So is this the McCain-Romney debate??!

Stage 2 and Thumper have many moderates to choose from. Hell you even have two parties to choose from. Their job as a voter is easier than if you are a conservative.....and thats the bottom line.
Click to expand...

Back to the calling names are we?

As a conservative my job is truly harder than you think. You see I think that casting a vote to make me feel better and then throwing up my hands saying "Oh well its not my problem anymore" borders on irresponsible.

Its about as mature as those stupid bumper stickers that start with "don't blame me". Voting isn't something to CYA. You vote to make the nation better, or prevent it from getting worse. Voting for Paul is the same as voting for the tooth fairy. Both are mathematically prohibited from winning.

Sure I could toss my vote for Paul and then spend the next 4 years heckling people who didn't. But someone who does that cares more about themselves than the country.

People who care about the nation are the ones that are going to make the tough choices. The people who live in reality who understand that you don't get a perfect candidate every election aren't going to flush things down the toilet for a sound byte on a gun board. They are going to pick someone who they arent too fond of to prevent the ultimate loss from happening.

So keep on with the jeers and heckling. It just reminds me which one of us is selfish.
 
Well said, but I would like to be able to vote for someone that I think will win AND will be represent my ideals and put forth the ideas I have in their capacity and given framework for the office they're running. But there isn't one. There isn't a vote for what I think is good.
 
Well, a year ago, Giuliani was the "Frontrunner" as predicted by MSM and general public. There were 11 candidates. You've all been saying Paul has no chance, yet here he is, in a group of 4 from the 11. Here he is with more money to burn and more money coming in every day! 2nd in NV 1st in LA, most likely 1st in ME tomorrow.
The self fulfilling prophesy is from people like Thumper and Stage2 who don't so much disagree or dislike Paul totally, but don't even consider him because in their minds he's " got no chance" or " as likely as the tooth fairy winning".
Here we are in 2008 with a candidate who's for the people, has integrity, honesty and a strong record. He's pro freedom, pro peace, a genius on economics and supports the constitution and liberty. People like this are rare to say the least. In our lives we may not get another chance like this.
From Paul's critics, I still don't hear who their choice is... I can settle for Huckabee, but it's early still! They need 1191 delegates! McCain only has about 100!!! Anyone of the 4 can still win! I say odds are in Paul's favor if people can wake up and pay attention.
That's it from me. Thick headed ignorant morons make me feel sick. I try to show that it's in their interest to choose Paul, but some may be hopeless....
 
Thick headed ignorant morons make me feel sick. I try to show that it's in their interest to choose Paul, but some may be hopeless....
Click to expand...

We thank you for your arrogant, misguided paternalism, but perhaps it's best for you to fade into obscurity.

You see, reality makes a fool of you. It's clear who here is politically ignorant, but perhaps you can't yet see it. That's kinda cute, in a sad way.

Please stay around for a couple of more months...
 
"but perhaps it's best for you to fade into obscurity"

I'll be in good company in this land of obscurity. I can read the constitution and enjoy all the guns we used to be allowed to own. I can keep my money and have freedom. Remember freedom?
As great as this site is, I have to question why people like you are here.
Again....Who do you support and why?? You can't seem to say! Is it Hillary? Obama? McWar? Flip?
 
Thick headed ignorant morons make me feel sick. I try to show that it's in their interest to choose Paul, but some may be hopeless....
Click to expand...

Ah, another Ron Paul supporter. Anyone who doesn't absolutely agree, or who even dares to question Ron Paul, is labeled as a morooon. :rolleyes:

"I wish they would stop, because it certainly doesn't help me." That is an approximate quote by Ron Paul concerning some of his supporters (the 9/11 "truthers"). So even Ron Paul recognizes how some of his more obnoxious supporters are seriously hurting his campaign. And he's certainly right about that.
 
Thanks for the analysis Dr. Phil "poor cognition let alone metacognition. projective identification forbidden when convenient how childish"

And Fremmer... I've spent the past weeks here being very civil and reading great posts. It wasn't until others instigated with their anti Paul messages that I said any names, such as Moron, Idiot, Ignorant... I posted legitimate links, info and data, only to be told:

" when will you realize the crazy Dr. has no chance"
" You RP supporters should put your tinfoil hats back on and go home"
" Ron Paul has as much a chance of winning as the tooth fairy"
" Ron Paul is downright bizarre"
Now, those statement have no argument, aren't constructive and don't benefit anyone here!! I was hoping for a discussion as to how we at TFL can best choose. It's fairly safe to say that Huckabee and Paul are the most common choices here, let's here more as to why. I keep asking others:
1: who do you support and why.
2: Why should I not support Paul, why should I support ________?
Let's discuss that, but with real points, not the ignorant nonsense about "crazy Dr", .... I've listed the facts I am aware of about Paul. He has the most money going into Super Tuesday. He has many delegates not yet added to his total, from LA win. He's survived this long, out of 11. He is viable.
I'm totally open to real arguments. I want to hear why I should not support Ron Paul.
 
I think people should remember that we are choosing a canidate for nomination not for president. Right now, it shouldn't matter if someone is viable. One should vote for who they want. When is gets narrowed down to two (republican vs. democrat) then we can talk about wanting or not wanting to comprimise. With all this bickering among us, we sound like hillary vs. obama or mccain vs. romney at their respective debates.


okay, that may be oversimplified, but can't we all just get along?
 
okay, that may be oversimplified, but can't we all just get along?
Click to expand...

No, we can't.

If we all just got along, we wouldn't need to vote. We'd have a set of laws we all understood and respected, and a fixed tax system that everyone thought was fair.

That's what representative government is for: when we don't get along, but we don't yet want to kill each other over it.

I'm selecting my general right now, and you are selecting yours.
 
Radiki, absolutely right. We're here to discuss and make an educated decision. Ive already voted in my primary, but I'm not ruling out that I can't support someone other than Paul. I like Huckabee too.
As of now I don't like McCain, but I'd like to hear from the McCain supporters here, why I should!
 
True conservatives try to bring the party to the right in a meaningful way. Dr. Paul tried, but his lack of leadership and his supporters have derailed the cause. Unfortunately, he's alienated a lot of his people in the process. I'm one of them.
Click to expand...

Funny I thought Bush did the very thing you claim Paul did.....

You are in denial of the last seven years...please wake up

Do you need an education on the last seven years of Bush?? Where have you been?
 
I don't think so...perhaps you could educate me on the concept of false dichotomy? Oh wait, you can't, can you?

Hint: That's known as irony. Please don't bother to look up the term.

Ignoring the foaming mouth contingent for a moment, are there any rational Paul supporters here who understand the concept that debates focus on the leading candidates? Now would be a good time to speak up; the sweaty conspiracy theorists are becoming more tedious than usual.
 
Of course MSM should cover leading candidates. They survive on ratings. But Presidential debates shouldn't be like that. How about a simple format. A question is posed. Then everyone has a certain amount of time to respond. Then it goes around and everyone has a 45 second rebuttal. The next question starts at the other end. That way you aren't always playing the blind like a a poker game. What MSM covers afterwards is up to them, but the debate for the most important job in the world should be equal. This would ensure even the smaller guys have a shot.

Understanding why, people and corporations do what they do, doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
 
Of course MSM should cover leading candidates. They survive on ratings. But Presidential debates shouldn't be like that. How about a simple format. A question is posed. Then everyone has a certain amount of time to respond. Then it goes around and everyone has a 45 second rebuttal. The next question starts at the other end. That way you aren't always playing the blind like a a poker game.
Click to expand...

Sounds ok, but how about questions posed toward a certain candidate?

"Mr. Romney, while Governor you signed an AWB into law. If presented with a similar Federal ban, would you sign it?"

These are IMO necessary and don't quite fit your format.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top