Dr. Paul's Realistic Chances?

[OutsiderJoe]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)

(Oh, and for the record, while this is my first post, I've been reading the message board for a while.)

[JPFromTally]

I hate to say this but:

If McCain wins then it's a lock for Hillary to be president. There is no way the US will vote for a pro-war president with the economy in bad shape.

They will look at McCain and his positions and say "he's very similar to the Democrats but he wants to keep fighting wars. Hillary says she's against the war this week so I'll vote for her."

In return we will have socialist programs shoved down our throats.

Here's the thing that bugs me about the Iraq war. It wasn't generals who designed and cheerleaded this war. It was little twerps (the kinds you picked on high school) like Wolfowitz, Pearle, David Frum, Bill Kristol, Podhoretz, etc. It's almost like Trump letting his bean-counters to design a hostile takeover of a company.

[Shinerxx]

I believe Ron Paul has the best chance of becoming the republican nominee. Here is my reasoning:

1): Popular vote in primaries do not elect nominees. Delegates elect the nominee. We are working harder than any other campaign to elect delegates that support Ron Paul. We also have delegates currently pledged to opponents when in a brokered convention will be released to vote for Ron Paul. We are betting the farm on a brokered convention and should one occur Ron Paul will most likely walk away with the nomination.

2): 70% of the people in our country want to end the War in Iraq. True most are Democrats however how do you expect a pro-war republican candidate to win in the general election. It is not going to happen. McCain/Romney will waltz into a general election slaughter by Hillary/Obama. A McCain/Romney nomination is handing the Whitehouse to the democrats on a silver platter. At least make them work for it.

3): Our economy is going down in flames and by the general election it will be even worse. The people will be looking for true answers and not empty promises. Dr. Paul delivers on the economy. That fact is why two of the most influential financialists are backing Ron Paul's campaign; Don Luskin and Peter Schiff.

[FortWorth38]

Welcome to the Forums....

I get the feeling that by you taking the first step by your post(which can be scary) that you are wanting something to change in Our Country's Future.

Ron Paul is the real Deal. I have 2 Questions for You..OK

1st Question
What are the 3 most important things that you value as a US CITIZEN???

2nd Question
Why are you going to vote
???

[Rob]

Hello friend,

Like yourself, I was a McCain supporter in 2000, but now as you can see I support Ron Paul. I will tell that we have a very good chance if we can prevent any other candidate from getting an absolute majority. The National Convention then becomes brokered, at which point the delegates are free to vote for whomever they wish. What you haven't been hearing is that we're doing VERY well in getting our delegates to the convention. It's realistically possible we'll have enough by the time of the convention to win.

Since you're self-described as fiscally conservative and socially moderate, It seems quite likely Dr. Paul may actually support more of your own views than Senator McCain. Have you ever taken a political quiz that shows you which candidate's views are in closest alignment to yours?

[hueylong]

McCain is mentally unstable. And if he is nominated, our next President will be Hillary Clinton.

[ronpaulyourmom]

I feel that Ron Paul has little or no chance of getting the republican nomination. I think he will have a legacy that will continue, and I hope that he runs Independent. I will vote for him no matter what.

[RobS]

What chance of winning did McCain have 4 months ago? Everybody said he was dead in the water.

[mavtek]

The question for you Joe. Will Ron Paul allow John McCain to win the General if he is the nominee? Considering his revenge and kill attitude toward Foreign Policy I'd say no. A recent Rasmussen report showed that if Ron Paul ran 3rd party he'd get 11% of the Republican vote, assuring Mr. McCain a defeat. Please keep that in mind while you support John McCain.

[Janet0116]

Hi and welcome. I loved McCain in 2000. Sadly, that man no longer exists. If you can't see that now, you will.

For me, it personally does not matter if Dr. Paul can win the nomination or not, the primaries are a chance to vote your principles/conscience. I can vote 'against' the other guy in November. Also important to note, this so-called revolution we have going on is much bigger than the Presidency. :)

However, to answer your question, yes he does have a chance, due to the reasons others have listed (delegates baby, it's all about the delegates) :)

[nullvalu]

Our fight has, and never will be about his chances to win the election. We've always laughed off the comments "he doesn't stand a chance". Yes, of course we want Ron Paul to win the nomination. We are all hopeful of such, and that is why we started and take part in this grassroots campaign. Can you say that John McCain will win the primary? No. It's about supporting the candidate you feel most comfortable with (and likely in most of our cases, the only candidate) and helping him to get elected. We don't live & die by polls and know there's a lot still in the air with Super Tuesday, and collecting delegates.

Personally, at the start of this, I would have given him a 1 in 11 chance to win the election. Now, I give him a 1 in 4 chance to win the nomination. How's that?

[Briggsy]

The fact that you are here would lead me to believe that YES he does have a chance. I think that the longer he sticks around, the higher that 10% will become. If he can pull out a few wins during super tuesday, the media will have to give him more attention. And then all those voters out there that may support Mcain, Romney or Huckabee, who unlike you, are not doing research on the net, will finally get a real and honest dose of exactly what Dr Paul is all about. The sparse good media coverage is 100% at fault for his message (and ours) not getting the traction it could and should. Through our grassroots efforts, we will win him a few primaries in super tuesday, and in fact may have already gotten him a win in Lousiana, the verdict is still out on that one.

The bottom line is that based on your comments, it sounds like you actually think that Ron Paul is the best candidate, but you may have focused your support to McCain because you think he has a good chance of winning. This has been said on here before, but I think it is important to point out again. The founding Fathers assumed people would vote based on who they thought would be the best for the country, not based on who they thought could win. This dynamic would have confounded the Founding Fathers and they probably would have questioned thier ideas about freedom, liberty and democracy. If someone with more "power" than the individual, can influence the individual, outside of thier stance on the issues, then our system is fundamentally broken. It leaves room for those in power to influence the right people to keep their power right where it is.

Let me ask you this, If Mcain was polling at 20% and Ron Paul was polling at 35% would you still support McCain? Again I know this is hypothetical at this point, but try to envision it and answer accordingly. I look back at how many times I have heard people complain about politics, politicians, The govt, and how they wished someone with honesty and integrity would run for office. I look back at how many times I heard people complain about how the gov't should butt out and stop thier overtaxing and overspending ways. Then we get Ron Paul who answers thier calls, almost as if the Universe Produced him just to give them what they had been asking for for so long, and they duck thier heads in the sand and continue to support the people who they complain about day and night.

The fact is that many people fear change. They don't like the way things are now, but they have adjusted to them and actually fear the premise of government not taking care of people. They have forgotten how to take care of themselves and have lost most of thier personal responsibility. This is fairly evident if we look at the trend that has been growing over the last 20 years with regard to tort lawsuits. People will file suit at the drop of the hat these days, because it is always someone else at fault for thier woes.

I am not sure if the situation is bad enough yet for people to make that leap back to personal responsibility and small government, but soon, the wieght and power of the federal government will be too much for anyone to bear. Our revolution will continue to grow, the only uncertain thing about it is the timetable.

[emilysdad]

He has a chance if intellegent folks like you wake up and face reality.

In May 07 there were 11 GOP candidates. At that time, Ron was classified as a nut, wakco, fringe, radical with no chance of success. Go back and watch the first couple debates. Kinda strange there are now only 4. Even more absurd is the fact the other three are now parroting Ron's message of which he was classified a nut, wacko, fringe and radical. The difference is Ron can back up every one of those positions based on his past and what he has done, the others can't.

I find it funny based on a few conversations I had today, that folks like you don't seem to understand that what you saw last night was the 2 leading GOP candidates for President were actually calling each other out. They have been accusing each other of being liberals for 2 weeks. Why can't you see that? Based on what they have DONE and not what they SAY, they are both leberals and both liars. Unfortunately, apathetic Americans unwilling to research and form their own opinions will continue to believe everything the media tells them. I had a conversation with my brother last night who in May supporter Rudy, in July supporter Gincrich or Thompson whichever entered the race and last night told me he supports Mitt. MITT!!!! My brother is one who plays into the liberal/conservative argument and hates liberals. How ironic, he will vote for a RINO. He blasted Ron with regurgitated rhetoric. I asked him how many times he has gone to Ron's website. He said he hasn't. I asked him how many policy statements and speeches of Ron's he has read, again he said none. He proved my point. His opinion of Ron is based on the opinions of others and don't belong to him.

I susupect most people will continue with the pattern of voting for the lessor of two evils to simply save the party. How sad. How un American.

If you want to vote for the lessor of two evils, just know you are still voting for evil.

Yes, Ron has a chance, a good one at that, but only if Americans wake up from their slumber. Otherwise, it will be more of the same.

BTW, who do you think is the most conservative candidate based on this:

h ttp://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Total_Proposed_Spending_for_All_2008_Candidates

My friend, (lol), we need intellegent people like you to wake up and exercise your ability to engage in critical thought. I enjoy discussing politics with folks and I speak with hundreds of people each week, but I will not debate "rhetoric" when "facts" are available.

See ya in November.

[ckhagen]

Do I believe that he will win the nomination... unless the American people start sitting down and assessing the real situation we're in, not necessarily. Apparently people aren't ready to deal with the truth. Sad, but true.

Do I think he can win it... yes, I do. If we can find a way to spread this message in layman's terms (some of this stuff is just so over people's heads), it will "click" and the emergent nature of the needs for solutions to these problems will spread like a wildfire.

This has so little to do with a man. It has everything to do with the movement. We've just so happened to find a man that supports the message and has an impeccable record to earn our trust.

Right now, 10% of Americans are fed up enough to recognize that these social divisive issues (abortion and "programs" for example) are nothing compared to the impending monetary collapse.

We have no social battles to fight when we've lost our freedom and sovereignty. None of that matters if we owe our lives to a central bank and foreign nations. They call the shots then, not us.

Personally, Sen. McCain scares the hell out of me. I would bet my last dollar that his term would include draft reinstatement (including women, into civil service) and war with Iran. The idea of my husband having to fight in a war that I do not for one second think is necessary or honorable, is horrifying to me. Besides, how will we pay for it?

[Drknows]

Ron Paul already won his message is spreading. This is a movement!

If your trying to get a feel on what we plan to do if Ron Paul does not win the small prize of a nomination.

Well most of us plan on writing him in. Some plan to switch parties and vote against the neocons in the general. BUT they will come back and help us get Ron Paul type republicans in office.

Let me make this very clear. We will not stop or give up!

And the best of luck to you!

[MrAustin]

Thanks for you post - you raise some great qustions... From a certain perspective, it might seem like it's not possible for Ron Paul to win the nomination.

Nationally he has never polled above 10%. He has not won a single state cacus or primary yet. He is not an eloquent speaker - especially in tense situations - and his voice can get whiny. He's "old" (he is in the same boat with McCain though)

BUT - and please think about this - what does he have going against him other than that?

Now here are some reasons that Ron Paul IS electable, and CAN win this Election:

1 - He has WON more than half of the straw polls conducted all over the nation. Far more than any other candidate.

2 - He has come in 2nd in the Nevada and Louisiana Caucuses.

3 - He is the only candidate who has raised more money each quarter than the previous quarter, raising almost 20Million in the 4th quarter. (Keep in mind these are small donations - about $100 average per donor.)

4 - He IS honest, and CONSISTENTLY acts (and votes) like a true consevative.

5 - Ronald Regan Campaigned for him.

6 - He has experience in the Military and Health Care, is an expert on econimics, knows the constitutuion that this country is supposed to follow, and has an impecable 30 year voting record.

7- He recieves more donations from members of the military than any other candidate - Republican or Democart.

8 - Has a very active grassroots campaign made up completely of volunteers.

9 - His supporters don;t bounce around. They stick!

10 - Most of the nation has still not even heard of Ron Paul! (Think about that one a little as well.)


Ron Paul is electable. We the people of this country just need to elect him.

Please keep learning about Dr. Paul and all that he stands for. I'm sure that if you do, you will come to see why this election is so very important, and why Dr. Paul is who we as a nation NEED right now in the whitehouse.

I myself used to support Romney, and actually campainged for him for a while...until - like you - I started doing a little more reading on Ron Paul.

Hope this helps! Sorry for the length...:)

[OutsiderJoe]

I apologize for the disjointedness of this response. (I'm trying to type a little as I'm working.)

First, McCain is not mentally unstable. (Along this point, I have to say that I take great issue with the insinuations that he's a traitor or not a war hero. I don't want to rehash that fight, but I have nothing but the greatest respect for the man -- although I wasn't pleased with his nastiness last night). And it's pretty clear to me, although God knows my wife will testify that I've been wrong before, that in the eventuality of a Hillary nomination, McCain is able to triangulate support in the middle. Against Obama, I'm less confident (and disheartened at the idea of having my taxes raised, of course).

I do believe -- and here is likely where you and I will part ways, ultimately -- that it is more important for the person you believe will be the best President than the person you believe best represents your views. So, while I disagree with John McCain on abortion (I'm moderate-to-pro-choice) and gay rights (I'm pro-gay marriage) and immigration (I'm for securing the borders and not granting special permissions), I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that. (Oh, and as a side note, I've taken the quizzes and, yes, my views are closest to Dr. Paul's views.)

In terms of chances to win, though, I just don't see Dr. Paul getting the nomination in a brokered convention. He's not a compromise candidate for anyone. Convince me otherwise.

(Also, can someone point me to the RNC regulation that dictates that a brokered convention candidate must have participated in the primaries? I'm not sure if this is the case, and if it's not, don't be surprised to see a brand new face emerge...).

Joe

P.S. For what it's worth, I'm an attorney and aspiring politician myself. A life-long Republican, I feel that the party's leaving me as it drifts towards the social conservative right and away from the fiscal conservative right. Thank you very much, George W. Bush.

[AisA1787]

If I were betting money on Ron Paul to win, I would be concerned. I'm not. Despite what the media wants you to believe, this isn't a horse race. I am an American who is concerned about the direction my country is going, and I see Ron Paul as the only presidential candidate who can get us back on the right track. Whether or not I think he will win isn't even an issue with me.

By the way, if you're fiscally conservative you might want to know that Ron Paul is the only candidate left in the race who proposes a net spending decrease:


National Taxpayers Union: Only Ron Paul Would Cut Spending

http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/01/national-taxpay.html

NTU Report: Other Republicans would increase spending by billions

According to a report released Tuesday by the National Taxpayers Union, Texas Congressman Ron Paul is the only remaining presidential candidate who proposes net spending cuts.

According to the report, Congressman Paul’s proposals would cut government spending by over $150 billion, a conservative estimate of the spending reductions Dr. Paul has proposed. The report concludes that the other remaining Republican candidates, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Mike Huckabee, have proposed spending increases of $19.5 billion, $6.9 billion and $54 billion respectively.

“It should come as no surprise that when you crunch the numbers Ron Paul is the only Republican who would actually shrink the size and cost of the federal government,” said Ron Paul campaign economic advisor Don Luskin. “Romney, McCain and Huckabee don’t hold a candle to Ron Paul – the only true fiscal conservative running for President.”

In ten terms in Congress, Ron Paul has never voted for a tax increase or for an unbalanced budget.

For more information, visit our Daily Dose Campaign HQ Blog

[Mortikhi]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)

(Oh, and for the record, while this is my first post, I've been reading the message board for a while.)

I hate to tell ya buddy, but McCain isn't going to win. Noone that is for Ron Paul would be for John McCain. That means he won't have the votes to go to the Whitehouse.

It looks like we all lose :D

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Ron Paul cannot win the nomination but we sure as hell can.

[redchina]

Don't vote for who you think will win. Vote for who you WANT to win.

[mavtek]

Joe, we are the Delegates, there's the news for you, run with it.

[Cleaner44]

I will answer your inquirey very directly. Ron Paul most definetly has a chance. He is 1 of only 6 candidates still in the race and the election is not until Nov. It will be tough, as it will be for any candidate. We had better hope he does get elected or we are all in some deep shit.

I am sure you realize that Ron Paul is the only candidate with an understanding of the real problems our country is facing economically. Without money, everything else stops. McCain can threaten the whole world with military action but without the money to buy bullets, his threats will be idle.

[JenaS62]

I too am a fiscal conservative first and then a social liberal 2nd. The top 3 issues to me this election year are in order, 1-economy, 2-war in Iraq, 3 - illegal immigration. In my mind, there is no other candidate who is strong on these issues and with whom I agree, other than Ron Paul. I am a republican and I voted for George Bush in 2004 but I will not support any GOP candidates in the general election except for Ron Paul. In addition - I will not support either of the Dem candidates. If Ron Paul does not win the GOP nomination, I will write him in.

[qwerty]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)

(Oh, and for the record, while this is my first post, I've been reading the message board for a while.)



Pat Buchanan on the John McCain Platform


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9Dd-yg2A4E





:D

[Drknows]

Id rather vote for a winner and lose than vote for a loser and win.

This is a movement not something we plan on walking away from if Ron Paul loses a nomination to some neocons.

We do not plan on supporting any other republican candidate. Its Ron Paul or Nobody for most of us. Some plan on switching parties and voting against your nominee but they wont leave this movement.

[AisA1787]

I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that.

Joe, did you watch the debate last night?

Anyone who would deliberately misquote a fellow Republican, and then get into an extended semantic argument about who said what when, is simply a childish egotist and does not have the character to be a great president. Unlike many people here, I don't believe McCain is "mentally unstable." However, I do believe his character is very poor and he doesn't have any business holding the highest office in our land.

[Elwar]

McCain has 0% chance of being our next president.

How many Giuliani supporters have you heard say "If Rudy doesn't win the nomination I'm writing his name in", how many Romney supporters have said "If Romney doesn't win the nomination I'm not sure who I'll vote for, maybe the Democrat just because of the treatment he's gotten".

How many Ron Paul supporters have I heard say this, or something similar? I'd say about 90%, and several polls have reflected just that.

So, when it comes down to a close race between Democrat and Republican in November, will a Republican be able to win with that 90% of Ron Paul supporters writing his name in? When we see the exact same person when we look at McCain and Clinton do you think we'll be swayed to support the lesser of two evils?

You say you want small government? Then you only have one chance. Ron Paul or nobody.

When you go to the voting booth just remember this.

It's Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton. The sooner people realize this the sooner we can start raising money for Ron Paul's general election run.

[Rob]

I apologize for the disjointedness of this response. (I'm trying to type a little as I'm working.)

First, McCain is not mentally unstable. (Along this point, I have to say that I take great issue with the insinuations that he's a traitor or not a war hero. I don't want to rehash that fight, but I have nothing but the greatest respect for the man -- although I wasn't pleased with his nastiness last night). And it's pretty clear to me, although God knows my wife will testify that I've been wrong before, that in the eventuality of a Hillary nomination, McCain is able to triangulate support in the middle. Against Obama, I'm less confident (and disheartened at the idea of having my taxes raised, of course).

I do believe -- and here is likely where you and I will part ways, ultimately -- that it is more important for the person you believe will be the best President than the person you believe best represents your views. So, while I disagree with John McCain on abortion (I'm moderate-to-pro-choice) and gay rights (I'm pro-gay marriage) and immigration (I'm for securing the borders and not granting special permissions), I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that. (Oh, and as a side note, I've taken the quizzes and, yes, my views are closest to Dr. Paul's views.)

In terms of chances to win, though, I just don't see Dr. Paul getting the nomination in a brokered convention. He's not a compromise candidate for anyone. Convince me otherwise.

(Also, can someone point me to the RNC regulation that dictates that a brokered convention candidate must have participated in the primaries? I'm not sure if this is the case, and if it's not, don't be surprised to see a brand new face emerge...).

Joe

P.S. For what it's worth, I'm an attorney and aspiring politician myself. A life-long Republican, I feel that the party's leaving me as it drifts towards the social conservative right and away from the fiscal conservative right. Thank you very much, George W. Bush.

Some of the delegates that bound for McCain or Romney in the first round are actually Ron Paul supporters who will vote for Paul in a brokered convention. Even at the lower levels of the campaign staff we don't know the exact number of who is a Ron Paul supporter and a delegate nationally, but they are more than you would think, certainly much more than our national polling indicates. We may not have to make any compromises, it's quite plausible we'll be able to win outright in a brokered convention.

I actually agree with you about voting for the best leader, and that is why I'm supporting Ron Paul. What concerns do you have about Congressman Paul's qualifications?

[evadmurd]

I believe Ron Paul has a great chance of winning the general election as the Republican nominee. That said, I don't think he has much of a chance at all to become the republican nominee. That's the sad reality of it.

Your boy appears to have the media and GOP behind him. Unfortunately, it's a losing ticket is my opinion, and it will not get my vote.

[Todd]

All I will say is this isn't simply about one man and one presidential election. Win or lose this election..this thing is alot bigger than Dr. Paul and will seep into the Republican party and political spectrum for many years to come. It's already started in numerous congressional runs. How many people do you know that are running "John McCain" congressional runs? Well there's a whole lot of them labeled "Ron Paul".
I was part of the Buchanan brigade nearly 20 years ago...so I know the system is blatantly against those who resort to Ideas and don't stoop to mere platitudes (Ron Paul as "Hitler" - McCain) and establishment contacts (Media Darling). That's not the type of world I want. If you watched the debate last night it's evident that the Romney's and McCain's want the pie all to themselves or they would come out against clandestine methods of bias and censorship in these debates that isn't easily recognizable by the general public. The way Paul and Huck were treated is deplorable. You see...McCain is only a "maverick" cause he's tough talking, but a moderate conservative can easily become a Media darling for being a Social Progressive. The Media eats that crap up. Huck found out how it works a bit too late last night. The system for elections has got to change in this country. So if McCain is your man then I will respect that. Don't have to like it....I won't label you troll because it accomplishes absoulutely nothing. You'll find one big difference from McCain's forum and ours.....You would have already been banned had you been infiltrating McCain's world. The fact that Ron Paul crowd allows trolls (as long as they aren't complete morons) distinguishes them from everyone else.

Yes he can win and yes he can make it a living hell for McCain if he were to run 3rd party, and for the first time in my life I will write him in if it comes to that. An I am a 20 year Reagan conservative who knows what the definition of conservative means. There haven't been any in a long time.

[Dan Klaus]

Hey Outsider Joe,
Thanks for posting and the question...the delegate process is quite peculiar and unique in the states and the chance of Dr. Paul getting the nomination isn't as bad as the media makes it seem once you delve into the specifics...the idea is that Dr. Paul will have many, many more delegates at the brokered convention than anticipated...However, the media are working overtime to derail this scenario because its seeming more and more likely...I think he has a darn good shot...

[BarryDonegan]

that's very true, i personally do not EVER empathize with people like mitt romney. i consider all big government neocons to be constitutional crooks, but watching mccain trash romney in such a childish way almost made me empathize with romney. anyone who listens to romney's quote, which he was using as source, obviously can tell he means that he thinks that the president needs to have a secret set of goals after which he pulls out U.S. troops, but publicly announcing this timetable would give the enemy too much strategic advantage. he clearly did not support a timetable of withdrawal. i personal wished he supported an immediate withdrawal, but i would never take that he supported a timetable for withdrawal in a retreat by the language he used. if mccain is unable to understand simple speech like that, then he is unfit to be president. what if he had a discussion with a foreign president or dictator and made a similar mistake. that could be world war iii.

however, obviously this wasn't a mistake... it was a diversionary tactic. he wanted to make mitt look like a foreign policy flip flopper(again, wish he was, but hes not) when really hes a flip flopper on issues like abortion and amnesty, which mccain does not want to see brought up, as he will lose the social conservative vote.

[emilysdad]

"I do believe -- and here is likely where you and I will part ways, ultimately -- that it is more important for the person you believe will be the best President than the person you believe best represents your views. So, while I disagree with John McCain on abortion (I'm moderate-to-pro-choice) and gay rights (I'm pro-gay marriage) and immigration (I'm for securing the borders and not granting special permissions), I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that. (Oh, and as a side note, I've taken the quizzes and, yes, my views are closest to Dr. Paul's views.)"

???? What then draws you to McCain?? The war??? Oh, character is a reflection of ones past. I suggest you dig a bit further before proclaiming Mr. McCain has the character to be president. What makes a war hero? Being a POW? McCain was at the bottom of his class and was not a good pilot. He lost 4 jets before being shot down in number 5. War hero???? Gimmie a break man.

[Rob]

I'll add that we believe we "have" a majority of delegates a couple states, and we may "have" a majority in many more by the time of the convention. I cannot speak to situations other than that of Michigan, however.

[Bradley in DC]

Hi Joe,

As you are well aware from Mr. McCain's previous run (and now), most Republicans have reservations about him. (I'm trying to use as dispassionate words as possible.) Dr. Paul has a very devoted base, money in the bank, and anti-tax, pro-gun, pro-life, pro-sovereignty positions and record unmatched by any other candidate in the race.

Honestly, our own HQ has probably been our biggest liability, but that problem has been addressed. Look our for a "new and improved" official campaign now!

[piotr1]

McCain can't beat the democrats, a warmonger will polarize the voters. The majority of Americans are against the War. The majority of Americans strongly disprove of Bush. McCain hugged Bush...

http://cache.wonkette.com/images/close%20your%20eyes%20and%20think%20of%20england.j pg

Only a peace candidate like Paul can beat the democrats.

I endorse Freedom, Peace and Prosperity.

[Rob]

Everyone please try to be a bit more diplomatic. We should be thankful Joe has come here and approached us at all.

[davidfarrar]

Thanks for you post - you raise some great qustions... From a certain perspective, it might seem like it's not possible for Ron Paul to win the nomination.

Nationally he has never polled above 10%. He has not won a single state cacus or primary yet. He is not an eloquent speaker - especially in tense situations - and his voice can get whiny. He's "old" (he is in the same boat with McCain though)

BUT - and please think about this - what does he have going against him other than that?

Now here are some reasons that Ron Paul IS electable, and CAN win this Election:

1 - He has WON more than half of the straw polls conducted all over the nation. Far more than any other candidate.

2 - He has come in 2nd in the Nevada and Louisiana Caucuses.

3 - He is the only candidate who has raised more money each quarter than the previous quarter, raising almost 20Million in the 4th quarter. (Keep in mind these are small donations - about $100 average per donor.)

4 - He IS honest, and CONSISTENTLY acts (and votes) like a true consevative.

5 - Ronald Regan Campaigned for him.

6 - He has experience in the Military and Health Care, is an expert on econimics, knows the constitutuion that this country is supposed to follow, and has an impecable 30 year voting record.

7- He recieves more donations from members of the military than any other candidate - Republican or Democart.

8 - Has a very active grassroots campaign made up completely of volunteers.

9 - His supporters don;t bounce around. They stick!

10 - Most of the nation has still not even heard of Ron Paul! (Think about that one a little as well.)


Ron Paul is electable. We the people of this country just need to elect him.

Please keep learning about Dr. Paul and all that he stands for. I'm sure that if you do, you will come to see why this election is so very important, and why Dr. Paul is who we as a nation NEED right now in the whitehouse.

I myself used to support Romney, and actually campainged for him for a while...until - like you - I started doing a little more reading on Ron Paul.

Hope this helps! Sorry for the length...:)


And yet you are going to vote for McCain?

Now let me ask you a question: Why?

ps: And Joe, please don 't worry about being called a "Troll", "Mole" or an "Agent Provocateur". I have been called those names many, many times here and it has never stopped me.

[aravoth]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)

(Oh, and for the record, while this is my first post, I've been reading the message board for a while.)

He can win. John McCain is no republican. If the election boils down to soundbites, and the GOP nominates anyone else for the General election, they are finished. Elect a guy that tried to grant amnesty to 12 million people, thats something even most democrats oppose. Then you have Romney, who at one time claimed he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy.

So those are your choices? The GOP has 5 days to pull it's head out of it's ass and return to it's roots. And you can't do that with McCain, Romney or Huckabee.

All these guys will Talk on and on about Regan. Well you know what? Ron Paul gave the Republican party Ronald Regan. Look it up sometime. If reading even means a god damn thing to anyone anymore. Regan endorsed Paul back in the 80's, and you know what? Ron Paul still hasn't change his stance on one single issue. I bet if Regan was alive today, he'd endorse him again.

The GOP is finished without Ron Paul. No other canidate is a statesman like him. While every coward in America is worried about terrorists hiding in their front lawns, everything that Ron Paul said was going to happen to the US economy 10 years ago is happening right now.

It'll be interesting to watch any democrat rip Romney and McCain to shreds over every issue they flopped on. Or maybe they won't, since both Romney and McCain's voting records are right in line with Hillary Clinton's. Either of those two get the nod, we'll have a socialistic president, and a socialistic congress. For 8 years most likely. And that will be the GOP's fault.

I will not ever Blame this election on Liberal mischif, or Socialist ideas, I will blame the GOP, I will never vote republican again after this, and I will never donate to the GOP again. The Republican Party strayed so far from the Platform that they act and behave like every other democrat that wanted to "Make the World Safe for Democracy", at the expense of our economy and our Middle class. It is the Republican fault we are here. They broke their "contract with America", they spent more than any democratic Administration ever did. They Spoke out against going into Kosovo, and yet championed the cause in Iraq. They Slaughtered Habeas Corpus, They created a whole new Government Bureaucracy, and they doubled the Dept ed, nearly doubled the Dept of energy, Said that The Medicare Prescription drug Benefit would cost 100-300 billion dollars, it wound up costing over 1 trillion, and didn't make drugs any cheaper. Un-fucking-believable.

Oh yeah, Republicans are all about Smal Government arn't they, They're all for Liberty and Freedom:rolleyes: What a crock of shit. Go Ahead, vote for the one Idea you think is Republican (The Unconstitutional War), And think about how much like Bill Clinton you've become.

Keep beating the war drum, it won't make any difference. The economy is crashing. Even as every idiotic pundit says "Look at the Dow, it's up today, see the economy is doing fine" As if 30 companies that are owned by foreigners can drive our 13 trillion dollar economy.

As the dollar goes, so will the war, the two are tied. Hopefully after that happen the US will Balkanize, and at least that will give real conservatives a chance to form a prosporus nation again. And Once again, if that happens, It will be the GOP's fault. They Had the Reigns, they fucked it up. I don't give a shit what any pundit says.

[NoPants]

Here are a couple links to some messages directly from Dr. Paul that address the question of his chances of securing the nomination:

http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/01/message-from--2.html
http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/01/you-say-you-wan.html

A couple other articles you may find of interest. I have a very good friend who if from Arizona and graduated from ASU. He is also a big McCain supporter and we regularly discuss the issues of this election together. He like Dr. Paul's ideas, but believes he must vote for McCain since he has the best chances of winning. Today he sent me these 3 articles, and mentioned that they had a lot of powerful information he had not heard before. I believe he is doing some soul searching today in trying to understand the same things as you.

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59938
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/01/30/national-taxpayers-union-only-paul-would-cut-spending/
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E4DC143BF932A35752C1A96F9582 60&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/P/Presidential%20Elections%20(US

Hope this is helpful.

[Todd]

What chance of winning did McCain have 4 months ago? Everybody said he was dead in the water.

That is one heck of a point....Of course he has no money....so I guess the Media Darling is resurgent!!! How is No Cash going to work in the next month?

[JS4Pat]

The founding Fathers assumed people would vote based on who they thought would be the best for the country, not based on who they thought could win. This dynamic would have confounded the Founding Fathers and they probably would have questioned thier ideas about freedom, liberty and democracy. If someone with more "power" than the individual, can influence the individual, outside of thier stance on the issues, then our system is fundamentally broken. It leaves room for those in power to influence the right people to keep their power right where it is.

That was a great post!


I look back at how many times I have heard people complain about politics, politicians, The govt, and how they wished someone with honesty and integrity would run for office. I look back at how many times I heard people complain about how the gov't should butt out and stop thier overtaxing and overspending ways. Then we get Ron Paul who answers thier calls, almost as if the Universe Produced him just to give them what they had been asking for for so long, and they duck thier heads in the sand and continue to support the people who they complain about day and night.

That is why almost no Ron Paul supporters WILL answer the GOP's call to please just vote for the lesser of two evils in November.

Besides, personally I can't even determine the lesser evil when it comes to McWar or Clinton.

[newmedia4ron]

John McCain is a liberal lol why not support a democrat instead?

[N13]

Question: How is McCain going to pay for his wars? Will he increase taxes or borrow from foreign interests? How long will it take for McCain to bankrupt our economy? His plans to eliminate pork will buy him a few extra months in Iraq...

McCain is not a fiscal conservative, he is a big government spender. His misguided views would amount to a trainwreck if he were electable.

[Sarge]

Welcome,

There have been good reasons posted, that I agree with, so I won't go over them.

I am 69 and have voted for McCain and will never vote for him again. I live in AZ and fail to see why people will not wake up that this country is going down the tubes. The most worried I have been in all my years of investing.

McCain is willing to have 100 more years of war. Our dollar is crashing, and we can not afford that kind of money. To do what he and the others want to do will require a draft, more soldiers killed and for what? Oil that we already have in Alaska? More amnesty? More trillions of debt thrown on our children?

One of our sons is a Border Patrol Agent in AZ, and I do know what is going on in AZ. If McCain is elected, I feel his job will be much harder. My wife and I stand behind Dr. Paul the whole way, brokered convention or what ever it takes to take back America before it goes broke.

[Drknows]

What are Dr. Paul's Realistic Chances?
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u315/BrandoBardot/300.jpg

[OutsiderJoe]

I appreciate all the responses. Unfortunately, however, the sheer number of them means I'll have to respond in generalities rather than in point-by-point fashion as is warranted (and due to you as respect for the often lengthy responses). I apologize.

Grassroots can't do everything, folks. I know someone (Bradley in DC?) indicated that the problem was with HQ and that has been resolved. Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.

I think Ron Paul's greatest legacy might be you. The movement. I just don't think he can win an election but I do think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.

More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe

[Dan Klaus]

Outsider Joe,
Please check out Dr. Pauls platform on the various issues at http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/

Its a great resource if you want to check Dr. Pauls stance on taxes, abortion, monetary policy, you name it...might be a good comparison resource when sizing up McCain and Dr. Paul in terms of conservative policy....

Nothing but respect for John McCain and his service...like you I don't like ad hominen attacks on him.... but I personally don't feel he would make a good president after the 'bomb, bomb, bomb iran' joke...burka comments in the debate..using racially charged words about asians, wanting to stay in course in Iraq...for me, these type of things turn me away from him...

Hope you stick around and post....nice to have real discussion....

[davidfarrar]

He can win. John McCain is no republican. If the election boils down to soundbites, and the GOP nominates anyone else for the General election, they are finished. Elect a guy that tried to grant amnesty to 12 million people, thats something even most democrats oppose. Then you have Romney, who at one time claimed he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy.

So those are your choices? The GOP has 5 days to pull it's head out of it's ass and return to it's roots. And you can't do that with McCain, Romney or Huckabee.

All these guys will Talk on and on about Regan. Well you know what? Ron Paul gave the Republican party Ronald Regan. Look it up sometime. If reading even means a god damn thing to anyone anymore. Regan endorsed Paul back in the 80's, and you know what? Ron Paul still hasn't change his stance on one single issue. I bet if Regan was alive today, he'd endorse him again.

The GOP is finished without Ron Paul. No other candidate is a statesman like him. While every coward in America is worried about terrorists hiding in their front lawns, everything that Ron Paul said was going to happen to the US economy 10 years ago is happening right now.

It'll be interesting to watch any democrat rip Romney and McCain to shreds over every issue they flopped on. Or maybe they won't, since both Romney and McCain's voting records are right in line with Hillary Clinton's. Either of those two get the nod, we'll have a socialistic president, and a socialistic congress. For 8 years most likely. And that will be the GOP's fault.

I will not ever Blame this election on Liberal mischif, or Socialist ideas, I will blame the GOP, I will never vote republican again after this, and I will never donate to the GOP again. The Republican Party strayed so far from the Platform that they act and behave like every other democrat that wanted to "Make the World Safe for Democracy", at the expense of our economy and our Middle class. It is the Republican fault we are here. They broke their "contract with America", they spent more than any democratic Administration ever did. They Spoke out against going into Kosovo, and yet championed the cause in Iraq. They Slaughtered Habeas Corpus, They created a whole new Government Bureaucracy, and they doubled the Dept ed, nearly doubled the Dept of energy, Said that The Medicare Prescription drug Benefit would cost 100-300 billion dollars, it wound up costing over 1 trillion, and didn't make drugs any cheaper. Un-fucking-believable.

Oh yeah, Republicans are all about Smal Government arn't they, They're all for Liberty and Freedom:rolleyes: What a crock of shit. Go Ahead, vote for the one Idea you think is Republican (The Unconstitutional War), And think about how much like Bill Clinton you've become.

Keep beating the war drum, it won't make any difference. The economy is crashing. Even as every idiotic pundit says "Look at the Dow, it's up today, see the economy is doing fine" As if 30 companies that are owned by foreigners can drive our 13 trillion dollar economy.

As the dollar goes, so will the war, the two are tied. Hopefully after that happen the US will Balkanize, and at least that will give real conservatives a chance to form a prosporus nation again. And Once again, if that happens, It will be the GOP's fault. They Had the Reigns, they fucked it up. I don't give a shit what any pundit says.


Look, whoever you are...you are no Republican, you probably never have been.
When have you attended your last local Republican Party meeting?
When have you even gone there and stated your objections?
When was the last time you went to your own local Republican Party meeting and asked them if they had any questions on Dr. Paul's conservative ideals?
Have you ever even placed your name on the ballot to became a Republican Party official?
Lastly, now tell us the truth: R U a registered Republican?

[Bilgefisher]

I understand what you are saying, but you do not understand what we are saying. This is not about Ron Paul. He is simply the messenger. Will it be easier to deliver the message if he is in the white house. Yes it will. If he doesn't make it, the message will still be delivered by the millions that now support our cause of freedom and liberty. Its not about one man, its about a nation.

Mark my words. John McCain will never sit as president of the U.S. It requires our support to get there and he will not have it. Do you really believe a pro war candidate can win when 70% of the nation is antiwar. I don't think were the ones being delusional here.

[aravoth]

Look, whoever you are...you are no Republican, you probably never have been.
When have you attended your last local Republican Party meeting?
When have you even gone there and stated your objections?
When was the last time you went to your own local Republican Party meeting and asked them if they had any questions on Dr. Paul's conservative ideals?
Have you ever even placed your name on the ballot to became a Republican Party official?
Lastly, now tell us the truth: R U a registered Republican?

I have no fucking clue who you are, and the answer to your stupid assed questions is yes. Figure out who your talking too before you start saying dumb shit like this.

[noztnac]

Nominate McCain and you will unwittingly elect Hillary!

Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate who can win in the general election. All of the others will get trounced in the general election. 75% plus Americans want us out of Iraq. Consider your vote carefully.

[zadrock]

It's more than just Ron Paul. Even if McCain somehow gets the nomination, we all will go to work in our Congressional districts. Last I checked, there were 30 "Ron Paul Republicans" running for Congress. There are probably more now. Murray Sabrin is a RPR running for Senate in NJ. If he gains a Senate seat, watch out. He'll be the Ron Paul of the Senate, which is WAY more powerful (filibuster).

This movement is about more than just one man. Ron Paul understands that better than anybody. Look at how he's changed the conversation - last night, the other three candidates all mentioned how much we borrow from the Chinese before Paul brought it up. Gee, where'd they get that idea? (Ironically, Paul was the first to say "9/11" but that's only because a certain someone didn't show up.)

I think Dr. Paul has a much better chance of winning the nomination than most people think. I also think the Giants have a much better chance on Sunday than most people think. Doesn't mean that either one will win, but it would suprise me much less than it would surprise everyone else.

Z

[Elwar]

We follow Ron Paul's lead.

Do you think when Ron Paul is the only voice voting "no" against higher taxes or an unbalanced budget he's thinking...what are the chances that my vote will be with the majority...

When Ron Paul votes against Unconstitutional abuses of power do you think he's weighing in on the fact that he might end up voting in the minority?

No, it's about principles. Some people have them (Ron Paul and his supporters)...some people don't *cough McCain/Kennedy*.

[MsDoodahs]

Id rather vote for a winner and lose than vote for a loser and win.

This is a movement not something we plan on walking away from if Ron Paul loses a nomination to some neocons.

We do not plan on supporting any other republican candidate. Its Ron Paul or Nobody for most of us. Some plan on switching parties and voting against your nominee but they wont leave this movement.

^^ What he said. :)

Saw you're an aspiring politician yourself.

If you ever decide to embrace individual freedom, let us know, because as the GOP dies, the Ron Paul Freedom Movement is born.

:)

[Bilgefisher]

Look, whoever you are...you are no Republican, you probably never have been.
When have you attended your last local Republican Party meeting?
When have you even gone there and stated your objections?
When was the last time you went to your own local Republican Party meeting and asked them if they had any questions on Dr. Paul's conservative ideals?
Have you ever even placed your name on the ballot to became a Republican Party official?
Lastly, now tell us the truth: R U a registered Republican?

Woah, easy on Aravoth. He has done more for the Ron Paul movement then any ten people combined. His videos have inspired Literally millions.

[MsDoodahs]

Nominate McCain and you will unwittingly elect Hillary!




It is not 'unwittingly' AT ALL. Months ago, I was told by a GOP party leader that the GOP GOAL is to LOSE this election - to Hillary. The people will hate her and the programs she instates will cause major financial problems for the nation.

The GOP will "sweep" back into power - Congress and the WH - in 2012.

Every single thing I've seen the GOP do leads me to conclude that the man knew exactly what he was talking about.

[hrdman2luv]

Outsider Joe. Again, welcome to the forums. I see you haven't posted an answer to one posters question. So I might be wasting my time doing this. But, just in case you reading and not replying. Here goes:

I'm not sure how much reasearch you have done on either Ron Paul or John McCain. I, on the other hand, have done extencive amounts on both their voting records. And to be quite honest with you, when they call McCain a liberal, according to his voting record, they are not all wrong. McCain has quite a liberal voting record.
In doing this research, I pay close attention to how other voted as well. Because if a bill hit's the media before it gets voted on, or after a congressman anounces his bid for the Presidentcy, congress tends to vote for the public. On bills that are not in the media, congress tends to vote for either how they feel, or who's paying the most.

Anyways, back to McCains voting record. If you will do just a little research, you will find that Hillary Clinton and John McCains voting records are very similiar. At least on the big spending bills. (that are dated BEFORE they anounced their run for the Presidentcy)

Voting record voting record voting record.....

Ron Paul has never voted to raise taxes, to allow welfare to illegals, a pay raise, gun restrictions, over-spending, Iraq, NAFTA, CAFTA, and just about every bill that places more restrictions on "We the People'.

In doing the McCain's research, you will find that he has voted to spend huge amounts of money for foriegn issues. But, has voted to cut funding for things here in the USA. (aka agriculture, energy, medicare, Social Security, and other things that this country needs. Especially since there isn't a viable solution at the moment to abolish them. So cutting alot of the funding for them is too dangerous)

Ron Paul's voting record stands alone.
Ron Pauls voting record here: http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=296

Also, here is a page that you can access to see some bills that Ron Paul authored: If you agree with these bills, you should ask yourself, why didn't John McCain co-sponcor, or even endorse: http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery

John McCains voting record here: http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270&type=category&category=10&go.x=7&go.y=10

I hope this helps.

[NoPants]

I do believe -- and here is likely where you and I will part ways, ultimately -- that it is more important for the person you believe will be the best President than the person you believe best represents your views. So, while I disagree with John McCain on abortion (I'm moderate-to-pro-choice) and gay rights (I'm pro-gay marriage) and immigration (I'm for securing the borders and not granting special permissions), I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that. (Oh, and as a side note, I've taken the quizzes and, yes, my views are closest to Dr. Paul's views.)


Securing the borders, ok. Not granting special permissions? McCain is not your guy if that's how you feel. There are too many sources to quote for this one, just go to Google News and search for "McCain amnesty", here's a link to the search:

http://news.google.com/news?um=1&hl=en&resnum=4&ct=title&q=mccain+amnesty&btnG=Search+News

McCain is for amnesty. He may not be saying it now since it's not popular for a Republican presidential candidate, but his record proves otherwise.

--

In answer to supporting McCain on gay rights, see the article below. Dr. Paul has been endorsed by GayWired Media becaule: "Paul won’t go out on a limb for our community, but as a Libertarian whose legacy will show he fought to stay out of American's personal lives, he won't be digging around for ways to limit our civil liberties."

Source: http://www.gaywired.com/article.cfm?section=66&id=18013

--

On the issue of abortion, Dr. Paul is pro-life, but he firmly believes that the federal government has no place passing laws to force us one way or the other.


“ I am strongly pro life. Life begins at conception ... but, I do not believe this should be a federal matter. All issues of life and violence and crime and murder are dealt with at the local level. ” - Dr. Paul

Source: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/



Hope all that helps too.

[Eponym_mi]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

I supported McCain in 2000 with money and my vote (in the primary AND in the general as a write-in). Nevertheless, he has compromised himself in the past 8 years to an extent that I find him to be just as repulsive as Bush was to me in 2000. I will not vote for McCain again, whether or not he gets the nomination.

I vote for people based on the principles and philosophy they espouse to the extent their views agree with mine. I never vote for anyone based on what others may think or how they might vote. I am truly an independent thinker.

So, your questions seem odd to me. Are you choosing someone to represent your views? Or are you choosing a horse to bet on? It seems you favor the latter approach to picking a candidate, but for me, I'd much rather choose the long shot knowing that the choice will be of tremendous benefit to me should he win, than to make a "safe bet" instead and compromise my values as a result.

What are your values?

[Mattsa]

He can win. John McCain is no republican. If the election boils down to soundbites, and the GOP nominates anyone else for the General election, they are finished. Elect a guy that tried to grant amnesty to 12 million people, thats something even most democrats oppose. Then you have Romney, who at one time claimed he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy.

So those are your choices? The GOP has 5 days to pull it's head out of it's ass and return to it's roots. And you can't do that with McCain, Romney or Huckabee.

All these guys will Talk on and on about Regan. Well you know what? Ron Paul gave the Republican party Ronald Regan. Look it up sometime. If reading even means a god damn thing to anyone anymore. Regan endorsed Paul back in the 80's, and you know what? Ron Paul still hasn't change his stance on one single issue. I bet if Regan was alive today, he'd endorse him again.

The GOP is finished without Ron Paul. No other canidate is a statesman like him. While every coward in America is worried about terrorists hiding in their front lawns, everything that Ron Paul said was going to happen to the US economy 10 years ago is happening right now.

It'll be interesting to watch any democrat rip Romney and McCain to shreds over every issue they flopped on. Or maybe they won't, since both Romney and McCain's voting records are right in line with Hillary Clinton's. Either of those two get the nod, we'll have a socialistic president, and a socialistic congress. For 8 years most likely. And that will be the GOP's fault.

I will not ever Blame this election on Liberal mischif, or Socialist ideas, I will blame the GOP, I will never vote republican again after this, and I will never donate to the GOP again. The Republican Party strayed so far from the Platform that they act and behave like every other democrat that wanted to "Make the World Safe for Democracy", at the expense of our economy and our Middle class. It is the Republican fault we are here. They broke their "contract with America", they spent more than any democratic Administration ever did. They Spoke out against going into Kosovo, and yet championed the cause in Iraq. They Slaughtered Habeas Corpus, They created a whole new Government Bureaucracy, and they doubled the Dept ed, nearly doubled the Dept of energy, Said that The Medicare Prescription drug Benefit would cost 100-300 billion dollars, it wound up costing over 1 trillion, and didn't make drugs any cheaper. Un-fucking-believable.

Oh yeah, Republicans are all about Smal Government arn't they, They're all for Liberty and Freedom:rolleyes: What a crock of shit. Go Ahead, vote for the one Idea you think is Republican (The Unconstitutional War), And think about how much like Bill Clinton you've become.

Keep beating the war drum, it won't make any difference. The economy is crashing. Even as every idiotic pundit says "Look at the Dow, it's up today, see the economy is doing fine" As if 30 companies that are owned by foreigners can drive our 13 trillion dollar economy.

As the dollar goes, so will the war, the two are tied. Hopefully after that happen the US will Balkanize, and at least that will give real conservatives a chance to form a prosporus nation again. And Once again, if that happens, It will be the GOP's fault. They Had the Reigns, they fucked it up. I don't give a shit what any pundit says.

Great post Aravoth

This must be a real dilemma for a lot of conservatives out there........because the only true conservative is Ron Paul. It's so blindingly obvious I find it hard to believe so many people out there have been suckered by the MSM.

In my opinion, if McCain gets the nomination. old fashioned conservatism in the USA is dead and buried. The GOP will morph into a centrist party and you'll end up with a similar situation to the one we have in the UK where the differentiation between the two main parties is the thickness of a cigarette paper.

A lot of these people who have supported McCain need to have a close look at themselves in the mirror and ask themselves if they really understand what they are voting for. I'm plenty sure a lot of them haven't a clue

[davidfarrar]

I appreciate all the responses. Unfortunately, however, the sheer number of them means I'll have to respond in generalities rather than in point-by-point fashion as is warranted (and due to you as respect for the often lengthy responses). I apologize.

Grassroots can't do everything, folks. I know someone (Bradley in DC?) indicated that the problem was with HQ and that has been resolved. Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.

I think Ron Paul's greatest legacy might be you. The movement. I just don't think he can win an election but I do think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.

More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe

In regards to Dr. Paul's greatest legacy...I hope you are right. But if his message isn't actively carried into and up the Republican Party hierarchy now, it might take another generation and a national economic depression for his legacy to be realized by the people.

So I hope all you "true" Republicans, and even you " true" Libertarians register as a Republican. Place your name on the ballot as a Republican Party Executive Committee nominee for your jurisdiction and win your seat within the Party.

If all of Dr. Paul's supporters did this, and with a little co-ordination, real conservative Republicans, just like Ron Paul, can change the face of the Republican Party overnight and perhaps, just perhaps, win the next presidential election.

If you have any questions about this procedure, drop me a line. I have done it. I have been there.

[tamor]

Even if Dr. Paul does not win the nomination, he has stirred in people a way to look at things differently and the importance of returning to the America of Freedom. We have heard from many new people that they are running on this idea. They like to call themselves Ron Paul Republicans. It is a revolution that will take time. Just think maybe someday you will be sitting in that Senate voting "NO" to some bill that will restrict the rights of individuals. :-)

[Energy]

Doesn't it concern you the media is handpicking the "front runners"?

Last night's CNN debate should be a huge wake-up call for anyone doubting the corporate-backed media's agenda.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

They aren't so good. But, Paul's been fighting against the odds for most of his political career. It's a wonder we're all here at all even talking about it, considering everything he's been up against. 2 years ago, I would have never believed that Paul could achieve the groundswell of support he has. I never would have believed he could outraise establishment types.

What has happened thus far is simply amazing. There's still a long way to go.

And this belongs in another forum.

[davidfarrar]

I have no fucking clue who you are, and the answer to your stupid assed questions is yes. Figure out who your talking too before you start saying dumb shit like this.


Thank you for your civilized reply....something by the way, a true Republican would never even think of doing.

Yes, I am trying to figure out who I am talking to. So when did you say you attend your last local Republican Party meeting?

[MsDoodahs]

And this belongs in another forum.

I'll move it to Hot Topics now. :)

[aravoth]

Thank you for your civilized reply....something by the way, a true Republican would never even think of doing.

So when did you attend your last local Republican Party meeting?

I've got a better question, when did you. Or were you focused on your "online Party" Scam. Or Better yet, what exactly have you done for Ron Paul.

And don't tell me what a "true republican" would never think of. I've been a republican my whole life, I'm a Veteran of the US Army. Smartasses like you, that jump to conclusions like you did, are annoying at best.

[davidfarrar]

I'll move it to Hot Topics now. :)


yes, I think I was getting a little bit closer to the truth than this forum can stand

[BigRedBrent]

McCain has 0% chance of being our next president.

How many Giuliani supporters have you heard say "If Rudy doesn't win the nomination I'm writing his name in", how many Romney supporters have said "If Romney doesn't win the nomination I'm not sure who I'll vote for, maybe the Democrat just because of the treatment he's gotten".

How many Ron Paul supporters have I heard say this, or something similar? I'd say about 90%, and several polls have reflected just that.

So, when it comes down to a close race between Democrat and Republican in November, will a Republican be able to win with that 90% of Ron Paul supporters writing his name in? When we see the exact same person when we look at McCain and Clinton do you think we'll be swayed to support the lesser of two evils?

You say you want small government? Then you only have one chance. Ron Paul or nobody.

When you go to the voting booth just remember this.

It's Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton. The sooner people realize this the sooner we can start raising money for Ron Paul's general election run.



Exactly, that is why I made this video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DV6G-jAGFg0


I love the last part of your post. I have been trying to get others to understand that if we don't nominate Ron Paul as the republican candidate then we WILL have a democrat as our next president.

[Ron2Win]

I appreciate all the responses. Unfortunately, however, the sheer number of them means I'll have to respond in generalities rather than in point-by-point fashion as is warranted (and due to you as respect for the often lengthy responses). I apologize.

Grassroots can't do everything, folks. I know someone (Bradley in DC?) indicated that the problem was with HQ and that has been resolved. Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.

I think Ron Paul's greatest legacy might be you. The movement. I just don't think he can win an election but I do think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.

More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe
Friendship with all nations my friend. Unfortunately America is so shielded by our own views that we fail to see what is going on around us.

The world is leaving us behind by joining together in trade and all we can do is "scream" that we are not getting in.

The world standard is increasing while ours is decreasing, how does it all happen? It's the lie of "Foreign Aid" we are taxing our people to oblivion and sending our money around the world.

The ones that benefit from this "foreign aid" are but a few, at the expense of the many American people.

[Elwar]

yes, I think I was getting a little bit closer to the truth than this forum can stand

What was the last thing you've done to get Ron Paul elected?

[aravoth]

What was the last thing you've done to get Ron Paul elected?

he's working on "the online party", and joined the Forum this month to promote on his sig.

[Ronin]

(Also, can someone point me to the RNC regulation that dictates that a brokered convention candidate must have participated in the primaries? I'm not sure if this is the case, and if it's not, don't be surprised to see a brand new face emerge...).


I don't have the link off hand, but I think it's pretty well known that a candidate must get the majority of delegates in 5 states. Of course, the way this year has been I wouldn't be surprised if the rules changed.

[Rhys]

I think Ron Paul CAN win. However, when the media acts like they do, it makes it seem impossible. If the "trusted" CNN wont even let him talk at a debate, the public is forced to ask them self if he can even be president.

I was for McCain in 2000. That was when I didn't understand Free Markets and Liberty. Also, McCain wasn't itchin to start wars in 2000.

The way I see it, if I don't vote for Ron Paul, this country will have no way left to go. All we'll be left with is a choice between communism and militarized statism with ZERO liberty coming from either selection.

McCain will tell us we need to give up liberty and ALL OUR MONEY for some unseen and terrible enemy... I'm not scared of terrorists. I have a better chance of dying TODAY from LIGHTNING. I'm scared of an American President furthering the concept of the Oval Office being some kind of Throne.

With the dems, I'm scared of the abject poverty and loss of individualism that comes with socialism.

Therefor, even IF Dr. Paul doesn't win, I will support him and his platform for ever into every election.

Also now thanks to Dr. Paul, I will run for state office, then governor of my badly dysfunctional state. In Michigan, we have a Canadian Communist governor and thanks to Ron Paul, I know how to fix it.

That is what Ron Paul is to us... hope for ever. Not just this election.

As a former McCain supporter, to me now, McCain is dumb. He's a moderate because he doesn't know enough about either side to chose. That's my honest opinion.

He uses slogans and such but never knows why. Like in the debate where he said "healthcare is caused by....uh....inflation?...." but he was trying to sound like he knew what he was talking about. Then, last night, he tried again and couldn't even remember "Sub Prime Mortgages"!!!!

Yeah, as a former McCain supporter (voted for him against Bush in 2000) I think he's a dolt. I must have missed it last time because Bush is a dolt too.

I don't honestly see how I could vote for McCain or Romeny or Huck or Hilary or Obama. They're all so terrible. They pander but don't think about what would be the results of their actions. We've knows this about liberals for years, that they think with their heart and not their head. Now that the GOP is in on that game, it's real sad.

That's why I support Ron Paul.

[belian78]

I apologize for the disjointedness of this response. (I'm trying to type a little as I'm working.)


I do believe -- and here is likely where you and I will part ways, ultimately -- that it is more important for the person you believe will be the best President than the person you believe best represents your views. So, while I disagree with John McCain on abortion (I'm moderate-to-pro-choice) and gay rights (I'm pro-gay marriage) and immigration (I'm for securing the borders and not granting special permissions), I believe John McCain has the character to be a great President. I'm sure many of you disagree. I respect that. (Oh, and as a side note, I've taken the quizzes and, yes, my views are closest to Dr. Paul's views.)



this is all that needs to be said as far as i'm concerned. this is what's wrong with this country.

if the man is going to further bankrupt this nation, drag us into more needless wars (which WILL take the draft), and then on top of that NOT EVEN REPRESENT YOUR VIEWS, how can you vote for him?

[raystone]

He can win. John McCain is no republican. If the election boils down to soundbites, and the GOP nominates anyone else for the General election, they are finished. Elect a guy that tried to grant amnesty to 12 million people, thats something even most democrats oppose. Then you have Romney, who at one time claimed he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy.

So those are your choices? The GOP has 5 days to pull it's head out of it's ass and return to it's roots. And you can't do that with McCain, Romney or Huckabee.

All these guys will Talk on and on about Regan. Well you know what? Ron Paul gave the Republican party Ronald Regan. Look it up sometime. If reading even means a god damn thing to anyone anymore. Regan endorsed Paul back in the 80's, and you know what? Ron Paul still hasn't change his stance on one single issue. I bet if Regan was alive today, he'd endorse him again.

The GOP is finished without Ron Paul. No other canidate is a statesman like him. While every coward in America is worried about terrorists hiding in their front lawns, everything that Ron Paul said was going to happen to the US economy 10 years ago is happening right now.

It'll be interesting to watch any democrat rip Romney and McCain to shreds over every issue they flopped on. Or maybe they won't, since both Romney and McCain's voting records are right in line with Hillary Clinton's. Either of those two get the nod, we'll have a socialistic president, and a socialistic congress. For 8 years most likely. And that will be the GOP's fault.

I will not ever Blame this election on Liberal mischif, or Socialist ideas, I will blame the GOP, I will never vote republican again after this, and I will never donate to the GOP again. The Republican Party strayed so far from the Platform that they act and behave like every other democrat that wanted to "Make the World Safe for Democracy", at the expense of our economy and our Middle class. It is the Republican fault we are here. They broke their "contract with America", they spent more than any democratic Administration ever did. They Spoke out against going into Kosovo, and yet championed the cause in Iraq. They Slaughtered Habeas Corpus, They created a whole new Government Bureaucracy, and they doubled the Dept ed, nearly doubled the Dept of energy, Said that The Medicare Prescription drug Benefit would cost 100-300 billion dollars, it wound up costing over 1 trillion, and didn't make drugs any cheaper. Un-fucking-believable.

Oh yeah, Republicans are all about Smal Government arn't they, They're all for Liberty and Freedom:rolleyes: What a crock of shit. Go Ahead, vote for the one Idea you think is Republican (The Unconstitutional War), And think about how much like Bill Clinton you've become.

Keep beating the war drum, it won't make any difference. The economy is crashing. Even as every idiotic pundit says "Look at the Dow, it's up today, see the economy is doing fine" As if 30 companies that are owned by foreigners can drive our 13 trillion dollar economy.

As the dollar goes, so will the war, the two are tied. Hopefully after that happen the US will Balkanize, and at least that will give real conservatives a chance to form a prosporus nation again. And Once again, if that happens, It will be the GOP's fault. They Had the Reigns, they fucked it up. I don't give a shit what any pundit says.


Arovoth - I respect the work you've done in RP grassroots, videos, Payday, etc. Here, when you use the term Republican Party/GOP - what group of people are you referring to exactly ? the leaders in DC ? the citizen members across the U.S. ? Because it seems like any group of people, the members will follow the leaders and the leaders will follow their base of power, and both can be changed in a positive manner.

[Steve_New_Jersey]

I appreciate all the responses. Unfortunately, however, the sheer number of them means I'll have to respond in generalities rather than in point-by-point fashion as is warranted (and due to you as respect for the often lengthy responses). I apologize.

Grassroots can't do everything, folks. I know someone (Bradley in DC?) indicated that the problem was with HQ and that has been resolved. Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.

I think Ron Paul's greatest legacy might be you. The movement. I just don't think he can win an election but I do think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.

More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe

The support for RP is a perfect example of his platform. Allowing people to be free has taken this campain this far. Everyone can get involved without regulation from the top.

You talk about the constitutional approach not applying today? Things are no different today then they had been 100 years ago. The human race is still up to the same old bag of tricks. Our getting involved in the afairs of others is what created this mess we have now. The constitution is the ONLY way to fix it. We can not continue to make the same mistakes over and over. Short of killing every Muslim in the mid-east there is no way to fix the current issues. I am not prepared to wipe the mid-east clean. We went into nation building in Afgan that was a mistake. We went into Iraq and that was 100% wrong. Now while we are trying to make the best of this bad situation we are toying around with Iran and Israel as well as elections and dictating to other countries internal affairs. At the same time we are giving EVERYONE money on all sides of the fence that we dont have.
We need the constitution now more then ever.

We are not going to be RP's legacy. RP is a legacy of the founding fathers. Every American is supposed to be. We owe everything we have to those brave men and its about time people started following the law laid out for us. Mc Cain is a criminal. He constantly votes against the constitution and caters to the lobby army. A violation of the constitution should be tried like any other crime. In a court.

[mosquitobite]

I appreciate all the responses. Unfortunately, however, the sheer number of them means I'll have to respond in generalities rather than in point-by-point fashion as is warranted (and due to you as respect for the often lengthy responses). I apologize.

Grassroots can't do everything, folks. I know someone (Bradley in DC?) indicated that the problem was with HQ and that has been resolved. Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.

I think Ron Paul's greatest legacy might be you. The movement. I just don't think he can win an election but I do think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.

More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1136871&postcount=45

I'll ask you as I ask others who consider the War on Terror to be their #1 issue: What defines WINNING?

And once you define that... tell me how it would be ANY different than the War on Drugs?

-Never ending, money pit, eroding all American good will around the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Neoconservatism emphasises foreign policy as paramount responsibility of government, seeing the need for the U.S. acting as the world's sole superpower as indispensable to establishing and maintaining global order.[2]

The term 'Neoconservative' was originally used as a criticism against liberals that had politically 'moved to the right'.

Historically, neoconservatives supported a militant anticommunism [26], tolerated more social welfare spending than was sometimes acceptable to libertarians and mainstream conservatives, and sympathized with a non-traditional foreign policy agenda that was less deferential to traditional conceptions of diplomacy and international law and less inclined to compromise principles, even if that meant unilateral action. (pre-emptive war)

Ie…liberals invaded our party and ruined it… :D

Now ask yourself again... HOW do you fund that philosophy without bankrupting this great nation?

[gjdavis60]

Win or lose, we're not going away because this is not just about a presidential election.

What I used to believe about government and politics I was fed by the media. I believed the stories I was told about the differences between "conservatives" and "liberals". I thought it mattered whether I voted for a Republican or a Democrat. But I honestly didn't pay much attention to politics. I did as I was told. And that was my fault.

Then I heard about Dr. Paul and began to read what he had written and listened to his speeches. And everything changed. I realized what I had been told about our government was simply the version that the people in power wanted me to hear. I realized that there was another version; one which made a lot more sense and was much more consistent with our founding principles; one that respected every individual and favored none.

Now I know that it doesn't really matter which establishment candidates are running for the presidency because compared to Dr. Paul, they are indistinguishable. So, I don't care if McCain gets the nomination over Romney, or if Clinton wins the general election against a Republican. I won't be sucked into hypothetical discussions of which establishment politician is better because the topic is irrelevant. They are all the same. Thay are all in it for themselves. They all stand for the abomination that our federal government has become.

It may take some time, but this perverse orgy of greed and dishonesty masquerading as a constitutional government will be brought down. Dr. Paul started this movement, but win or lose, it will not end with him. As long as the message circulates, Americans will be captivated and compelled by its simple and powerful truth. We will prevail. We have to.

[seapilot]

A vote for McCain is a vote for Hillary or Obama as 2006 was the big wake up to republicans to change thier tune.

McCain is a trojan horse( war democrat) his voting record is basically in par with Hillary Clintons. He helped kill drilling for oil in ANWR while he wants to keep troops securing "oil intrests" in the middle east for the next 100 years. McCain also voted against Bushes tax cuts in the begining, so dont go counting on taxes to be cut again for a long time.

We are voting for Ron Paul not by his name recognition or his chances of winning but that his past record and values represents liberty and freedom. Does McCains record represent that? It is immoral for us to vote for someone like McCain or Hillary that represents less liberty and freedom for tommorow than we even lack today.

[MsDoodahs]

Mod disagreement. Moving to General Politics. lol...

[Rhys]

btw, original poster, you're brave for entering the fanboi den!

lol Hot Topics? Is this the way we sway people's votes? By sending their threads to the depths of "truther" hell?

[Sarah]

Re: the actual question. Dr. Paul's Realistic Chances?

I have to admit that when I first started to learn about RP I loved his message from the start...but felt that he wasn't heard enough and wasn't aggressive enough for me to have the confidence in him actually winning the Presidency. I felt though...at least his message is getting out there and ppl are listening.

I learned to look at the debates differently and see the less aggressiveness as a plus for RP...and I like it. I've re watched videos and he is not a man to come across harshly...it's not his nature. In the big picture I see this as a good thing and I feel now that his chances are good.

I don't know how ppl can support the candidates that are fighting all the time...it's hard for me to even listen to it. It's refreshing to see a candidate ...Ron Paul...come across without the personal attack approach.

So yes ...now I do think he has a realistic chance because his message is honest and that comes through loud and clear to me. JMHO

[aravoth]

Arovoth - I respect the work you've done in RP grassroots, videos, Payday, etc. Here, when you use the term Republican Party/GOP - what group of people are you referring to exactly ? the leaders in DC ? the citizen members across the U.S. ? Because it seems like any group of people, the members will follow the leaders and the leaders will follow their base of power, and both can be changed in a positive manner.

Not so sure I believe that. The Citizen Members are the base. So they follow the leaders, but the leaders must follow the base to get elected. If that is the case then I am speaking to the whole entire party. I knew better, I knew better when the patriot act came, I knew better when we invaded Iraq. I never compromised my principles for the sake of the party. Other people knew better also, and that is why the Base shrunk dramatically in 2006. It's also why we lost congress that year. And if they don't nominate Ron Paul, it will be why we lose the 2008 election.

The group of people I am referring to is the the group that screwed up so bad that it created perfect conditions for the opposition to sweep in and drive us even deeper into the ground. That would be the people your talking about. The ones that believe the Base only follows the leader, and the leader panders to the base. They are both chasing each other, and therefore they are not responsible? I say no, they are both responsible for it.

People can be angry at me for things I say around here sometimes. I have no loyalty to the GOP any longer, they have abandoned me and my family. They are not the same party they were once upon a time. Whatever they have become, it is not to the countries benefit. They interfere in the markets, and the base goes along with it, They Torture in prisons in other countries, and the base cheers it on, they come up with an economic stimulus package, and the base cheers it on.

There was a time when we didn't ask for anything, we didn't want handouts, we didn't want Wars because we knew the cost of it. Now we interefere, in other Nations and ours, our government interferes. And it shouldn't. It should get out of our way.

I can't believe how jaded the last seven years has made me.

[nullvalu]

///

[Patriot123]

Ron Paul will WIN the GOP, due to this corrupt governments overthrow of elections which your candidate is a part of. In other words, elections have been so twisted that there's a sort of 'little known secret" that the amount of delegates a candidate has determines if they win or not. So realistically, your candidate doesn't have a shot in hell; no offense to you or your candidate whatsoever. Ron Paul is expected to pick up nearly all of the delegates in Florida once they're chosen in a week or two, and another whole bunch on Super Tuesday.

[mosquitobite]

Not so sure I believe that. The Citizen Members are the base. So they follow the leaders, but the leaders must follow the base to get elected. If that is the case then I am speaking to the whole entire party. I knew better, I knew better when the patriot act came, I knew better when we invaded Iraq. I never compromised my principles for the sake of the party. Other people knew better also, and that is why the Base shrunk dramatically in 2006. It's also why we lost congress that year. And if they don't nominate Ron Paul, it will be why we lose the 2008 election.

The group of people I am referring to is the the group that screwed up so bad that it created perfect conditions for the opposition to sweep in and drive us even deeper into the ground. That would be the people your talking about. The ones that believe the Base only follows the leader, and the leader panders to the base. They are both chasing each other, and therefore they are not responsible? I say no, they are both responsible for it.

People can be angry at me for things I say around here sometimes. I have no loyalty to the GOP any longer, they have abandoned me and my family. They are not the same party they were once upon a time. Whatever they have become, it is not to the countries benefit. They interfere in the markets, and the base goes along with it, They Torture in prisons in other countries, and the base cheers it on, they come up with an economic stimulus package, and the base cheers it on.

There was a time when we didn't ask for anything, we didn't want handouts, we didn't want Wars because we knew the cost of it. Now we interefere, in other Nations and ours, our government interferes. And it shouldn't. It should get out of our way.

I can't believe how jaded the last seven years has made me.

+1776 :)

I was a freshman in college in 1994 when the Republicans offered up the Contract with America. Oh how far we've wandered...

[alaric]

Yes, he certainly has a chance. Ponder this: after watching the disgusting media treatment that Ron Paul got in this last debate alone coupled with the 'helpful' treatment that your man received, what chances would you give if the roles were reversed? Meaning Paul was given preferential treatment and FAR greater speaking time and Mccain was cutoff and muzzled. If this were to happen, Ron Paul would easily be the next president. He could beat hillary's lies, where your man has no chance against the media's crowned winner. Mccain is the Bob Dole of 2008.

[Todd]

Not so sure I believe that. The Citizen Members are the base. So they follow the leaders, but the leaders must follow the base to get elected. If that is the case then I am speaking to the whole entire party. I knew better, I knew better when the patriot act came, I knew better when we invaded Iraq. I never compromised my principles for the sake of the party. Other people knew better also, and that is why the Base shrunk dramatically in 2006. It's also why we lost congress that year. And if they don't nominate Ron Paul, it will be why we lose the 2008 election.

The group of people I am referring to is the the group that screwed up so bad that it created perfect conditions for the opposition to sweep in and drive us even deeper into the ground. That would be the people your talking about. The ones that believe the Base only follows the leader, and the leader panders to the base. They are both chasing each other, and therefore they are not responsible? I say no, they are both responsible for it.

People can be angry at me for things I say around here sometimes. I have no loyalty to the GOP any longer, they have abandoned me and my family. They are not the same party they were once upon a time. Whatever they have become, it is not to the countries benefit. They interfere in the markets, and the base goes along with it, They Torture in prisons in other countries, and the base cheers it on, they come up with an economic stimulus package, and the base cheers it on.

There was a time when we didn't ask for anything, we didn't want handouts, we didn't want Wars because we knew the cost of it. Now we interefere, in other Nations and ours, our government interferes. And it shouldn't. It should get out of our way.

I can't believe how jaded the last seven years has made me.

I couldn't have said it any better man. Your last couple posts sum it up perfectly for me. Thanks.

[Deoptics8]

The media has tapped McCain as the winner of the GOP just as they tap Clinton/ Obama their choices. They can lead America into these choice because it helps their revenues/ their journalists getting preferential treatment in Washington inner circles and keeps their lobbyists employed in ensuring control of how the policies are shaped for their cause. It is a club, they work hand in hand, to send out the controlled message of the DC bureaucracy in return for constant coverage which equates to advertising dollars and son.

McCain is NY Times and most of the MSM choice for GOP nomination because they want the Democrats to sweep not only the White House but Congress as well. McCain doesn't represent the MSM's views but he is candidate that will provide their ultimate goal of getting the Democrats in the White House. If McCain does become the nominee, the focus will come back to Iraq by the renewing of the constant barrage of negative news by the MSM from Iraq/Afghanistan. The MSM will then blast McCain as an sabre-rattler and the endorsements now will be meaningless. The MSM has this "3D chess game" already played out, and America is buying it (for the most part). Checkmate, MSM and the Dems win and McCain is just another pawn. This time next year, if the Dems (Clinton would be my guess) get in, buckle up, our ongoing recession will now go into overdrive. In the meantime keep pressing to get RP delegates for the RNC. Its our only hope!

[John P Slevin]

I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate.

So your reasoning is we should choose a demagogue like McCain because he speaks in soundbites?

McCain also repeatedly uses a racial slur. (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i29732)

[realist]

Outsider Joe,

thanks for respecfully challenging our thinking. I will answer you questions directly but I have one for you as well.

1) I agree with you- Ron Pauls chances of securing the republican nomination are slim (less than 10%).
2) I beleive his idea's are sound and he could be doing much better - but the campaign has failed where it counts most - at the polls. We can debate the reasons but, all we're left with are opinions.
3) Success is still possible, but not without a MAJOR, MAJOR shift which, is unlikely in my view.

You seam pretty open minded. I must say that I'm about as politcally engaged as it gets and my stance is similar to yours (fiscal conservative, social moderate, small government protecting civil liberties). But I've gotta ask... How in Gods name did you come to support John McCain?

Of all the candidates, he fits our position the least. He is not only fiscally liberal, he has no clue about economics- none. He is socially liberal (evidenced by his associations and co sponsorships with so many democrats). He is for big government, big military, was for amnesty until his staff told him that wouldn't fly and he is clueless to the inner working of governement. I mean the man has been in government for 29 years, and he didn't know about the " plunge team" thats been in existance for nearly 2 decades? He Co Sonsors McCain Feingold to save face after the Keating 5 debacle and he's coming close to violating his own bill. He outright lies and refuses to acknowledge when he is wrong, even when it's proven to his face. His temper has caused him to assault an aid in house chambers.

I could go on and on but even Vitenam Vets hate this guy. What in tarnation is appealing about this guy? I hionestly want to know since he does have the numbers... I just can't seem to understand why?

[jacmicwag]

The old war issue is the decider then. There are many in the Paul camp who used to believe the same as you concerning the need for foreign intervention to maintain our security. No one really knows what will happen if we change gears and give Ron's policy a shot. The current (last 50 years) policy of policing the world seems to have merit in regards to spreading liberty and democracy but we have experienced some 'unintended consequences" both good and bad. I'm ready for a change myself - McCain's myopic focus on Islamofacism gives me more cause for concern than Paul's non-interventionist approach. If we try Paul's method and it doesn't work, we can always go back to empire-building.

[noztnac]

No way in hell I'll ever vote for John McCain.

[Goldwater Conservative]

I think he can still win the nomination, but the odds are obviously against him. When the media gives a hundred times more coverage (that's probably an understatement) to any other candidate, sometimes even candidates who have already withdrawn, it's hard to reach out to many people.

Paul has run competitively with the other candidates among young voters, who disproportionately rely on the Internet for their news and candidate research, but has had massive problems among senior citizens, who disproportionately depend on television media to make their decisions.

A lot of those elderly voters are misinformed and think Paul is an isolationist or a pacifist, when he's really a traditional conservative on defense policy (he even supported SDI during the 80s), or don't even know he exists.

They also sometimes think he wants to gut their Social Security, when he's really the best candidate for it because he wants to preserve the trust fund, not raid it, and honor commitments while allowing young people to opt out of the system, and then there's his strong emphasis on sound money and fighting inflation, which hits them the hardest.

I think Paul's best chances are to pick up delegates in caucus and proportional primary states and to stay in until Huckabee and Romney drop out. Paul might be promoted, even by some of his harshest critics, as the anti-McCain since for many he's the lesser of those two "evils."

Anyway, I used to like McCain, but that was before he started talking about occupying more Middle East countries and staying in Iraq for 100 years. Not only do I think this policy of invading countries is going to bankrupt us, but it leaves us wide open for attack here at home since our military is stretched thin everywhere else, while also galvanizing and uniting the Arab/Muslim world against us.

A policy of secure borders and strong national DEFENSE (that is, people like the 9/11 hijackers couldn't get in or do what they did, and nobody would dare carry out a traditional act of war against us) is best, since it preserves our resources and actually reduces the likelihood of attack. Whatever terrorist threat remained could be dealt with by rebuilding our embarrassing intelligence agencies so that we could deal with any imminent threat.

Small-scale military operations where need be, but wholesale invasions and occupations are the wrong tactic for scattered enemies without borders or economies. Transnational enemies cannot be dealt with in the traditional manner of nation-state warfare. We should also use letters of marque and reprisal, as Paul proposed after 9/11.

[PatriotG]

The old war issue is the decider then. There are many in the Paul camp who used to believe the same as you concerning the need for foreign intervention to maintain our security. No one really knows what will happen if we change gears and give Ron's policy a shot. The current (last 50 years) policy of policing the world seems to have merit in regards to spreading liberty and democracy but we have experienced some 'unintended consequences" both good and bad. I'm ready for a change myself - McCain's myopic focus on Islamofacism gives me more cause for concern than Paul's non-interventionist approach. If we try Paul's method and it doesn't work, we can always go back to empire-building.

I would like to echo this answer.
One thing is for certain and you can debate me all you like on this
We are already in a recession quite possibly heading for depression

McCains warmonger beliefs will just speed up the process

Plain and simple
We can no longer afford to be be the policemen of the planet.

And I do not belive for a minute that he will resist attacking iran next

No way

I have watched evry debate so far and you can see it in his demeanor and body language

[porcupine07]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now.

John Mc Cain:

Fought to close POW files

Lobbied to get POW investigators fired

Cheated on his wife after a tragic car accident, describing her as 4 inches shorter and had gained a good deal of weight

Wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years

Opposes repeal of the death tax

Voted against Tax cuts

Liberal on Immigration and borders

Voted to allow illegal aliens to collect social security

On tax cuts: "I was a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution." Tim Russert: But you voted against tax cuts. McCain: We need to make tax cuts permanent. We also need spending cuts. Tim: But your vote didn't include spending cuts. McCain: Non-responsive. Mentioned Reagan again.

which is laughable, since the other republicans name drop Reagan all the time, there's only one of them that Reagan actually endorsed and CAMPAIGNED for, thats Ron Paul. Reagan said Ron Paul was the best man for America in 1988, he also camapigned for him in '78.

[PatriotG]

I would like to echo this answer.
One thing is for certain and you can debate me all you like on this
We are already in a recession quite possibly heading for depression

McCains warmonger beliefs will just speed up the process

Plain and simple
We can no longer afford to be be the policemen of the planet.

And I do not belive for a minute that he will resist attacking iran next

No way

I have watched evry debate so far and you can see it in his demeanor and body language

PS
I hadd to add this because it may be trivial to most but not to me

McCain is a disrespectul son of a bitch to Dr paul as is romney and was Giuliani

And we see where giuliani is now

[762x54r]

Welcome to the boards.

Your question is a fair one.

I have been a RP follower (and a registered Republican) for almost two decades (and a registered Republican for longer) watching his one minute speeches on C-span as I moved from state to state.

I have never had a candidate articulate my own views on the role of the state, fiscal policy, foreign policy, civil liberties, like Dr. Paul. I will write him in come November if that is what I have to do. Until then it only matters to me that he stay in the race and continue to articulate his cogent ideas about devolving the federal government and devolving our foreign commitments/entanglements while returning us to a historically successful fiscal policy that we should have never abandoned.

So while your question may be a fair one is is ultimately irrelevant as to why I support him.

[gb13]

BTW, who do you think is the most conservative candidate based on this:

h ttp://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Total_Proposed_Spending_for_All_2008_Candidates

This graph is great. I think someone should make a graph to put right next to it that shows our national debt, and our projected debt in 4 years with each candidates fiscal/spending proposals applied.

[Crickett]

do[/I] think that ten years down the road Ron Paul Republicans might make up a sizeable contingent in the Congress and state assemblies.
More soon (I hope -- damn corporate dilligence filings).

Joe

Hi Joe, You may take your vote elsewhere if your own conscience dictates that..but I will debate the non-intervention thing all night. LOL Our Founders had seen PLENTY of what happens when other countries try to compete in a World Order. They saw Alexander The Great. They saw the Roman Empire. They saw the British Empire. Believe me, in a short 200 years, nothing has changed but technology. Oh, and one other thing. The United States of America. A country that was founded to live in PEACE. A country that was NOT supposed to have entangling alliances other than trade and friendship with ANY other country EVER. One that had a small federal government that did NOT raise high taxes and regulations (that is inevitably tied to wars, and they knew it). A country that was a shining example to the world and indeed an experiment for a country where the people ruled and prosperity and peace was a legacy for and by each of us.

Now we are being convinced that we fear other countries. Or that we NEED them. Or that they NEED us to fix them. That they might hurt us. It takes a very strong man to avoid the brainwashing. It takes a strong Statesman to not be corrupted by lobbyists (McCain not one of them) and special interest money. It takes a strong man to not be corrupted by power, and want to return it to the people. It takes a strong man to stand up to those who continually ridicule, censor and deride him, and maintain temper and wisdom.

Last night McCain said something about how much other countries needed us, because their media was manipulating them, and their rights were being taken away by governments. To me, he was talking about what is going on in this country, NOW, because I have seen it. Not many have. You are very wrong in saying that this Constitution--the document that made us different from EVERY other country, is not relevant in almost every way today as a short 200 years ago. Tyranny is ancient. The USA is still a baby, and losing its way. Now, as we sit here.

I will vote for Ron Paul--but more than that, I am committed to continue this fight to keep this country great. I will vote for any senator and representative that will uphold the constitution and bring our troops home to defend us and get our economy back on track. If RP does not win, it will not even take 4 years to change congress. I do not believe you see the entire picture yet. Good luck wherever your conscience leads you.

[Chabsfromcanada]

People need to stop worrying about whether or not their man "can win". The whole idea of voting is for each individual to be able to have their "say" in the form of a vote.

If you are more inclined to vote for McCain then by all means, that is your choice, and that is your voice in the process. You vote for him, and in that, you are saying "this is the man I want to lead my country, he stands for what I stand for, he represents me and what I believe."

The same can be said for Ron Paul if you were to vote for him.

The question is, which man represents you? It is a question to be taken seriously. Try to ignore what the media tells people. Research for yourself, and find the answers. At the end of your research, you pick your man. Do not worry about who can "beat" Hilary. Worry about casting a vote that will reflect exactly how you feel. The true meaning, in my opinion, of a wasted vote, is a vote that you make, that does not represent you, the individual.

[brandon13830]

Can Paul get the nomination? Sadly no, he can't. Before New Hampshire I thought there was a decent chance but when I saw "Libertarian" New Hampshire vote for McCain I knew that we were pretty much screwed for this election cycle.

I do think that a candidate with Paul's platform could win in the future however, which is why this movement is so important.

[xd9fan]

McCain splits the base....no way you can win with the base split.

[qh4dotcom]

Actually Ron Paul has a good chance to win if Americans care about their bank accounts. Ron Paul has the biggest tax cut. If they are stubborn about voting for another candidate the IRS will make them pay for their defiance.

[qh4dotcom]

I will tell you folks right off the bat that I'm a John McCain supporter. I was in 2000 and I am now. However, I'm trying fairly hard to be open-minded about Dr. Paul, given that I have fiscally conservative and socially moderate-to-liberal views (i.e., government, leave me and mine alone). So please do not respond to this post with accusations of "Troll" or insults of my preferred candidate or declarations that with my views being of such a character I'm backing the wrong man (although I am, of course, inviting these types of responses by alluding to them beforehand).

To put it as neutrally and non-judgmentally as possible: do you folks believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination? Do you believe that Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination? At this point in time, it appears to me as an outsider that Ron Paul's chances are the least of the four remaining candidates and that even though he's still got to have a large warchest (freedomchest?), I'm not sure that he's shown that -- whether his fault of not -- he can break through to achieve anything more than an at-most 10% showing in major primaries.

I'm just curious as to how you dispassionately view your chances in this election cycle.

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)

(Oh, and for the record, while this is my first post, I've been reading the message board for a while.)

For the McCain supporter: Please watch these videos and let me know what you think

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI&v3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-lYKrQPgZM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41CpnoAfbV4

[Peterjar]

Dear OutsiderJoe,

Thanks for your post! We at the forum love such posts cause it gets us thinking. Ron Paul supporters are the thinking type and I surmise that you are too. That's why I believe you actually support Ron Paul, but have at some point been mislead or have misunderstood the executive branch of government.

The executive branch is not a figurehead appointment. Your belief that the president should be a good leader or an example for the nation is misplaced. The presidential branch has seven responsibilities and is co-equal to the Judicial and congressional branches. It is not the temporary appointment of a king or a personality that represents America. The next president should have an adept understanding of the Constitution so to execute his responsibilities faithfully. He should not have to be good looking, charming, brave, or know how to drive a pick-up-truck. If you are looking to appoint someone who makes you feel good then go vote in the peoples choice awards, fill out your MLB Allstar card, or something...just don't vote for John Mccain!

Besides, Ron Paul is an excellent leader. Despite being o the fringe in congress he has had a number of big successes there with legislation.

Peter

[Broadlighter]

Let me say then, clearly: if the Ron Paul campaign was as well managed as a campaign with enthusiastic supporters like you guys deserves, I think he would be doing much better in the polls. I still wouldn't support him -- I just don't think non-interventionism, among other things, is a policy that the Founders of the Constitution would apply to today's world (we can debate this, if you'd like, of course) -- but I can damn well agree with you that his polling numbers might be a bit better if he'd gotten an Ed Rollins or two.


I appreciate your use of the word non-interventionism and not the pejorative isolationism, which is what detractors have tried to paint Ron Paul with. The problem with the current foreign policy is that it fails to take into account that it has had a hand in the current dangerous world we live in. Do we intervene because our national security is at stake or do we pursue that end by proactively secure strategic objectives?

The world of the founders had its dangers, too. The founders wanted to approach it without intervening, yet foreign interests tried damn hard to intervene in the affairs of the U.S. If you look at Ron Paul's popularity around the world, that would suggest that non-interventionism will make more friends than enemies. As far as the rogues running around in the world out there, We have the defensive capacity to deal with them. We don't need to start aggressive wars to put these guys in their place. We do that and we motivate people to align themselves with the rogues.

The reason Ron Paul doesn't have Ed Rollins types is because he only hires people who already agree with him on his planks. You won't see guys like Rollins or David Gergen joining the Ron Paul camp. The politics of compromise isn't going to fly with Ron Paul's supporters.

[IcyPeaceMaker]

I do not believe a brokered convention will be necessary, as I truely believe Dr. Paul will win it outright. Here's why: Romney is $33 M in debt and his daddy has shut off his spending. Huckabee is on the ropes and will be gone after super tuesday. That leaves Paul & McCain.

McCain has scored about 30% of the votes, and true conservatives hate him. In a two man contest, McCain gets 35% tops, Paul wins in a landslide. Ron Paul has won by 70% in every election he's been in. 90% of America has never heard of him, and that means 90% of McCain supporters haven't heard of him either.

Ron Paul's message is what America has been waiting for, to release us from the bondage of the folks who own the FED and it's subsidiary the media. When others, who just like you Joe, see that his views are aligned with their own, they will turn out in record numbers for Ron Paul. Bet the farm on it.

[Dan Klaus]

bump for Outsider Joe - this is a good thread with some very convincing and reasoned opinions...hope you post more - and know your welcome here..

[Zyphlin]

I hate to tell ya buddy, but McCain isn't going to win. Noone that is for Ron Paul would be for John McCain. That means he won't have the votes to go to the Whitehouse.

It looks like we all lose :D

Not true, espicially as time goes on and you gain Ron Paul voters that weren't part of the initial base.

I've just recently decided to vote for Ron Paul. I STRONGELY disagree with his Iraq policy, and agree with his foreign policy in principle but not in the extreme extent he'd wish to go.

However, while the War is a huge issue for me, the amount of domestic issues I agree with Ron Paul on compared to McCain or Romney is gigantic and has outweighed my disagreements with him on the War.

In a primary, I will be voting my principles, even if I don't think he can win. I don't see anyone easily beating McCain, so a vote for Paul is as good as any other and he's the one I agree with most.

I disagree with John McCain in a large amount of ways...I disagree with Hillary on just about everything.

In a general between John McCain and Hillary, I WOULD vote for McCain.

If I honestly thought it'd be a land slide any way, I wouldn't do it...but I don't think that's the case. And voting for a write end on this one due to "principles" is akin to not speeding to hurry and try to get to a dieing realitive because my "principles" tell me not to break the law.

If Ron Paul runs 3rd party he loses any support I would ever have given him. One of the big draws for me is that he is an honest candidate, one that doesn't seem to play politics but just honestly has a message and will tell it to you without trying ot pull strings.

I've watched interview after interview where he's said its running as a Republican or nothing else. Where he's said he won't run 3rd party.

If he ends up running 3rd party, and shows that he's just like every other politician...saying what's beneficial for the time at hand and changing it on a whim...then I don't want him.

The arrogance you display is one of the things that kept me away from Ron Paul up until now. Same for the people that mischaracterize McCain as "Wanting to stay in Iraq for 100" years, when it was hyperbole for the fact he'd stay until he felt the job was complete, no matter how long it took.

Ron Paul's message is getting out, and as the field narrows, you have people that aren't joining him because they worshipping him as the political equivilent of the second coming of christ but because they agree with much, but not all, of what he says. I do hope he wins the primary...I don't see it highly likely, but there's a chance. But if it really catches on its going to take a lot of his hardcore base to understand that as your numbers grow its not going to be people that agree with EVERYTHING Ron Paul says, or people that want to be insulted for not walking in absolute lock step.

[InLoveWithRon]

I've just recently decided to vote for Ron Paul. I STRONGELY disagree with his Iraq policy, and agree with his foreign policy in principle

.

Okay.. I just cannot fathom how you can support the war in Iraq.. I mean, being there is hurting our national security ALOT more than helping it.. The blowback is coming my friend.. Just listen to a soldier's own experience from being there.. Look how stupid it is to be there.. We aren't liberating those people at all. We treat iraqi's like total garbage,

http://www.archive.org/details/Trucking_In_Iraq

And that doesn't even include the 121 soldiers who committed suicide last year over there. And doesnt include the over 1000 additional attempts of soldier suicide..

The fact of the matter is, we only went there for the International bankers to get their oil.. And to open their central banks in that country to control their people like the Federal reserve has controlled us since 1913.. Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded to open central banks in those countries, to control their lending rates, profit from them, and to fix price their economies.. And we also went there for oil ( Iraq directly, and for Rockefeller to build his Exxon oil pipeline through afghanistan, which the Taliban refused to build , even though the US and the taliban were in negotiations to build it since 1997).. And of course Cheney, Bush and his cronies getting rich off of the Industrial military complex..

Have you ever asked yourself why Iran, Cuba, Syria and North Korea are considered enemies of the US?? It's because those are the only 4 countries left on earth that do not have the elite's central banks instilled in those countries. Iraq and Afghanistan are no longer on the list as the central banks were opened in those countries in 2003 and 2004 respectively.

How the heck can you, or anyone for that matter, support a war which has killed thousands of americans, maimed tens of thousands more with debilitating injuries, and has psychologically damaged tens of thousands more for life ??-- and all in the name of a few elite rich men getting more rich.

How can you tell me with a straight face that we should be there after watching that video ?? I will be awaiting your reply.


By the way, thank you for your support of the good doctor.

[Zyphlin]

Okay.. I just cannot fathom how you can support the war in Iraq.. I mean, being there is hurting our national security ALOT more than helping it.. The blowback is coming my friend.. Just listen to a soldier's own experience from being there.. Look how stupid it is to be there.. We aren't liberating those people at all. We treat iraqi's like total garbage,

http://www.archive.org/details/Trucking_In_Iraq

I believe we will have more trouble, in the present and definitely 5-10 years down the line, by up and abandoning them where they're at right now than investing a bit more time in it with an administration willing to let the General decide what's best, step out of it completely, and just make it known to them that they want it wrapped up FAST. Let the administration focus on the pressure of the Iraqi government.

I think a strategy change is needed, but I don't agree with pulling out immedietely or in any shape or form setting a public deadline.

The blowback in regards to Iraq is going to be coming at this point either way. I don't think another year or two of us there is goign to make a gigantic difference in the amount of blowback. Nothing that's been linked to me by ron paul supporters has changed my mind on that.

And I'm sorry, the numerous soliders I personally know that have been over there and tell me a COMPLETELY different story than the handful of ones that are saying these things weigh more to me.



The fact of the matter is, we only went there for the International bankers to get their oil.. And to open their central banks in that country to control their people like the Federal reserve has controlled us since 1913.. Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded to open central banks in those countries, to control their lending rates, profit from them, and to fix price their economies.. And we also went there for oil ( Iraq directly, and for Rockefeller to build his Exxon oil pipeline through afghanistan, which the Taliban refused to build , even though the US and the taliban were in negotiations to build it since 1997).. And of course Cheney, Bush and his cronies getting rich off of the Industrial military complex..

There's no "fact" there. Nothing there was "fact". ALL of it is speculation and opinion. That's one of the things that kept me from supporting Ron Paul, people like you that state your OPINIONS as if its absolute fact and acting like anyone that doesn't believe it is an idiot. I respect your opinion, I humbly disagree, and don't see this elaborate conspiracy you see. You spouting off about some conspiracy isn't going to change my mind on it.


How the heck can you, or anyone for that matter, support a war which has killed thousands of americans, maimed tens of thousands more with debilitating injuries, and has psychologically damaged tens of thousands more for life ??-- and all in the name of a few elite rich men getting more rich.

Oh I don't know...because me, and anyone else for that matter, may not follow lock step in your personal beliefs and opinions that this is just a war "in the name of a few elite rich men getting more rich".


How can you tell me with a straight face that we should be there after watching that video ?? I will be awaiting your reply.

Because a single guy, who is an activist, accounts of it with a particular squad does not constitute that its the 100% truth of everyone...or the majority...of what's going on over there...nor do I take one activists words against the word of all the ones I personally know over there. The military is a huge thing, I do not doubt there are a number of jerks, a-holes, and bad apples in it...that does not mean that is the norm.

[InLoveWithRon]

There's no "fact" there. Nothing there was "fact". ALL of it is speculation and opinion. That's one of the things that kept me from supporting Ron Paul, people like you that state your OPINIONS as if its absolute fact and acting like anyone that doesn't believe it is an idiot. I respect your opinion, I humbly disagree, and don't see this elaborate conspiracy you see. You spouting off about some conspiracy isn't going to change my mind on it..

Everything I stated is fact.. I have so much concrete evidence to support it, it would make your head spin 1000 times..

It is a fact that the same people who are affiliated with the federal reserve opened central banks in Afghanistan and Iraq to control their economies.. it is a concrete fact, it cannot be denied.. it is a concrete fact that the only countries who don't employ the same central banks in the world presently are Iran, Syria, North Korea and Cuba.. All considered the biggest enemies of the US

I can shoot 100 links minimum, with factual evidence supporting this..

I can also supply concrete evidence that in 1997, the US (namely Exxon oil run by Rockefeller) was in negotiaitons with the taliban in 1997 (and 98) to build an oil pipeline through afghanistan to the caspian sea.. This was because Exxon found oil to the north of Afghanistan, and needed a pipeline to run through afghanistan to secure it.. These negotiations were fronted by Colin Powell..

And i can also give you unequivocable evidence that a week after the taliban rejected the pipeline deal in 1997 (because the taliban felt they were being ripped off and wanted a bigger cut), the US and Britain ran news stories (just a week after the deal fell through) claiming the taliban were terrorists all of a sudden and needed to be apprehended..

Coincidence huh ? As soon as the US doesn't get the oil pipeline deal they want, they fabricate a story around the globe that the taliban are all of a sudden a threat to the world and are a terrorist organization.. These are facts buddy.. You can claim whatever you want, but these facts cannot be denied.. Unless you are in denial of the truth.

[Catatonic]

I believe we will have more trouble, in the present and definitely 5-10 years down the line, by up and abandoning them where they're at right now than investing a bit more time in it with an administration willing to let the General decide what's best, step out of it completely, and just make it known to them that they want it wrapped up FAST. Let the administration focus on the pressure of the Iraqi government.

I think a strategy change is needed, but I don't agree with pulling out immedietely or in any shape or form setting a public deadline.

The blowback in regards to Iraq is going to be coming at this point either way. I don't think another year or two of us there is goign to make a gigantic difference in the amount of blowback. Nothing that's been linked to me by ron paul supporters has changed my mind on that.

And I'm sorry, the numerous soliders I personally know that have been over there and tell me a COMPLETELY different story than the handful of ones that are saying these things weigh more to me.




There's no "fact" there. Nothing there was "fact". ALL of it is speculation and opinion. That's one of the things that kept me from supporting Ron Paul, people like you that state your OPINIONS as if its absolute fact and acting like anyone that doesn't believe it is an idiot. I respect your opinion, I humbly disagree, and don't see this elaborate conspiracy you see. You spouting off about some conspiracy isn't going to change my mind on it.



Oh I don't know...because me, and anyone else for that matter, may not follow lock step in your personal beliefs and opinions that this is just a war "in the name of a few elite rich men getting more rich".



Because a single guy, who is an activist, accounts of it with a particular squad does not constitute that its the 100% truth of everyone...or the majority...of what's going on over there...nor do I take one activists words against the word of all the ones I personally know over there. The military is a huge thing, I do not doubt there are a number of jerks, a-holes, and bad apples in it...that does not mean that is the norm.

You believe we should continue to occupy a soverign nation, against their will and to their detriment, for our own good?

[Todd]

Where did Outsider Joe go??? After everyone was so polite and receptive to answer "debate" an honest assessment of his guy. Our debate with him was more fair than our guys gotten from the McCain establishment.

[mahopaul]

Well, my friend, its time for a little straight talk. If you have concerns about my conservative record, just ask my conservative friends Feingold, Kennedy, Lieberman, and Clinton. Also I've recently been endorsed by known conservatives Schwarzenegger and Giuliani.

As far as the economy, I've got Greenspan's book. He had some good ideas, but we should take them a little further. I would like to see Bernake set interest rates at zero.

And I'm not mentally unstable.

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

[Ron Paul Fan]

Here's some straight talk for ya, Ron Paul's chances are slim to none. He likely won't win any states on Super Tuesday. They're talking about Maine, but I doubt it. Even if he did win Maine, big deal as McCain will probably win California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona, and a host of others. Huckabee is strong in the south east, Romney in the mountain west. Ron Paul will not be the next President of the United States. It certainly looks as though McCain will be the nominee so you'll have someone to support. But I doubt he beats Obama as people are ready for a change, not another George W. Bush. If he's against Hillary, it could be interesting though. It's hard to estimate how many independents would vote McCain just because they hate Hillary. I'd say at this point, either Hillary or Obama will be the next President. McCain has the next best chance, then Romney, then Huckabee, then Ron Paul.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Well, my friend, its time for a little straight talk. If you have concerns about my conservative record, just ask my conservative friends Feingold, Kennedy, Lieberman, and Clinton. Also I've recently been endorsed by known conservatives Schwarzenegger and Giuliani.

As far as the economy, I've got Greenspan's book. He had some good ideas, but we should take them a little further. I would like to see Bernake set interest rates at zero.

And I'm not mentally unstable.

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

If I were drinking something when I read this it would have ended up spit all over my keyboard. I nominate this for post of the year lmao :D

[IcyPeaceMaker]

Defeatism is rarely a pretty thing, and your doom & gloom scenario just dosen't add up.

Ron is second tier, behind only one man, McCain. Conservatives hate McCain for a number of reasons, but mostly because he's a stealth liberal. Straight up, McCain can't beat Ron Paul.

[Zyphlin]

You believe we should continue to occupy a soverign nation, against their will and to their detriment, for our own good?

One, I don't think its to their detriment.

Two, if their government formally asks us to leave, I have no problem with us leaving.

To my knowledge, that hasn't happened. If you got a link for it, you'll likely have helped change my mind.

[IcyPeaceMaker]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/51624/

There is alot more support in Iraq for an immediate w/drawl of U.S. troops.

[mahopaul]

"If you got a link for it, you'll likely have helped change my mind."

http://www.everydaycitizen.com/2007/09/79_of_iraqis_oppose_our_occupa.html

[Zyphlin]

Icy, thank you for useful links. Maho, linking me to a specifically antiwar website as some kind of "proof" is pointless.

The USA Today poll is telling. That said, they should take it up with their government, as if you note I said when they're government asks us to leave.

The alternet is a more interesting one. Its back from May, it was put forth as nonbinding, and still a binding one hasn't been put up yet.

I would reject any demand by them that WE put time limits on ourselves. What our military and our government puts down should be on us. HOWEVER...if THEY would like to saddle themselves with a time table, saying "By X date we demand that the U.S. military removes itself from the country" then I am completely fine with that.

Likewise, if they say "We demand an immediete pull out of U.S. Troops" i would also support that.

I won't support them telling us "YOU must choose to pull out now." or "YOU must set a deadline". Nope, doesn't work that way. If their governing body decides they no longer wish us there, they can tell us to go.

[LEK]

Thank you very much, George W. Bush.

AND: Bill Clinton, HW Bush, and the list goes on...

[IcyPeaceMaker]

Ann Coulter would vote for Hillary before McCain
February 1st, 2008 by Matt Hawes
In a move that illustrates the discontent of conservatives over the progress of John McCain so far this primary season, Ann Coulter announced last night on “Hannity and Colmes” that she would vote for Hillary before she would vote for McCain. I don’t think I have to go into detail about how big of an admission this is.

Our job is to remind Ms. Coulter and others that it is still not too late to stop Senator McCain’s rise - by voting for Ron Paul, the consistent limited-government conservative.

Don’t worry, Ann. You don’t have to vote for Hillary - just throw your support behind Dr. Paul and let’s take back the Republican Party!

[Goldwater Conservative]

I'd say at this point, either Hillary or Obama will be the next President. McCain has the next best chance, then Romney, then Huckabee, then Ron Paul.

So you're saying there's a chance! :D

[OutsiderJoe]

Where did Outsider Joe go??? After everyone was so polite and receptive to answer "debate" an honest assessment of his guy. Our debate with him was more fair than our guys gotten from the McCain establishment.

I'm still here -- just that, much as I love you guys, I haven't had time to read any of your posts today. Also, although I respect many of your attempts to convert me to Dr. Paul, you're wasting your virtual breath (e-breath?): I'm not settling on John McCain. I'm not rationalizing my vote for John McCain as the best choice to beat Hillary. I'm actually incredibly enthusiastic and excited about John McCain as a candidate. He is a man who I believe has shown himself to be a principled leader who would cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Dr. Paul has some interesting ideas. But ultimately they're taken too far and I think read the Constitution incorrectly. This idea that Lincoln is a villain is, in my humble opinion, fairly far-fetched. I of course understand the arguments made against his expansion of federal power, etc. (in law school I was often, for the sake of argument, voicing those positions just to piss off the liberal big-government professors and classmates), but the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

The world is a very different place than it was in 1787. The world is much more integrated economically, culturally, and militarily. I just do not think it possible or realistic to take a George Washington Farewell Address approach to world affairs. Assuming the Japanese never bombed Hawaii, should we have stayed out of World War II while black boots crushed others? (I just picked that example off the top of my mind; please don't think that I'm trying to pull the old y'all-support-Hitler-don't-you trick.)

I'm happy to discuss any of these things with you and would be quite interested in having a lively debate about this. (Ron Paul supporters -- or at least those on this board -- are among the most intelligent I've come across...as I'm sure those of you with big egos know.) But please also remember that I will not vote for Ron Paul, that I will vote for John McCain, and that I'd prefer to not be inundated with YouTube videos (some actually offensive -- like the Manchurian Candidate trash) and arguments against the man.

(And that's not to say I'm in love with McCain. As expressed earlier, I take GREAT umbrage with his crass appeals to the Religious Right and think the attacks on Romney at the recent debate were ridiculous and low-handed. Along those lines, I also think Paul and Huckabee were treated abysmally by Anderson Cooper.)

Sorry for the very general response.

Joe

[FreeTraveler]

If Ron Paul runs 3rd party he loses any support I would ever have given him. One of the big draws for me is that he is an honest candidate, one that doesn't seem to play politics but just honestly has a message and will tell it to you without trying ot pull strings.

I've watched interview after interview where he's said its running as a Republican or nothing else. Where he's said he won't run 3rd party.

If he ends up running 3rd party, and shows that he's just like every other politician...saying what's beneficial for the time at hand and changing it on a whim...then I don't want him.

Please show me ONE interview where he's said that he absolutely says he won't run 3rd party. Dr. Paul has always been careful not to completely rule out that possibility. He has definately said it's not what he wants, it's not in the plans... but he's also said he'll keep running as long as we support him, and if McCain seals the deal on Super Tuesday, Dr. Paul will HAVE to go third party if he's to keep his pledge to his supporters.

[raystone]

cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Hopefully, Outsider Joe has a big list of "among other things", because the only thing McCain has promised to cut his porkbarrel spending, which amounts to 1/2 of 1% of all federal spending. Strong image? not sure what that means but Bush's imperial hubris hasn't exactly endeared us with the world, and McCain will compound that with throwing out "gooks" and of course singing"bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" , and yes, now that he has 30 major backers from the military industrial complex, he'll be singing that as he gives the "commence firing" order.

[InLoveWithRon]

The USA Today poll is telling. That said, they should take it up with their government, as if you note I said when they're government asks us to leave.

.

Unbelieveable, how naive can you possibly be ?? Like in Afghanistan, the United States "hand picked" the leadership in Iraq to suit their own agenda.. Of course the present Iraqi government is going to want them to stay and rape that country of resources... Because the US put allies (paid them off) as puppets..

It was the same in 1953 in Iran when the CIA covertly replaced the iranian leadership with the Shah.. For their own agenda, and not for the good of their country or the Iranian people.

My goodness, wake up man !

[InLoveWithRon]

Because a single guy, who is an activist, accounts of it with a particular squad does not constitute that its the 100% truth of everyone...or the majority...of what's going on over there...nor do I take one activists words against the word of all the ones I personally know over there. The military is a huge thing, I do not doubt there are a number of jerks, a-holes, and bad apples in it...that does not mean that is the norm.

stop lying !! I have met soldiers as well, and they agree with my stance.. And to further make your comment look foolish, Ron Paul has received THREE TIMES more military donations than ANY other candidate..

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=109049

If Ron's position of the war was so not the norm as you state, then he wouldn't be getting THREE times more money from military personnel over the other candidates.

Again, your comments look extremely foolish.. Sorry if the facts go right over your head..

[InLoveWithRon]

To support my last post.. Here is the total for Military donations to candidates-

Barack Obama $51,933
Dennis J Kucinich $1,432
Hillary Rodham Clinton $33,681
John Edwards $8,667
John S McCain $51,369
Mike Gravel $260
Mike Huckabee $30,220
Mitt Romney $22,966
Ron Paul $162,527
Rudolph W Giuliani 12480

Ron Paul has more donations from the military than Huckabee, McCain, Giuliani and Romney COMBINED !!!.. So stop spewing the military rhetoric that they want to stay in Iraq.

heh

[OutsiderJoe]

So...I know it's gotta be a pretty depressing night for you folks, but does anyone want to reevaluate how likely it is that this man will get our party's nomination?

It's not looking likely, guys. Maybe you'll still pull it out, but time's running out. (And please don't try to suggest that a man who can't win a single state will miraculously control the convention -- frankly, that's naive.)

Sorry, guys. Back in 2000 when it was clear Bush would run away with the nomination I was depressed like I'm sure you are now.

[stilltrying]

Just to vent. I hope more than anything that RP can win Pres. But I think this government and corporations will make it impossible for him to do such by rigging the election in some way shape or form. Its been done before (George W - times 2). Please dont flame as I am wanting RP as much as anybody in these forums to get this presidency but I have a strong feeling of what elites will try to do to prevent that.

I will not sacrifice my vote for anyone, its RP or write in RP. No compromise.

[liberteebell]

I'm still here -- just that, much as I love you guys, I haven't had time to read any of your posts today. Also, although I respect many of your attempts to convert me to Dr. Paul, you're wasting your virtual breath (e-breath?): I'm not settling on John McCain. I'm not rationalizing my vote for John McCain as the best choice to beat Hillary. I'm actually incredibly enthusiastic and excited about John McCain as a candidate. He is a man who I believe has shown himself to be a principled leader who would cut the size of government and project a strong image of the country (among other things).

Dr. Paul has some interesting ideas. But ultimately they're taken too far and I think read the Constitution incorrectly. This idea that Lincoln is a villain is, in my humble opinion, fairly far-fetched. I of course understand the arguments made against his expansion of federal power, etc. (in law school I was often, for the sake of argument, voicing those positions just to piss off the liberal big-government professors and classmates), but the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

The world is a very different place than it was in 1787. The world is much more integrated economically, culturally, and militarily. I just do not think it possible or realistic to take a George Washington Farewell Address approach to world affairs. Assuming the Japanese never bombed Hawaii, should we have stayed out of World War II while black boots crushed others? (I just picked that example off the top of my mind; please don't think that I'm trying to pull the old y'all-support-Hitler-don't-you trick.)

I'm happy to discuss any of these things with you and would be quite interested in having a lively debate about this. (Ron Paul supporters -- or at least those on this board -- are among the most intelligent I've come across...as I'm sure those of you with big egos know.) But please also remember that I will not vote for Ron Paul, that I will vote for John McCain, and that I'd prefer to not be inundated with YouTube videos (some actually offensive -- like the Manchurian Candidate trash) and arguments against the man.

(And that's not to say I'm in love with McCain. As expressed earlier, I take GREAT umbrage with his crass appeals to the Religious Right and think the attacks on Romney at the recent debate were ridiculous and low-handed. Along those lines, I also think Paul and Huckabee were treated abysmally by Anderson Cooper.)

Sorry for the very general response.

Joe

There seems to be a common misconception about Ron Paul's foreign policy and you've parroted it here. He is NOT the roll-over-and-play-dead pacifist that he's been made out to be. He wants a strong national DEFENSE; take care of America by closing our borders and protecting American soil. Just because he is against an illegal (unconstitutional), undeclared war of aggression in Iraq doesn't mean he's against going to war if/when necessary. He did vote in favor of going into Afghanistan.

Ron Paul has a very well thought out foreign policy--this man cannot be summed up in bumper sticker slogans or sound bites. He correctly ties it all together with our economy and yes, our place in the world. Our being the world's policeman is bankrupting this country. There's more than one way to destroy a country, you know.

Read his book, "A Foreign Policy of Freedom". Just reading the first few chapters will open your eyes.

That said, since you are supporting mccain, I presume you're in favor of continuing this war. So I have some questions for you: Are you posting from Iraq? If not, why not? Looks to me like those who are so in favor of continuing should be signing up for the military in droves and instead, I hear recruitment is down. I'm sure there's a recruiting office near you.

Also, could you please define what "winning" this war is? How many lives are enough? How much more bankrupt should our country be before we call it quits? What should we cut to pay for it? Cut seniors off social security and medicare? How 'bout subsidized housing and food stamps? Or would you prefer a large income tax increase? What about a huge increase in the excise taxes on gasoline?

Certainly, you are free to vote for whomever you please. But past history being the best predictor of future behavior, I'll take the one with the impeccable record. I'm saying NO to war, amnesty, taxes and a bankrupt country.

[qh4dotcom]

To: OutsiderJoe

Don't forget that Hillary and MSM can't wait to get their hands on McCain should he get the nomination...they have so much stuff they can attack him with..you're basically voting for a loser.

[Desperado]

As for me, I think Dr. Paul is a fundamentally honest, intelligent, and good man. Nonetheless, in this day of soundbite politics and a demagogue'd electorate, Ron Paul doesn't appear to be able to get any traction with the broaded electorate. So does he have a chance? :)



As you say Ron Paul is everything John McCain is not,
Honestly at this point RP's chances don't look good but hopefully he might consider a third party run.
No matter, If McCain get the nomination I will work my hardest for whoever is running against him.