Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

  1. #31
    Educator

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-06-15 @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,226

    Re: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    Ron Paul supporters voting for Romney are going to be sadly disappointed if he wins.
    I agree. They need to focus on engaging the libertarians of the left to reign in Obama's abuses of power. First, do no harm.

  2. #32
    Educator

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-06-15 @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,226

    Re: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

    Quote Originally Posted by BayToBay View Post
    I agree. They need to focus on engaging the libertarians of the left to reign in Obama's abuses of power. First, do no harm.
    Ron Paul has told them so. I wish we could have saved Feingold. Now he is using all of his energy on the wrong thing. We have to stop wasting our energies too much on rearguard. Let the angry morons wear themselves out with that.

  3. #33
    Student John.NoseTip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Music City
    Last Seen
    10-17-12 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    287

    Re: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

    Quote Originally Posted by BayToBay View Post
    Then you are misrepresnting yourself with Perot. Perot was huge backer of the CIA. Pick your poison.
    I wasn't for Perot. I just give him credit for running against the two party system which is quite trailblazing. He only got 19% of the vote but he had the b**** to take on the two party establishment. Moreover, he got in the debates which forced certain subjects to be put before the American people while everyone was watching. Did he have any lasting impact I don't know but Clinton did eventually balance the budget with the help of a congress swept into power on the contract with America which if I remember correctly had a balance budget amendment in it.

    Perot would have been great on some things IMO like trade and balancing the budget I also think he would have been a warmonger.

    There is no candidate that represents my views. I agree with Paul on foreign policy, the drug war and civil liberties but couldn't disagree more with much of his domestic policy. Although I will give him credit it talking about the fed and devalued currency as a tax. Romney and Obama are horrific warmongers and both ,despite the rhetoric, buy into corporatism so I wouldn't walk across the street to vote for either one.

    I believe in civil liberties, staying the hell out of other countries business, free enterprise with reasonable government regulation, government programs to help those that are down on their luck, government programs to improve the infrastructure of the country and doing something about the power of the banks and the fed. The last one may seem like a cop out but it's a complicated issue so my opinion on what should be done isn't set in stone.

    As far as this election goes I believe in not voting as a vote of no confidence. To vote for a donkey or an elephant is to give approval of the system which I can't do

  4. #34
    Educator

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-06-15 @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,226

    Re: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

    Quote Originally Posted by John.NoseTip View Post
    I wasn't for Perot. I just give him credit for running against the two party system which is quite trailblazing. He only got 19% of the vote but he had the b**** to take on the two party establishment. Moreover, he got in the debates which forced certain subjects to be put before the American people while everyone was watching. Did he have any lasting impact I don't know but Clinton did eventually balance the budget with the help of a congress swept into power on the contract with America which if I remember correctly had a balance budget amendment in it.

    Perot would have been great on some things IMO like trade and balancing the budget I also think he would have been a warmonger.

    There is no candidate that represents my views. I agree with Paul on foreign policy, the drug war and civil liberties but couldn't disagree more with much of his domestic policy. Although I will give him credit it talking about the fed and devalued currency as a tax. Romney and Obama are horrific warmongers and both ,despite the rhetoric, buy into corporatism so I wouldn't walk across the street to vote for either one.

    I believe in civil liberties, staying the hell out of other countries business, free enterprise with reasonable government regulation, government programs to help those that are down on their luck, government programs to improve the infrastructure of the country and doing something about the power of the banks and the fed. The last one may seem like a cop out but it's a complicated issue so my opinion on what should be done isn't set in stone.

    As far as this election goes I believe in not voting as a vote of no confidence. To vote for a donkey or an elephant is to give approval of the system which I can't do
    Ok then.

    The two party system will not fall without big changes to the electoral process. There is not much point in wasting too much energy on that. I spent quite a bit on that trying to invigorate the LP. It is not needed anyway and probably will not lead to positive change. Europe is not a good model.

    I learned this first hand (it took time but it got through eventually) from an older/smarter/wiser libertarian. He lead us to a reform of the LP that has made the party more visible. His efforts were not wasted but the fight drained him. I hope he finds some strength because we need him still.

    We can be more effective with a fight from within the parties. Ron Paul has shown the way. We must fight on multiple fronts, but too much rear guard is a death sentence.

    You work on your side and we can join up in the middle. Peace and good fortune too you.

  5. #35
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Ron Paul Delegates Cause Mayhem At Republican Convention

    Quote Originally Posted by John.NoseTip View Post
    I think it goes deeper than that. This guy hasn't been campaigning for president in months because he had some secret delegate strategy which is why he kept accepting donations I guess. Remember he also never went after Romney like the other candidates and withdrew from one debate in which it would have been himself and Romney one on one. I think at some point the supporters need to call bull**** on his campaign. I feel bad for the Paul supporters because they seem to genuinely believe in him and they are going to have hard time accepting the reality. I find it almost amazing people can believe in a politician as much as they seem to. They remind of the Kath Bates character in in the movie "Primary Colors" which Billy Bob's character described as having a case of galloping TB(True Believerism). However, there is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that he was Romney's wingman and not really running for president all along. That may not be fair but when you stop campaigning but don't stop accepting donations and are paying a boat load of your relatives with those campaign contributions I call bull****.
    Very nice analysis.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •