• 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!

Ron Paul: 'I Don't Fully Endorse' Mitt Romney

vauge said:
Interesting, were are your arguments directed? I said that they had to offer him a spot per the rules - that's it. They are very much allowed to control what is said - you are right.
However, as far as the Repub, Paul could actually be defined as Mr Republican Jr (behind Taft).

The party public definition left him, and you are right - he can leave at any time. But why? He is much more in line with the states' Republican parties than any other presidential candidate in recent history. In short: he is pure Republican.
Click to expand...

I had recently read that as a result of delegate disputes and the tally after the final arbitration Paul's campaign can now only claim a 3 state plurality in delegates, not the five required for a slot. Which means only Santorum would qualify.
 
vauge said:
So, using your own "logic" - Romney cannot be a Republican.
Click to expand...

Damnnnnnn......

Well played sir!

I will point out that you said it, not me. Oh, and he sure as hell ain't a democrat, but he might be a republican after he shakes the etch-a-sketch.
 
PirateMk1 said:
As oppossed to what we are doing now?
Click to expand...

You deal with the world you have. Not the ridiculous vacuum Ron Paul thinks he can have.
 
Hatuey said:
You deal with the world you have. Not the ridiculous vacuum Ron Paul thinks he can have.
Click to expand...

Can you explain your thoughts here?
 
Hatuey said:
You deal with the world you have. Not the ridiculous vacuum Ron Paul thinks he can have.
Click to expand...

blablabla_Ineedmybiggovernmenttosurvive_blablabla
 
Hatuey said:
You deal with the world you have. Not the ridiculous vacuum Ron Paul thinks he can have.
Click to expand...

And people think I am being ridculous. Oiy Vey:2brickwal
 
Hatuey said:
You deal with the world you have. Not the ridiculous vacuum Ron Paul thinks he can have.
Click to expand...

Henrin said:
Can you explain your thoughts here?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would be interested in well. Vacuum? He wants to make friends all over the world and not enemies - right now we are doing the later very aggressively.
 
Henrin said:
Can you explain your thoughts here?
Click to expand...

Simple. We live in a globalist economy which in order to succeed needs both political and military ties. Ron Paul thinks he can have the economic ties without anything else. That's simply not true. :shrug:
 
vauge said:
Yeah, I would be interested in well. Vacuum? He wants to make friends all over the world and not enemies - right now we are doing the later very aggressively.
Click to expand...

It's a shame we live in the real world then isn't it and not everyone wants to be friends. :shrug:.
 
Hatuey said:
Simple. We live in a globalist economy which in order to succeed needs both political and military ties. Ron Paul thinks he can have the economic ties without anything else. That's simply not true. :shrug:
Click to expand...

And how is it not true?
 
Hatuey said:
It's a shame we live in the real world then isn't it and not everyone wants to be friends. :shrug:.
Click to expand...

Then what you are saying is there is still a reason for war. How exactly does that back up your claims made here?
 
Henrin said:
And how is it not true?
Click to expand...

Because economics does not exist outside of the political and military sphere in the 21st century. Thanks for joining the rest of us.
 
Hatuey said:
Because economics does not exist outside of the political and military sphere in the 21st century. Thanks for joining the rest of us.
Click to expand...

That explains nothing.
 
Henrin said:
Then what you are saying is there is still a reason for war. How exactly does that back up your claims made here?
Click to expand...

Your simplistic interpretation of what I said is simplistic indeed.
 
Henrin said:
That explains nothing.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry your libertarian goggles don't allow you to join the 21st century. :shrug: - Try this - read a book on geopolitics and the links between politics and international economics. It'll help you a lot more than paraphrasing Ron Paul's simplicity ad nauseum.
 
Hatuey said:
I'm sorry your libertarian goggles don't allow you to join the 21st century. :shrug: - Try this - read a book on geopolitics and the links between politics and international economics. It'll help you a lot more than paraphrasing Ron Paul's simplicity ad nauseum.
Click to expand...

Insulting me does not explain yourself.
 
Hatuey said:
Your simplistic interpretation of what I said is simplistic indeed.
Click to expand...

you said:
It's a shame we live in the real world then isn't it and not everyone wants to be friends.
Click to expand...

That is what you said. Its not exactly hard to understand or complex.
 
blablaisolationismblabla

blabla18thcenturyblabla

blablalibertarianblabla
 
Henrin said:
Insulting me does not explain yourself.
Click to expand...

You have the right to feel offended at me exposing your ignorance of the link between politics, economics and war. :shrug: Ron Paul & Co's sheer stupidity when it comes to foreign policy is ridiculous. One can advocate for less invasive economic ties, but his followers pink & rosy beliefs that we could cut them down to the level they want and "be friends" with everyone is just stupid. We're not friends with the world. We're there to get their resources and exploit them to our advantage. That we do it better than everyone else is just a testament to our superiority.
 
I got a new signature lol
 
Hatuey said:
You have the right to feel offended at me exposing your ignorance of the link between politics, economics and war. :shrug: Ron Paul & Co's sheer stupidity when it comes to foreign policy is ridiculous. One can advocate for less invasive economic ties, but his followers pink & rosy beliefs that we could cut them down to the level they want and "be friends" with everyone is just stupid. We're not friends with the world. We're there to get their resources and exploit them to our advantage. That we do it better than everyone else is just a testament to our superiority.
Click to expand...

claiming someone that has different views from you live in a prior century is not a real debate point, it is a personal insult meant to flame and anger the person you are responding to.
 
ARealConservative said:
claiming someone that has different views from you live in a prior century is not a real debate point, it is a personal insult meant to flame and anger the person you are responding to.
Click to expand...

Don't complain about the truth when you cry socialism at every chance. Ron Paul does live in the 18th century where it was technologically, socially and economically plausible to live in your borders. However in the 21st century the sharing of technology, intelligence, political secrets and economic ties do not come in separate boxes. They're all mixed and if the U.S. plans on being a super power, it has to play the same game as everyone else. Deal with it and move on. It'll help you a ton.
 
Hatuey said:
Don't complain about the truth when you cry socialism at every chance. Ron Paul does live in the 18th century where it was technologically, socially and economically plausible to live in your borders. However in the 21st century the sharing of technology, intelligence, political secrets and economic ties do not come in separate boxes. They're all mixed and if the U.S. plans on being a super power, it has to play the same game as everyone else. Deal with it and move on. It'll help you a ton.
Click to expand...

every single sentence you wrote is hollow and shallow.

First off, nobody is playing the game we are playing. We spend more money on foreign policy then all other players in your sick game combined. that alone makes what you said a waste of time and space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom