The lesser of 2 evils

Methinks the real purpose of this thread is to say, "why choose the lesser of 3 evils when you can have Ron Paul?"
Click to expand...
Why? Because he's still not the lesser of the evils. He's a loon. Which is too bad, because in some respects, I happen to agree with him. In other respects, I happen to disagree with him strongly; so strongly that he has eliminated himself from my consideration.
 
He's a loon.
Click to expand...

Yeah, remember that one time, when all the other politicians were getting sweet interviews on all the major news outlets and Sunday morning talk shows, the best that Ron Paul could get was an interview with the owners of the website, RogueGovernment.com: EXPOSING GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER, remember?

Then, do you remember that one time, when Ron Paul scored this fantastic interview, he equated a couple of tax dodgers to Martin Luther King and Gandhi? How brilliant!
 
Here's the rub.

Ron Paul is not a viable candidate. Viable meaning able to garnish enough votes to win.

When a Republican and a third party candidate who appeals to Republicans are running against each other and against the Democrat, the Democrat will always win. The Republican and the third party split the Republican votes and both end up being losers.

It's the same thing that happened when Bill Clinton was elected.

Why was bill Clinton so bad? How about signing the "assault rifle" ban into law? How about sending the ATF after David Koresh in WACO for reports of practicing with assault rifles? Remember what happened to them? Janet Reno sent army tanks, etc. out and the whole thing ended in a fiery blaze, and there were questions about who set the blaze. The 2nd Amendment was under some serious attack during the Clinton administration.

I'm not going to get into the non-gun related issues of Bill Clinton, this is a gun forum. But Hillary and Barak are both on record as being strong anti-gun proponents.
 
It's a Ron Paul thread.
Click to expand...

Shhh!!! don't say that too loud. You may just end up getting those annoying supporters back here that would not shut up about him for what seemed like eternity...amazing how quickly they shut up when he dropped out of the race.

I know, I know, before I get nasty PM's, freedom haters and the neocons were the ones who did not care enough about the Constitution to vote for Dr. Ron Paul.

*crickets chirping
 
Vote for the one that put his life on the line for USA

I'm voting for the man who has already put it on the line for Liberty- John McCain.

Obama has already told us what he thinks of those gun huggers in Pennsylvania.

Hillary is a better choice than Obama, She lived in Arkansas and we know there are gun huggers there. Her husband at least fired some missiles ( kind of like a big gun)

McCain put his life on the line for this country. He knows what it is to put yourself in harms way for the greater good. You may not like all of his opinions and actions, but his core values were cast long ago sitting as a prisoner of war. He IS an American hero and if I am going to error it is on the side of someone that has risk his life for my freedom.

Anyone that is foolish enough to not cast a vote should look to the Iraq people that were proud to display their purple thumbs for voting. Our solders are giving their lives so we and people of Iraq can vote and argue about these issues in a free environment. How can we sit on our rear ends and say it's too rainy, I'm too busy, I don't like the choices. shame on us if we do not respect our brave soldiers by voting for someone. and yes all ideological BS aside a no vote is vote lost that could offset a vote for Obama (the gun hugger hater). If he can't argue with his spiritual guide how is he going to represent liberty for you and me

I'm voting for the man who has already put it on the line for Liberty, John McCain. VOTE! we owe it to the solders, and the only American hero in the race.


Obama- really bad
Hillary- Can be convinced by negative feedback
McCain- war hero, He has porven that he loves his country beyond doubt!

Arguing with a gun hugger is like mud wrestling a pig sooner or later you will realize that we both enjoy it.:D
 
lol How about the Republicans spending 587 Million dollars of tax payers money. Trying kick a guy out of office for getting a little on the side. Now that's funny. Especially with what is going on in the world today.
 
nearly one out of every 5 Republican voters in Pennsylvania who chose Ron Paul.
Click to expand...

the word "nearly" doesn't quite do that justice there...and 20% is not accurate.

actually it was 128,483 out of 807,123 votes...15.9186%, but details are only important if they are in your favor.
;)
 
I thought it was because 16% of Republicans in Pennsylvania can't stomach the lib John McCain..
Click to expand...
On this we do agree. In fact, I'll bet there's more than 16% that can't stomach McLibrocrat. Hell, I would think about voting for someone other than McCain if I were in the same boat. But again, the thread is titled the lesser of three evils... not the lesser of three evils and the quack.
 
You are full of spin...look at the facts, compare the voter turnout for Republicans in this election to the total number registered and the voter turnout for Democrats to total number registered, you will see a staggering difference.
Click to expand...

I thought *this* is what the thread was about.
 
lol How about the Republicans spending 587 Million dollars of tax payers money. Trying kick a guy out of office for getting a little on the side. Now that's funny. Especially with what is going on in the world today.
Click to expand...

Actually it was an investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. The REAL crime was that President Clinton LIED under oath in court. Oddly enough the same thing the Dems convicted Scooter Libby of doing.

Yes, the Republicans are horrible on spending, but Hillary just submitted $2.3 BILLION in earmarks, over THREE TIMES more than any Senator has ever requested in one year! Furthermore, the health care programs from the two Dems will cost the taxpayer far more than anything a Republican has ever spent.
 
I'm voting for the man who has already put it on the line for Liberty- John McCain.
Click to expand...

OMG can I barf now??
He may have put his a$$ on the line....but it had nothing to do with liberty.
wow.

Please lets have that discussion of John McCain....his voting record...and liberty.

The "problem" with Ron Paul is that he is the only guy left in the GOP with principle........but then again......a spider-web entangled foreign policy, no southern border, pro-govt = we love to spend other people's money too, and a we-wont-take-your-guns-and-liberty-as-fast-as-the-dems....is a GREAT PARTY PLATFORM!!!


You neocons will never have to worry about a Ron Paul Republican treading to you.....I just wish it was true the other way around. Because I see no southern border. This country doesn't make enough male babies for your foreign policy. You spend money like the Clintons. You get freedom and liberty confused with nationalism and what it means to be patriotic. You claim to be pro-gun.

Neocons are the right's answer to the socialist left.......and neither of them want Individual Liberty. That my problem.
 
Last edited:
While Ron Paul may be a good candidate to some in terms of issues, he's certainly not a viable candidate.

I'm not sure if he's changed his stance, but he also said he wouldn't run third party if he didn't get the nomination.



Side note: How libertarian or constitutional is it to request several million dollars in earmarks for the shrimping industry in the Houston/Galveston area? Just asking. ;)
 
Selling out? What are you, some kind of punk rocker? Do you still wear your leather jacket with studs and handcuffs, with "Punk Never Dies" emblazoned across the back?

And "not selling out" will mean we all suffer the dictatorship of Barak or Obama. But at least you didn't sell out.

A measly >20% isn't enough to get elected dog catcher, much less President.
 
boringaccountant
Shhh!!! don't say that too loud. You may just end up getting those annoying supporters back here that would not shut up about him for what seemed like eternity...amazing how quickly they shut up when he dropped out of the race.
Click to expand...

I find it amusing when people talk as if they have a clue when they don't. Of course, Ron Paul has not dropped out of the race. Maybe you and other fans of big spending republicans wish he had dropped out.... but as it is.....
 
John McCain is not a fan of earmarks or big spending. He's the one who has called for a moratorium on earmarks.

I believe Ron Paul liked to collect earmarks for the shrimping industry in his district.

If there's one thing John McCain isn't is a supporter of big spending.
 
Gpossenti
Selling out? What are you, some kind of punk rocker? Do you still wear your leather jacket with studs and handcuffs, with "Punk Never Dies" emblazoned across the back?
Click to expand...
Your attempt at derision and humor missed on both accounts.

Gpossenti
And "not selling out" will mean we all suffer the dictatorship of Barak or Obama. But at least you didn't sell out.
Click to expand...
Damn right I will not sell out. My vote is precious to me and I will not waste it on either of the 3 liberals (that includes McCain) whom you and others claim are "viable" candidates.

Gpossenti
A measly >20% isn't enough to get elected dog catcher, much less President.
Click to expand...
Nearly 20% of the vote for Ron Paul in Pennsylvania means there are a great many conservatives who are not buying into the whole "lesser of 2 evils" mantra that McCain is hoping will help him get elected. Maybe that is upsetting you. Learn to deal with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top