Has Ron Paul bashing here caused you to change your mind?

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

Unregistered

Moderator
There has been a continual bombardment of threads maligning Ron Paul, where he has been called everything from racist to nutcase to traitor.

Have these threads changed anyones mind? Has anyone here previously been a RP supporter, but then changed their minds based on the bashing threads?
 
I was a Ron Paul supporter, I even donated money to his campaign. I have since become undecided due to the following reasons:

1 Ron Paul is not electable
2 Ron Paul's supporters are so overbearing and obtrusive, that they are starting to make me feel like it is a cult. It has become annoying.
3 Some of his own statements and policy speeches have turned me away

The bashing threads had no effect, I don't read them.
 
I kind of feel the same way. I donated as well, but some of his recent statements have me wondering about him.

Also, I would like to add a followup question:

If you were a Ron Paul supporter and changed your mind, who do you now support?

I am trying to figure out which candidate is the least Bush-like, but with Tancredo out of the race, its hard to say.
 
No, I have looked into many of the accusations and they are little more than smear attempts and taking his words out of context and twisting them into a completely different meaning.

I see him as the only conservative in the race. All the rest are nothing more than RINOs.
 
Even when you put his words in context they say the same thing. He will not deny he plans on running on a third party ticket if he fails to get the nomination. Which with his following he knows would give the Whitehouse to the dems ala Ross perot. He puts in earmarks but votes against them so he can honestly say he never votes for earmarks knowing they'll pass without his vote.
 
There has been a continual bombardment of threads maligning Ron Paul, where he has been called everything from racist to nutcase to traitor.

Have these threads changed anyones mind? Has anyone here previously been a RP supporter, but then changed their minds based on the bashing threads?
Click to expand...
No, of course not. I fully expected this activity just as soon as it was realized that not only is Ron Paul a serious candidate, he could be positioned to win the Republican nomination for the presidency. If Dr. Paul weren't perceived as serious, few of these smears would have occurred. Like this one in the War Street Journal for example.

I've read the writings of Ron Paul for at least ten years and have a pretty good idea of his political philosophy. It is sound, it is based on well founded research of some of the finest minds of the 20th century, and available for anyone to see.

There is no "cult-like" aspects of any of Dr. Paul's supporters that I've seen. Just people that favor liberty and freedom, all based on sound economic principles and Constitutional government.

So, no, there's nothing to these smears and they're not influencing anyone I know or anyone of integrity and courage.

Edit: Looks like the New York times has printed a retraction of one of its smears of Ron Paul.
 
Last edited:
No, of course not! I will continue to support Fred Thompson until he's no longer a viable candidate... :D:D:D
 
I've gone from viewing him as the greatest thing since sliced bread, to thinking him a flawed human who none the less happens to be better than any of the other candidates.

And, yeah, I've had to conclude he has a better chance of getting the nomination than I ever thought, or else he'd be ignored, not subject to vicious attack.
 
"Has Ron Paul bashing here caused you to change your mind? "

About what? That's he's a minor player on the fringe of things? No, no it hasn't.

John
 
I would never vote for Ron Paul.
After watching the Meet the Press show I do like Ron Paul more. But I still wouldn't vote for him.
 
I became aware of Ron Paul here, but I didn't really form an opinion of him until I did more research. Now I think that he's a lot like Ralph Nader, but from a different end of the spectrum. We need true believers, even if they can't possibly win.
 
Racist-NO Traitor-NO!!! Nutcase-YES.
Click to expand...
How many nutcases do you know who have an M.D. from Duke Medical School, served as an Army flight surgeon, and have gone on to have a very successful medical career? Think about it.

*********************

I think the Ron Paul bashing is generally due to two factors:

(1) For many people, it's more important that the US continue to "kick ass" overseas in endless, trillion-dollar warfare in the Middle East than for Americans to retain our Constitutional liberties right here at home. These people are willing to trade any amount of their remaining freedom for the false promise of security -- as if wars overseas were stopping terrorists from infiltrating the US right now.

(2) Some people in this country (Jewish and Christian Zionists) are more loyal to Israel than to America for religious or ethnic reasons -- hence the existence of organizations like AIPAC, JINSA, ZOA, AJC, etc. These organizations are enormously influential, and all other GOP candidates kowtow to them, as do most of the Democrats (esp. Hillary). Since Paul wants US tax dollars to be spent only in the US, those people don't like him, and they smear him at every opportunity.

You know the GOP is truly screwed up when NY and Massachusetts liberals like Giuliani and Romney, respectively, are considered more conservative than a strict Constitutionalist like Ron Paul -- simply because they're pro-war and are willing to attack Iran for the sake of "poor, defenseless," nuclear-armed Israel.

When it comes to guns, the other candidates believe the Second Amendment gives us the right to play games with firearms, like hunting and target shooting. Ron Paul believes the Second Amendment is about keeping combat weapons in the hands of civilians so we can defend our freedom from a government that turns brutally repressive. So you'd think the choice would be obvious for people who care about the right that protects all our other rights, wouldn't you? Well, apparently it's not obvious enough.

If a GOP candidate besides Paul gets elected and ends up signing another Assault Weapons Ban or something even worse, then I'm not even going to cry about it. In fact, if that happens, I'm going to go on every gun board I know of and rub it in to all those who didn't support Paul while they had the chance.

I swear, I'm beginning to think Americans deserve to lose their rights. Not only will they NEVER fight for them even during an unconstitutional gun confiscation, they won't even support the only pro-Constitution candidate who slips through the establishment's filter. :mad:
 
Has Ron Paul bashing here caused you to change your mind?
Click to expand...

No.
However, it did make me do quite a bit more research about him. Some of the accusations may be true, some may be taken way out of proportion.

After all of the hooplah, I've come to the conclusion that he's a man of fault just like every other person on this planet. Hence, I said person, not just politician. I think he is in fact a man of principle. I do believe that he will support the top two meaningful things that I look for in a president. However, I also don't see him being able to follow through. Not because of him, but because the other two branches of government will not cooperate at all. I also believe the presidential position has more to do with dealings with foreign policy than most other issues. I believe Paul will be ineffective on this front. He has some great ideas and beliefs that fit the mold of what the role of the president should be, but I just don't think he has what it takes right now to get congress to follow suit. Do I think he's a kook? No, I don't think so. Is he too legalistic? Maybe. But I do think he needs to be picked to be VP. His duties may be different than the president, but it would definitely get his foot in the door and the public will be able to see him in action easier. Four years of being a VP is great experience and a good way for Paul to receive media attention. It's hard for a news source to ignore the VP if he wants to talk.

Voting who I want in Congress and my state's politicians are more pressing to me to get satifactory results.
 
SteelCore, that was the most eloquent and spot-on post I have ever read on this forum. I couldn't have said it better myself. Well done.

And to answer the original question - no, it only reinforces my belief that he's a threat to the hivemind.
 
I can't wait for the nomination process to get over with so all the Ron Paul supporters will stop with the silliness of how he is the only one who can beat Hillary. Ron Paul is not going to win the nomination, he will be regulated to watching from the sidelines just like Tancredo.

Ron Paul is a joke, even in Texas.
Click to expand...

Unless you were trying to give us an unwanted example of Ron Paul bashing, your statements have nothing to do with my question. I am trying to ask a legitmate question, and get a legitimate answer. If you want to bash Ron Paul, feel free to do so, but please start your own thread. Why did you post in this thread?

Also, why do Ron Paul bashers feel the need to bash him at every opportunity, such as what Xnavy has just done? What about Ron Paul causes his detractors to reflexively and ferociously assail him?
 
I'll still vote for Ron Paul in the primary and keep an open mind come November.

The Ron Paul bashing here hasn't caused me to change my mind - on the contrary, it is the fanatical, cult-like, over-the-top Ron Paul supporters/zombies/robots that have almost persuaded me to abandon the candidate who most closely matches my opinions on the issues. Seriously, if fewer of his supporters foamed at the mouth when they talked, he might actually have a chance at winning the Rep. nomination.
 
I agree with you Blues Man that some supporters of RP are very fanatical. But his opponents, some of whom cannot resist the opportunity to bash him, are often just as fanatical.
 
When it comes to guns, the other candidates believe the Second Amendment gives us the right to play games with firearms, like hunting and target shooting. Ron Paul believes the Second Amendment is about keeping combat weapons in the hands of civilians so we can defend our freedom from a government that turns brutally repressive. So you'd think the choice would be obvious for people who care about the right that protects all our other rights, wouldn't you? Well, apparently it's not obvious enough.
Click to expand...

Several other candidates such as: Tancredo (now gone), Thomas, Huckabee, and Hunter have long stated that it is their strong belief that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms as a check against tyranny.

Paul's vote against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act shows that he is not as strong as those other Republican candidates on second amendment issues.

Was that "bashing" Paul? No, I think it's just setting the record straight about him. It’s far from obvious that he is the best candidate on 2nd Amendment issues.

Paul's supporters have established a pattern of constantly making pronouncements about how great the man is, and how it should be *obvious* to any thinking person that he's just the bestest conservative candidate ever, and then complain about "bashing" whenever anyone offers up a contrary opinion about him.

Sorry, but if someone is going to offer up a thread about Ron Paul or any other candidate they should expect to hear both positive and negative opinions about him. It's that simple.
 
This thread is not directly about Ron Paul. I don't want to hear good or bad about him. What I asked was whether or not your vote had changed because of the discussion about him.

Its a yes or no question, and really pretty simple if you think about it.

But since my thread has been hijacked, let me ask you this Luke. Why is it Ron Paul detractors are so vocally opposed to him and feel a reflexive need to speak out against him at any time? The man is polling less than 10 percent and has no chance of winning. Is the bashing because Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, and McCain are running very close statistically and hope to turn off Paul voters and recruit them to their camps? Thats the only thing I can think of. Certainly it isnt because you think he actually has a chance to win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top