In case you didn't notice - idiot's votes count JUST AS MUCH as those who aren't.
And with this line of thought you're not really distinguishing yourself from them.
So are we done ignoring the Evangelicals?
- Thread starter idiom
- Start date
In case you didn't notice - idiot's votes count JUST AS MUCH as those who aren't.
And with this line of thought you're not really distinguishing yourself from them.
Highstreet
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,786
Pointing out the truth and Paul's record is NOT pandering. It's converting.
Highstreet
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,786
I am an evangelical, and there are some misperceptions being thrown around.
Many of you favor Dr. Paul because you look at his record and see him as honest and consistant. The evangelical right also wants the same thing, but for whatever reason (it doesn't really matter if it's right or wrong) they see the Christianity claim as meaning that the guy will more likely be honest and consistant. At least they hope the odds of it will be higher. So, we all want the same thing, they just have a different litmus test for it. That's all.
This doesn't mean that Dr. Paul needs to pander or anything. He doesn't need to go and thump the Bible like Huckabee and say vote for me cause I'm a Christian. However, it is one of his beliefs and if people know that, yes it would help. For the exact same reason that I think it should be mentioned that he has more military experience then anyone else running. These are safety blankets that the public wants before they'll support someone, they don't need to be pandered to, but a mention here or there wouldn't be bad. Especially since we are the model candidate on both.
Many of you favor Dr. Paul because you look at his record and see him as honest and consistant. The evangelical right also wants the same thing, but for whatever reason (it doesn't really matter if it's right or wrong) they see the Christianity claim as meaning that the guy will more likely be honest and consistant. At least they hope the odds of it will be higher. So, we all want the same thing, they just have a different litmus test for it. That's all.
This doesn't mean that Dr. Paul needs to pander or anything. He doesn't need to go and thump the Bible like Huckabee and say vote for me cause I'm a Christian. However, it is one of his beliefs and if people know that, yes it would help. For the exact same reason that I think it should be mentioned that he has more military experience then anyone else running. These are safety blankets that the public wants before they'll support someone, they don't need to be pandered to, but a mention here or there wouldn't be bad. Especially since we are the model candidate on both.
I just call it like I see it, I cant believe so many people would vote just on religion...
off course not all christians are idiots, but a bunch of them are... lol
Yes, you reach someone where they are at.
If it's Evangelical related, you reach them with Evangelical points.
Like here: http://ronpaul.cc/video/ronpaul/Chuck_Baldwin_Ron_Paul.htm
(I've got more work to do on the page - but it's okay to send to someone as it is)
And I've got a page with specifically a comparison with Huck. I need to find the URL.
here: http://ronpaul.cc/images/Ron/Christian/Christian_Flyer.htm
Last edited:
no, the iowan christians are the ones I cant stomach right now... lol
Highstreet
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,786
Quit being an ass by painting with that broad brush. Paul's campaign is only working because it is inclusive.
webber53
Member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
- Messages
- 495
Not all non-believers are idiots, but a bunch of them are
+1 - by the way- I'm going to start telling Dr Paul how to deliver babies since I know nothing about it.
There are two Serious Born Again candidates, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee.
When someone asks me what Jesus would look like in politics, I point at Ron Paul, not at Mike.
Ron Paul has enough belief in his own faith that he doesn't need to prop it up in public. Yet it is the foundation of his policy.
Mike is a bit of a slime. His policy is put together by 'people smarter than him' and he puts Jesus™ on top as the main selling point.
When someone asks me what Jesus would look like in politics, I point at Ron Paul, not at Mike.
Ron Paul has enough belief in his own faith that he doesn't need to prop it up in public. Yet it is the foundation of his policy.
Mike is a bit of a slime. His policy is put together by 'people smarter than him' and he puts Jesus™ on top as the main selling point.
Highstreet
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,786
Did anyone who jumps into threads about God and prayer to start trolling negativity about such things that they know NOTHING about -
EVER CONSIDER - that they might be DRIVING AWAY NEW PEOPLE WHO DO?
And who want to LEARN how Ron's supporters who DO BELIEVE think.
And if there WASN"T SO MUCH NEGATIVE TROLLING that they might even TURN INTO a supporter of Ron?
.
If you want to POINT FINGERS at a group for being idiots -
people who have RUINED I don't know how many GOOD THREADS ABOUT GOD AND PRAYER - start with YOURSELF!
EVER CONSIDER - that they might be DRIVING AWAY NEW PEOPLE WHO DO?
And who want to LEARN how Ron's supporters who DO BELIEVE think.
And if there WASN"T SO MUCH NEGATIVE TROLLING that they might even TURN INTO a supporter of Ron?
.
If you want to POINT FINGERS at a group for being idiots -
people who have RUINED I don't know how many GOOD THREADS ABOUT GOD AND PRAYER - start with YOURSELF!
Last edited:
I know quite a bit of christianity, I have many religious family members, none of them huckster voters btw... and they dont vote based on religion...
The problem is not separating religious beliefs from political ones. This would demand hypocrisy (of a different kind than most of you are sure to accuse Christians of, but that's a different topic).
The problem is that Christians aren't using their religious beliefs correctly in forming their political beliefs. Yes, sin should be frowned upon, but nowhere, NOWHERE does the Bible say that the spiritual direction of a country (outside of Israel) is dependent on a secular government. This is entirely the work of the gospel, and the responsibility to spread the gospel belongs to the church and to individual Christians, not to our government.
To that effect, I wrote this: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=47829 which I hope will help some of the Christians you know to rethink secular government and what it's there for (and what we would like it to look like).
RoyalShock
Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2007
- Messages
- 562
As an evangelical, here is my perspective.
The Christians aren't voting based solely on their religion. For several elections (since Clinton) we've had it pounded into our brains by our leaders to "vote our values, not our wallets". What that did was push a large percentage of evangelicals to bring only a few issues to the forefront. Abortion is a big one. Gay mariage is another one.
For many who went along with that way of thinking, when they see a guy like Huckabee, they see someone like themselves (looking at the positives), which they trust.
We are in a battle of ideas. It's relatively easy to win over the apathetic or neutral types. It's much harder to convert those who have been voting a certain way, using a certain set of critieria. It will take time, truth, and tact (kindness) to win them over. Dismissing them as dumb, stupid sheep is only going to alienate them further.
A portion of them are not going to be winnable, but the ones who are open minded enough to be willing to look at things from a different perspective are ripe for the picking. But like I said, it will take time, truth and tact. Say it again . . . "Time, Truth and Tact!"
The Christians aren't voting based solely on their religion. For several elections (since Clinton) we've had it pounded into our brains by our leaders to "vote our values, not our wallets". What that did was push a large percentage of evangelicals to bring only a few issues to the forefront. Abortion is a big one. Gay mariage is another one.
For many who went along with that way of thinking, when they see a guy like Huckabee, they see someone like themselves (looking at the positives), which they trust.
We are in a battle of ideas. It's relatively easy to win over the apathetic or neutral types. It's much harder to convert those who have been voting a certain way, using a certain set of critieria. It will take time, truth, and tact (kindness) to win them over. Dismissing them as dumb, stupid sheep is only going to alienate them further.
A portion of them are not going to be winnable, but the ones who are open minded enough to be willing to look at things from a different perspective are ripe for the picking. But like I said, it will take time, truth and tact. Say it again . . . "Time, Truth and Tact!"
scandinaviany3
Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,976
good idea but needs to be on tv and less than 1 minute
Good idea but should be no more than 1 minute and on tv to reach everyone
Good idea but should be no more than 1 minute and on tv to reach everyone
Grandson of Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 1,081
well, you could start by not calling them effing morons. I'm guessing that might make them a bit defensive and unwilling to listen to you. Just a guess.
Perhaps ask them what issues they find most important in voting for a candidate. I'm confident that will be a good launching point for a discussion in which you can make a thoughtful, rational case for Ron Paul.
Similar threads
- Featured
