• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Ron Paul Insane?

Is Ron Paul Insane?


  • Total voters
    98
I'd say these days it's most hip to be a social/civil libertarian and a fiscal conservative.

I don't think many college students do that route. Most of them fell in love with Paul because of his foreign policy notions, but politely ignored his domestic policy tendencies.
 
Yes, only because doing the same thing over and over with the same results while expecting different ones is in itself insanity.
 
Of course not.
His "thinking" may be from the 16th century and he may not be very bright,.....but....then, what if he is right and I am wrong......that possibility always exists...
For "balance" we need him....
 
I'd say these days it's most hip to be a social/civil libertarian and a fiscal conservative.
There is too much of a connection/dependence with social and fiscal to have such a luxury.
What we need is balance....we need things that benefit all not just some....
 
Yes, only because doing the same thing over and over with the same results while expecting different ones is in itself insanity.

the results are clearly different because his talking points are now being co-opted by the so called front tier candidates.
 
But they're the same because he's still not going to win the primary.
 
But they're the same because he's still not going to win the primary.

he is effecting the debate by injecting some serious discussion in what would otherwise be an exchange of MSM talking points where we all pretend to agree on what it means to be conservative.
 
How is he mentally rooted in the 18th century?

The notion that isolationism and withdrawing from the rest of the world. That is completely absurd in the 21st century. And in reality, the U.S. was not as isolationist back then as some would have you believe.
 
The notion that isolationism and withdrawing from the rest of the world. That is completely absurd in the 21st century.

You would know this because....?

Last time I checked you don't have anything to base this on besides assumptions.
 
The notion that isolationism and withdrawing from the rest of the world. That is completely absurd in the 21st century. And in reality, the U.S. was not as isolationist back then as some would have you believe.

ending the empire <> isolationism.

pathetic attempt at hyperbole duly noted.
 
I do not happen to agree with Ron Paul on some things (mostly the idea that there should be almost no government), but I like him more than most politicians out there.
 
May be but this one is 2 years old.

Besides, it may be interesting for someone to see one's post in 2 years time.

This place sucked before. Pretty much all those people ate crap.
 
I don't think he's crazy. I don't even necessarily think his ideas are "extreme". I think they're different. And maybe, in some areas, different is what we need. We've alternated with traditional GOP leadership and traditional Dem leadership and we're sort of seesawed between different versions of suck for the last few decades. Maybe we should stop trying to prove how right our ideas are and give somebody a chance to lead us through a new approach.

Also, it would serve us all to remember that the President doesn't vote on, write, or sponsor legislation. He can offer his opinion, but he can't force his hand. Even executive orders have limited power. I don't see Ron Paul, especially given his record, empowering the office of President further than it already has been. His ideas on limited federal government have been consistent for years and I have seen no indication that being President would change that. So even if you think is foreign policy ideas are all wrong, you have to remember he's gotta work with the legislative branch to make major changes.
 
The notion that isolationism and withdrawing from the rest of the world. That is completely absurd in the 21st century. And in reality, the U.S. was not as isolationist back then as some would have you believe.

Your confusing Paul with Cold War throwback Pat Buchanan. Isolationism and nonintervention are two different things
 
Your confusing Paul with Cold War throwback Pat Buchanan. Isolationism and nonintervention are two different things

he knows.

but you have to understand, when you are living in Taiwan, the idea of the United States not meddling in the affairs of other countries is a terrifying thing to ponder. His bias towards policy that benefits him personally trumps longstanding views on a humble, conservative foreign policy.

and once he picked the side that benefits him personally, he will use any form of dishonest rhetoric to keep the charade going, such as labeling this isolationism.
 
This place sucked before. Pretty much all those people ate crap.

Uh, I'm not sure what you mean but anyway I wish you all the best. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom