Let us consider this about Ron Paul.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Both of the qualifiers inherrent in my statement are necessary.

If enough voted based on the first statement, the second statement would be self-fulfilling.
Click to expand...

And if there were enough strict constitutionists in the voting pool, you would have a point.

Unfortunately, there aren't...not even close. Wishing it doesn't make is it so.

Therefore, the pragmatic minority faction (us) looks to influence the race with the candidate with at least some chance of winning.

Dr. Paul was never that candidate.
 
Ok, so the candidates who currently have an apparent chance of winning are Obama, Clinton, Romney, and McCain.

Now tell me, no matter which one wins, where do you see constitutionalist appointments coming from? :barf:

I am not betting on a winner, I am voting for who best represents my principles, win or lose. I've done the "pick a winner" thing before and lost in the long term. I'm done with that nonsense.
It may not happen this time, but I am hopeful that eventually we will have a combination of a principled (read Constitution supporting) candidate and enough principled (read Constitution supporting) voters (who can accept that candidate) to take back this country from the government.

Until then, I wish you would quit confusing some of the ruder Paul supporters with Dr. Paul and the rest of his supporters. (In other words I am asking you to quit being rude, yourself. I know, wasted bandwidth.)

I have made an edit to make it clear that I do not mean that anyone not supporting Ron Paul does not support the constitution. I realized that it could be interpreted that way. Sorry
 
Last edited:
Thumper,

Who you pulling for now? I was with Hunter, then with Thompson, now I am supporting Huckabee, but it looks like he will drop shortly after Super Tuesday unless he does well (lets hope).
 
I wish you would quit confusing some of the ruder Paul supporters with Dr. Paul and the rest of his supporters.
Click to expand...

It's getting harder and harder to not confuse the RUDE Ron Paul supporters with the non-rude Ron Paul supporters, especially on TFL. I know, I know, I'm a communist-socialist-liberal who isn't a "conservative", and who is a "moron", weak minded, close minded, etc..... Incidently, all of those labels are commonly applied by angry, RUDE Ron Paul supporters here on TFL. Just look in this thread alone. Who has already labeled others as "weak minded?" It isn't a Hillbama supporter. Or a McCain supporter. Or a Romney supporter. Or a Huck supporter.

Naturally, it was a RON PAUL supporter.
 
Yes, Fremmer, it was A Ron Paul supporter, as in one. That is my point. I do not accuse all non-Paul supporters of saying the things that you do. I accept each individual on their own merits, not on a group that they can be associated with. (Hmmmm, now why does that sound familiar?)
 
Oh, but its not just one, it is several, and it happens time after time. Athough admittedly, some are worse than others. Remember, I'm a communist-socialist, according to another Ron Paul supporter. :D

And remember, if you don't support Ron Paul, then you're not "conservative", at least as the term "conservative" is defined by Ron Paul supporters. :rolleyes:

It's getting to the point that I'm wondering whether some of the newer members who claim to be Ron Paul supporters truly support Ron Paul, or whether they are just trying to troll and cause problems. Because that's how rude they are.

Hey, no offense, Mib. I have no problem with anyone supporting Ron Paul, at least until they start calling everyone else communists, socialists, morons, etc.
 
Let me try to be clearer. I'm not against anyone who doesn't support Ron Paul. I won't call someone names based on that alone. If they've made an educated choice and can show that before condemning up RP supporters, then I respect that. Friends of mine support Hillary!! They listened to what I say, they watched videos and visited RP sites, fair enough, they chose based on some research.
I haven't cut down any other candidates. I like Paul and Huckabee. Yet, I see too many posts with people buying into what MSM has pushed so far " crazy Dr" " irrelevant candidate" . When people this early have already decided someone is irrelevant, than they are wrong.
11 rep. in the beginning, now there's 4. All 4 are viable, none have won yet. We'll all see after Super Tuesday.
 
jtaylor,

I just spent 5 minutes researching your posts in the L&P section. Except for the occasional economy comment or something similar...ALL of your posts about everything mention Ron Paul in there somewhere. Just a thought, apparently you are not helping to further his cause and are drawing bad press by mentioning his name...so just keep it quiet from now on...if you like him so much, great, do us a favor and vote for him, but you don't need to keep shouting 100 posts about why he is the next best thing and if we don't vote for him, we are anti-American.

"Very often the quiet fellow has said all he knows."
Kin Hubbard
 
But he's helping you guys, Bored...

Thumper,

Who you pulling for now? I was with Hunter, then with Thompson, now I am supporting Huckabee, but it looks like he will drop shortly after Super Tuesday unless he does well (lets hope).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was hoping for more from Huck, but I'm afraid the guy I originally supported (Fred) should have pulled out before South Carolina. He only served as a spoiler against Huckabee. Huck's done, I'm afraid. My boy Fred's refusal to drop is the reason we're stuck with McCain and Romney.

Of the two, I'm leaning more towards McCain based on his background, his indisputable honor, his propensity to appoint strict constitutionist justices, and the fact that he's the most likely to beat Hillary or Obama head to head. He knows he needs a right leaning VP, so I'm hoping for Thompson.

I hate McCain-Feingold, but I certainly hate the concept of a Dem making appointments even more.
 
Per "Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition."

"Conservative 1. conserving or tending to conserve; preservative 2. tending to preserve established traditions or institutions and to resist or oppose any changes in these [conservative politics, conservative art...

This definition may explain much of the opposition to Dr. Paul. The "Fab Four" we're left with at this stage (Hillary, Obama, Romney and McCain) can't be expected to make much of a change in the course our country is taking toward the pit of Socialism. Ron Paul would definitely make some waves insofar as he could.

Most of us (and here I have to include myself) call ourselves conservative and want our lives to be as simple as they were in our childhood. It ain't gonna happen! The genie is out of the bottle now and we have to learn to live with it. Ron Paul would try to lure the genie back into the bottle and in so doing might cut back on big government and its attendant trillions in expenses. Since government is the single, largest employer on record, what would happen to all the families suddenly laid off? Who would pay their rent? Who would buy their groceries?

Folks, we've spent the past seventy-five years painting ourselves into a corner. Bit by tiny bit we've sipped, drank and - finally - guzzled the kool-aid Marx and Lenin offered us. Now that we have a choice - albeit a painful one - we are beginning to realize that kool-aid is habit forming and we're hooked! As good "conservatives" we will continue to repeat the lines about wanting our country to go back to pre-FDR days while working as hard as we can to see that it doesn't happen.

After all, who in those days had two cars and a pickup? Flat-screen TV wasn't even thought of yet and how could all those people have survived without the Superbowl?
 
Thumper, in all seriousness, I am interested to know how McCain will continue the war effort, double the military size , cut taxes and save the failing economy.
I hope you don't just write this question off. I do want to know and I'm sure he has plans, I just haven't heard them come through during debates yet. Thanks-
 
He knows he needs a right leaning VP, so I'm hoping for Thompson
Click to expand...

I don't think he needs Thompson.

If the democrats end up running Hillary, there is no reason to add a conservative to his ticket. Hillary will inspire conservatives to turn out and vote against her. Hillary would be an extremely effective motivator for conservative voters. In fact, I suspet she would cause the greatest turn out of conservative voters we have ever had.

I think it would be brilliant of McCain to pick Lieberman as his running mate. The conservatives are already going to vote for McCain if Hillary runs. Adding Lieberman would increase independents, and even pull in a few moderate democrats.

I think a McCain/Lieberman ticket is unstoppable.
 
I think a McCain/Lieberman ticket is unstoppable
Click to expand...

I would have to point out, that nothing is unstoppable in this world of MSM and the internet. All it would take is one comment while not remembering the mic is on to completely unravel a campaign. But I do agree that it would be a very hard ticket to beat.
 
Yes, we should always look to outside interests to determine what's best for the U.S...you really do have a lot in common with the moveon.org folks. Interesting.

Perhaps the Patriots should call the Giants for advice before every play this weekend?

Anyway, who besides you and Pat H have mentioned this 'Giuliani as A.G.' BS?

Candidate failing miserably, so let's do some fear mongering?

I don't want you to leave, but what happened to your threat that you were taking your ball and going home?
 
Wow...What are you 10? Do your parents know you come on this site? I ask and ask, respectfully, for you're points and arguments and you come off sounding like a disgruntled special ed student.
Anyone who is resourceful has come across the idea that Giuliani may have had an offer.
And yes!! I do care what the world thinks of us and what they would like to see us do!!! Man...how arrogant to think we're somehow better than everyone else in the world. The US seems to get involved everywhere and think it's ok, but as soon as others take interest in our future, you condemn it.
It's very disturbing that people like this vote.
 
I think a McCain/Lieberman ticket is unstoppable.
Click to expand...

Unregistered, I believe that against a Clinton or Obama led ticket, you're correct. I believe that Lieberman has said he's opposed to the idea.

Pragmatic or not, that would be hard for those of us representing the base to vote for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top