Presidential hopeful Ron Paul thinks Barack Obama will win White House

Phantom

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
1,102
Presidential hopeful Ron Paul thinks Barack Obama will win White House

Libertarian Republican Congressman from Texas speaks about his non-interventionist foreign policy at Goucher as part of the President's Forum

Lori Shull
5/2/08

Flags, signs, bumper stickers and buttons were distributed to the crowd, who were ready to make a sensation in support of their favorite political candidate, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas). When the long-shot contender for the Republican presidential ticket showed up to speak at Goucher as part of the President's Forum, Kraushaar Auditorium didn't even have standing room left.

They gave him a standing ovation before he even opened his mouth, and clapped during his speech more than 20 times.

And then, after listening to his libertarian ideas for over an hour, they heard him say Democratic-hopeful Barack Obama would win the rat race to the White House.

The rest of the talk, which was not written down, was a fairly run-of-the-mill campaign stump speech. Though running for the Republican nomination, he distanced himself from the party and its contemporary hawkish ways.

"The sad part is… if you don't support it - vote against the PATRIOT Act, you're unpatriotic. You vote against the war, you vote against the troops," he said. "They turn it and twist it around. I have come to the firm conclusion that you can be conservative, libertarian, institutionalist - a good American and vote against the war and still be a patriot."

His focus was on his non-interventionist foreign policy stance. He said the nation needs to focus on issues within its own borders and get out of other places - Iraq and the Middle East but also Korea, Japan and Germany.

"All empires end for financial reasons," he said. "The Soviet Union… bankrupted themselves and one place where they really bankrupted themselves was their fruitless efforts in Afghanistan - you'd think we'd learn a lesson or two."

The crowd was very receptive to Paul's ideas - it interrupted him many times to applaud and every once in a while, a couple people standing in the back were seen waving full-size American flags.

Among the hundreds of people there were students, middle aged parents with their young children and older people.

Paul, however, is not the politician most Goucher students endorse. Many were there out of curiosity to hear what he would have to say, and what his supporters would do.
"I told my mom I was coming to see him and she was like 'Oh my God, that's the lunatic fringe!'" senior international relations major Lindsey Rich said.

Others were thrilled that he was coming. Before Paul came on stage, sophomore Emily Adams introduced him to the crowd. Adams is one of Paul's more vocal supporters on campus and was asked by college president Sanford J. Ungar to introduce him at the event.

Paul's speech lasted a little less than 40 minutes and ended with another standing ovation. After the speech, about 30 people raced to get in line behind microphones to ask questions of the presidential hopeful. This was the first time there was any sign that not all members of the crowd supported him.

Questions about abortion and women's rights drew applause in favor of the students who asked, rather than the answers the Congressman gave. Though Paul is pro-life, he said he objected to the federal government's involvement in the issue at all.

One of the themes of his speech was getting the federal government out of more issues. He wants to return to the text that is in the Constitution, rather than the big government he thinks we currently have. Though current American foreign policy, he says, is what convinced him to run for president again after his failed effort in 1988, individual liberties are what matter most.

"The big issue for me is individual liberty," he said. "I believe that's what's been neglected in this country for a hundred years plus. I believe the Founders understood this issue, understood what limited government is all about and gave us a pretty darn good Constitution which unfortunately we have ignored."

"We need more production, we need sound money, we need less taxes, we need a sensible foreign policy and [a new system] emphasizing personal liberty where creative energy would be released not suppressed."

Link

For more articles on Ron Paul and the Revolution, please visit this link.
 
Well, by the looks of things, he's probably right.
 
I think the American people are tired of fighting wars and are waking up to the cost of it (thanks in part to Dr. Paul)...
 
Why on earth would he say something like that?

I was there. He answered a direct question about who he thought would win the WH. I think he didn't really want to say, but being as honest as he is, came out with.... "well, I never duck a question, so here's what I think..... it's going to be Obama"

RP-Honest to the core.

Gotta love that man!
 
I was there. He answered a direct question about who he thought would win the WH. I think he didn't really want to say, but being as honest as he is, came out with.... "well, I never duck a question, so here's what I think..... it's going to be Obama"

RP-Honest to the core.

Gotta love that man!

Good to know. I wish that would have been reflected in the article.
 
I think there is a less than 10 percent chance Sen. Obama will be the next president. There are too many blue states that will go with McCain over Obama. Hill would have a fighting chance against McCain but If she was to win the nomination it will be at the political destruction of Obama causing much of the black vote to stay at home making it very difficult for her. Even more so if Powell, Rice, Steele or Watts are on McCain's ticket.

I would give McCain a better than 75% chance of being the next president regardless of what the democrats do at this point.
 
Kade was saying this earlier. the los vegas sun article
highlights how mccain lacks both an internet army and
a traditional political machine. hillary has traditional dems
aplenty, barack obama has brought NEW voters to the
democrats. today has a thread asking why WE ain't trying
to take over the democratic party apparatus! the answer is
two fold! barry goldwater was a hero to ron paul in his youth,
and mccain himself hasn't built up a machine based on personal
loyalty and ideological stances. g.w bush seems to be ramrodding
john mccain on the non-mccain elements of the republican party...
 
toss in any combo of b.barr, m.gravel, n.ruwart and chuck baldwin in either a CP
or LP run or both as fusion or a breakaway fission and this pulls votes from mcCain...
ralph nader & his lonesome honest nader's raiders only command 1% to 3% of the vote!
 
not voting john mccain this november may have obama as a one or two term president.
 
just so you all don't jump me, i'd write in perhaps Ron Paul or simply vote Nader
if i don't see a LP or CP combo that i like, that is if Ron Paul is not running nor
has given a nod to any of the field of candidates. i might even write in mike gravel.
 
keep in mind ross perot had the potentiality to almost negate one of the two main parties recently! i once voted for him!
 
Last edited:
Unless there is video footage or this is on Ron Paul's website I am going to say this didn't happen and that the media is going to great lengths to lie. Don't forget Jason Blair.
 
Good to know. I wish that would have been reflected in the article.

I agree. So I left this comment to the writer:

posted 5/02/08 @ 12:38 PM EST

Point of clarification-- Ron Paul was asked directly who he thought would win the white house. Honest man that he is, he said... "well, I'm not one to duck a question, ...I think it will be Obama."

When asked a question, Ron Paul will answer honestly. Yet, in your review of the lecture, you intimate Paul's response is somehow a betrayal to his supporters.

He was asked a question, he answered honestly.

It would have been a betrayal had he answered otherwise.
 
i just went into the link~site and left a comment. i again noticed that the poster just
previous to my comment, namely "Teri" ... thought the good doctor to be quite honest!
the site looks legit and its connected to the U of Phoenix. this is lookin' VERRRY REAL!
 
I agree. So I left this comment to the writer:

posted 5/02/08 @ 12:38 PM EST

Point of clarification-- Ron Paul was asked directly who he thought would win the white house. Honest man that he is, he said... "well, I'm not one to duck a question, ...I think it will be Obama."

When asked a question, Ron Paul will answer honestly. Yet, in your review of the lecture, you intimate Paul's response is somehow a betrayal to his supporters.

He was asked a question, he answered honestly.

It would have been a betrayal had he answered otherwise.


prlgrl... did i just follow your 12:38 posting with one of my own?:rolleyes:
 
i just went into the link~site and left a comment. i again noticed that the poster just
previous to my comment, namely "Teri" ... thought the good doctor to be quite honest!
the site looks legit and its connected to the U of Phoenix. this is lookin' VERRRY REAL!

It doesn't matter if it looks real, that is why it is such a good lie. Until there is a video, I'm not buying it.
 
Back
Top