PDA

View Full Version : Talking about us over at ultimitt.org forums




ladyjade3
08-03-2007, 09:19 AM
http://ultimitt.org/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=0&func=view&catid=15&id=2109#2272

I like this:

"There is one thing that Ron Paul and Fred Thompson have in common. Niether of them is actually in controll of their campaigns. Thompson probably will try to grab hold of the reins if he ever announces, and that will lead to his downfall. Ron Paul however has remarkably little to do personally with directing the support he has gathered and that is not likely to change. As long as he mentions the Constitution in every speach, Libertarians will flock to him. He may have some good ideas, but he has very little control over his campaign. He has been the mouth peice and spoken the ideas, but other people have picked up the ball and created the campaign. In the White house who is going to fill that roll for him? Congress has no grass roots on the internet, neither do the other government leaders around the world. None of these leaders that a President will have to work with is spends all their time on the internet, many of them don't even use email. The tactics that Ron Paul's uncontrolled team are trying to use to get American's to support him are not going to work on World leaders.

What would he do, how would he exert any influence and get anything done if he were the President? Congress will not be seeing the spam that his supporters wield like a club to get his, no not his but the Libertarian, message out. "

:) That's kind of the point. We like Ron Paul because he's not trying to control things. It's about leadership. He's not interested in political affairs of other countries, just true free trade agreements.

micahnelson
08-03-2007, 09:21 AM
Not to mention I don't think the FEC would get warm and fuzzy about the money we spend on our private efforts if it was coming from HQ.

LibertyEagle
08-03-2007, 09:29 AM
They don't seem to fathom how anything could work without massive centralized control. And their mention of the Constitution, like this is only of interest to libertarians. It used to be that the Constitution was of prime interest to every AMERICAN.

mdh
08-03-2007, 09:30 AM
Actually, I'd say Ron Paul has quite a bit of experience in congress... having... y'know... been a congressman for a whole bunch of years.

freelance
08-03-2007, 09:31 AM
What would he do, how would he exert any influence and get anything done if he were the President? Congress will not be seeing the spam that his supporters wield like a club to get his, no not his but the Libertarian, message out. "

I've heard a lot of reasons why Ron Paul should not be President, but that one is, by far, THE most absurd! Oh sure, we "spammers" are going to take over foreign policy by directly communicating with foreign leaders! That's just patently absurd.

micahnelson
08-03-2007, 09:34 AM
I've heard a lot of reasons why Ron Paul should not be President, but that one is, by far, THE most absurd! Oh sure, we "spammers" are going to take over foreign policy by directly communicating with foreign leaders! That's just patently absurd.

I dunno, isn't Hugo Chavez sending aid to private citizens? Lol, how do we get Iran to post on facebook. I'm sure we could work something out.

LibertyEagle
08-03-2007, 09:43 AM
Oh wait... there must be an Executive Order about this somewhere. :p

nexalacer
08-03-2007, 09:43 AM
That site is pretty funny. Saw a post about online polls... one guy said they had a larger online presence than Ron Paul's supporters, but they "weren't as organized". I don't see how that could possibly happen... if the support is so big, shouldn't grassroots organizations be popping up?

ghemminger
08-03-2007, 09:45 AM
This show just how out of touch the other campaigns really are...they just don't get it at all

angelatc
08-03-2007, 09:57 AM
It is sort of scary to see that they're confident that they are better suited to manipulate the people.

But, I think they have a valid point. Carter had a problem when he filled the White House with a bunch of ineffective good ol' boys. Paul is known as the outsider, and other than the veto power, it remains to be seen how much he wil be able to effect the system as a whole. (If he can get rid of "Executive Orders" forever, I'll be happy though.)


Plus, I think there's currently a huge void in conservative leadership. If Paul manages to pull this off, I hope that the career politicians do their typical flip-flop and jump on the bandwagon.

Lots of us here heard the message through the noise, and there's no reason to think some of them won't get it too.

freelance
08-03-2007, 10:17 AM
They don't seem to fathom how anything could work without massive centralized control.

And, John Dean explained why a few months back:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/07/14/triumph_of_the_authoritarians/

hard@work
08-03-2007, 11:43 AM
http://ultimitt.org/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=0&func=view&catid=15&id=2109#2272

I like this:

[I]"There is one thing that Ron Paul and Fred Thompson have in common. Niether of them is actually in controll of their campaigns. Thompson probably will try to grab hold of the reins if he ever announces, and that will lead to his downfall. Ron Paul however has remarkably little to do personally with directing the support he has gathered and that is not likely to change. As long as he mentions the Constitution in every speach, Libertarians will flock to him. He may have some good ideas, but he has very little control over his campaign. He has been the mouth peice and spoken the ideas, but other people have picked up the ball and created the campaign. In the White house who is going to fill that roll for him? Congress has no grass roots on the internet, neither do the other government leaders around the world. None of these leaders that a President will have to work with is spends all their time on the internet, many of them don't even use email. The tactics that Ron Paul's uncontrolled team are trying to use to get American's to support him are not going to work on World leaders.


That is hilariouis. It's basically saying "this candidate is being supported by the people as intended by the founders of our country" and then "how will this work for government? government isn't supported by the people."

JoshLowry
08-03-2007, 12:13 PM
For the people, by the people...?

For the people, by the President...?


I forget what it says on that damn piece of paper.

constituent
08-03-2007, 07:12 PM
correction:

that damn [quaint] piece of paper.

or was that geneva... i don't remember... [we didn't even sign that did we?]

Kregener
08-03-2007, 07:16 PM
Those folks want Mitt Romney for POTUS and I should care what they think because....

???

Roxi
08-03-2007, 09:22 PM
what's F'd up is people have the mindset the president is supposed to "control" anything.... This country is supposed to be ran by the people, like us, and the president is supposed to be our leader, our voice in the chaos

what an effing idiot

llamabread
08-03-2007, 09:37 PM
It took me a second to realize why no one was chipping in on Ron's side of the argument. It is a Mitt Romney Forum. Ohh, and on the front page, there is an article saying "When will we hit 1000 Members!" We did that about two months ago.

Badger Paul
08-03-2007, 10:40 PM
Hey, I willing to be Secretary of State. Anyone want to be NSC Adviser?

freelance
08-04-2007, 04:09 AM
Lol, how do we get Iran to post on facebook.

THAT was funny!

0zzy
08-04-2007, 04:42 AM
Someone make a Ron Paul account for everyone to share here, id rather not raise their account numbers by us all registering and responding to these ass hats.