Help Needed... Obama vs. Paul

[Santana28]

I'd like to design some sort of card or pamphlet with a side-by-side comparison of Dr. Paul to Barack Obama on their issues, voting history, all sorts of relevant stuff.

The more i think about it the more i feel like this is something i can do to help, especially since i have many friends who are Obama fans that live in Chicago.

What do you think would be the most relevant information to point out?? Thanks all!

Dang i wish i would have thought of this before July 4th...

 

[johnrocks]

I think his stand on gun rights would affect some people, maybe the Universal Health Plan.

 

[DavyDuke17]

Obama voted for the patriot act, although I know he wanted to revise it.

 

[LastoftheMohicans]

Foreign Policy: Obama is not a non-interventionist. He's just against "stupid" wars.

War on Drugs: Obama, like most allegedly pro-civil liberties Democrats, is for the Drug War. He may want to prettify it a little, mainly to get votes, but he doesn't want the Fed. Gov out of it.

 

[beermotor]

In the first or second dem debate, Obama said on camera he wants to increase the military by at least 100k troops. Gee, wonder what those are for? and how does he plan to pay for them? We got a 800b deficit already eh... and 6t debt...

 

[RohanT]

Obama's approach to healthcare is assanine.

Werd.

 

[Quantumystic]

I'd say be very careful with this one.

The direct Obama-Paul comparison is bound to encourage attacks against The Doctor's "race" issues. WE know the race card is a non-issue, but why give them any chance to take a "free swing" at it?

Until after the primaries and nominations... I'd steer clear of this one.

If you MUST... then make it a comparison against the Dem frontrunners: Hillary, Obama, Edwards. That way, you're making a "clean" case between Paul's Conservative stance, and the Liberal stance.

 

[jd603]

I take the easy way out. Obama = more of the same , ron paul = only potential for much needed change.

 

[Santana28]

quantum...

the truth stands for itself - we shouldn't worry about accusations of racism against Paul because his behavior won't back that up at all.

I really think Paul needs to go after Obama now (see my other post) if he has any chance of getting the primary nod... seriously. We need those anti-establishment votes.

But anyways, i'm not paid by Paul's campaign - i just want to print something up that states the facts and positions of each side by side. I think if i can do this, and i know i can - then i should.

 

[Erazmus]

I think we’re looking to far ahead into the future. Let’s not worry about Obama. He has to win the Democratic primaries before we need to even worry about him. We need to focus on the other Republican candidates before we start looking at the other side.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Wait, I guess I'm confused: Obama has positions?

 

[Santana28]

i disagree...

Choosing between the "lesser of two evils" applies to people voting in the primaries as well.

Just as McCain was the "other" choice for the GOP nod, Obama is the "other" choice for the Democrat nod... These people may not consider themselves "hardcore" conservatives or liberals enough to vote for the party-backed front-runner.. but don't want to "waste" their vote on a "2nd tier" candidate, or a 3rd party candidate. These are the vulnerable people. I think McCains stark drop in the polls and donations directly correlates to Paul's rise.

Anyways, i think more liberals than conservatives are more inclined to vote 3rd party if their favorite doesn't make the primary. The bigger 3rd parties seem to sway to the liberal side anyways. Conservatives simply vote the party line (to keep those nutty liberals out) or abstain from voting.

That being said - i think the Republican nod is inevitably going to come down to Paul vs. Guiliani anyway you look at it. War Repub vs. Anti-War Repub. The Democrats are still considered "anti-war" for some reason, and that might steal anti-war conservatives away before they notice Ron Paul. These people would be more likely to vote for Obama, as a supposed "moderate" than Hillary.

Simply put - the more moderate democratic voters we can gain (and the lower we can push Obama's campaign), the higher our chances are of winning the Republican primary at all.

I don't want to argue about this, but this is all simply my opinion.

Okay - back on topic - any more things i should bring up?

 

[Buzz]

I think we’re looking to far ahead into the future. Let’s not worry about Obama. He has to win the Democratic primaries before we need to even worry about him. We need to focus on the other Republican candidates before we start looking at the other side.

Agreed.

 

[atilla]

there is no comparison between ron paul and obama

 

[tsoldrin]

I think you need to tailor your approach to each individual audience. A straight up comparison might not be so handy because you may want to emphasize some points while not over emphasizing others.

For me, I'm against Obama because ... he's another phony politician saying what he thinks people want to hear. I find his message of change to be hollow.

For others, a strong point might be made that right now the United States is in a terrible mess on a world wide scale with all of our detrimental foreign entanglements. Obama has zero experience with foreign policy or diplomacy or economics... in this time of dire consequences do we really want to take a chance on someone so inexperienced and potentially disasterous?

 

[Santana28]

i am...

i'm thinking about those uninformed younger voters who havent really researched the other candidates, yet think obama is the "anti-establishment" candidate.

which is why i think a straightforward side-by-side comparison would work wonderfully. most aren't looking to be convinced - they'll probably think its another reason to vote for obama until they actually READ it.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Seriously, I think the best way is to promote Dr. Paul and his positions with no personal comparisons. One might do that with an eye on what appeals to Obama's supporters, but we should not make blatant personal comparisons, IMHO.

 

[rp4prez]

Obama voted for the immigration reform that just recently failed! AH!

 

[austinphish]

I say go for it. I am in the same boat with too many Obama friends.

My points have already been mentioned:
Obama = more of the same
Obama = for the immigration bill (even if you like all the immigrants, that bill was just another form of government bureacracy, ineptitude and tyranny)
Obama = CFR
Obama = socialized healthcare - if your friends like socialism my response is "socialism may give you utopia in the short term, but your grandchildren will be bowing to the Fuhrer" - we need less government intervention, not more.

 

[Santana28]

...

i didnt say anything about PERSONAL comparisons - someone else brought that up.

I'm talking straightforward issues and voting records and stances taken - thats it!

whats so bad about that?