial for the time at hand and changing it on a whim...then I don't want him.

Please show me ONE interview where he's said that he absolutely says he won't run 3rd party. Dr. Paul has always been careful not to completely rule out that possibility. He has definately said it's not what he wants, it's not in the plans... but he's also said he'll keep running as long as we support him, and if McCain seals the deal on Super Tuesday, Dr. Paul will HAVE to go third party if he's to keep his pledge to his supporters.

 

[raystone]

cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Hopefully, Outsider Joe has a big list of "among other things", because the only thing McCain has promised to cut his porkbarrel spending, which amounts to 1/2 of 1% of all federal spending. Strong image? not sure what that means but Bush's imperial hubris hasn't exactly endeared us with the world, and McCain will compound that with throwing out "gooks" and of course singing"bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" , and yes, now that he has 30 major backers from the military industrial complex, he'll be singing that as he gives the "commence firing" order.

 

[InLoveWithRon]

The USA Today poll is telling. That said, they should take it up with their government, as if you note I said when they're government asks us to leave.

.

Unbelieveable, how naive can you possibly be ?? Like in Afghanistan, the United States "hand picked" the leadership in Iraq to suit their own agenda.. Of course the present Iraqi government is going to want them to stay and rape that country of resources... Because the US put allies (paid them off) as puppets..

It was the same in 1953 in Iran when the CIA covertly replaced the iranian leadership with the Shah.. For their own agenda, and not for the good of their country or the Iranian people.

My goodness, wake up man !

 

[InLoveWithRon]

Because a single guy, who is an activist, accounts of it with a particular squad does not constitute that its the 100% truth of everyone...or the majority...of what's going on over there...nor do I take one activists words against the word of all the ones I personally know over there. The military is a huge thing, I do not doubt there are a number of jerks, a-holes, and bad apples in it...that does not mean that is the norm.

stop lying !! I have met soldiers as well, and they agree with my stance.. And to further make your comment look foolish, Ron Paul has received THREE TIMES more military donations than ANY other candidate..

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=109049

If Ron's position of the war was so not the norm as you state, then he wouldn't be getting THREE times more money from military personnel over the other candidates.

Again, your comments look extremely foolish.. Sorry if the facts go right over your head..

 

[InLoveWithRon]

To support my last post.. Here is the total for Military donations to candidates-

Barack Obama $51,933
Dennis J Kucinich $1,432
Hillary Rodham Clinton $33,681
John Edwards $8,667
John S McCain $51,369
Mike Gravel $260
Mike Huckabee $30,220
Mitt Romney $22,966
Ron Paul $162,527
Rudolph W Giuliani 12480

Ron Paul has more donations from the military than Huckabee, McCain, Giuliani and Romney COMBINED !!!.. So stop spewing the military rhetoric that they want to stay in Iraq.

heh

 

[OutsiderJoe]

So...I know it's gotta be a pretty depressing night for you folks, but does anyone want to reevaluate how likely it is that this man will get our party's nomination?

It's not looking likely, guys. Maybe you'll still pull it out, but time's running out. (And please don't try to suggest that a man who can't win a single state will miraculously control the convention -- frankly, that's naive.)

Sorry, guys. Back in 2000 when it was clear Bush would run away with the nomination I was depressed like I'm sure you are now.

 

[stilltrying]

Just to vent. I hope more than anything that RP can win Pres. But I think this government and corporations will make it impossible for him to do such by rigging the election in some way shape or form. Its been done before (George W - times 2). Please dont flame as I am wanting RP as much as anybody in these forums to get this presidency but I have a strong feeling of what elites will try to do to prevent that.

I will not sacrifice my vote for anyone, its RP or write in RP. No compromise.

 

[liberteebell]

I'm still here -- just that, much as I love you guys, I haven't had time to read any of your posts today. Also, although I respect many of your attempts to convert me to Dr. Paul, you're wasting your virtual breath (e-breath?): I'm not settling on John McCain. I'm not rationalizing my vote for John McCain as the best choice to beat Hillary. I'm actually incredibly enthusiastic and excited about John McCain as a candidate. He is a man who I believe has shown himself to be a principled leader who would cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Dr. Paul has some interesting ideas. But ultimately they're taken too far and I think read the Constitution incorrectly. This idea that Lincoln is a villain is, in my humble opinion, fairly far-fetched. I of course understand the arguments made against his expansion of federal power, etc. (in law school I was often, for the sake of argument, voicing those positions just to piss off the liberal big-government professors and classmates), but the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

The world is a very different place than it was in 1787. The world is much more integrated economically, culturally, and militarily. I just do not think it possible or realistic to take a George Washington Farewell Address approach to world affairs. Assuming the Japanese never bombed Hawaii, should we have stayed out of World War II while black boots crushed others? (I just picked that example off the top of my mind; please don't think that I'm trying to pull the old y'all-support-Hitler-don't-you trick.)

I'm happy to discuss any of these things with you and would be quite interested in having a lively debate about this. (Ron Paul supporters -- or at least those on this board -- are among the most intelligent I've come across...as I'm sure those of you with big egos know.) But please also remember that I will not vote for Ron Paul, that I will vote for John McCain, and that I'd prefer to not be inundated with YouTube videos (some actually offensive -- like the Manchurian Candidate trash) and arguments against the man.

(And that's not to say I'm in love with McCain. As expressed earlier, I take GREAT umbrage with his crass appeals to the Religious Right and think the attacks on Romney at the recent debate were ridiculous and low-handed. Along those lines, I also think Paul and Huckabee were treated abysmally by Anderson Cooper.)

Sorry for the very general response.

Joe

There seems to be a common misconception about Ron Paul's foreign policy and you've parroted it here. He is NOT the roll-over-and-play-dead pacifist that he's been made out to be. He wants a strong national DEFENSE; take care of America by closing our borders and protecting American soil. Just because he is against an illegal (unconstitutional), undeclared war of aggression in Iraq doesn't mean he's against going to war if/when necessary. He did vote in favor of going into Afghanistan.

Ron Paul has a very well thought out foreign policy--this man cannot be summed up in bumper sticker slogans or sound bites. He correctly ties it all together with our economy and yes, our place in the world. Our being the world's policeman is bankrupting this country. There's more than one way to destroy a country, you know.

Read his book, "A Foreign Policy of Freedom". Just reading the first few chapters will open your eyes.

That said, since you are supporting mccain, I presume you're in favor of continuing this war. So I have some questions for you: Are you posting from Iraq? If not, why not? Looks to me like those who are so in favor of continuing should be signing up for the military in droves and instead, I hear recruitment is down. I'm sure there's a recruiting office near you.

Also, could you please define what "winning" this war is? How many lives are enough? How much more bankrupt should our country be before we call it quits? What should we cut to pay for it? Cut seniors off social security and medicare? How 'bout subsidized housing and food stamps? Or would you prefer a large income tax increase? What about a huge increase in the excise taxes on gasoline?

Certainly, you are free to vote for whomever you please. But past history being the best predictor of future behavior, I'll take the one with the impeccable record. I'm saying NO to war, amnesty, taxes and a bankrupt country.

 

[qh4dotcom]

To: OutsiderJoe

Don't forget that Hillary and MSM can't wait to get their hands on McCain should he get the nomination...they have so much stuff they can attack him with..you're basically voting for a loser.

 

[Desperado]

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance?

As you say Ron Paul is everything John McCain is not,
Honestly at this point RP's chances don't look good but hopefully he might consider a third party run.
No matter, If McCain get the nomination I will work my hardest for whoever is running against him.