ron paul=awesome/kickass?

[Dr. Love]

No, you're too bright for that.....



But shilling for a wack-job with ZERO chance of winning the White House is just plain stupid.

I agree with supporting the ideas, but Ron Paul is unelectable plain and simple.

duh.

In the US, you have to support the people that espouse the ideas that you support; With a large swell of support for the individual (especially like Ron Paul), people begin to look at and take the ideas more seriously. Look at what you see in the campaign, with Newt recently endorsing the idea of a return to the gold standard, with other republicans (like jim demint) calling for other republicans to adopt ideas from his platform.

I don't think Ron Paul will be elected, but I want a lot of the things he talks about to be a major part of the discussion this election cycle. To me, that is a big victory.

[LoungeMachine]

The idiot is your mom...

But Paul is not sold out to a political party, fool...

My mom is dead, swamprat.



I never said Ron Paul sold out, you inbred, idiotic mouthbreathing racist troll.....


I said he can't win the White House.

Learn to read, Cracker.

[ELVIS]

He can't, Swampthing.



Tell you what, let's make a Romoney style bet....

IF Ron Paul wins the White House, I'll never darken this site again.....

IF Ron Paul doesn't win the White House.....you leave forever.



DEAL????

No, I don't bet...

[LoungeMachine]

I don't think Ron Paul will be elected, but I want a lot of the things he talks about to be a major part of the discussion this election cycle. To me, that is a big victory.

Which is exactly what I've been saying.....



I agree with him on most things..... BUT HE CANT WIN

Jesus fucking christ.

[LoungeMachine]

No, I don't bet...

Of course you don't....



Because you're a sac-less windbag full of shit.

[ELVIS]

My mom is dead, swamprat.



I never said Ron Paul sold out, you inbred, idiotic mouthbreathing racist troll.....


I said he can't win the White House.

Learn to read, Cracker.

It's you that misreads my posts...

[Dr. Love]

I'm all for the States rights to govern themselves but I can not agree with his policies/agenda, period!

How is my statement an over-simplification?

You disagree with a major portion of his platform, yet, you have a naive hope that Congress will reign him in and not let him push his agenda forward.

So you support someone you hope will not get his way

Do you agree with every political stance of every candidate that you vote for/support? Or do you focus on the issues that matter most to you? I am certain there things that your favored politicians do that you disagree with. Does that mean they don't deserve your support? (I suppose it depends on what they do)

I'm a pragmatist; I think there is merit to a lot of what Dr. Paul talks about. The things he can do unilaterally, I support. The things he can't do unilaterally, I don't necessarily support in full but I think that it merits a discussion.

I think issues like monetary policy, fiscal policy, regulation, foreign interventionism, military spending, federal/state rights and a host of other things should be discussed and the appropriate legislation should be enacted as a result.

I support someone who I think will get some of his way, but not all of it, at least, not in the areas I'm not in full alignment on. And I think that's a very pragmatic and realistic point of view to take given the system we operate under.

[ELVIS]

Of course you don't....



Because you're a sac-less windbag full of shit.

You must be drunk...

[kwame k]

Well, that was what I was alluding to....

When Obama is reelected, and if you assume that the Reps keep the House (which is in jeopardy) and the Dems control the Senate, you're right, it won't matter, 'cause the Reps will just block everything for another four years.....

I think this election will be a wake up call for the obstructionist in both the House and the Senate......Americans are sick and tired of this nonsense. With Congress' disapproval rating at a historic high of 80% people are not going to reelect those obstructionists......be it in Nov or the mid-terms in 2 years.

[Dr. Love]

Which is exactly what I've been saying.....



I agree with him on most things..... BUT HE CANT WIN

Jesus fucking christ.

I know what you're saying. I've read it at least a few dozen times by now.

But until enough people are vocal and actively supporting the positions he holds that they agree with (regardless of the candidate), the issues won't be heard by the rest of the political system.

For the record, if and when Paul loses the nomination, I'll probably vote for Gary Johnson. I'm still researching him.

[LoungeMachine]

Do you agree with every political stance of every candidate that you vote for/support? Or do you focus on the issues that matter most to you? I am certain there things that your favored politicians do that you disagree with. Does that mean they don't deserve your support? (I suppose it depends on what they do)

I'm a pragmatist; I think there is merit to a lot of what Dr. Paul talks about. The things he can do unilaterally, I support. The things he can't do unilaterally, I don't necessarily support in full but I think that it merits a discussion.

I think issues like monetary policy, fiscal policy, regulation, foreign interventionism, military spending, federal/state rights and a host of other things should be discussed and the appropriate legislation should be enacted as a result.

I support someone who I think will get some of his way, but not all of it, at least, not in the areas I'm not in full alignment on. And I think that's a very pragmatic and realistic point of view to take given the system we operate under.

I agree with everything in this post....



Doesn't change the facts that RP can't win, and ELBOW is a Swamp dwelling moron.

[Dr. Love]

I think this election will be a wake up call for the obstructionist in both the House and the Senate......Americans are sick and tired of this nonsense. With Congress' disapproval rating at a historic high of 80% people are not going to reelect those obstructionists......be it in Nov or the mid-terms in 2 years.

Not if people vote for the status quo. What possible incentive will they have to change their habits if people aren't voting them out and replacing them with people that don't behave the same?

[LoungeMachine]

You must be drunk...

You must be stupid....

[LoungeMachine]

Not if people vote for the status quo. What possible incentive will they have to change their habits if people aren't voting them out and replacing them with people that don't behave the same?

You're putting the onus on the people

When we both know that until there is real campaign finance reform no Ron Paul can ever get elected.

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Not if people vote for the status quo. What possible incentive will they have to change their habits if people aren't voting them out and replacing them with people that don't behave the same?

Agreed, it's not going to change....