Daily Kos quotes Ron Paul Forums | Paul Ryan Pick Swings Libertarians to Obama

[FrankRep]

Ryan Pick Swings Libertarians to Obama (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/11/1118993/-Ryan-Pick-Swings-Libertarians-to-Obama)


Daily Kos
Aug 11, 2012



After following several links to different places last night, I somehow ended up at a Ron Paul forum. I decided to stick around for a few minutes to see what they thought of the Ryan pick.

I don't know what I expected, the Paul-bots seem as crazy to me as Ryan, but apparently not. Beyond the predictable ongoing outrage that Paul is not the nominee, and some rather oblique references to a "coo" (LOL) at the convention, they had some surprising things to say.
...

Most of them will either hold their noses and vote Obama, not vote at all or write in someone else.

And for fun, a few quotes.



Paul "add 28 years of deficits to the national debt" Ryan. Nice going assholes. I will vote for Obama now to invoke my severest rebuke of the Republican Party. I apologize if I caved in some way to the false left-right paradigm.

Obama 2012!

- anaconda (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?385786-Romney-to-select-Paul-Ryan-for-VP-slot&p=4576203&viewfull=1#post4576203)


Now thats what I'm talking about!


I'm ready to jump aboard the Obama train just to shut down these GOP moderates. Anyone else with me?

- brandon (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?385786-Romney-to-select-Paul-Ryan-for-VP-slot&p=4576131&viewfull=1#post4576131)



Yes! We are with you.


GOP establisment has superseded Obama as my enemy.


SOURCE:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/11/1118993/-Ryan-Pick-Swings-Libertarians-to-Obama

[cindy25]

not to Obama, but maybe Gary Johnson.

[Brett85]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

[pcosmar]

not to Obama, but maybe Gary Johnson.

Not even,,
well, maybe some of the gullible ones who are grasping at straw.

I don't care for Obama and will never vote for him.. But in an honest assessment I do think a Romney-Ryan will be worse.

I am hoping Tampa results in sanity (by some miracle)
This shit sucks.

[Sematary]

Since I live in Ct. a vote for anyone but Obama is technically a wasted vote because he will win this state by a landslide no matter whom the opposition is. Such is life in one of the most democrat leaning states in America. Regardless, my vote has and always will, belong to Ron Paul. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will go down in flames because Romney doesn't have a clue and Ryans budget would destroy the economy while benefiting (again) the wealthy and the military industrial complex.

[thoughtomator]

I have been speculating about the possibility of voting Obama to punish the Romney camp for cheating us out of the nomination, but when push comes to shove there's no way I am going to dirty my hands with the blood of innocents by affirmatively voting for a psychotic mass murderer.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Anyone who calls themselves a "Libertarian" and votes for Obama in 2012, knowing all he's done as President, is a retard.

[Brett85]

Since I live in Ct. a vote for anyone but Obama is technically a wasted vote because he will win this state by a landslide no matter whom the opposition is.

That's the same with me, except that I live in a heavily Republican state, where my vote won't make any difference. So when people say that a vote for a 3rd party candidate is a vote for Obama, I remind them that that isn't true in the state where I live. It makes absolutely no difference who I vote for. I'd probably be more likely to vote for the Romney/Ryan ticket if I lived in one of the swing states that actually determine the election. But I don't live in one of those states, so I don't see the point of holding my nose and voting for the lesser of two evils when my vote will have no sway on the outcome of the election anyway.

[July]

What is the difference between holding your nose to vote for Obama, versus holding your nose to vote for Romney? Is Ryan really worse than Biden?

Anyway it's not the popular vote that counts, but the electoral college, and Obama is already currently ahead there.

I can't bring myself to vote for Obama. I don't even think he is less worse on foriegn policy, he is just less transparent.

[The Goat]

I'll vote Gary Johnson just so my vote gets counted against R's and D's. I'm in SC so Romney is winning here anyway. although I would love to see Obama get SC just so the Republicans see how big a mistake they made with Romney).

[The Goat]

What is the difference between holding your nose to vote for Obama, versus holding your nose to vote for Romney? Is Ryan really worse than Biden?

Romney/Ryan will push Israel to attack Iran so we can be in another war. I think Obama keeps us out of that war but finds a few more to get involved in. IMO Obama is the lesser of 2 evils. would never vote for him though.

[Brett85]

What is the difference between holding your nose to vote for Obama, versus holding your nose to vote for Romney?

People on this forum will relentlessly bash anyone who says that they're going to vote for Romney, while those who say that they're going to vote for Obama are usually praised or ignored.

[BSU kid]

Either way the government is going to hell, I won't vote for either. I can't believe those idiots are for Obama!

Clearly they learned nothing from Ron Paul at all.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Let's go to some random Internet forum where members are anonymous, pick out a couple of posts, and declare libertarians are flocking to Obama.

Got to love journalism.

[July]

Let's go to some random Internet forum where members are anonymous, pick out a couple of posts, and declare libertarians are flocking to Obama.

Got to love journalism.

I know, right. It's just as bad as that other article declaring that the Ryan pick was a gift to libertarians. I guess it's not a bad thing they are fighting over our votes like this, but man.

[juleswin]

I have been speculating about the possibility of voting Obama to punish the Romney camp for cheating us out of the nomination, but when push comes to shove there's no way I am going to dirty my hands with the blood of innocents by affirmatively voting for a psychotic mass murderer.

Now that is one post that will not be showing up in any liberal site post. But then again, its all about strategy. Is Romney going to be any less psychotic? or any less of a murderer on the inncoent? My guess is that he will be just as bad as Obama, so that cancels pyschotic murderer charge out. But now voting for Obama will give us a better chance to end the killing and vote for a peace and liberty candidate in 2016.

I have seriously thought about voting for Obama to prevent Romney from winning but we will see while I continue to think about my choice

[Dr.3D]

People don't have to vote for Obama, all they have to do is not vote for Romney and the end result will be the same.

[evilfunnystuff]

People on this forum will relentlessly bash anyone who says that they're going to vote for Romney, while those who say that they're going to vote for Obama are usually praised or ignored.

I think the people who say they would vote Romney tend to think Romney would be preferable, which is simply laughable as demonstrated by the Ryan pick.

I think those threatening to vote for Barry tend to be doing it out of spite, while hoping it would give us a strategic advantage, by keeping the "day to day" repubs engaged in the battle against expanding govt. rather than defending the republican brand of the same product.

Also, they tend to feel we have a better chance for a liberty candidate in 2016 if the incumbent is a dem.

I would never vote for O'bombus, but can see the logic of those who say they will, I can't say the same of those pimpin' for Romney.

[juleswin]

Romney/Ryan will push Israel to attack Iran so we can be in another war. I think Obama keeps us out of that war but finds a few more to get involved in. IMO Obama is the lesser of 2 evils. would never vote for him though.

Nonsense, Obama is just as hawkish as Romney is, Obama is just smart to keep his mouth shut about it. I believe if Obama would get away with it, he will nuke all of Israel's percieved enemies killing all the civilians along with their military. We are talking about a man here who killed a 17yr for no apparanet reason

[juleswin]

People on this forum will relentlessly bash anyone who says that they're going to vote for Romney, while those who say that they're going to vote for Obama are usually praised or ignored.

Because it hurts more when family is the one twisting the knife.

[kathy88]

Great RPFs on record at the Kos as pro- Obama. well done trolls.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I've said time and time again that the board needs a post limit to see certain forums so that journalists can't quote the idiots who say stuff like what is in the article.

[MelissaWV]

I've said time and time again that the board needs a post limit to see certain forums so that journalists can't quote the idiots who say stuff like this.

Do you really think a journalist can't post a hundred or a thousand little response posts and gain access within a day or two? lol

[DerailingDaTrain]

Do you really think a journalist can't post a hundred or a thousand little response posts and gain access within a day or two? lol

With how this board treats new members (especially ones that people perceive as not being actual supporters) I don't think they would make it past 30 posts without being banned or neg repped to oblivion.

[trey4sports]

Anyone who calls themselves a "Libertarian" and votes for Obama in 2012, knowing all he's done as President, is a retard.

Really, because Mitt will take us in another direction?

[MelissaWV]

With how this board treats new members (especially ones that people perceive as not being actual supporters) I don't think they would make it past 30 posts without being banned or neg repped to oblivion.

Not really. I did not say tey would actually post opinions.

Just post "lol" and "No one but Paul" and "+rep" and "wow" and see how fast the post count flies.

[DerailingDaTrain]

Not really. I did not say tey would actually post opinions.

Just post "lol" and "No one but Paul" and "+rep" and "wow" and see how fast the post count flies.

Then a mod would ban them under the new "low value post" rule.

It seriously irritates me that some of the members here (especially anaconda and brandon who have been Paul supporters since 07) would even consider voting for Obama.

[ctiger2]

A vote for Obama IS a vote for Romney. They would be only marginally different as presidents. Both fascist dictators.

[TomtheTinker]

Talk about cherry picking

[brandon]

Well at least there's a compelling argument to be made in favor of voting for Obama. I don't see any such argument about other ways to spend/not spend my vote.

[brandon]

They would be only marginally different as presidents.

Right, but if Romney loses we can double down on our efforts to change the GOP. If he wins it's validation that moderates can still win and they will control the party. There's really a lot at stake here beyond the obvious.

[moostraks]

Then a mod would ban them under the new "low value post" rule.

It seriously irritates me that some of the members here (especially anaconda and brandon who have been Paul supporters since 07) would even consider voting for Obama.

Why? There isn't a whit's worth of difference really between the two choices and there is a legitimate case to be made for teaching the GOP a lesson about blowback not to mention the potential to run a candidate next round which is less likely in the case of an incumbent. Of course one can always vote for the GOP candidate and play the hopey changey card being sold to them just like Obama supporters got to play this time.

[The Free Hornet]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

4 more years of a lame duck Obama versus an increasingly hostile tea party faction or 4 to 8 years of Romney who will eviscerate the liberty movement within the GOP and with little chance to put up a liberty GOP candidate in 2016? Enjoy the wait to 2020!

How is this even a contest? Of course, I'll vote Johnson or Goode or use a Sharpie to write Ron Paul on the screen. Were it to fall on just me to pick Obama or Romney, it is no contest. I would pick not Romney.

[roho76]

I would never vote for Obama. The last thing that guy needs is a bigger ego. Write in RP, vote for Johnson, or abstain. Those are my three options. A vote for Obama, even if to punish the Repugs, is a vote for murder, period.

[The Free Hornet]

I would never vote for Obama. The last thing that guy needs is a bigger ego. Write in RP, vote for Johnson, or abstain. Those are my three options. A vote for Obama, even if to punish the Repugs, is a vote for murder, period.

That is a very good point. A vote for Romeny would be the same.

Odds are it doesn't matter who any of us supports so it is best to vote your conscience and shrink the thug-in-chief's margin of victory.

[DerailingDaTrain]

Why? There isn't a whit's worth of difference really between the two choices and there is a legitimate case to be made for teaching the GOP a lesson about blowback not to mention the potential to run a candidate next round which is less likely in the case of an incumbent. Of course one can always vote for the GOP candidate and play the hopey changey card being sold to them just like Obama supporters got to play this time.

Yeah. I'm sure you will teach them a lesson

:rolleyes:

[moostraks]

Yeah. I'm sure you will teach them a lesson

:rolleyes:

You are a serious pain in the butt. I said there is a case to be made for not joining the hold your nose and vote against Obama by voting Mitt crowd. I did not say what I was going to do personally. I am currently of the I don't give a crap crowd with these two choices and have yet to decide just where my vote will go. Stop making assumptions. I am sure you will shake things up if you were to vote for Mittens if that is your choice in this two party theater we are seeing...

[Anti Federalist]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

Which came first?

[Anti Federalist]

People on this forum will relentlessly bash anyone who says that they're going to vote for Romney, while those who say that they're going to vote for Obama are usually praised or ignored.

Voting for either one, regardless of where you live, is a total sell out of the principles we're supposed to be all about here.

That said, from a purely political standpoint, a Romney win would be a disaster for what we are supposed to be doing here, and would set back our efforts by decades.

[Anti Federalist]

People don't have to vote for Obama, all they have to do is not vote for Romney and the end result will be the same.

Thread winner!

[Brett85]

Voting for either one, regardless of where you live, is a total sell out of the principles we're supposed to be all about here.

That said, from a purely political standpoint, a Romney win would be a disaster for what we are supposed to be doing here, and would set back our efforts by decades.

The thing I don't like about all of this is this whole idea of group think, that you aren't allowed to vote a certain way because you're a member of some club. I'm on the record as saying that I won't vote for Romney this time, but if he becomes President, I won't rule out voting to re-elect him if I think that he's leading our country in the right direction overall. But my decision not to vote for him this time around has nothing to do with people telling me that I'm not allowed to vote for him, or else I'll be kicked out of the "liberty movement." That type of tactic that people here use I simply despise, to be honest. Libertarianism is supposed to be an ideology where people think for themselves, not engage in some type of group think, where every member of the group has to vote a certain way. Every single individual simply needs to think for themselves, rather than feeling like they have to engage in group think and just do whatever the group says to do.

[Anti Federalist]

The thing I don't like about all of this is this whole idea of group think, that you aren't allowed to vote a certain way because you're a member of some club. I'm on the record as saying that I won't vote for Romney this time, but if he becomes President, I won't rule out voting to re-elect him if I think that he's leading our country in the right direction overall. But my decision not to vote for him this time around has nothing to do with people telling me that I'm not allowed to vote for him, or else I'll be kicked out of the "liberty movement." That type of tactic that people here use I simply despise, to be honest. Libertarianism is supposed to be an ideology where people think for themselves, not engage in some type of group think, where every member of the group has to vote a certain way. Every single individual simply needs to think for themselves, rather than feeling like they have to engage in group think and just do whatever the group says to do.

Meh, sometimes collective action has to be taken.

Politics is, unfortunately, one of those times.

Of course, you're free to do whatever you wish, and I'm not in the business of drumming people out of anything, but, the fact is, a unified vote and voice is what will get the message across to the GOP leadership that they will lose, over and over and over again if they continue this direction and ignore us.

[Anti Federalist]

Shameless cross post that says what I think about this.


I hope that Mutt gets a mud hole stomped in his ass come November, and that it is perfectly clear that the reason for that is because "we" sat on our hands.

I don't want the mainstreamers to like us, or even understand us.

I want them to only do two things, march their dumb asses into a voting booth and hold their nose for a change, and then get the hell out of the way.

The GOP has no one to blame for the coming train wreck other than themselves.

We gave them an honorable family man, with a thirty year record of integrity and adherence to the constitution, who was the only man with a realistic chance of "beating" Obama, by bringing in young, undecided and disenfranchised voters.

They, the establishment GOP, in turn, rejected that, spit in our face, mocked us, scorned us, beat us up and had us arrested, among other things.

Fuck them.

No One But Paul

[AbVag]

People don't have to vote for Obama, all they have to do is not vote for Romney and the end result will be the same.

As long as Romney loses.

[pcosmar]

Every single individual simply needs to think for themselves, rather than feeling like they have to engage in group think and just do whatever the group says to do.

I do, as do most in this thread.. And I get annoyed with people trying to push the GOP down our throats like they are some kind of saviors.

I won't vote for Obama,, but he may well be the better choice here.

Bush gave us the Patriot Act and TSA,, Obama only continued them.
Romney gave the Health care,, Obama only expanded on that. (it is a copy of Romneycare)

Obama has been delaying War with Iran,,for whatever his reasons.. I don't Care. McCain would have jumped at the chance to attack and Romney Has promised to.

I won't vote for either,, but we will (barring some miracle) be stuck with one of them.

And the GOP can kiss my ass. Their actions through this whole primary are purely criminal.

[AuH20]

A vote for Obama is lunacy if you're a true RP supporter. I'm going to sit this one out just like 2008. No vote for either major party.

[Brett85]

It's just that I do know people who voted for Ron Paul in the primary who are going to vote for Romney in the general election. One of them is a friend of mine I went to college with, and I was pretty surprised he voted for Ron in the primary, to be honest. He's come a long ways since then, becoming much more liberty oriented. (As have I) But I just don't believe that his support for Romney in the general election means that he was any less of a Ron Paul supporter than those RP supporters who are going to vote 3rd party or vote for Obama.

[JoshLowry]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.


Anyone who calls themselves a "Libertarian" and votes for Obama in 2012, knowing all he's done as President, is a retard.

Tha usual suspects.

Do you think the people posting here are going to be corralled into doing something that benefits the GOP and/or Romney?


Shameless cross post that says what I think about this.


I hope that Mutt gets a mud hole stomped in his ass come November, and that it is perfectly clear that the reason for that is because "we" sat on our hands.

I don't want the mainstreamers to like us, or even understand us.

I want them to only do two things, march their dumb asses into a voting booth and hold their nose for a change, and then get the hell out of the way.

The GOP has no one to blame for the coming train wreck other than themselves.

We gave them an honorable family man, with a thirty year record of integrity and adherence to the constitution, who was the only man with a realistic chance of "beating" Obama, by bringing in young, undecided and disenfranchised voters.

They, the establishment GOP, in turn, rejected that, spit in our face, mocked us, scorned us, beat us up and had us arrested, among other things.

Fuck them.

No One But Paul

I like that too.

[Brett85]

And I get annoyed with people trying to push the GOP down our throats like they are some kind of saviors.

I'm not promoting anybody. I'm just saying that people can think for themselves.

[Anti Federalist]

It's just that I do know people who voted for Ron Paul in the primary who are going to vote for Romney in the general election. One of them is a friend of mine I went to college with, and I was pretty surprised he voted for Ron in the primary, to be honest. He's come a long ways since then, becoming much more liberty oriented. (As have I) But I just don't believe that his support for Romney in the general election means that he was any less of a Ron Paul supporter than those RP supporters who are going to vote 3rd party or vote for Obama.

Romney represents a 180 degree range of separation from what RP represents.

So your friend either doesn't understand things clearly enough yet, or disapproves of Obama enough to want to be rid of him, even if it means, for all intents and purposes, replacing him with the same thing.

[Brett85]

Do you think the people posting here are going to be corralled into doing something that benefits the GOP and/or Romney?

Neither RonPaulFanINGA nor I have promoted Romney in any way. We've simply made the obvious point that Obama doesn't hold a single pro liberty position, so it makes no sense at all for any libertarian to vote for him.

[JoshLowry]

I'm not promoting anybody. I'm just saying that people can think for themselves.


The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

http://theultimateplaylist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/willy-wonka-wilder-300x300.jpg

[Brett85]

Romney represents a 180 degree range of separation from what RP represents.

Not true at all. Even Ron Paul has mentioned areas where he and Romney agree, such as opposing tax increases and reducing regulations. I have a big problem with Romney's foreign policy, which is the main reason I'm not voting for him. But to say that he and Ron Paul disagree on everything is flat out false. You must have missed the primary where Ron Paul basically refused to ever criticize Romney for anything.

[AuH20]

Not true at all. Even Ron Paul has mentioned areas where he and Romney agree, such as opposing tax increases and reducing regulations. I have a big problem with Romney's foreign policy, which is the main reason I'm not voting for him. But to say that he and Ron Paul disagree on everything is flat out false. You must have missed the primary where Ron Paul basically refused to ever criticize Romney for anything.

Ron Paul stated that Romney would be slightly better than Obama. But like I said, that is not enough to warrant a vote for him.

[Anti Federalist]

Neither RonPaulFanINGA nor I have promoted Romney in any way. We've simply made the obvious point that Obama doesn't hold a single pro liberty position, so it makes no sense at all for any libertarian to vote for him.

No, not from that angle it doesn't.

But if we are to assume that all this is legit and on the up and up, then there is a strategic logic here, especially for people in swing states.

Neither Obama of Romney have anything to offer from a liberty perspective.

So, what would work out better?

A lame duck Obama and a chance to do this all again in 2016?

Or a re-invigorated neo-con GOP wing in power for another 8 years, coupled with compliant congress?

[Brett85]

Ron Paul supporters can vote for Obama if they want. I'm just saying that it doesn't really help the cause of liberty candidates within the GOP when word gets out that Obama is being supported by Ron Paul supporters.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Rand supporters should be hoping and praying that Obama wins. Otherwise, there is zero chance Rand will ever be in the White House. Except as a guest or tourist.

[JoshLowry]

Thanks for giving everyone permission to do whatever they want.

The GOP chose poorly.

[Brett85]

A lame duck Obama and a chance to do this all again in 2016?

Well, it seems like the majority of people here don't even like Rand, so I don't know who you're going to support in 2016.

[Anti Federalist]

Not true at all. Even Ron Paul has mentioned areas where he and Romney agree, such as opposing tax increases and reducing regulations. I have a big problem with Romney's foreign policy, which is the main reason I'm not voting for him. But to say that he and Ron Paul disagree on everything is flat out false. You must have missed the primary where Ron Paul basically refused to ever criticize Romney for anything.

What you are missing is the years that I watched Romney work in Massachusetts and why I can say, with no hesitation, that his rhetoric now is just bluster and bullshit.

I have no good answer for why the RP campaign kissed Romney's ass all during the campaign.

I have my suspicions however.

[Brett85]

Rand supporters should be hoping and praying that Obama wins. Otherwise, there is zero chance Rand will ever be in the White House. Except as a guest or tourist.

He could primary Romney in 2016.

[Victor Grey]

I don't want the mainstreamers to like us, or even understand us.

I want them to only do two things, march their dumb asses into a voting booth and hold their nose for a change, and then get the hell out of the way.


I like this so much I need a smoke after reading it.

That is how I feel about the common GOP party member every day.

[Feeding the Abscess]

He could primary Romney in 2016.

And you're saying that RP supporters strategically voting for Obama under game theory would piss off the GOP...

What do you think opposing the sitting GOP president, whose VP is literally praised by every corner of the official party, would do?

[Brett85]

What you are missing is the years that I watched Romney work in Massachusetts and why I can say, with no hesitation, that his rhetoric now is just bluster and bullshit.

I have no good answer for why the RP campaign kissed Romney's ass all during the campaign.

I have my suspicions however.

It seems like Romney just does whatever he thinks is popular. So if Romney comes to the conclusion that liberty is popular, is it possible that he could start moving in that direction?

[Anti Federalist]

Well, it seems like the majority of people here don't even like Rand, so I don't know who you're going to support in 2016.

I'd vote for Rand in 2016, assuming he doesn't do something extraordinarily chowder-headed between then and now.

I'd not be as gung ho as I am about Ron nor as liberal with my wallet.

[Brett85]

And you're saying that RP supporters strategically voting for Obama under game theory would piss off the GOP...

What do you think opposing the sitting GOP president, whose VP is literally praised by every corner of the official party, would do?

It depends on whether Romney is popular or not with the GOP base. If he ends up being as terrible of a President as everyone here says he will be, Rand could have a chance in 2016. Buchanan made a good run against the first Bush in the same situation.

[Anti Federalist]

It seems like Romney just does whatever he thinks is popular. So if Romney comes to the conclusion that liberty is popular, is it possible that he could start moving in that direction?

No.

Liberty requires backbone to make it meaningful.

Anybody can say anything.

When push came to shove, he'd crimp and fold faster than a Chinese laundry.

[Feeding the Abscess]

It depends on whether Romney is popular or not with the GOP base. If he ends up being as terrible of a President as everyone here says he is, Rand could have a chance in 2016. Buchanan made a good run against the first Bush in the same situation.

Which is more likely, Rand running and doing well in an open competition, or running against the person he endorsed and burning all the bridges he's been twisting and turning to build?

[pcosmar]

Ron Paul supporters can vote for Obama if they want. I'm just saying that it doesn't really help the cause of liberty candidates within the GOP when word gets out that Obama is being supported by Ron Paul supporters.

NO ONE is supporting Obama.
NO One.

Many are just NOT supporting the lying sack of shit Romney.

So what if he loses,, it would be good for him to lose,, It will be horrendously BAD for the US if he wins.
if Obama wins,,it will be more of the same (not good)

That is not "support" for Obama.

really this fucking team shit sucks,, on so many levels.

[Brett85]

I'd vote for Rand in 2016, assuming he doesn't do something extraordinarily chowder-headed between then and now.

I'd not be as gung ho as I am about Ron nor as liberal with my wallet.

That's good to hear. I've still heard a lot of Ron Paul supporters say that they wouldn't even cast a vote for Rand, which kind of ruins the strategy of hoping Obama wins this year. I don't think there would be any other liberty candidate who would be in a position to run for President in 2016.

[Anti Federalist]

It depends on whether Romney is popular or not with the GOP base. If he ends up being as terrible of a President as everyone here says he will be, Rand could have a chance in 2016. Buchanan made a good run against the first Bush in the same situation.

You'd think they would have learned their lesson by now.

But, to the leadership, it's all the same to them anyway.

[Brett85]

NO ONE is supporting Obama.
NO One.

Many are just NOT supporting the lying sack of shit Romney.

So what if he loses,, it would be good for him to lose,, It will be horrendously BAD for the US if he wins.
if Obama wins,,it will be more of the same (not good)

That is not "support" for Obama.

really this fucking team shit sucks,, on so many levels.

No, I was referring to Ron Paul supporters who have said that they're actually going to vote for Obama. I would never criticize a Ron Paul supporter for voting 3rd party. It's a tough call for me, but I'm at least voting 3rd party this time around. (Chuck Baldwin, Kansas Reform Party.)

[Anti Federalist]

It's really no more difficult than that.


NO ONE is supporting Obama.
NO One.

Many are just NOT supporting the lying sack of shit Romney.

So what if he loses,, it would be good for him to lose,, It will be horrendously BAD for the US if he wins.
if Obama wins,,it will be more of the same (not good)

That is not "support" for Obama.

really this fucking team shit sucks,, on so many levels.

[Anti Federalist]

No, I was referring to Ron Paul supporters who have said that they're actually going to vote for Obama. I would never criticize a Ron Paul supporter for voting 3rd party. It's a tough call for me, but I'm at least voting 3rd party this time around. (Chuck Baldwin, Kansas Reform Party.)

Vote =/= "support".

[Brett85]

Vote =/= "support".

Then why can't someone vote for Romney without "supporting" him?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Then why can't someone vote for Romney without "supporting" him.

Because the GOP would be in power for up to 8 years, and the democrats in power for up to 8 years after that. There is nothing to gain in voting for Romney.

[Brett85]

Because the GOP would be in power for up to 8 years, and the democrats in power for up to 8 years after that. There is nothing to gain in voting for Romney.

To reiterate, I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin, not Romney. However, I think there's a lot of Ron Paul supporters who feel like there would be a strategic advantage in at least having Romney win. (Even if they're not actually voting for Romney) That strategic advantage would be that Romney would at least be more likely to sign pro liberty legislation than Obama. For example, Romney has said that he supports the Fed audit, repealing Obamacare, repealing Dodd Frank, etc. Obama really isn't with us on any of the issues.

[Brett85]

really this fucking team shit sucks,, on so many levels.

I've been arguing against this "team stuff," both from the rank and file Republicans and from people here. I don't agree with the idea that if you're a Republican "you have to vote for Romney in order to get rid of Obama." I also don't agree with people here that say you aren't a true Ron Paul supporter if you vote for Mitt Romney in the general election. Every individual can simply decide for themselves who to vote for. This shouldn't be a group or "team" thing, regardless of whether you're talking about "Team Mitt Romney" or "Team Ron Paul." Let's just all vote as individuals.

[pcosmar]

That strategic advantage would be that Romney would at least be more likely to sign pro liberty legislation than Obama.

BULLSHIT.
And if you truly believe that you are more stupid than this whole thread.

:(

[Brett85]

BULLSHIT.
And if you truly believe that you are more stupid than this whole thread.

:(

Lol. Can you write a single post without using a profanity? It's really impossible to have a rational conversation with you.

[Brett85]

And I never said I agreed with that. I was just reporting what I've heard some Ron Paul supporters say.

[low preference guy]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

the GOP presumptive nominees for President and VP both supported the bailout. it's no wonder enemies of tyranny despise the GOP so much.

[pcosmar]

And I never said I agreed with that. I was just reporting what I've heard some Ron Paul supporters say.

Any you do realize that some of them make statements out of anger and frustration,, at the GOP duplicity and corruption.
I doubt that any RP supporter would be Voting for Obama..despite how the DailyKoz wants to spin it.

[juleswin]

Why are you so worried about RP supporter voting for Obama? especially when you are in favor of people voting for whoever they want. I personally am considering voting for Obama the same way NBA teams lose games in order to get a higher draft pick. Romney winning is going to result in 8yrs where a liberty candidate will be shut out from presidential election as opposed to 4yrs if Obama wins.

Its about losing to win if you understand what am saying :)

[juleswin]

double post

[Brett85]

the GOP presumptive nominees for President and VP both supported the bailout. it's no wonder enemies of tyranny despise the GOP so much.

I've criticized both Romney and Paul Ryan repeatedly. If you could see my Facebook page you can see that. It just seems like voting for Obama is an over reaction. If your goal is to cause damage to the GOP and the RR ticket, you can do that by voting 3rd party.

[Brett85]

Why are you so worried about RP supporter voting for Obama? especially when you are in favor of people voting for whoever they want. I personally am considering voting for Obama the same way NBA teams lose games in order to get a higher draft pick. Romney winning is going to result in 8yrs where a liberty candidate will be shut out from presidential election as opposed to 4yrs if Obama wins.

Its about losing to win if you understand what am saying :)

You can vote for whoever you want. I'm not going to say that you're any less of a Ron Paul supporter for voting for Obama, just like I'm not going to say that someone is less of a Ron Paul supporter for voting for Romney. I just commented that it doesn't make much sense to me, since Obama basically disagrees with us on everything. But, I understand the strategy argument that people are putting forth.

[low preference guy]

I've criticized both Romney and Paul Ryan repeatedly. If you could see my Facebook page you can see that. It just seems like voting for Obama is an over reaction. If your goal is to cause damage to the GOP and the RR ticket, you can do that by voting 3rd party.

i wouldn't vote for Obama, but it's better to vote for an honest statist than for a statist who pretends to be a capitalist. if the latter wins, capitalism will get blamed for the problems created by the government.

[Southron]

Why are you so worried about RP supporter voting for Obama? especially when you are in favor of people voting for whoever they want. I personally am considering voting for Obama the same way NBA teams lose games in order to get a higher draft pick. Romney winning is going to result in 8yrs where a liberty candidate will be shut out from presidential election as opposed to 4yrs if Obama wins.

Its about losing to win if you understand what am saying :)

Do you really want that vote for Obama on your conscience? And I would say the same thing for Romney.

[cajuncocoa]

Kos kiddies, listen up: this Ron Paul supporter will not be voting for either Romney OR Obama. I will figure out a way to write-in Ron Paul. That's what I promised I would do in the early days of this election cycle....and I keep my promises.

[QuickZ06]

To reiterate, I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin, not Romney. However, I think there's a lot of Ron Paul supporters who feel like there would be a strategic advantage in at least having Romney win. (Even if they're not actually voting for Romney) That strategic advantage would be that Romney would at least be more likely to sign pro liberty legislation than Obama. For example, Romney has said that he supports the Fed audit, repealing Obamacare, repealing Dodd Frank, etc. Obama really isn't with us on any of the issues.

And Romney is? He is a LIAR, he is a dog that will obey his masters commands.

[Brett85]

And Romney is? He is a LIAR, he is a dog that will obey his masters commands.

Yes. Even Ron has stated that he would be an improvement over Obama on some issues, such as taxes and regulations. That's not the same as saying that he would be a good President.

[Athan]

I don't see the point in voting Obama. It's the same as voting for Romney. It makes far more sense just vote third party. At least Johnson is making serious overtures to woo us.

[QuickZ06]

Yes. Even Ron has stated that he would be an improvement over Obama on some issues, such as taxes and regulations. That's not the same as saying that he would be a good President.

And that is just that, Ron's opinion. Mine is different, he is 100% EVIL. And for the record, ill be writing him in.

[Brett85]

And that is just that, Ron's opinion. Mine is different, he is 100% EVIL. And for the record, ill be writing him in.

My opinion is that Romney is better than Obama on domestic issues, but his stance on Iran and other foreign policy issues bothers me enough that I don't feel comfortable voting for him.

[QuickZ06]

My opinion is that Romney is better than Obama on domestic issues, but his stance on Iran and other foreign policy issues bothers me enough that I don't feel comfortable voting for him.

They are 100% the same, bought and paid for. ZERO DIFFERENCE.

[Anti Federalist]

To reiterate, I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin, not Romney. However, I think there's a lot of Ron Paul supporters who feel like there would be a strategic advantage in at least having Romney win. (Even if they're not actually voting for Romney) That strategic advantage would be that Romney would at least be more likely to sign pro liberty legislation than Obama. For example, Romney has said that he supports the Fed audit, repealing Obamacare, repealing Dodd Frank, etc. Obama really isn't with us on any of the issues.

I understand your point, I just disagree.

I don't think any of those things will happen, based on his proven track record.

[JoshLowry]

They are 100% the same, bought and paid for. ZERO DIFFERENCE.

1533


"You can not give Reputation to the same post twice."

:(

[Brett85]

They are 100% the same, bought and paid for. ZERO DIFFERENCE.

I just disagree. Romney seems to be more of the neo-conservative variety, and I'm tired of politicians who are so overly eager to take us to war. But I think if you look at things completely objectively, Romney is an improvement over Obama on issues like offshore oil drilling, taxes, regulations, unions, etc. Those issues don't overshadow the war issue, which is very important. But it just isn't accurate to say that both of them are "exactly the same." I just look at it from a different perspective.

[QuickZ06]

"You can not give Reputation to the same post twice."

:(

Dang images keep leaving my post for some reason. Thanks for quoting, one of my favorite ones out their currently. Speaks volumes.

[JoshLowry]

Dang images keep leaving my post for some reason. Thanks for quoting, one of my favorite ones out their currently. Speaks volumes.

Yea, that's really strange behaviour on imageshacks part.

I'm trying to figure out what just happened. I saved it and then saw it missing so reuploaded.

Maybe it got deleted?

[QuickZ06]

I just disagree. Romney seems to be more of the neo-conservative variety, and I'm tired of politicians who are so overly eager to take us to war. But I think if you look at things completely objectively, Romney is an improvement over Obama on issues like offshore oil drilling, taxes, regulations, unions, etc. Those issues don't overshadow the war issue, which is very important. But it just isn't accurate to say that both of them are "exactly the same." I just look at it from a different perspective.

He is doing exactly what he was told to do, fool the masses. And he is so good at it, it is even working on RP supporters.

[KingNothing]

Anyone who calls themselves a "Libertarian" and votes for Obama in 2012, knowing all he's done as President, is a retard.


This should also be quoted by Daily Kos, because it's a more accurate assessment of things.

[JorgeStevenson]

I just disagree. Romney seems to be more of the neo-conservative variety, and I'm tired of politicians who are so overly eager to take us to war. But I think if you look at things completely objectively, Romney is an improvement over Obama on issues like offshore oil drilling, taxes, regulations, unions, etc. Those issues don't overshadow the war issue, which is very important. But it just isn't accurate to say that both of them are "exactly the same." I just look at it from a different perspective.

I agree that Romney is probably better than Obama by a smidge. However, you have to think about the consequences of a Romney election versus the consequences of an Obama election. If Romney is elected, you are stuck with him for 8 years - there is no hope of running a different candidate in 2016. Are you prepared to sign-off on Obama-lite for a full 8 years? I think I would prefer Obama to get another 4 years than for Romney to get 8 years. After 8 years of Romney, the GOP will be stuck explaining all the liberal BS they signed off on just to show support for Romney, just like they did with Bush. Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, and the various bailouts of 2008 are an albatross that it will take conservatives years to recover from.

I'm in a swing state, and I'm voting Johnson (unless I can write RP in - still haven't determined if that's possible). If Romney loses my state, I want to send a message to the GOP - the libertarian side of the party is growing and you are going to keep losing until you run candidates that can prevent us from voting Libertarian. Running these centrist extremists is just not going to work.

[Brett85]

I agree that Romney is probably better than Obama by a smidge. However, you have to think about the consequences of a Romney election versus the consequences of an Obama election. If Romney is elected, you are stuck with him for 8 years - there is no hope of running a different candidate in 2016. Are you prepared to sign-off on Obama-lite for a full 8 years? I think I would prefer Obama to get another 4 years than for Romney to get 8 years. After 8 years of Romney, the GOP will be stuck explaining all the liberal BS they signed off on just to show support for Romney, just like they did with Bush. Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, and the various bailouts of 2008 are an albatross that it will take conservatives years to recover from.

I'm in a swing state, and I'm voting Johnson (unless I can write RP in - still haven't determined if that's possible). If Romney loses my state, I want to send a message to the GOP - the libertarian side of the party is growing and you are going to keep losing until you run candidates that can prevent us from voting Libertarian. Running these centrist extremists is just not going to work.

I understand where you're coming from. My position is basically that I would prefer that Romney defeat Obama, but I don't want to have a guilty conscience by voting for him, in the event that he gets our country involved in additional wars. My vote also doesn't matter since I live in a heavily Republican state.

I'm not necessarily sure why you say that we would have Romney for 8 years, however. If he becomes President and ends up being as bad as everyone says he is, he'll only end up being a one term President anyway. The Dems could run someone like Kucinich, who most people here would probably prefer over Romney.

[brandon]

I love that some stupid thing I write on a forum in the middle of the night while drunk can end up on a blog post with people seriously analyzing it. Lol internets rule.

[Danke]

I love that some stupid thing I write on a forum in the middle of the night while drunk can end up on a blog post with people seriously analyzing it. Lol internets rule.

You're famous infamous now!

[Anti Federalist]

"You can not give Reputation to the same post twice."

:(

The Willie Wonka meme kicks ass.

I use these guys for meme faces:

http://memegenerator.net/Willy-Wonka

[devil21]

Then a mod would ban them under the new "low value post" rule.

It seriously irritates me that some of the members here (especially anaconda and brandon who have been Paul supporters since 07) would even consider voting for Obama.

Ive been considering it myself. One of the other posters was right that a lot of it is spite over the treatment RP and his supporters have received from people that are supposedly our "friends", or at least friends in comparison to the Dems. Im getting to the point where I want the GOP to suffer a HUGE loss and maybe the rank-and-file will start to wake up and ask themselves why they keep losing so badly? Oh that's right, you keep selecting liberals to run against another liberal then want to be shocked with the most predictable outcome of such a plan. Eye for an eye. We've been given the scorched earth treatment so there's an urge to give it back twice as hard. GJ isn't a terrible vote in the alternative if you want to make a (weak) point but I definitely understand considering voting for Obama to make a strong point. The GOP as it stands right now should NOT even come close to beating Obama. That only reinforces to the elites that control this charade that they can trot out any old POS politician with crap history and credentials and they'll still do well. That needs to stop.

[devil21]

It seems like Romney just does whatever he thinks is popular because it gives him more power. So if Romney comes to the conclusion that liberty is popular, is it possible that he could start moving in that direction?

FTFY

Moving in the direction of more liberty lessens Romney's power. He may talk about liberty more if he thinks its politically expedient but he will frame it in some doublespeak that makes freedom sound a lot like statism. He'll find a way.

[dillo]

As a registered republican, Ill vote for Gary Johnson. I feel like this is best way because if Romney loses by 5% to Obummer and Gary Johnson gets at least 5% then theyll know their tricks wont work on me. That being said, Romney and Obama have the same puppet master.

[Brett85]

As a registered republican, Ill vote for Gary Johnson. I feel like this is best way because if Romney loses by 5% to Obummer and Gary Johnson gets at least 5% then theyll know their tricks wont work on me. That being said, Romney and Obama have the same puppet master.

It seems like the word "puppet" is used by almost all of the libertarian posters here and on Facebook. I just find it interesting, because I've never seen the word "puppet" mentioned so often in the political arena, or at all.

[The Free Hornet]

I understand where you're coming from. My position is basically that I would prefer that Romney defeat Obama, but I don't want to have a guilty conscience by voting for him, in the event that he gets our country involved in additional wars. My vote also doesn't matter since I live in a heavily Republican state.

I'm not necessarily sure why you say that we would have Romney for 8 years, however. If he becomes President and ends up being as bad as everyone says he is, he'll only end up being a one term President anyway. The Dems could run someone like Kucinich, who most people here would probably prefer over Romney.

No, you do not get it.

If Romney is the winner in 2012 then he is 95% likely the GOP nominee in 2016. If he loses in 2016, we ought to have a shot in 2020. If he wins in 2016, the next best opportunity is likely 2024 (unless he left with great approval in 2020 AND TPTB have had their claws trimmed). Either way, it is 8 or 12 more years, not 4. Basic math.

[Brett85]

No, you do not get it.

If Romney is the winner in 2012 then he is 95% likely the GOP nominee in 2016. If he loses in 2016, we ought to have a shot in 2020. If he wins in 2016, the next best opportunity is likely 2024 (unless he left with great approval in 2020 AND TPTB have had their claws trimmed). Either way, it is 8 or 12 more years, not 4. Basic math.

Why can't we defeat Romney in 2016 with an independent candidate?

[r3volution]

Let's go to some random Internet forum where members are anonymous, pick out a couple of posts, and declare libertarians are flocking to Obama.

Got to love journalism. kos is not known for its high standard , i know 2 people that need rep'ed though .

[Anti Federalist]

It seems like the word "puppet" is used by almost all of the libertarian posters here and on Facebook. I just find it interesting, because I've never seen the word "puppet" mentioned so often in the political arena, or at all.

Probably because the powers that be have never been so obvious and "in your face" about who really runs this show.

[Brett85]

Probably because the powers that be have never been so obvious and "in your face" about who really runs this show.

...

[low preference guy]

I love that some stupid thing I write on a forum in the middle of the night while drunk can end up on a blog post with people seriously analyzing it. Lol internets rule.

i hope to see this comment on HuffPo's front page.

[The Free Hornet]

Why can't we defeat Romney in 2016 with an independent candidate?

That's a good question but I suspect the odds of a 3rd-party/independent candidate winning in 2016 will be similar to 1988. I suspect a primary challenger is more likely and that would fit your reasoning however unlikely success is for such a challenge. I would support almost anyone who challenged Romney in 2016.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Tha usual suspects.

Do you think the people posting here are going to be corralled into doing something that benefits the GOP and/or Romney?

It's nice to see the head honcho in on the game of browbeating anyone who suggests they're going to vote for Romney, but posting only snide "you're trying to get people to support Romney" comments when anyone says anything about those pushing an Obama vote. Maybe all the Romney-bashers are Obama concern trolls, makes as much sense.

At least one can trust Ron Paul himself not to directly vote for a total zero such as Obama.

[papitosabe]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

I'd rather have 4 years of Obama, than 8 yrs of Romney....who cares why the GOP hates RP/supporters..they're part of the problem anyway...RP would prefer to be third party but has stated several times that the party has no say...what he's been trying to do is change the system... but for now, I'd rather get obama in and out in 4 yrs...and hope for something new in 2016...Romney will be much worse than Obama as far as foreign policy IMO

[LibertyEagle]

If you listen to Romney's speeches now, it's clear that he has fully embraced the neocon foreign policy. I couldn't believe the stuff out of his mouth. He sounded like daddy Bush. "Shining city on a hill". America living out its destiny, etc. He's going to be a major warmonger. Count on it. But, of course, so is Obama.

[Feeding the Abscess]

If you listen to Romney's speeches now, it's clear that he has fully embraced the neocon foreign policy. I couldn't believe the stuff out of his mouth. He sounded like daddy Bush. "Shining city on a hill". America living out its destiny, etc. He's going to be a major warmonger. Count on it. But, of course, so is Obama.

If he actually governed like H.W., that'd be a massive improvement over the last two presidents. Then again, there's almost no chance he would be comparatively restrained. H.W. would have been as bad as Bush/Obama if he were president the last 12 years.

[LibertyEagle]

If he actually governed like H.W., that'd be a massive improvement over the last two presidents. Then again, there's almost no chance he would be comparatively restrained. H.W. would have been as bad as Bush/Obama if he were president the last 12 years.

It was the words he used. They were the same words that daddy Bush used when he first started talking about a New World Order.

[Kluge]

Ryan Pick Swings Libertarians to Obama (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/11/1118993/-Ryan-Pick-Swings-Libertarians-to-Obama)


Daily Kos
Aug 11, 2012



After following several links to different places last night, I somehow ended up at a Ron Paul forum. I decided to stick around for a few minutes to see what they thought of the Ryan pick.

I don't know what I expected, the Paul-bots seem as crazy to me as Ryan, but apparently not. Beyond the predictable ongoing outrage that Paul is not the nominee, and some rather oblique references to a "coo" (LOL) at the convention, they had some surprising things to say.
...

Most of them will either hold their noses and vote Obama, not vote at all or write in someone else.

And for fun, a few quotes.




Now thats what I'm talking about!




Yes! We are with you.




SOURCE:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/11/1118993/-Ryan-Pick-Swings-Libertarians-to-Obama

What nimrod spelled "coup" as "coo?" Bring back our grammar Nazi!

Oh, and the GOP doesn't hate us because we won't vote for their idiot candidate, they hate us because we stand for what they're supposed to stand for.

[Weston White]

Oh, yuppers, and guess who that "someone else" will be?


http://www.defendindependence.us/global_cloud/images/WIRP_44.PNG

[Liberty74]

not to Obama, but maybe Gary Johnson.

Exactly. The KOS is pure Left wing propaganda. No real Libertarian would vote for the illegal Obama occupying the WH.

We support and are voting for Gary Johnson for the top spot.

[moostraks]

What nimrod spelled "coup" as "coo?" Bring back our grammar Nazi!

Oh, and the GOP doesn't hate us because we won't vote for their idiot candidate, they hate us because we stand for what they're supposed to stand for.

Lol...and yep that is exactly why the GOP hates us. It ruins the story line when the people are unsure of who the real hero is. When you peak behind the curtain and see the voting records, the charade is up.


Oh, yuppers, and guess who that "someone else" will be?


http://www.defendindependence.us/global_cloud/images/WIRP_44.PNG
Yeah, I chuckled that he who shall not be named remains so even on an article such as this. It is why I took a break from the media crap for awhile. I am trying to figure if I want to bother making a statement this time with a write in only me and the old gals that run the polling booth I go to will see, or if I will just stay home. THis will be the first time I have stayed home since Bush the younger was elected his first time ( which was the only presidential election I sat out since I turned of age...) I will probably go write in but I sure feel apathetic about the whole matter.

[moostraks]

I love that some stupid thing I write on a forum in the middle of the night while drunk can end up on a blog post with people seriously analyzing it. Lol internets rule.

lol...awesome to see you bring some reality to the ridiculousness of it!


It's nice to see the head honcho in on the game of browbeating anyone who suggests they're going to vote for Romney, but posting only snide "you're trying to get people to support Romney" comments when anyone says anything about those pushing an Obama vote. Maybe all the Romney-bashers are Obama concern trolls, makes as much sense.

At least one can trust Ron Paul himself not to directly vote for a total zero such as Obama.

Josh is just as much entitled to an opinion on it as anyone else, and considering where you are at maybe you should be greatful he is passionate about his opinions. I think everyone feels strongly about the strategy they are choosing to employ. I was also of the impression that TC was in the camp of lesser of two evils vote for the R.R. ticket. If one is paying attention they might see that would be the worst decision considering the liberty movement has vested more time in Republicans and it will set back the movement a considerable bit if that pair got voted in, so of course you are going to find a very vocal negative response to that. It is why Rand stepped in it with his "support" and set himself back with more than a few of us.

[Raudsarw]

Anyone who calls themselves a "Libertarian" and votes for Obama in 2012, knowing all he's done as President, is a retard.

I couldn't stomach voting or Obama either, but it is best in the long term if Obama wins.

1) If Obama wins, Republicans are likely to win in 2016. We might control the party by then.
2) If Romney wins, any crisis will be blamed on his "radical free market policies". Yes, people are that stupid.
3) If Romney wins, we won't have a shot at the presidency again until 2020.

I still couldn't vote for him, but I understand those that would.

[pcosmar]

It was the words he used. They were the same words that daddy Bush used when he first started talking about a New World Order.

Because that agenda has not changed,

It did not end with Daddy Bush,, did not start with him either. and it runs in both parties..

[MelissaCato]

Unbelievable. I am voting for the champion of the constitution and that's Ron Paul. I'll prolly vote for Ron Paul for the rest of my life too. :cool:

[DGambler]

I won't vote for Obama or Romney. Not sure who I'll vote for, probably Johnson. I live in GA, Romney will take this state.

[NCGOPer_for_Paul]

Maybe I'm way off base here, but I have a real fear that if Obama is re-elected, 2012 will be the last presidential election in this American republic's history. I do fear Obama executive ordering himself dictator-in-chief, ESPECIALLY if Republicans gain control of both houses of Congress.

That's not saying that I support Romney, or even will vote for him, but I have a fear that the entire republic will disappear with an Obama re-election.

As disgusting as it sounds, Romney is probably better for the country, although he offers very little in the way of getting things back to where they should be.

Personally, the best strategy is not to worry so much about 2016, but worry about local races, district races, and state races where true liberty candidates have real opporuntities to break through. Start taking school boards, towns, cities, counties, and states back, then the Federal offices will follow.

[Peace Piper]

Dear Lurking Kos-Suckers:

Your site is filled with people too stupid to realize yet that your jug eared grinning liar has institutionalized the worst parts of bush policy into the very heart of your "party".

Most of you were so dumb you fell for, among many despicable things, his "Affordable Care Act" and shut your eyes & plugged your ears when the Louse Baucus had Doctors and Nurses Arrested at a Hearing. (a few of you numbbrains realize that you would have never *ever* tolerated that kind of stuff under a President McCain).

The New DemoRat party is one of Drone Bombs, Mandatory Monthly Payments to Corporations that will wring the last few dollars out of what's left of the Middle Class, having Health Professionals arrested, and looking the other way as Bankster Con men have their way with the whores in DC.

But your heads are so far up the grinning liars behind you can't even see your noses.

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1388/obamasmug.jpg

Have Fun with your new Drone toys, punks. Just remember: Someone (or some thing) will always be watching You!

Love, One who will *NEVER* vote for a (D)Rat again.

PS: My kids will not lift a single finger or break even one drop of sweat to pay for your short sighted cult worship, we're leaving the country just as soon as we can, after casting votes for:

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/3673/gj2012sm1.jpg

[Brett85]

I was also of the impression that TC was in the camp of lesser of two evils vote for the R.R. ticket.

No, I just said that my preference is for Romney to win, even though I'm not going to vote for him or lift a finger in order to make that happen.

[moostraks]

No, I just said that my preference is for Romney to win, even though I'm not going to vote for him or lift a finger in order to make that happen.

I got that later on in the thread. Should have said initially of the impression.:)

[Anti Federalist]

If you listen to Romney's speeches now, it's clear that he has fully embraced the neocon foreign policy. I couldn't believe the stuff out of his mouth. He sounded like daddy Bush. "Shining city on a hill". America living out its destiny, etc. He's going to be a major warmonger. Count on it. But, of course, so is Obama.


It was the words he used. They were the same words that daddy Bush used when he first started talking about a New World Order.

I noticed this as well.

Joy...

[nobody's_hero]

The people who are actually going to vote for Obama are taking this too far. It's no wonder the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and his supporters so much.

Not my video, but this was made a while ago. Still relevant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLyPMACvgc

I will say though, that before Kos folks get too excited, if Obama wins again, the 'axe' is in his hands. The democrats won't be able to keep pointing to the Bush years and saying that they're just stuck with a badly dealt hand; that they, 'inherited' all these problems from Bush. Obama has enough new problems by now to leave a little 'inheritance' of his own to whomever comes next in November, even himself, should he be re-elected.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Right, but if Romney loses we can double down on our efforts to change the GOP. If he wins it's validation that moderates can still win and they will control the party. There's really a lot at stake here beyond the obvious.
+1776

This man knows what he's talking about.