Total Posts:141|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ron Paul 2nd???

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 9:27:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Would you vote for Ron Paul over Obama?

VOTE PAUL
or
VOTE OBAMA

in bold to see.

One thing I will add, Mitt Romney paid for peoples tickets if they vowed to vote for him in the straw pole. His numbers are inflated and not a true reflection of what happened.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 9:35:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Obama, obviously.

And to point out, Paul had his own must-win-straw-poll efforts, probably like Romney did. Know how you can tell? The straw poll had a "second preference" option, and Paul was very, very far behind. That's indicative of Paul being the real choice of few, or at least someone who can only rely on his base, and not much else. The guy isn't a popular Republican peer, you know.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 9:41:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 9:35:14 AM, Volkov wrote:
Obama, obviously.

And to point out, Paul had his own must-win-straw-poll efforts, probably like Romney did. Know how you can tell? The straw poll had a "second preference" option, and Paul was very, very far behind. That's indicative of Paul being the real choice of few, or at least someone who can only rely on his base, and not much else. The guy isn't a popular Republican peer, you know.

Yes, the campaign for liberty did buy tickets for supporters but they did not buy tickets with a clause of "you have to vote for me in the straw poll".

Many people buy tickets for their supporters.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 9:44:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 9:41:48 AM, comoncents wrote:
Yes, the campaign for liberty did buy tickets for supporters but they did not buy tickets with a clause of "you have to vote for me in the straw poll".

I'm pretty sure it was implied, comon. You don't usually go out on an expense like that just for giggles.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 10:54:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Vote Ron Paul

I almost voted that way in the last R primaries, but Paul has no chance of victory and would have us pull strait out of all other counties without any plan for easing out, because there is no easying out for him, whatever the consequenses of sudden withdraw matter not to him.
Plus Huckabee's for the fair tax.

but Paul is republican enough for me over whatever kind of liberal you call obama
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 11:02:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Vote Obama

I don't agree with 50% of eithers policies, but Ron Paul is a conservative with a dash of libertarianism. And just a dash.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 11:30:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
do you think Paul would get the most support out of the Tea party? Or would they make sure to support a more traditional republican?
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 11:34:13 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 11:02:58 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
but Ron Paul is a conservative with a dash of libertarianism. And just a dash.

Lies!
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:29:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Even as a Socialist, I will probably vote for Ron Paul as president. He'll be the only viable candidate actually dedicated to getting us out of war. On several occasions Dennis Kucinich was mentioned as being a possible running mate, I hope that's true.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:32:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:26:10 PM, Volkov wrote:
Out of curiosity to the other Obama supporters, what do you think of his mandate so far?

I can't say I ever was particularly an Obama supporter, but he has been a disappointment. At first he seemed promising, with his proposals to reform the American healthcare system and close down Gitmo and such. However, he's a man of big words and little action. He should have never recieved the Nobel Peace Prize. He sent more troops to Afghanistan! How that is supposed to contribute to peace, I have no idea. I think he just got it for not being a warmonger like Bush before him was. I'm not too happy with his healthcare reforms either. They could be better, but I suppose with extreme opposition from the right it's difficult.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:34:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:29:19 PM, FREEDO wrote:
He'll be the only viable candidate actually dedicated to getting us out of war.

I'm a big fan of his foreign policy.

http://www.ronpaul.com...
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:40:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:38:34 PM, wjmelements wrote:
By "responsibilities", you mean "imperialism"?

If you want to call it that. However, though the US may be an imperial power, its one that if it has any interest in self-preservation and continued prosperity, will continue along that path.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:43:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:41:00 PM, FREEDO wrote:
The US has no responsibilities but to itself or any contracts it may have entered into.

Last time I checked most of the trade deals and military bases and etc. fell under both those categories. Was there another point to this statement?
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:44:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:40:45 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/12/2010 1:38:34 PM, wjmelements wrote:
By "responsibilities", you mean "imperialism"?

If you want to call it that. However, though the US may be an imperial power, its one that if it has any interest in self-preservation and continued prosperity, will continue along that path.

All historical imperial powers have declined due to over-expansion and inability to manage their occupied territory. The United States is trying to govern the world, and the world hates it. The longer we insist on world hegemony, the more our subjects see us as a threat and the more our prosperity is put in danger.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:45:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Volkov, the United States still has troops stationed in Germany and Japan. Why?
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:46:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:45:11 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Volkov, the United States still has troops stationed in Germany and Japan. Why?

Is it our responsibility, or our imperialism?
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:50:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:44:00 PM, wjmelements wrote:
All historical imperial powers have declined due to over-expansion and inability to manage their occupied territory. The United States is trying to govern the world, and the world hates it. The longer we insist on world hegemony, the more our subjects see us as a threat and the more our prosperity is put in danger.

What the world hates the US imperialism when the US tells them not to beat their citizens, not to double back on their deals, etc. When the US exports their technology, influence, and culture, the world loves it.

The US is a "declining empire" - but it will probably be the first world empire that will not collapse as others have. It won't collapse because even though its influence is smaller, it is still much too integrated into the world for it to simply disappear. America's ability to slowly recede but retain its power through globalization and projection will maintain it for the forseeable future as one, if not the, main actor in the world. That is the source of America's prosperity and ability.

And Ron Paul wants to take it all away.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:57:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:50:49 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/12/2010 1:44:00 PM, wjmelements wrote:
All historical imperial powers have declined due to over-expansion and inability to manage their occupied territory. The United States is trying to govern the world, and the world hates it. The longer we insist on world hegemony, the more our subjects see us as a threat and the more our prosperity is put in danger.

What the world hates the US imperialism when the US tells them not to beat their citizens, not to double back on their deals, etc. When the US exports their technology, influence, and culture, the world loves it.

No, the world hates it when we invade countries and occupy them indefinitely, while actually threatening countries are ignored. And the most advanced technology nowadays is exported from Japan.

The US is a "declining empire" - but it will probably be the first world empire that will not collapse as others have. It won't collapse because even though its influence is smaller, it is still much too integrated into the world for it to simply disappear. America's ability to slowly recede but retain its power through globalization and projection will maintain it for the forseeable future as one, if not the, main actor in the world. That is the source of America's prosperity and ability.

Globalization is not what Ron Paul seeks to end. Ron Paul seeks to end Imperialism. Our bases in Germany, Kazakhstan, Japan, Poland, Ukraine, etc., are not the source of our prosperity.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 1:59:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:50:49 PM, Volkov wrote:

What the world hates the US imperialism when the US tells them not to beat their citizens, not to double back on their deals, etc. When the US exports their technology, influence, and culture, the world loves it.

The US is a "declining empire" - but it will probably be the first world empire that will not collapse as others have. It won't collapse because even though its influence is smaller, it is still much too integrated into the world for it to simply disappear. America's ability to slowly recede but retain its power through globalization and projection will maintain it for the forseeable future as one, if not the, main actor in the world. That is the source of America's prosperity and ability.

And Ron Paul wants to take it all away.

U.S. imperialism maintained and sustainable through modern technology.

Also, the U.S. has troops in Japan for quick deployment to S.K. and Taiwan. As for Germany, I supposed it was overlooked after the collapse of the eastern bloc, and I guess they don't entirely trust Poland and the likes yet.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 2:00:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:57:32 PM, wjmelements wrote:

Globalization is not what Ron Paul seeks to end. Ron Paul seeks to end Imperialism. Our bases in Germany, Kazakhstan, Japan, Poland, Ukraine, etc., are not the source of our prosperity.

You do realise that by those bases existence an attack on those countries is perceived as an attack on the U.S.?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 2:01:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 1:59:19 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
I guess they don't entirely trust Poland and the likes yet.

Poland isn't a threat to the United States.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light