FOX News Admits Romney Cannot Win Without Ron Paul Supporters

[TheGrinch]

Can take that a bit further. If the GOP wanted to win, they would have never run Romney....

Hell, it's entirely possible the GOP brass wants the democrats left holding the bag (though I have serious doubts their intentions are anywhere near that genuine). I mean, after McCain didn't excite people, they go with Romney this time? One can just about only draw two reasonable conclusions, probably both: 1) that conservative voters hate Obama so much, that they could shove any puppet in their face if people believed he had a shot of beating him, or 2) they're happy letting the dems take the fall and making careers out of criticizing the guy they helped re-elect.

Option three, is they're all so corrupt under the current system that they really don't give a crap who's in power, as long as it's not honest people like Ron Paul threatening the gravy train. Actually, that's probably the one I can say with any level of certainty.

 

[TheGrinch]

I dislike Romney for all the same reasons stated but all this talk about no difference between Romney and Obama is bullshit.

Just of the top of my head a few examples come to mind that effect me directly.

1. Health insurance rates that I can no longer afford. Under Obama not only will I still not be able to afford health insurance, I will be penalized next year with a tax. So some of the money I could have used to pay for insurance is going to go to the IRS.

Romney however is running with Ron's plank of allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines to drive down costs. He has also renounced the mandate and plans to repeal Obamacare. I know this is the guy that created it at the state level but it is the only chance of repeal of any of it where Obama there is no chance. I also believe he knows he cannot get re-elected if he betrays this campaign promise.

2. Romney = lower taxes and spending cuts. Obama = higher taxes and increased spending.

This is some what of an improvement over Obama. It is not Ron Paul but it is in my best interest. Of course Romney does not come close to Ron Paul and would be a painful choice but it is still in my best interest. If you are given a choice of a master that will beat you 2 hours a day instead of 5. I will take 2 hours a day.

For moral reasons however I may just sit home or vote Johnson but just getting tired of the no difference bit and people so shocked a Paul supporter would consider Romney when the choice is between a Socialist and a Communist.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is a big part of what got us into this mess. We have to demand more from our politicians, or we'll continue to get more Bush's and Romneys.

 

[lx43]

I'm writing in RP name and not voting for Mittens or Comrade Obama.

 

[kahless]

Choosing the lesser of two evils is a big part of what got us into this mess. We have to demand more from our politicians, or we'll continue to get more Bush's and Romneys.

I have always believed that and have not voted R or D for President since the 80s. As bad as Romney is there way too much at stake. Under this President my life has been impacted the most and will continue to be impacted further if he is re-elected. There is just too much at stake to allow Obama another 4 years.

 

[kahless]

I'm writing in RP name and not voting for Mittens or Comrade Obama.

I cannot do that in my county. All write-in's are trashed and listed in the tally as "scatter".

 

[sailingaway]

I cannot do that in my county. All write-in's are trashed and listed in the tally as "scatter".

They are counted as the difference between voters for other tickets and for president. If a presidential race has significantly fewer voters than voted in other races, they can't spin it as 'not caring enough to vote', it is clearly (to me) rejection of the choices. The media may not report it, but they won't report what we want in any event. We can get the word out of results, if they are significant.

In any event, I'm not going to vote for a candidate I don't want.

So I plan to write in Ron Paul, barring the unlikely event of Romney picking Ron to be VP and National Conscience....

 

[Anti Federalist]

Who voted this thread one star and why?

 

[row333au]

 

[bunklocoempire]

I dislike Romney for all the same reasons stated but all this talk about no difference between Romney and Obama is bullshit.

Just of the top of my head a few examples come to mind that effect me directly.

1. Health insurance rates that I can no longer afford. Under Obama not only will I still not be able to afford health insurance, I will be penalized next year with a tax. So some of the money I could have used to pay for insurance is going to go to the IRS.

Romney however is running with Ron's plank of allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines to drive down costs. He has also renounced the mandate and plans to repeal Obamacare. I know this is the guy that created it at the state level but it is the only chance of repeal of any of it where Obama there is no chance. I also believe he knows he cannot get re-elected if he betrays this campaign promise.

2. Romney = lower taxes and spending cuts. Obama = higher taxes and increased spending.

This is some what of an improvement over Obama. It is not Ron Paul but it is in my best interest. Of course Romney does not come close to Ron Paul and would be a painful choice but it is still in my best interest. If you are given a choice of a master that will beat you 2 hours a day instead of 5. I will take 2 hours a day.

For moral reasons however I may just sit home or vote Johnson but just getting tired of the no difference bit and people so shocked a Paul supporter would consider Romney when the choice is between a Socialist and a Communist.

"no difference" between Romney and Obama is only one part of why telling both of those jokers to take a hike is so important.

This is what the bulk of the issue really is:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

..I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

From George Washington's farewell address 1796. That is friggin' scary stuff. We are at this stage, and we will perpetuate it and make it even worse by further ignoring the similarities of the parties and giving any credence to their "differences".

Hang in there. Hold the line. EDIT: Short term "in my best interest" bones thrown to you are an insult to you. You do not deserve ANY beatings.

 

[jovasi]

The only Ron Paul supporters who would ever support Romney are people who are attracted to our energy and want to be apart of some kind of movement (similar to the occupy phenomenon) but aren't actually 'awake'.

I suspect that those people account for a very small percentage of Ron Paul supporters.

Exactly! Took the words right out of my mouth. No TRUE Ron Paul supporter or freedom/liberty lover would ever cast a vote for Romney. He is everything this movement abhors. +rep

 

[Kylie]

I dislike Romney for all the same reasons stated but all this talk about no difference between Romney and Obama is bullshit.

Just of the top of my head a few examples come to mind that effect me directly.

1. Health insurance rates that I can no longer afford. Under Obama not only will I still not be able to afford health insurance, I will be penalized next year with a tax. So some of the money I could have used to pay for insurance is going to go to the IRS.

Romney however is running with Ron's plank of allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines to drive down costs. He has also renounced the mandate and plans to repeal Obamacare. I know this is the guy that created it at the state level but it is the only chance of repeal of any of it where Obama there is no chance. I also believe he knows he cannot get re-elected if he betrays this campaign promise.

2. Romney = lower taxes and spending cuts. Obama = higher taxes and increased spending.

This is some what of an improvement over Obama. It is not Ron Paul but it is in my best interest. Of course Romney does not come close to Ron Paul and would be a painful choice but it is still in my best interest. If you are given a choice of a master that will beat you 2 hours a day instead of 5. I will take 2 hours a day.

For moral reasons however I may just sit home or vote Johnson but just getting tired of the no difference bit and people so shocked a Paul supporter would consider Romney when the choice is between a Socialist and a Communist.

A false choice is still false.

What if I don't want to be beaten AT ALL?

I always reserve the right to say NO to any of it. And trying to justify voting for someone who will only beat you two hours a day, when you know damned good and well you shouldn't be beaten at all, is such a weird analogy anyway.

They have no right to beat me. Period. They have no right to use force against me, be it force-light, or full out force heavy.

 

[donnay]

That is why, in November, my vote will stand; No One But Paul!

 

[Tankbot85]

FUCK YOU FRANK!!

That guy is a complete shill.

 

[EBounding]

I dislike Romney for all the same reasons stated but all this talk about no difference between Romney and Obama is bullshit.

I agree. There is a difference between Obama and Romney. Obama doesn't really care for this country or what it was founded on. I'm sure Romney loves America, but he thinks it's problems will be cured just by him being president and tweaking big government. But to me, their differences are irrelevant.

The system still works. Even if Obama is Stalin reincarnated, there's still enough controls in our system to keep him from implementing his full agenda. We survived 4 years of Obama when people thought we wouldn't even make it past the first year. We also survived 8 years of Bush.

To me, the real damage is giving Romney approval for what he's done in the past simply based what he says he'll do now. I'm tired of being manipulated by politicians.

 

[kahless]

A false choice is still false.

What if I don't want to be beaten AT ALL?

I always reserve the right to say NO to any of it. And trying to justify voting for someone who will only beat you two hours a day, when you know damned good and well you shouldn't be beaten at all, is such a weird analogy anyway.

They have no right to beat me. Period. They have no right to use force against me, be it force-light, or full out force heavy.

You have no choice since your fellow slaves overwhelming only chose masters that will beat you. I therefore chose the master that will beat me less at least until we have someone whom does not want to be our master and have converted a formidable number of slaves so that person can win.

If I do not work with my fellow slaves to ensure the lesser master wins then I will be beaten more for the next four years. There is also not enough slaves that think like me to resist my master. If I do so my master and the majority of slaves will insist on imprisoning me and the news media will tell everyone I am crazy for the mere thought that my master is wrong.

My masters house will also not collapse in the next 4 years which I think some people here are banking on. Therefore unless something miraculous happens in converting the masses then the only choice right now to reduce my beating over the next 4 years is to vote for Romney.

btw - if Ron does not get a speaking slot at the convention I may make the sacrifice and either not vote or vote for Johnson.

 

[Shane Harris]

If they really want me to vote for the lesser of two evils then so be it, Obama it is.

 

[kahless]

If they really want me to vote for the lesser of two evils then so be it, Obama it is.

How the hell would Obama be the lesser of the two evils? I think your hatred of the GOP due to their treatment of Ron Paul has blinded you from reality.