OFFICIAL 11/9/11 ECONOMICS DEBATE FROM MICHIGAN THREAD

[WD-NY]

LOL So Ron Paul supporters switched from Paul to Romney?

Can you blame them though? His answer was pretty sub par imo.

The establishment media has been playing with dynamite by attempting to 'gotcha' Paul on the student loan/debt issue since Meet The Press. They're so out of touch that they honestly seem to think that they can hang Paul on this issue when the truth is, this is one subject that millions of Americans seem in agreement with Paul's diagnosis.

So when the attacks first began I honestly believed that that student loans had the potential to be this campaign's "They attack us here because we're over there" position (aka - a mind-blowing, game-changing moment that backfires on the MSM because they mistakenly assumed that the people would buy into their superficial treatment of the issue and demagoguery of Ron Paul's position).

And yet, several weeks later, in the middle of a big debate on a big college campus... with Cain crashing hard, Newt rising fast and opportunity knocking loudly on Ron Paul's door... we get the good fortune of some establishment puppet/reporter who calls on Paul to "explain how ending student loans would make college more affordable".

As the question was being asked, I couldn't help thinking that the MSM's hubris had once again clouded their judgement and provided us with another BIG opportunity. No way is Paul going to go all philosophical given the mood of the moment and the simple fact that the student loans/debt issue/question = THE PERFECT ISSUE FOR RON PAUL. And yet, what we got was a can of 'everything-but-the-kitchen-sink-soup'!

Usually, I don't dwell on such things, but given all the time that Paul has had to put his thoughts on student debt/loans into better order, I must admit that his answer has me a bit deflated - mostly because it reminds me of his resistance to debate prep and message consistency. I mean, their pre-question video included a clip of a college kid pointing out the massive disconnect between the rate of inflation and the rate of tuition "inflation". And yet, the reporter still had to ask "but how will they pay for it??" ::sigh::

The other part of it is that the student loan/debt bubble = a perfect step stone into Ron Paul's diagnosis of the housing and healthcare bubbles (re: gov't subsidies > higher prices > massive consumer debt). It's a SIMPLIFIED, easier-to-understand-since-there-are-10x-less-moving-parts issue that clearly demonstrates the negative effects consumer (in this case, kids and their parents) suffer as a result of govn't meddling within a previously free-market.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=D2eq2nZ6J6g#t=364s

Bringing up the constitution when answering the student loan question should be LAST on his list of points to make... First should be the fact that ending student loans would bring down tuition rates. The solution to high prices isn't larger loans... all that does is create an entire generation of indentured students who have spend decades paying off 4 years of college.

 

[parocks]

"Is it me, or is this blown way out of proportion? I'm not defending Perry; I'm pointing out we're not all as saintly as we'd like to think."

I've seen a lot of campaign s not all there. I know conservatives and libertarians who can tick off 10 agencies they would get rid at the drop of a hat and all Perry can think of is two?

No, the problem wasn't that he couldn't come up with agencies to eliminate.

The problem was that he started a sentence with I want to eliminate 3 agencies, and he couldn't remember what they were by the end of the sentence.

I would like to say 3 words at the center of my economic plan. 1, 2 and I forgot the 3rd.

He completely forgot his economic plan. It wasn't some sort of trick question.

 

[parocks]

What do we learn from this?

Is there anything we can learn from this that can help Ron Paul in any way?

The truth, as CNBC sees it, is that Ron Paul Supporters are meeting on message boards and talking about internet polls. Going to websites they never go to, and voting for their candidate.

CNBC says that they know it's happening, and they don't like it.

And when they allege that it's happening, they're 100% right, because that's exactly what we're doing right now.

And after every debate, we do the same thing. And the media organizations do the same thing.

And Ron Paul never gets any coverage for winning the online poll on TV.

Is there anything we can learn from this?

Do you think it's a good idea to do the same thing every single time, when all you're going to get is the poll taken down?

Why don't you say

"wait, might it not be a good idea to use our internet dominance to actually get Ron Paul a mention on TV" Maybe tie for first? Try it. They'll say "Herman Cain tied for first with Ron Paul." Instead of NOTHING, LIKE ALWAYS.

And we wonder "why does the media hate us so much". We screw up their polls, we send them tons of emails when we don't like what they say, and we even pelt them with snowballs. And we keep doing it even though it's proven to have little positive impact.

We got good press in NYC. Dusman, RonPaulHawaii. They were nice to Joe and Mika. Did not pelt them with rocks.

Not shocked, but saddened.

CNBC, if it had been Romney supporters that decided to be ACTIVE and support their candidate online, you would have trumpeted the results from the mountaintops. Seeing as though most of Cain's, Romney's, Perry's, and the other's supporters are octogenarians who could not discern a computer from a garden hose - and therefore, have little to no online presence - you ignore the voice of those who use computers.

I like to think my skin has gotten pretty thick as of late, but this is hard to take. This is even worse than what fuckhead O'Reilly did the other day - and even more shortsighted. Enjoy your growing irrelevance, CNBC, and your parent company, GE. Rest assured that we are growing in number, and we will own YOU before this is all over.

You all can have the thread back now.

/rant

 

[parocks]

Cain reminds me more of Huck.. people led to believe he's an outsider, picks up a bunch of last minute support from people that really don't understand his policies...

I'd say Santorum is more like Huck. Socon.

 

[bluesc]

I'd say Santorum is more like Huck. Socon.

And we absolutely need to watch him in Iowa. Can't stress that enough.

 

[parocks]

With Cain, I think you have Kissinger there, sizing him up, sending the information to the global elites, who then are issued instructions on how to treat Cain.

Perry was fully vetted. They wanted Perry in there. Very comfortable with him. But all the kings horses aren't putting Perry together again. That plan did not work, and destroy Cain did not work. So they needed to find out about Cain. With Perry out (and he's not out yet) it's one down. I'm not sure if we're the last choice of the global elites. Perhaps they don't think Ron Paul is electable at all if he got the nomination. Perhaps someone is better on policy than Paul, but much more electable, and they might rather take their chances with Paul. That was possible with Palin.

I agree with your analysis here. The elites never thought Cain really had a chance, but now with his emergence they're throwing everything at him, trying to bring him down. There are two outcomes: A) he goes down. The elites are fine with this. Or B) he somehow weathers the storm and maybe even ends up winning the nom. I think the elites are fine with this, too. What they don't want is for him to be untested going into the general. He is under trial right now is the way I see it.

About Romney, yes, this is exactly right. He's always been the elite's first pick, he has been ever since '08. His problem is that the voters don't like him, lol. I honestly don't think that Mitt is getting the nom, no matter what happens. Newt I think has a better chance.

The cards are being dealt perfectly for Paul, we really couldn't ask for anything better. The media blackout you just have to take as a given when you're challenging the establishment.

 

[parocks]

And we absolutely need to watch him in Iowa. Can't stress that enough.

Agreed. He's starting to get some good things happening recently.

Intrade has Santorum at .5% That's 1/200

 

[WarNoMore]

What we should learn is that since they don't want us voting on their polls then we shouldn't use their website or view their channel either.Fuck them. This is a takeover. This goes far beyond electing Ron Paul. They want to silence us? They'll live to regret that choice. We're going to be in control of this country, and they'll get exactly what they deserve. They'll be out of a job, or they'll have to start kissing our ass.

 

[affa]

Yep, he's drunk and trying to be Ron Paul. I do it all the time.

lol.

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

 

[brooks009]

I’m been noticing that the other candidates are soaking in what Ron is saying (they are being schooled). He is changing some of their views. You see it when they start using his talking points. This really is the age of Ron Paul.