Ron Paul: I wouldn't support Trump as GOP nominee

[Krugminator2]

Ron Paul: I wouldn't support Trump as GOP nominee





Three-time candidate for president Ron Paul (http://www.cnbc.com/ron-paul/) said Wednesday he does not like any of the remaining GOP candidates in the 2016 race, and would not support Donald Trump (http://www.cnbc.com/donald-trump/) if he were to win the Republican nomination.

Trump has been able to tap into the anger and fear of a large "minority" of voters, Paul told CNBC's "Squawk Box (http://www.cnbc.com/squawk-box-us/)." He said the billionaire businessman acts like he has all the answers but "zero" realistic solutions to the problems facing the nation.

The race for the White House has become "Trump-ism versus Sander-ism," said Paul, referring to Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders (http://www.cnbc.com/bernie-sanders/). He said both approaches are "not a whole lot different" in their wrongheadedness.


http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/24/ron-paul-i-wouldnt-support-trump-as-gop-nominee.html

[Unknown.User]

..

[jclay2]

Ron is staying true to his son, no surprise there.

[Tywysog Cymru]

Sometimes I forget that he's the guy this forum was founded on!

[Theocrat]

I really wish that Sen. Paul would adopt his father's position on not endorsing anyone who becomes the GOP nominee.

[Fivezeroes]

Makes you wonder if Ron would support a Trump/Paul ticket to back his son.

[kcchiefs6465]

Ron is staying true to his son, no surprise there.
Might just be because Trump is an authoritarian. But hey, don't let reality affect your world view.

[thoughtomator]

Sometimes I forget that he's the guy this forum was founded on!

Maybe it's because he jumped ship on the movement he helped mightily to create and went into profiteering on his reputation instead. I for one am extremely disappointed at the post-2012 Ron Paul, I barely recognize the guy.

[Tywysog Cymru]

Maybe it's because he jumped ship on the movement he helped mightily to create and went into profiteering on his reputation instead. I for one am extremely disappointed at the post-2012 Ron Paul, I barely recognize the guy.

Pre-2012 Ron Paul would have never supported Trump either.

[Umad]

Pre-2012 Ron Paul would have never supported Trump either.

Didn't he endorse Don Young and a bunch of Texas neo cons?

[PierzStyx]

Maybe it's because he jumped ship on the movement he helped mightily to create and went into profiteering on his reputation instead. I for one am extremely disappointed at the post-2012 Ron Paul, I barely recognize the guy.

Imagine that, a person trying to make money from all the time and effort they put into something and all the work they do. Come on now. We aren't liberals, we don't believe we have a right to the man's labor. I'm glad he found a way to make a living and promote liberty.

As for not supporting Trump, duh. If he isn't going to support Mittens he isn't going to support a fascist like Trump. Question in my mind is what Rand wil do.

[CPUd]

Rand has already said what he will do.

[Fivezeroes]

Imagine that, a person trying to make money from all the time and effort they put into something and all the work they do. Come on now. We aren't liberals, we don't believe we have a right to the man's labor. I'm glad he found a way to make a living and promote liberty.

As for not supporting Trump, duh. If he isn't going to support Mittens he isn't going to support a fascist like Trump. Question in my mind is what Rand wil do.

Rand has already said he will support the nominee. Which looks like he will be supporting Trump.

[Rudeman]

So when does Trump start talking shit about Ron?

[CPUd]

So when does Trump start talking shit about Ron?

About 5 years ago.

[Dianne]

Well Ron, who the hell should be the next President? One of those dudes will be. You didn't run, your son pussed out on us.

[opal]

Well there goes Ron's chance at VP with the trumptard

[jkob]

Ron has endorsed way worse candidates than Trump for strategic reasons

[Mani]

LOL:


The race for the White House has become "Trump-ism versus Sander-ism," said Paul, referring to Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders. He said both approaches are "not a whole lot different" in their wrongheadedness.

Sanders wants to make the government bigger and Trump wants to be the government, said Paul, who unsuccessfully sought the GOP presidential nomination in 2008 and 2012.

[Dianne]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

[nasaal]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

Why? Why should he throw away the rest of his political capital on a group even smaller than his father had? And Ron didn't "send" anyone.

[Mani]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.


in 2008 he did endorse the constitution party...So he did offer up that.

[Fivezeroes]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.



This... so much this. Some of us donated hundreds to his campaign that could have went to important things. I was never a Cruz or Rubio or any other fan, Trump was always my second choice and a hard second at that. Rand would have never gotten $800 out of me had I known he planned to roll over and die after Iowa, just my two cents. Between Ron and Rand I'm now out a few thousands bucks so yes, I'm with Dianne, I'm pissed off.

[misterx]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

Actually Ron wanted to run. He didn't send his son, he got out of his way.

[CPUd]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

You need to ban yourself for posting crap like this.

[nasaal]

This... so much this. Some of us donated hundreds to his campaign that could have went to important things. I was never a Cruz or Rubio or any other fan, Trump was always my second choice and a hard second at that. Rand would have never gotten $800 out of me had I known he planned to roll over and die after Iowa, just my two cents. Between Ron and Rand I'm now out a few thousands bucks so yes, I'm with Dianne, I'm pissed off.
I don't get it. Why on earth did you see him having a chance? And if you didn't.... Then why would you want him to spend MORE donated campaign money on a losing campaign?

[misterx]

This... so much this. Some of us donated hundreds to his campaign that could have went to important things. I was never a Cruz or Rubio or any other fan, Trump was always my second choice and a hard second at that. Rand would have never gotten $800 out of me had I known he planned to roll over and die after Iowa, just my two cents. Between Ron and Rand I'm now out a few thousands bucks so yes, I'm with Dianne, I'm pissed off.

What could Rand do? He had no shot of winning the nomination at that point. You have to know when to cut your losses and move on. He has a job in the Senate, and a seat to hold onto. He tried for the nomination, you can't expect more of him than that. When the battle is lost, the smart man recognizes it and shifts his focus to the battles he can win. Thankfully Rand is smart enough and wise enough to do that.

[Fivezeroes]

I don't get it. Why on earth did you see him having a chance? And if you didn't.... Then why would you want him to spend MORE donated campaign money on a losing campaign?

To give up after Iowa is what pissed me off, I understand not wanting to spend more money, but don't roll over on us, not after the first caucus.

[Dianne]

You need to ban yourself for posting crap like this.

You need to face reality. I've been on this train five years before you even found this forum. You weren't here when Ron ran, both times so why the hell you think I should ban myself? If you had the blood, sweat and tears, most of us have put in to Ron's campaigns, you would understand. Being a newbie, you don't. I can't help but feel abandoned, since Rand left the race.

[libertyplz]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

Umm... where did Ron tell you who not to vote for?

Ron was asked directly if HE could support Trump, and he said no. Is Ron not allowed to express his opinion?

[nasaal]

To give up after Iowa is what pissed me off, I understand not wanting to spend more money, but don't roll over on us, not after the first caucus.

Staying in through Iowa was already considered crazy by many with no particular loyalty to Rand.. He stayed, hoping that his ground game in Iowa would give him a miraculous boost in the caucus results. Instead he did exactly as was polled. That meant it was time to get out before wasting what political credibility he still had.

[Dianne]

Umm... where did Ron tell you who not to vote for?

Ron was asked directly if HE could support Trump, and he said no. Is Ron not allowed to express his opinion?

So, who is he supporting? Who is he endorsing?

[CPUd]

You need to face reality. I've been on this train five years before you even found this forum. You weren't here when Ron ran, both times so why the hell you think I should ban myself? If you had the blood, sweat and tears, most of us have put in to Ron's campaigns, you would understand. Being a newbie, you don't. I can't help but feel abandoned, since Rand left the race.

Rand has said from day 1 it will not be like Ron 2008 or Ron 2012, he will not keep running a campaign he knows he can't win. But you didn't even know until a couple months ago he endorsed Mitt in 2012, when there have been dozens of threads for dozens of pages on here about it for 4 years, so I guess I really can't expect you to know very much about the campaign you supposedly were supporting.

[Mani]

My wife and I maxed out in 2008 and besides that I gave up a shit ton of hours and hours of time promoting Ron Paul, creating signs, going to RP meetups weekly, standing outside the debate in Ft. Lauderdale all day and night handing out flyers and talking to people. Besides maxing out, also donating to the blimp, the fly overs (I think we in Miami paid for the first airplane one nationally), and a dozen other fund raising projects many from this forum. Man we shelled out thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours. We were all trying, and experimenting and wanted to do whatever we could.


At the end of the day, I felt it was me supporting liberty and freedom and doing the most I could do to educate and further enhance the message of freedom. I'm not going to hold Ron Paul responsible for the rest of his life for my everything I sacrificed. I absolutely remember the taste of defeat and it was bitter and awful, but still felt the cause moved forward because we got a couple liberty candidates nationally and locally in office and we got the audit the fed bill moving.

It did wake up some politicians seeing what the RP run did, and it did push forward something as mundane sounding as Audit the Fed. I think it gave Rand Some instant credibility whereas Ron was an alone odd congressmen for 3 decades except for the the very tail end of his career.

I can completely relate to being pissed and feeling terrible, because it doesn't take long for me to recall the feeling sitting in the Miami RP office and feeling about as low as it gets. We spent a year of our lives to get RP's name out there and we had nothing to show for it when the FL primary came around. But like I said the movement continued in other ways.

I don't think we've seen the last of Rand. I think he saw the Trump mania, saw the ISIS fear mongering, needed to regroup and keep his spot in Kentucky, and we will be seeing a lot more of Rand in the future. I think he's going to make a name for himself in the Senate, speak more and get heard and raise his profile as a seasoned well known senator before he tries again.

In the shortterm is definitely hurts but I think long run he will have a good strategy.

[misterx]

So, who is he supporting? Who is he endorsing?

No one. He didn't endorse anyone in 2012 or 2008 either.

[nasaal]

So, who is he supporting? Who is he endorsing?

Why does it matter. Is he the captain of your soul? Maybe he supports no one this time around. I don't. Should I just come up with someone to appease people as well?

[wizardwatson]

Umm... where did Ron tell you who not to vote for?

Ron was asked directly if HE could support Trump, and he said no. Is Ron not allowed to express his opinion?

Yeah, guys. Don't get mad at Ron because you support Trump and he doesn't. There's a lot of people who are behind Trump on here coming out of the closet now that Rand's done. And a lot of that is based on antihero/despair politics, of "fuck it". Ron is a peace/hope/hippy guy. He's the last guy to throw in the towel. And he is really the soft chewy center in the middle of the crusty shell of neocon that people want Trump to smash to bits.

I think we can understand his position. He doesn't support Trump in principle or spirit. I think many people who "support" Trump do "in the spirit" of what he represents and not on principle, obviously. I think Ron gets that too.

Chillaaaaaaaaaaaaaax.

[thatpeculiarcat]

Actually Ron wanted to run. He didn't send his son, he got out of his way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPwvWTs3MI8 Somewhere between 1:15:00-1:20:00 he says he doesn't want to run for president again. I have not seen anything from Ron since he lost the GOP nomination in 2012 about him wanting to run for president agian.


No one. He didn't endorse anyone in 2012 or 2008 either.

Chuck Baldwin in 2008, no?

[Mani]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPwvWTs3MI8 Somewhere between 1:15:00-1:20:00 he says he doesn't want to run for president again. I have not seen anything from Ron since he lost the GOP nomination in 2012 about him wanting to run for president agian.



Chuck Baldwin in 2008, no?


Ya Constitution Party. It got a little BUMP, most votes ever 200K, thanks to Ron's stamp of approval.

[Dianne]

Yeah, guys. Don't get mad at Ron because you support Trump and he doesn't. There's a lot of people who are behind Trump on here coming out of the closet now that Rand's done. And a lot of that is based on antihero/despair politics, of "fuck it". Ron is a peace/hope/hippy guy. He's the last guy to throw in the towel. And he is really the soft chewy center in the middle of the crusty shell of neocon that people want Trump to smash to bits.

I think we can understand his position. He doesn't support Trump in principle or spirit. I think many people who "support" Trump do "in the spirit" of what he represents and not on principle, obviously. I think Ron gets that too.

Chillaaaaaaaaaaaaaax.

I don't support Trump either. But the second guessing when we don't have Ron; we don't have Rand... So who the f'k does Ron suggest we support?

[dannno]

..and sent his son...

Amen lol

As far as Rand quitting, there were several obvious reasons why he did and although I don't think they were strong enough to drop out as early as he did I don't have all the information.

[Dianne]

I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.

[nasaal]

I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.

Which other maggot did he say to vote for. Also.... He's not a prophet of a holy figure. It's not his responsibility to leave us with instructions like that.

[Mani]

Which other maggot did he say to vote for. Also.... He's not a prophet of a holy figure. It's not his responsibility to leave us with instructions like that.


No one is saying he's a prophet. I do think his opinion has a lot of value, so I could see someone wanting his opinion.


Right now none of the turd sandwiches are worthy IMO. Will have to check out how the 3rd parties look later.

[misterx]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPwvWTs3MI8 Somewhere between 1:15:00-1:20:00 he says he doesn't want to run for president again. I have not seen anything from Ron since he lost the GOP nomination in 2012 about him wanting to run for president agian.



Chuck Baldwin in 2008, no?

It was reported a while back that there was some friction within the family because Ron didn't think Rand was ready, and he wanted to run again.

Yes, I think he endorsed a few third-party candidates. He hasn't endorsed a GOP nominee since Idk when, and certainly not a Democrat.

[misterx]

I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.

If you really want Ron's advice it's probably to stay home and vote for Rand in 2020.

[dannno]

I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.

He said he doesn't support anybody in the race.

[Brian4Liberty]

Ron Paul: I wouldn't support Trump as GOP nominee

Three-time candidate for president Ron Paul said Wednesday he does not like any of the remaining GOP candidates in the 2016 race, and would not support Donald Trump if he were to win the Republican nomination.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/24/ron-paul-i-wouldnt-support-trump-as-gop-nominee.html

What I heard in the video was the question "would you support Trump" and Ron laughed and said "no".

[Brian4Liberty]

I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.

Well, we all are free to make up our own minds. Ron's old voters went to several different candidates. The irony here is that from many indications, the plurality of old Ron voters went with Trump, based on election results so far.

[AuH20]

Well, we all are free to make up our own minds. Ron's old voters went to several different candidates. The irony here is that from many indications, the plurality of old Ron voters went with Trump, based on election results so far.

All of the New Hampshire towns Ron had won, went this year to Trump. Anyone with a functioning brain knows that Trump is the best candidate left. Examine all the pros and cons. Go down the list and compare it to the two donor class candidates.

[nikcers]

What I heard in the video was the question "would you support Trump" and Ron laughed and said "no".

Video was so worth the watch,especially at the end when he says they are all establishment. Then he says Trump is worse then the others in some ways because he loves torture. They took Ron out of context, Ron made a coherent argument.

[Dianne]

No one is saying he's a prophet. I do think his opinion has a lot of value, so I could see someone wanting his opinion.


Right now none of the turd sandwiches are worthy IMO. Will have to check out how the 3rd parties look later.

I agree. Don't tell me who NOT to vote for, unless you're willing to tell me who to vote for. Ron Paul's opinions reign 95% in me. And these new trolls on here, telling me to ban myself for objecting, really pisses me off. Where the hell were these trolls when BuddyRey and I were crafting Ron Paul signs on I-85 in Charlotte, N.C.? Nowhere to be found.

[nikcers]

I agree. Don't tell me who NOT to vote for, unless you're willing to tell me who to vote for. Ron Paul's opinions reign 95% in me. And these new trolls on here, telling me to ban myself for objecting, really pisses me off. Where the hell were these trolls when BuddyRey and I were crafting Ron Paul signs on I-85 in Charlotte, N.C.? Nowhere to be found.

It sounds more like Ron Paul was asked if he would support Trump. I don't understand where he told you to do anything. It sounds like you are just mad that he disagrees with you on whether or not he should support Trump.

[Dianne]

You need to ban yourself for posting crap like this.

This is the fagot that sent me into a tyraid. Telling me to ban myself lolol because I'm pissed Ron tells me not to vote for Trump, but no suggestion on who he endorses. This little troll needs to head back to the Marco Rubio forum where he belongs.

[nikcers]

This is the fagot that sent me into a tyraid. Telling me to ban myself lolol because I'm pissed Ron tells me not to vote for Trump, but no suggestion on who he endorses. This little troll needs to head back to the Marco Rubio forum where he belongs.
I just wish the Paul's had given us a direction prior to leaving the race. Now Ron says, don't support Trump, but who the hell is he supporting? Cruz? Rubio? Kasich? Carson? I'm sorry, I just got pissed off as hell, after all the work we did for Ron Paul, and now we are stuck with these neocon maggots in both parties ... And we're told, not to vote for this particular one, but no guidance as to why we should vote for the other maggot.


Stop getting mad at other people because Ron Paul doesn't want to tell you what to do. Ron Paul was asked what he was going to do, and he is not going to support Trump.

[LibertyEagle]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

Why? To waste money?

[CPUd]

This is the fagot that sent me into a tyraid. Telling me to ban myself lolol because I'm pissed Ron tells me not to vote for Trump, but no suggestion on who he endorses. This little troll needs to head back to the Marco Rubio forum where he belongs.

I'm guessing you haven't even seen the video.

[AuH20]

Why? To waste money?

Exactly.

[Dianne]

Why? To waste money?

Well, I did waste money :(( . I bet the farm on Rand, being half the man his Dad is. Actually Ron could have run this time, I would have been so totally entrenched in his campaign, as the two previous.

[nikcers]

Well, I did waste money :(( . I bet the farm on Rand, being half the man his Dad is. Actually Ron could have run this time, I would have been so totally entrenched in his campaign, as the two previous.

That means that we all just should vote for you right? You're running on a national platform that would be competitive in a general election right? Oh you're not even running a presidential campaign that would be competitive in a general election?? We would of all showed up and voted for you. You let us all down though, you didn't even try.

[juleswin]

Its amazing how fast these people threw Ron under the bus. This forums needs to clean house fast and its not just because they are bashing Ron but the idea that was the foundation of the movement is being undermined by them. Deport them like Trump would deport the illegals and build a wall with gatling guns every 5 feet to kill and maim anyone of them trying to sneak back in.

[fr33]

I doubt that Trump cares about headlines like this. It's not like Ron has much political capital to lend anymore.

[liveandletlive]

Trump is a modern day George Wallace, similar domestic and foreign policy. Imagine if Wallace was elected, he would do some good things but completely fuck up the country because the bad outweights the good.

Also similar personalities. Wallace was a showman who would say anything for a vote. He became a full-time bigot when he realized saying ****** would play to the masses. Trump has found success following that mold. This is not someone to be trusted.

[P3ter_Griffin]

//

[SovereignMN]

Ron is being bashed for this? What the hell forum is this? Ron Paul knows more about Liberty than just about anyone on here. He smells a rat and if we are smart we'll listen to him. The man has been America's political prophet for decades.

[AuH20]

Trump is a modern day George Wallace, similar domestic and foreign policy. Imagine if Wallace was elected, he would do some good things but completely fuck up the country because the bad outweights the good.

Also similar personalities. Wallace was a showman who would say anything for a vote. He became a full-time bigot when he realized saying ****** would play to the masses. Trump has found success following that mold. This is not someone to be trusted.

George Wallace openly preached for segregation. Trump never advocated any such radical departures from the norm. Trump has made it abundantly clear that he's out to the advance the interests of Americans, be it black, white, Asian or whomever. However, he has no obligation to materially assist non-citizens.

[FSP-Rebel]

To give up after Iowa is what pissed me off, I understand not wanting to spend more money, but don't roll over on us, not after the first caucus.

Ok, the point is that Rand didn't want to milk us for millions more after he saw his or his dad's former trajectory when he knew his window had closed. But, I get that we're all left w/o a hero to carry-on with at this point. It sucks and I agree and get it - we got nothing. Moving on, I hope Rand keeps his Senate persona pure gold for us/movement but for now, we have to choose - liberty thru the LP/CP, not voting or the lesser of yeah... Your choice is now and totally on you. The anti-establishment republican position is Trump and that is likely where I'm at here. Truth is, I get where or what Trump can be but Hillary is the other viable option. Sorry to all that thought I knew or would do better.:o

I'm not doing this for sport. Perhaps, a unique possibility is on our hands. If not, I'm hoping Trump doesn't show the establishment stripes that I know Clinton/Rubio would enshrine. And, I'm hoping those I encounter daily on the Bernie side, whom I advise, would swing to the "anti-establishment" Trump over Hillary. We got nothing here besides this. Firing squad is ready, btw.

[nikcers]

Ron's not telling us to eat shit and die. He's not telling us that we can have cake, or death. He's not telling us we can choose liberty, or death. He's telling us we don't have a good choice, just a choice between two poops and shit. He's telling us we can make whatever choice we want, but no choice leads to liberty. Ron's not going to lead you the wrong way, whether you like it or not.

[enhanced_deficit]

RP is too principled for someone like Trumpster.

Another problem with Trump is that lately his attacks on Obama, ISIS, media, Bush Iraq WMD lies group, neocons have taken very harsh and politically incorrect tone.

[fr33]

Ron's not telling us to eat shit and die. He's not telling us that we can have cake, or death. He's not telling us we can choose liberty, or death. He's telling us we don't have a good choice, just a choice between two poops and shit. He's telling us we can make whatever choice we want, but no choice leads to liberty. Ron's not going to lead you the wrong way, whether you like it or not.

You are a member of a cult. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? You need Ron Paul to tell you what to think.

[alucard13mm]

Staying in through Iowa was already considered crazy by many with no particular loyalty to Rand.. He stayed, hoping that his ground game in Iowa would give him a miraculous boost in the caucus results. Instead he did exactly as was polled. That meant it was time to get out before wasting what political credibility he still had.

Yeah. He boasted about having 10,000 students pledging to caucus for Rand and 1,000+ precinct captains.. Would be hard to talk to media on why you polled so horribly and what happened to all the kids, support, ground game he had.

Rand tried hard to talk about how inaccurate and irrelevant pre-caucus polls were. It would way too hard to talk your way out of why you did so poorly.

[thoughtomator]

Its amazing how fast these people threw Ron under the bus. This forums needs to clean house fast and its not just because they are bashing Ron but the idea that was the foundation of the movement is being undermined by them. Deport them like Trump would deport the illegals and build a wall with gatling guns every 5 feet to kill and maim anyone of them trying to sneak back in.


I have standing to complain because I busted my ass for Ron and gave him my money.

Took me four years to come to grips with the fact that Ron and Rand threw us under the bus. Looks like you've yet to reach that stage, but if you keep your eyes open you will.

Let's be honest - the Paul family has fucked up the liberty movement in a big way, starting from the moment Rand endorsed Romney and began to crawl on his knees to curry favor with the establishment to become acceptable to them. It should have been obvious from the start that liberty was never acceptable to the establishment - they fight it tooth and nail at every turn.

Rand threw his political base under the bus chasing that establishment favor, which is why the movement shrank and didn't rally to him like it did his father.

Ron disappeared - didn't campaign for his son. Even if Rand didn't know better, Ron sure as hell should have.

And what has Ron done since? He's not been spreading the message of liberty, he's only talking now to the hardcore already-converted and trying to make money off of them. Gone are the days of making speeches at colleges where they're climbing trees just to get a glimpse of him, teaching a new generation what their rightful inheritance was.

Mind you, I'm not a fan of Trump and have made that consistently clear. If Ron ran for President now, I would rally behind him. But what Ron is doing now is not something I can rally behind, it's a mission of personal profit at odds with the importance of spreading the message of liberty. While he's fully entitled to do that as a private citizen in charge of his own affairs, he's not entitled to be admired for it.

[thoughtomator]

Ron's not telling us to eat shit and die. He's not telling us that we can have cake, or death. He's not telling us we can choose liberty, or death. He's telling us we don't have a good choice, just a choice between two poops and shit. He's telling us we can make whatever choice we want, but no choice leads to liberty. Ron's not going to lead you the wrong way, whether you like it or not.

We didn't need Ron to tell us that. The system as is is now beyond hope of salvage. At this point the only thing under discussion is damage control.

[juleswin]

Mind you, I'm not a fan of Trump and have made that consistently clear.

:rolleyes: and some more :rolleyes:

Geeze you guys move on already. Ron lost the election, he for all intent and purpose dropped out before Rand endorsed Romney. And yes, Rand tried to play nice the establishment in hope that he gets some of their support and he was actually leading most of the polls where he was polled with people like Jeb until the Clintons sent in their goon squad.

You have "come to grips with the fact that Ron and Rand threw us under the bus" but you also say that if Ron ran again now, you would vote for him. Its either you are lying to me or you are full of it.

[nikcers]

You are a member of a cult. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? You need Ron Paul to tell you what to think.

I wish I was, then I would at least have an excuse. Want to start one? We should call it freedom club.

[thoughtomator]

:rolleyes: and some more :rolleyes:

Geeze you guys move on already. Ron lost the election, he for all intent and purpose dropped out before Rand endorsed Romney. And yes, Rand tried to play nice the establishment in hope that he gets some of their support and he was actually leading most of the polls where he was polled with people like Jeb until the Clintons sent in their goon squad.

You have "come to grips with the fact that Ron and Rand threw us under the bus" but you also say that if Ron ran again now, you would vote for him. Its either you are lying to me or you are full of it.

As difficult as it may be for you to conceive, I simply don't share your view that Ron is infallible or perfect. I support the cause of liberty but I most definitely did NOT sign up for a cult.

[nikcers]

As difficult as it may be for you to conceive, I simply don't share your view that Ron is infallible or perfect. I support the cause of liberty but I most definitely did NOT sign up for a cult.

ONE OF US... ONE OF US..

Posts9,417Join DateJan 2012

[juleswin]

As difficult as it may be for you to conceive, I simply don't share your view that Ron is infallible or perfect. I support the cause of liberty but I most definitely did NOT sign up for a cult.

Says the man who will still support Ron today after he threw him under the bus. No, I don't and have never thought Ron was infallible. I think I disagree with Ron and Rand more than any of his remaining supporter on this site. I understood that Ron was a huge step in the right direction and I was prepared to live with the flaws in hope that his tenure will spark the fire for a bigger revolution.

[thoughtomator]

Says the man who will still support Ron today after he threw him under the bus. No, I don't and have never thought Ron was infallible. I think I disagree with Ron and Rand more than any of his remaining supporter on this site. I understood that Ron was a huge step in the right direction and I was prepared to live with the flaws in hope that his tenure will spark the fire for a bigger revolution.

That's right. A person doesn't need to be perfect in order for one to consider them the best choice.

At the same time, nobody should ever be beyond honest criticism, which is something that the post to which I initially replied strongly implied.

If the liberty movement is to move forward from here, it will have to do so without the Pauls, and perhaps even in spite of them.

[kcchiefs6465]

I agree. Don't tell me who NOT to vote for, unless you're willing to tell me who to vote for. Ron Paul's opinions reign 95% in me. And these new trolls on here, telling me to ban myself for objecting, really pisses me off. Where the hell were these trolls when BuddyRey and I were crafting Ron Paul signs on I-85 in Charlotte, N.C.? Nowhere to be found.
Where is BXM to mock someone when we need him to?

How about this.... don't vote. Oh, the blasphemy.

You should probably be more concerned on diversifying your investments, hedging against inflationary economic calamities, and less concerned with which authoritarian will rule you.

Jesus Christ.

[juleswin]

That's right. A person doesn't need to be perfect in order for one to consider them the best choice.

At the same time, nobody should ever be beyond honest criticism, which is something that the post to which I initially replied strongly implied.

If the liberty movement is to move forward from here, it will have to do so without the Pauls, and perhaps even in spite of them.

There is a wide gap between someone not being perfect and someone throwing you under the bus and "the paul family being a disaster to the liberty movement". If someone threw me under the bus, used me to line their pocket and was a disaster to the liberty movement, there is no way I vote for the person ever again. But you would go back for a second round of abuse.

How do you talk about honest criticism when your major beef with Rand is that he endorsed Mitt Romney after the elections were virtually over?

Small correction and then agree with your last sentence

"If the liberty movement is to move forward from here, it should be able to do it without the Pauls"> I would vote for the best man and not the man with a Paul last name. Like my sig says, I trust principles not people

[thoughtomator]

There is a wide gap between someone not being perfect and someone throwing you under the bus and "the paul family being a disaster to the liberty movement". If someone threw me under the bus, used me to line their pocket and was a disaster to the liberty movement, there is no way I vote for the person ever again. But you would go back for a second round of abuse.

How do you talk about honest criticism when you major beef with Rand is that he endorsed Mitt Romney after the elections were virtually over?

Small correction and then agree with you last sentence

"If the liberty movement is to move forward from here, it should be able to do it without the Pauls"> I would vote for the best man and not the man with a Paul last name. Like my sig says, I trust principles not people

My major beef with Rand is that he attempted to make himself part of the establishment, when it was very clear that that was an absolutely terrible thing to do. The Romney endorsement was merely the first step on that path - he took many, many others, and it is not clear that he has left that path even today.

So, you are wondering, why I would still support Ron if he ran for President. The answer is simple - as burned as I feel by his post-2012 behavior, a rational decision as to who is best for the job is not based on feelings. He would still be the best out of all potential prospects for advancing the cause of liberty.

I once would have included Rand in that statement but I no longer do. Someone like Justin Amash, or perhaps a new liberty leader whose name is not well known, would be preferable. Rand doesn't have the killer instinct necessary to get the job done, and I'm tired of backing loser after loser after loser. I've done that my whole life and things haven't changed for the better at all. From here on in I will only back someone who is serious about winning and has the drive and skills to make it happen. Anyone who doesn't will simply be another waste of my time and money, and another hope to be dashed.

[juleswin]

My major beef with Rand is that he attempted to make himself part of the establishment, when it was very clear that that was an absolutely terrible thing to do. The Romney endorsement was merely the first step on that path - he took many, many others, and it is not clear that he has left that path even today.

Seeing as I wasn't born yesterday, I don't buy that excuse. He was trying to cover all bases, you might argue against such a strategy but it was a strategy that worked up until a Trump came into the race. He perfectly reflected the anti establishment sentiment while not antagonizing the establishment. But I have heard a much believable explanation from some of the former supporters that have now turned on him. That explanation was his decision to appeal to the black community, they say things like "how did it work out for you palling around with Al Sharpton" etc etc when everyone knew it was done to broaden the coalition for the general election.

Btw Trump has said that he would have to make nice with the establishment to get his bills passed but that doesn't seem to bother any of his fan boys who were so quick to condemn Rand for endorsing Romney.


So, you are wondering, why I would still support Ron if he ran for President. The answer is simple - as burned as I feel by his post-2012 behavior, a rational decision as to who is best for the job is not based on feelings. He would still be the best out of all potential prospects for advancing the cause of liberty.

Its sorta like a woman going ahead to marry a man who cheated on her during their courtship. If Ron threw you under the bus during the campaign, he would be double worse after the election and that alone should tell you that he is not trust worthy. This is especially true seeing as Ron ran a campaign that relied very little on pandering to win votes


I once would have included Rand in that statement but I no longer do. Someone like Justin Amash, or perhaps a new liberty leader whose name is not well known, would be preferable. Rand doesn't have the killer instinct necessary to get the job done, and I'm tired of backing loser after loser after loser. I've done that my whole life and things haven't changed for the better at all. From here on in I will only back someone who is serious about winning and has the drive and skills to make it happen. Anyone who doesn't will simply be another waste of my time and money, and another hope to be dashed.

I get the eagerness to be on the winning team, any winning team for that matter but what is the point in winning if its going to be more of the same? For me, I want to win and on top of that, I want to win something that wouldn't injure me. That is why I support Rand and never a man like Trump.

[Ronin Truth]

Why not just go ahead and skip voting this time, Ron?

[rg17]

This is the fagot that sent me into a tyraid. Telling me to ban myself lolol because I'm pissed Ron tells me not to vote for Trump, but no suggestion on who he endorses. This little troll needs to head back to the Marco Rubio forum where he belongs.

I completely respect your opinion.

[jkob]

Ron is entitled to endorse or not endorse anybody he wants, I don't hold his word as gospel especially when it comes to endorsements of which he has been fairly liberal giving out in the past for personal and strategic reasons but now he's retired and free to do what he wants. He's earned it. I'd be more upset if Ron endorsed Ted Cruz, there really is no reason for him to endorse anyone in this primary now that Rand is out. Rand has said he will endorse the nominee which is strategically and politically necessary, Rand has built these relationships in the Senate so I hope that he can become one of this country's all time great senators and the respect will come maybe not today or not year or maybe not until he's 70 like his dad but if he puts in the work and builds these relationships without losing his soul this country will be so much better off for it.

Vote for who you think is the best most qualified candidate for whatever you prioritize, we are a diverse group so we're not all going to agree but that's okay.

[georgiaboy]

Why not just go ahead and skip voting this time, Ron?

Ultimately, he may do that, if no candidate meets his criteria.

Preferably, there will be someone on the ballot where he can register his vote and be counted, even as protest, just so the world can see that not everybody buys into this "lesser of two evils" charade.

ETA - I sure wish there was a way for conscientious objectors to log a "none of the above" vote.

[Ronin Truth]

Ultimately, he may do that, if no candidate meets his criteria.

Preferably, there will be someone on the ballot where he can register his vote and be counted, even as protest, just so the world can see that not everybody buys into this "lesser of two evils" charade.

ETA - I sure wish there was a way for conscientious objectors to log a "none of the above" vote.

There is. Don't vote. What was the last national election that the non-voters weren't the majority?

[jkob]

Not voting is cowardly, there are other races than just presidency. I have potentially John McCain to vote against(altho hopefully we get that done in August instead of November) and a hardcore socialist in Krysten Sinema as my congressional representative in a swing district. Not to mention the referendum to legalize marijuana. Holding your breath and having a hissy fit doesn't advance liberty one bit. Get lemons, make lemonade. I'm excited to vote this November, hopefully you guys stop crying into your pillows and realize the world keeps going with or without you.

[georgiaboy]

There is. Don't vote. What was the last national election that the non-voters weren't the majority?

It's too easy to brush off non-voting.

I'd much rather see conscientious non-voters show up at the polls to register a NOTA write-in. That way at least there's a signal of people paying attention, but not buying into the garbage they're being forced to live with.

[georgiaboy]

Not voting is cowardly, there are other races than just presidency. I have potentially John McCain to vote against(altho hopefully we get that done in August instead of November) and a hardcore socialist in Krysten Sinema as my congressional representative in a swing district. Not to mention the referendum to legalize marijuana. Holding your breath and having a hissy fit doesn't advance liberty one bit. Get lemons, make lemonade. I'm excited to vote this November, hopefully you guys stop crying into your pillows and realize the world keeps going with or without you.

Exactly - the ballot is larger than just the presidency. I try to vote at every opportunity, even if I only partially fill in the ballot. That way the counters are at least seeing people paying attention, participating, and registering their honest views.

For those who desire to see change within the system, I just can't see any other way of participating. Ron Paul gets the credit for helping me see this.

cue the Texan. ;)

[Brian4Liberty]

Video was so worth the watch,especially at the end when he says they are all establishment. Then he says Trump is worse then the others in some ways because he loves torture. They took Ron out of context, Ron made a coherent argument.

Yep, standard operating procedure.

[Brian4Liberty]

...
And what has Ron done since? He's not been spreading the message of liberty, he's only talking now to the hardcore already-converted and trying to make money off of them.
...

Bullshit. Ron is producing a daily (internet) television show, and spreading his message. And he is certainly not pushing for donations or selling anything other than his liberty-oriented perspective, so I have no idea how it is funded.

It's worth watching:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkJ1N-7g9Q6n7KnriGit-Ig

And he also has a foreign policy oriented website, which once again, is not selling anything or pushing for donations:

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/

[Ronin Truth]

Not voting is cowardly, there are other races than just presidency. I have potentially John McCain to vote against(altho hopefully we get that done in August instead of November) and a hardcore socialist in Krysten Sinema as my congressional representative in a swing district. Not to mention the referendum to legalize marijuana. Holding your breath and having a hissy fit doesn't advance liberty one bit. Get lemons, make lemonade. I'm excited to vote this November, hopefully you guys stop crying into your pillows and realize the world keeps going with or without you.

For you too. Your vote is insignificant, trivial, redundant and meaningless. If your folks win, they would have anyway. If your folks lose, they would have anyway.

For grins and snickers, just skip voting once and see what that effects and changes.

Your shepherds will forgive you.

[LibertyExtremist]

It's a real shame that Ron didn't run again this time around and then Rand next time. The steam that Ron built from 2008 to 2012 just didn't translate to Rand. However, hindsight is always 20/20.

[GunnyFreedom]

Ron has endorsed way worse candidates than Trump for strategic reasons

I wasn't aware that Pol Pot ran for office in the US?

[thoughtomator]

Bullshit. Ron is producing a daily (internet) television show, and spreading his message. And he is certainly not pushing for donations or selling anything other than his liberty-oriented perspective, so I have no idea how it is funded.

It's worth watching:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkJ1N-7g9Q6n7KnriGit-Ig

And he also has a foreign policy oriented website, which once again, is not selling anything or pushing for donations:

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/

Check out the view counts on those videos. He used to reach more people than that in a single speech. Nobody is tuning in but the most hardcore, already-converted RP admirers, and only a small percentage of that group is even bothering to watch.

His days of leading and most importantly growing the movement are over. The peak and decline of the liberty movement directly corresponds with the Rand endorsement of Romney followed by Ron all but dropping out of public view.

This movement had the momentum to completely overwhelm and take over the political system and provide for some real liberty. That momentum crashed with the effective capitulation of the two Pauls, the younger to the establishment, the older to what is essentially a resting-on-laurels retirement. If these principles are as important as they said they are, this abdication is inexcusable.

[CPUd]

Check out the view counts on those videos. He used to reach more people than that in a single speech. Nobody is tuning in but the most hardcore, already-converted RP admirers, and only a small percentage of that group is even bothering to watch.

His days of leading and most importantly growing the movement are over. The peak and decline of the liberty movement directly corresponds with the Rand endorsement of Romney followed by Ron all but dropping out of public view.

This movement had the momentum to completely overwhelm and take over the political system and provide for some real liberty. That momentum crashed with the effective capitulation of the two Pauls, the younger to the establishment, the older to what is essentially a resting-on-laurels retirement. If these principles are as important as they said they are, this abdication is inexcusable.

At some point people have to take his ideas and be committed to implementing them. There were 3 or 4 state GOPs completely controlled by Paul people after 2012, they did not get the support they needed from the folks who voted them in, and they almost all got forced out by 2014. That's not Ron or Rand's fault, it's ours.

[misterx]

For you too. Your vote is insignificant, trivial, redundant and meaningless. If your folks win, they would have anyway. If your folks lose, they would have anyway.

For grins and snickers, just skip voting once and see what that effects and changes.

Your shepherds will forgive you.

The difference being that if everyone who wants to write in Rand stays home it will have zero impact on anything. If everyone who wants to vote Trump stays home, it will give the nomination to Rubio.

[Ronin Truth]

The difference being that if everyone who wants to write in Rand stays home it will have zero impact on anything. If everyone who wants to vote Trump stays home, it will give the nomination to Rubio.

What in your life has everyone ever chosen to do, politics-wise?

If everyone always boycotts all elections, who wins?

[GunnyFreedom]

What in your life has everyone ever chosen to do, politics-wise?

If everyone always boycotts all elections, who wins?
Whichever candidate has the most children of voting age?

[jkob]

For you too. Your vote is insignificant, trivial, redundant and meaningless. If your folks win, they would have anyway. If your folks lose, they would have anyway.

For grins and snickers, just skip voting once and see what that effects and changes.

Your shepherds will forgive you.


whatever dude, cry like a baby

this is why libertarians have always been losers, nobody cares if you take your ball and go home. that's exactly what they want.

that's not some great statement you're making by not participating, it's just cutting your nose off to spite your face

[Ronin Truth]

whatever dude, cry like a baby

this is why libertarians have always been losers

We libertarians don't vote nor cry, Goober. Get real and a clue!


"People are fucking nuts. This country is full of nitwits and assholes. You ever notice that? Nitwits, assholes, fuckups, scumbags, jerkoffs, and dipshits. And they all vote. In fact, sometimes you get the impression that they’re the only ones who vote." -- George Carlin

[kahless]

Check out the view counts on those videos. He used to reach more people than that in a single speech. Nobody is tuning in but the most hardcore, already-converted RP admirers, and only a small percentage of that group is even bothering to watch.

His days of leading and most importantly growing the movement are over. The peak and decline of the liberty movement directly corresponds with the Rand endorsement of Romney followed by Ron all but dropping out of public view.

This movement had the momentum to completely overwhelm and take over the political system and provide for some real liberty. That momentum crashed with the effective capitulation of the two Pauls, the younger to the establishment, the older to what is essentially a resting-on-laurels retirement. If these principles are as important as they said they are, this abdication is inexcusable.

There was also the appearance of being in it as a money making scheme and loss of credibility with the Publisher Clearing house type emails. They lost credibility with all these emails where people get to the point where they stop reading them, unsubscribe or just sent them to junk. The recipient then misses any important activism since it would be buried with all the scare tactics spamming for donations.

[thoughtomator]

At some point people have to take his ideas and be committed to implementing them. There were 3 or 4 state GOPs completely controlled by Paul people after 2012, they did not get the support they needed from the folks who voted them in, and they almost all got forced out by 2014. That's not Ron or Rand's fault, it's ours.

And for that I blame the aforementioned abdication of leadership at perhaps what was the most cruicial time for the movement.

When the leaders abandon the field, what does that say to the ground troops?

[Brian4Liberty]

Check out the view counts on those videos. He used to reach more people than that in a single speech. Nobody is tuning in but the most hardcore, already-converted RP admirers, and only a small percentage of that group is even bothering to watch.

His days of leading and most importantly growing the movement are over. The peak and decline of the liberty movement directly corresponds with the Rand endorsement of Romney followed by Ron all but dropping out of public view.

This movement had the momentum to completely overwhelm and take over the political system and provide for some real liberty. That momentum crashed with the effective capitulation of the two Pauls, the younger to the establishment, the older to what is essentially a resting-on-laurels retirement. If these principles are as important as they said they are, this abdication is inexcusable.

You implied Ron was doing nothing. He is working hard, no doubt it's not easy to do all of those videos. As far as retirement, good for him. If he wants to be retired or semi-retired, he deserves it. If his viewership is not up to your standards, there's not a lot he can do about it. Fox isn't knocking at his door to give him a show on their network.

[Ronin Truth]

Seems reasonable. I don't recall Trump supporting Ron for POTUS, previously either. <shrug>

[RonPaulIsGreat]

I have no "destroy the government" candidate to vote for. :( Trump hates snowden, is pro universal healthcare, pro-forced back doors on cellphones, etc... Sanders is a nice option, I figure he'll run up taxes, and boost welfare. So, probably can get on disability (retirement). It shouldn't be hard under Sanders Rule. Under Hillary, well, I'll probably be executed, I'm not in good enough shape to be a slave, and she hates men. She's just with Bill the Serial Rapist because he's popular, and he only rapes "dumb" women that she detests as much as males.

Sanders 2016! Fuck work....

[thoughtomator]

You implied Ron was doing nothing. He is working hard, no doubt it's not easy to do all of those videos. As far as retirement, good for him. If he wants to be retired or semi-retired, he deserves it. If his viewership is not up to your standards, there's not a lot he can do about it. Fox isn't knocking at his door to give him a show on their network.

There are teenagers who put out more videos and get more views than Ron is. And not just a handful either, hundreds of thousands of them.

[GunnyFreedom]

There are teenagers who put out more videos and get more views than Ron is. And not just a handful either, hundreds of thousands of them.

The average teenage girl spends more time on the phone than the average Fortune 500 CEO. That doesn't mean that the average teenage girl should run a Fortune 500 company.

[thoughtomator]

The average teenage girl spends more time on the phone than the average Fortune 500 CEO. That doesn't mean that the average teenage girl should run a Fortune 500 company.

Perhaps not, but it's one hell of a drop for that CEO to become no more influential than a teenage girl, and that's the situation we have here.

[GunnyFreedom]

Perhaps not, but it's one hell of a drop for that CEO to become no more influential than a teenage girl, and that's the situation we have here.
You are seriously arguing that Ron Paul is "no more influential than a teenage girl," just because you are butthurt that he refuses to support your pet fascist?

[thoughtomator]

You are seriously arguing that Ron Paul is "no more influential than a teenage girl," just because you are butthurt that he refuses to support your pet fascist?

Why are you knowingly making the false claim that Trump is my "pet Fascist", in lieu of actually putting forth an alternative? Is it because you don't have any alternative and are suffering butthurt yourself and like a small child lack the self-discipline not to project that onto others?

[GunnyFreedom]

Why are you knowingly making the false claim that Trump is my "pet Fascist", in lieu of actually putting forth an alternative? Is it because you don't have any alternative and are suffering butthurt yourself and like a small child lack the self-discipline not to project that onto others?
Why do you have to have "an alternative" in order to reject an anticonstitutional authoritarian fascist? I don't have "an alternative" to being shot in the head, so I should point a gun at my temple and pull the trigger?

[Dianne]

Exactly - the ballot is larger than just the presidency. I try to vote at every opportunity, even if I only partially fill in the ballot. That way the counters are at least seeing people paying attention, participating, and registering their honest views.

For those who desire to see change within the system, I just can't see any other way of participating. Ron Paul gets the credit for helping me see this.

cue the Texan. ;)

Excellent points !! The Senate is supposed to be far more important than the President. We need to work on getting all the dinosaur rinos replaced.

[thoughtomator]

Why do you have to have "an alternative" in order to reject an anticonstitutional authoritarian fascist? I don't have "an alternative" to being shot in the head, so I should point a gun at my temple and pull the trigger?

Refusing to make a choice is making a choice.

I say there's some validity to the argument that Trump is a Hail Mary play to bust up the oligarchy and that it is at least worth serious consideration on the basis that there will never be any chance for liberty until that busting happens.

I am not satisfied with no chance ever. I lose nothing by Trump being President, because we already have authoritarian fascism in the here and now.

Refusing to take the one shot there may be, and refusing to present or promote any alternative, says you are content with the authoritarian fascism of the present moment and the WW3/total Orwell future it is 100% without fail guaranteed to bring.

I am not so content, and thus I will not refuse the roll of the dice. It's all we got.

[GunnyFreedom]

Refusing to make a choice is making a choice.

I say there's some validity to the argument that Trump is a Hail Mary play to bust up the oligarchy and that it is at least worth serious consideration on the basis that there will never be any chance for liberty until that busting happens.

I am not satisfied with no chance ever. I lose nothing by Trump being President, because we already have authoritarian fascism in the here and now.

Awww, you think it can't get any worse. How cute.


Refusing to take the one shot there may be, and refusing to present or promote any alternative, says you are content with the authoritarian fascism of the present moment and the WW3/total Orwell future it is 100% without fail guaranteed to bring.

I am not so content, and thus I will not refuse the roll of the dice. It's all we got.

I will not help that motherfucker build gas chambers and ovens. If you do want to, then let it be on your conscience.

[thoughtomator]

Awww, you think it can't get any worse. How cute.



I will not help that motherfucker build gas chambers and ovens. If you do want to, then let it be on your conscience.

Godwin's Law. I win~!

[AuH20]

Godwin's Law. I win~!

I'm shocked he believes that. The guy builds gawdy casinos and next he's building death chambers? That's one hell of a jump, dontcha think?

[thoughtomator]

I'm shocked he believes that. The guy builds gawdy casinos and next he's building death chambers? That's one hell of a jump, dontcha think?

Given the ridiculousness I've had to put up with so far in this conversation, I'd wager he's not alone.

To me, this is basic math. Unless you are perfectly satisfied with never having a good outcome, it is almost obligatory to take a 1% chance for a good outcome over a 0% chance for a good outcome.

[TomtheTinker]

I'm still trying to figure out why I come here anymore.

[thoughtomator]

I'm still trying to figure out why I come here anymore.

You and me both, buddy. Bad habit that needs breaking, I suppose.

It was a productive place to collaborate back in 2012, but since?

[PaleoPaul]

I would love to see the Ron Paul of 1988 (yes, including his younger self) run against Trump this year. It would be the battle of the century.

[AuH20]

At 2:56 mark, Alex says he respects Ron Paul's decision as a purist, but ultimately disagrees.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCGBgyIHpfI

[GunnyFreedom]

Godwin's Law. I win~!

"Godwin's Law" is one of the stupidest things to ever infect the Internet, and is used mostly to PC people into swallowing fascism.

[GunnyFreedom]

You and me both, buddy. Bad habit that needs breaking, I suppose.

It was a productive place to collaborate back in 2012, but since?

Supporting Trump is anti-productive. If you are looking for a reason why the forums have lost productivity and become a divisive discohesive mess, look no further than your own mirror.

[thoughtomator]

"Godwin's Law" is one of the stupidest things to ever infect the Internet, and is used mostly to PC people into swallowing fascism.

Second only to the trivial invocation of Hitler to try and intimidate people out of well-reasoned positions.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm shocked he believes that. The guy builds gawdy casinos and next he's building death chambers? That's one hell of a jump, dontcha think?

Maybe I'm just not asleep. Before Hitler was elected Chancellor he was just a lowly corporal and a minor political activist. It's a much larger jump to think that an anti-communist political activist would start stuffing Jews into ovens than that a Casino mogul would do likewise to Muslims.

[GunnyFreedom]

Second only to the trivial invocation of Hitler to try and intimidate people out of well-reasoned positions.

LMAO it's only "trivial" because you like the guy and don't want to believe it.

[misterx]

LMAO it's only "trivial" because you like the guy and don't want to believe it.

That tired refrain isn't effective anymore. For 70 years we've heard about how everyone the liberals don't like is going to kill six million jews. None of them have killed even one.

[thoughtomator]

LMAO it's only "trivial" because you like the guy and don't want to believe it.

I could not have been clearer that I don't like the guy.

On that basis, I feel fully justified in calling you a fucking liar and an asshole.

[erowe1]

At 2:56 mark, Alex says he respects Ron Paul's decision as a purist, but ultimately disagrees.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCGBgyIHpfI

If AJ were supporting Cruz, he could use that line. But supporting Trump isn't about being less of a purist than Ron Paul. It's about standing diametrically opposite agendas.

[kahless]

Awww, you think it can't get any worse. How cute.

I will not help that motherfucker build gas chambers and ovens. If you do want to, then let it be on your conscience.

I am trying to look at the bright side of this conversation. At least you moved on from telling people they are going to hell for supporting Trump. :eek:

[GunnyFreedom]

That tired refrain isn't effective anymore. For 70 years we've heard about how everyone the liberals don't like is going to kill six million jews. None of them have killed even one.

And just who do you think is the 'liberal' in this conversation?

[FindLiberty]

I'm still trying to figure out why I come here anymore.

I just stop by for the browser cookies

[GunnyFreedom]

I could not have been clearer that I don't like the guy.

On that basis, I feel fully justified in calling you a fucking liar and an asshole.

Didn't you just claim that Ron Paul ws less influential than a teenage girl?

[GunnyFreedom]

I am trying to look at the bright side of this conversation. At least you moved on from telling people they are going to hell for supporting Trump. :eek:

Second Thessalonians chapter 2 doesn't really leave a whole lot of room for 'interpretation' on that score.

[wmmonk]

Supporting Trump is anti-productive. If you are looking for a reason why the forums have lost productivity and become a divisive discohesive mess, look no further than your own mirror.

From what I've seen, the forums fell apart long ago. I've been scrolling through many of the older threads, and it's amazing at how active it was until a few members started down the path of divisiveness when some didn't agree with certain positions political campaigns and politicians took.

Donald Trump has very little to do with the forums losing productivity. If anything, the forums have remained active with users because of Donald Trump being in the race from what I can see.

People like him. People don't like him. But, people are here talking about him.

[CPUd]

From what I've seen, the forums fell apart long ago. I've been scrolling through many of the older threads, and it's amazing at how active it was until a few members started down the path of divisiveness when some didn't agree with certain positions political campaigns and politicians took.

Donald Trump has very little to do with the forums losing productivity. If anything, the forums have remained active with users because of Donald Trump being in the race from what I can see.

People like him. People don't like him. But, people are here talking about him.

They're not just talking about him, a few **********s are actively promoting.

[Petar]

They're not just talking about him, a few **********s are actively promoting.

It's not our fault if non-libertarian Donald Trump is going to create an environment that will end up being very helpful for libertarians...

[GunnyFreedom]

It's not our fault if non-libertarian Donald Trump is going to create an environment that will end up being very helpful for libertarians...
You are delusional.

[wmmonk]

They're not just talking about him, a few **********s are actively promoting.

A few "**********s" aren't going to destroy activity on the site. If anything, they are contributing to it.

Why is Donald Trump, getting blamed for the actions of members that have been here for years? The ones supporting Trump, are just a few of them? How does that influence the activity of others? It sounds like an excuse to not look at the real problems within the liberty movement.

Like, why aren't we supporting Vermin Supreme?

[wmmonk]

It's not our fault if non-libertarian Donald Trump is going to create an environment that will end up being very helpful for libertarians...

When you say "an environment that will end up being very helpful for libertarians...", what exactly do you mean?

[juleswin]

Maybe I'm just not asleep. Before Hitler was elected Chancellor he was just a lowly corporal and a minor political activist. It's a much larger jump to think that an anti-communist political activist would start stuffing Jews into ovens than that a Casino mogul would do likewise to Muslims.

Hitler really? its one thing for his fanboys to think he is the next coming of George Washington but thinking he is the next Hitler is just crazy. For one, unlike with Hitler, the economy would completely tank under his proposed economic policies. The man is a poser working to get Hillary elected. He is not a conservative, not a nationalist of any kind except for maybe a zionist and if magically he is allowed to win, his presidency won't change much(i.e won't be allowed to implement his policies)

My worry is not that he would kill anyone other than the people the Israelis want to kill, its the fact that another politician has pulled the wool over our heads yet again and a whole swat of people who have supposedly woken up fell for it.

[AuH20]

A few "**********s" aren't going to destroy activity on the site. If anything, they are contributing to it.

Why is Donald Trump, getting blamed for the actions of members that have been here for years? The ones supporting Trump, are just a few of them? How does that influence the activity of others? It sounds like an excuse to not look at the real problems within the liberty movement.

Like, why aren't we supporting Vermin Supreme?

It's not like Trump supporters are running around stating that Donald Trump is the next Thomas Jefferson. We admit his faults and statist tendencies. Meanwhile, the other camp, the detractors, are assured he will be Hitler, Mussolini and Castro all rolled into one. We have one side actively promoting histrionics, while the other side is saying , 'Hey, there are a few good things here, but we have to wait and see."

[juleswin]

You are delusional.

No he is not delusional, remember Bush's "we have to abandon the free market principles to save the free market". It all makes sense when you are not over working your brain cells. They have to save those brain cells for mental activities as demanding as making sense of what Trump is saying.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmi8cJG0BJo

[kahless]

Second Thessalonians chapter 2 doesn't really leave a whole lot of room for 'interpretation' on that score.

Oh come on Gunny, how so?


2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

btw - the closest we have come in this race with a candidate using his faith to promote his candidacy is Ted Cruz and his supporters like Glenn Beck.

[CPUd]

It's not like Trump supporters are running around stating that Donald Trump is the next Thomas Jefferson. We admit his faults and statist tendencies. Meanwhile, the other camp, the detractors, are assured he will be Hitler, Mussolini and Castro all rolled into one. We have one side actively promoting histrionics, while the other side is saying , 'Hey, there are a few good things here, but we have to wait and see."

You want it to be like that, you got it.

[nikcers]

No he is not delusional, remember Bush's "we have to abandon the free market principles to save the free market".

Trump reminds me more of Bush then anyone else. Everyone thinks they are smarter then Trump, that's one thing everyone likes about him. The doublethink though is like deja vu.

[Philmanoman]

And...low and behold...donald supporters will lie just like he does.

Im sorry...ive seen enough to know a large number of people who think trump is some kind of god...

Go ahead and read as many trump supporters comments as you can stomach...we should make a database of them all.
You wont find common sense in a one...honestly.

One word could sum the whole database up
Delusional

[TheTexan]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.


Don't ever let anyone tell you who you can or can't vote for. Your vote is yours. Noone can take it away from you.

Unless you're a felon obviously.

[thoughtomator]

Maybe I'm just not asleep. Before Hitler was elected Chancellor he was just a lowly corporal and a minor political activist. It's a much larger jump to think that an anti-communist political activist would start stuffing Jews into ovens than that a Casino mogul would do likewise to Muslims.

If you're siding with the Muslims in any way, you're suicidal. They literally want you dead, your children dead, your grave dug up and bones scattered. It's in their holy book.

Alternatively, you can be converted by force and join the Borg.

[thoughtomator]

You are delusional.

Honestly, until you are ready to propose an alternative, it's time for you to STFU and stop whining like a baby. You are age-regressing as we watch.

[Petar]

When you say "an environment that will end up being very helpful for libertarians...", what exactly do you mean?

I think that it will be an environment where rather than having a coordinated PR campaign of a globalist cabal dictating every single thing that a President is supposed to pretend to be trying to do, you will have an imperfect leader actually sincerely trying to improve things instead.

It's going to be chaos, but it is going to be the kind of chaos that allows people to start actually dealing with reality, for once.

[LatinsforPaul]

If you're siding with the Muslims in any way, you're suicidal. They literally want you dead, your children dead, your grave dug up and bones scattered. It's in their holy book.

Alternatively, you can be converted by force and join the Borg.

Wow, and you are a Ron Paul supporter. You definitely have been listening to FOX News and Republicans for to long.

[nikcers]

Wow, and you are a Ron Paul supporter. You definitely have been listening to FOX News and Republicans for to long.

I'm sure at some point people were saying... but Hitler was our least bad choice!

[misterx]

I'm sure at some point people were saying... but Hitler was our least bad choice!

I don't think so, but they were saying George Bush is Hitler, and they were saying Ronald Reagan is Hitler. Where are the gas chambers that they built?

[r3volution 3.0]

Rand has already said what he will do.

Yea, but when he said that, many months ago, I'm sure he hadn't even considered the possibility of Trump winning.

He was probably envisioning a Romney-esque robot, some empty suit around whom the whole party would rally as per usual.

Trump is something else entirely.

He's much more dangerous, and the party is not going to rally around him.

...meaning there's going to be more reason and a better opportunity for Rand to oppose him in public.

I really hope he refuses to endorse, and leads the opposition in the Senate.

[jmdrake]

Ron Paul: I wouldn't support Trump as GOP nominee






http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/24/ron-paul-i-wouldnt-support-trump-as-gop-nominee.html

No surprise here. Ron didn't support John McCain or Mitt Romney either. I doubt he'll support Rubio or Cruz if either of them happen to squeak by the Trumpster.

[jmdrake]

If AJ were supporting Cruz, he could use that line. But supporting Trump isn't about being less of a purist than Ron Paul. It's about standing diametrically opposite agendas.

Alex Jones' #1 issue is 9/11 Truth and Donald Trump has come closer to pushing 9/11 Truth in GOP debates than Ron or Rand ever were willing to do. "The towers came down on your brother's watch. I'm just saying......Your brother flew the Bin Laden's out...I'm just saying....Bush lied about WMDs to get us into war with Iraq....I'm just saying" The only joy I'm getting out of this election cycle is listening to Mark Levin's head implode and then explode and then grow back and then implode again over Trump's (weak I'm just saying) trutherisms. Of course Trump was saying some of this stuff long ago when Rand was still in the race but Levin didn't go full bore anti Trump until Rand pulled out. Now that there's no competition but Cruz and to a lesser extent Rubio, Levin has taken the gloves off and acting like he's just heard this stuff.

[Origanalist]

Honestly, until you are ready to propose an alternative, it's time for you to STFU and stop whining like a baby. You are age-regressing as we watch.

Maybe you should STFU, Trump is not a alternative he's a joke.

[thoughtomator]

Wow, and you are a Ron Paul supporter. You definitely have been listening to FOX News and Republicans for to long.

I've read the Koran, the Hadiths, and studied Islamic history. You very obviously most definitely have not, or my statement would be considered to be quite mild in comparison to the things I could say.

Muhammad:
- was a raving lunatic justly shunned in his hometown who eventually became so obnoxious they exiled him;
- started his career as a highwayman, bandit and thief
- ordered multiple assassinations for the crime of making fun of him
- commited a great many mass murders
- captured and owned slaves and raped them
- married a 6 year old girl and raped her at age 9
- repeatedly claimed divine sanction for whoever he wanted to have sex with, no matter how grossly inappropriate
- made false peace with enemies for the specific and premeditated intention of betraying them and committing genocide, which he did
- established the Islamic practice of "convert or die"
- is considered by Islam to be a faultless, perfect paragon of human behavior to be emulated by all Muslims


This is canon. I made not a word of this up, and exaggerate none of it.

Go ahead, go to the source and try to prove me wrong. It will blow your fucking mind into the next galaxy.

[thoughtomator]

Maybe you should STFU, Trump is not a alternative he's a joke.

The pretense of representative government is the joke. If Trump is also a joke then he fits in perfectly.

[idiom]

I reckon Ron might Support Trump if Rand were VP

[jmdrake]

"Godwin's Law" is one of the stupidest things to ever infect the Internet, and is used mostly to PC people into swallowing fascism.

Yeah...except Hitler wasn't a fascist. Hitler was a national socialist. (Where the word "nazi" comes from.) Mussolini was a fascist. Trump is a fascist. It's got nothing to do with hating Muslims or Mexicans or whoever. It's got everything to do with economic control. He's using fear based populism because it works. George Wallace did the same thing and he was a progressive believe it or not.

Back to Trump. Anyone, like Trump, who thinks the government forcing you to sell your land to a private developer is "great" is a fascist. Anyone, like Trump, who thinks America "deserves" an assault weapons ban is a fascist. Trump mixes some good stuff with his fascism but don't they all?

[Origanalist]

The pretense of representative government is the joke. If Trump is also a joke then he fits in perfectly.

I have no argument to that.

[jmdrake]

I reckon Ron might Support Trump if Rand were VP

Dear God please no!

[thoughtomator]

Trump mixes some good stuff with his fascism but don't they all?

No, the version of Fascism that rules the Western world today has no good stuff mixed in with it. It's all bad, without exception.

[jmdrake]

No, the version of Fascism that rules the Western world today has no good stuff mixed in with it. It's all bad, without exception.

So let me see if I understand you. You support Trump's "The government should take your property at gun point (and pay you something for it) to give to a private developer" as a "less bad" version of fascism? Ummmm....okay.

[r3volution 3.0]

I reckon Ron might Support Trump if Rand were VP

For my part, if Rand accepted a VP offer from Trump, I still wouldn't vote for that ticket, and I'd stop supporting Rand.

[jmdrake]

Question for the Trump supporters. Why not support Ted Cruz? Seriously? I can't think of any reason why Cruz is worse than Trump. I can think of reasons why I don't like Cruz but they equally apply to Trump.

[AuH20]

Question for the Trump supporters. Why not support Ted Cruz? Seriously? I can't think of any reason why Cruz is worse than Trump. I can think of reasons why I don't like Cruz but they equally apply to Trump.

Goldman Sachs. Chad Sweet and others. Cruz's donors and staff are horrid. Like really really bad. Cruz talks a good game but his actions speak otherwise.

[r3volution 3.0]

Question for the Trump supporters. Why not support Ted Cruz? Seriously? I can't think of any reason why Cruz is worse than Trump. I can think of reasons why I don't like Cruz but they equally apply to Trump.

Indeed, on the face of it, Cruz is much better than Trump policy-wise.

(under the face of it, however, Cruz is dog shit of approximately the same flavor, which is why I'll be supporting neither of them)

[idiom]

For my part, if Rand accepted a VP offer from Trump, I still wouldn't vote for that ticket, and I'd stop supporting Rand.

What if it moderated Trumps Platform?

[jmdrake]

Goldman Sachs. Chad Sweet and others. Cruz's donors and staff are horrid. Like really really bad. Cruz talks a good game but his actions speak otherwise.

Trump took money from people like that when he got bailed out multiple times. Now as a result of those bailouts he's rich enough not to need donations. Try again.

[jmdrake]

What if it moderated Trumps Platform?

Trump doesn't have a platform. He's an "etch-a-sketch" candidate just like Mitt Romney. In the little bit of the debate I watched tonight he was called out on why his "I'll let the good illegal immigrants back" plan supposedly isn't amnesty.

[r3volution 3.0]

What if it moderated Trumps Platform?

What if Trump is actually Ron Paul in a rubber suit?

...in other words, that's not a possibility.

If Trump for some incomprehensible reason asked Rand to be his VP at this point, it would be Rand who would have to conform to Trump, not the other way round, as Rand has no leverage (1 delegate). Thus, if Rand accepted, I would infer that Rand agreed to conform to Trump, which would mean I could no longer support him. Anyway, the whole thing is ridiculous. There's no chance of this happening. Trump definitely won't offer, and Rand definitely wouldn't accept if he did.

[AuH20]

Trump took money from people like that when he got bailed out multiple times. Now as a result of those bailouts he's rich enough not to need donations. Try again.

But do they actually control him? He filed chapter 11 a few times and eventually repaid his creditors. In comparison, Cruz will not have much autonomy with that much money hanging over his head.

[jmdrake]

But do they actually control him? He filed chapter 11 a few times and eventually repaid his creditors. In comparison, Cruz will not have much autonomy with that much money hanging over his head.

Ah. So if you can steal enough money so you can con your supporters into thinking you no longer need the thieves then it's all good? Al Capone for president?

[r3volution 3.0]

But do they actually control him? He filed chapter 11 a few times and eventually repaid his creditors. In comparison, Cruz will not have much autonomy with that much money hanging over his head.

What would Trump do with his alleged autonomy differently from what Cruz would do without autonomy?

[AuH20]

What would Trump do with his alleged autonomy differently from what Cruz would do without autonomy?

whatever he wants. We're supposed to elect independent candidates as opposed to candidates that represent distinct special interests.

[AuH20]

Ah. So if you can steal enough money so you can con your supporters into thinking you no longer need the thieves then it's all good? Al Capone for president?

At this point it doesn't matter. Let's see what Trump can do.

[r3volution 3.0]

whatever he wants

Which is what?

[r3volution 3.0]

At this point it doesn't matter. Let's see what Trump can do.

We have to elect him to find out what he's for, kind of deal...

:rolleyes:

[AuH20]

Which is what?

whatever he deems is necessary. It's a leap of faith. We have been raped by politicians telling us falsehoods. Let Trump have his shot. Country is on it's death bed. It can't get worse. Think of Trump as an experimental drug not yet cleared by the FDA that will be used on a terminal patient.

[Origanalist]

At this point it doesn't matter. Let's see what Trump can do.

Lol, you have to elect the President to see what's inside. HAHAHAHA

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachments/general-chit-chat/918746d1370961072-another-scandal-hillary-sex-drugs-prostitutes-minors-secret-service-cover-up-memos-what-difference-does-make.jpg

[jmdrake]

At this point it doesn't matter. Let's see what Trump can do.

I'm going to laugh my ass off when President Trump makes good on his pre campaign promise to rid the U.S. of assault rifles.

[jmdrake]

whatever he deems is necessary. It's a leap of faith. We have been raped by politicians telling us falsehoods. Let Trump have his shot. Country is on it's death bed. It can't get worse.

That's what the Germans were saying in the 1930s. Hyper inflation. Loss of international prestige. Economy in the dumps. Loss of historic German territory. It can't get any worse.

[AuH20]

That's what the Germans were saying in the 1930s. Hyper inflation. Loss of international prestige. Economy in the dumps. Loss of historic German territory. It can't get any worse.

But that was after Versailles.

[r3volution 3.0]

Portrait of a Trumpkin, presented without further comment..






But do they actually control him? He filed chapter 11 a few times and eventually repaid his creditors. In comparison, Cruz will not have much autonomy with that much money hanging over his head.What would Trump do with his alleged autonomy differently from what Cruz would do without autonomy?whatever he wants. We're supposed to elect independent candidates as opposed to candidates that represent distinct special interests.Which is what?whatever he deems is necessary. It's a leap of faith. We have been raped by politicians telling us falsehoods. Let Trump have his shot. Country is on it's death bed. It can't get worse.

[jmdrake]

But that was after Versailles.

Your point is.....? We are living after 9/11. Everything happens after something.

[jmdrake]

But that was after Versailles.

Your point is.....? We are living after 9/11. Everything happens after something.

[AuH20]

Your point is.....? We are living after 9/11. Everything happens after something.

But we haven't been humiliated nationally like the Germans were. There are many Americans walking around with a chip on their shoulder.

[jmdrake]

Lol, you have to elect the President to see what's inside. HAHAHAHA

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachments/general-chit-chat/918746d1370961072-another-scandal-hillary-sex-drugs-prostitutes-minors-secret-service-cover-up-memos-what-difference-does-make.jpg

That's kinda like Obamacare. "We have to pass it to find out what's inside."

[jmdrake]

But we haven't been humiliated nationally like the Germans were. There are many Americans walking around with a chip on their shoulder.

You said things are so bad that they can't get worse. Your silly "counter point" to me just proves that things can get worse. Question. Are you one of those people that said "Yes" to the question of "Should we bomb Agriba?"

[AuH20]

You said things are so bad that they can't get worse. Your silly "counter point" to me just proves that things can get worse. Question. Are you one of those people that said "Yes" to the question of "Should we bomb Agriba?"

Things are bad from a first world perspective. We don't have a representative government. The rule of law is selective. Is Donald Trump really going to make Washington more corrupt? C'mon, let's be serious here. We just survived the Dubya and Obama years. Trump looks like an angel comparatively.

[Origanalist]

You said things are so bad that they can't get worse. Your silly "counter point" to me just proves that things can get worse. Question. Are you one of those people that said "Yes" to the question of "Should we bomb Agriba?"

Would it make America great again? If so, I think we should bomb them.

[kahless]

I think the Trump/Cruz haters are really secretly Clinton or Sanders supporters. No one here is saying Trump and Cruz are fantastic candidates but at least they support some policy positions that are similar to Rand or Ron or will dial a few things back a bit. I believe more so with Trump than Cruz. Where as Clinton or Sanders for the most part things are about to get far worse then they were under Obama and Bush.

[jmdrake]

I think the Trump/Cruz haters are really secretly Clinton or Sanders supporters. No one here is saying Trump and Cruz are fantastic candidates but at least they support some policy positions that are similar to Rand or Ron or will dial a few things back a bit. I believe more so with Trump than Cruz. Where as Clinton or Sanders for the most part things are about to get far worse then they were under Obama and Bush.

Please name one actual policy position where Trump is closer to Ron or Rand than Cruz. Just one.

[jmdrake]

Things are bad from a first world perspective. We don't have a representative government. The rule of law is selective. Is Donald Trump really going to make Washington more corrupt? C'mon, let's be serious here. We just survived the Dubya and Obama years. Trump looks like an angel comparatively.

Dubya and Obama both looked quite different when they were running than when they got elected. That's the part that you are missing. Go back to the pre campaign Donald Trump and read what he had to say about gun control.

[AuH20]

Dubya and Obama both looked quite different when they were running than when they got elected. That's the part that you are missing. Go back to the pre campaign Donald Trump and read what he had to say about gun control.

Yes, donors tend to do that.

[P3ter_Griffin]

Please name one actual policy position where Trump is closer to Ron or Rand than Cruz. Just one.

Being neutral on Israel.

[r3volution 3.0]

Being neutral on Israel.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm5Je73bYOY

[P3ter_Griffin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm5Je73bYOY

Yes, we saw it was such a beneficial political stance that Rand decided to back off of it. I.e. why the hell would Trump profess these positions if he didn't believe them?

[r3volution 3.0]

Yes, we saw it was such a beneficial political stance that Rand decided to back off of it. I.e. why the hell would Trump profess these positions if he didn't believe them?

I don't know.

If he wanted to be neutral and not alienate the Arabs, why did he make a campaign ad for the most violently Zionist Israeli PM in decades?

[kahless]

Please name one actual policy position where Trump is closer to Ron or Rand than Cruz. Just one.

Do you not do any research at all or are just blinded by all the Trump hate. This is just off the top of my head, I am not even trying. I am sure I could probably find more.

- Health insurance competition across state lines.
- National right to concealed carry.
- Defund sanctuary cities.

Other similarities in immigration polices.
- Rand/Trump both support deportation of criminal illegal aliens.
- Both support border security measures with some differences. Rand wants to use drones, satellite tracking and physical barriers. Trump promotes a wall.
- End birthright citizenship. (Supported by Ron, Trump, Rand sponsored a bill in 2011, backed off it a bit more recently)
- Rand Paul a moratorium on Middle East immigration while Trump taking it a step further with a moratorium on Muslim immigration.

[P3ter_Griffin]

I don't know.

If he wanted to be neutral and not alienate the Arabs, why did he make a campaign ad for the most violently Zionist Israeli PM in decades?

Maybe he wants to be neutral so he can wipe his hands of a mass genocide of Palestinians? Either way neutral towards Israel is closer to Ron and Rand's position than Ted's.

[TheTexan]

whatever he deems is necessary. It's a leap of faith. We have been raped by politicians telling us falsehoods. Let Trump have his shot. Country is on it's death bed. It can't get worse. Think of Trump as an experimental drug not yet cleared by the FDA that will be used on a terminal patient.

He probably won't fulfill all his campaign promises, but as long as he gets rid of the Muslims and Mexicans I'm happy.

[William Tell]

Country is on it's death bed. It can't get worse.

:rolleyes: Oh, it will.

[nikcers]

I don't know.

If he wanted to be neutral and not alienate the Arabs, why did he make a campaign ad for the most violently Zionist Israeli PM in decades?

chaotic neutral

[Anti Federalist]

I have no "destroy the government" candidate to vote for. :( Trump hates snowden, is pro universal healthcare, pro-forced back doors on cellphones, etc... Sanders is a nice option, I figure he'll run up taxes, and boost welfare. So, probably can get on disability (retirement). It shouldn't be hard under Sanders Rule. Under Hillary, well, I'll probably be executed, I'm not in good enough shape to be a slave, and she hates men. She's just with Bill the Serial Rapist because he's popular, and he only rapes "dumb" women that she detests as much as males.

Sanders 2016! Fuck work....

Vermin Supreme in 2016.

You get all that and a free pony!

[Krugminator2]

Do you not do any research at all or are just blinded by all the Trump hate. This is just off the top of my head, I am not even trying. I am sure I could probably find more.

- Health insurance competition across state lines.
- National right to concealed carry.
- Defund sanctuary cities.

Other similarities in immigration polices.
- Rand/Trump both support deportation of criminal illegal aliens.
- Both support border security measures with some differences. Rand wants to use drones, satellite tracking and physical barriers. Trump promotes a wall.
- End birthright citizenship. (Supported by Ron, Trump, Rand sponsored a bill in 2011, backed off it a bit more recently)
- Rand Paul a moratorium on Middle East immigration while Trump taking it a step further with a moratorium on Muslim immigration.


Trump is a socialist on health care. He is not closer than Cruz to Ron or Rand on health care. Trump is closer to Bernie Sanders than he is to Rand. You don't think Cruz is for shopping for health insurance across state lines? That is a layup issue that frankly I don't Trump cares about at all. Trump was for an assault weapons ban. He is certainly not better than Cruz on the Second Amendment. Cruz was endorsed by Gun Owners of America.

Literally, NONE of the things you listed are issues where Trump is better than Cruz. My preference of Presidential candidates, as a libertarian, Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, Hillary, Trump, then Sanders.

[NoOneButPaul]

Well Ron, who the hell should be the next President? One of those dudes will be. You didn't run, your son pussed out on us.

Couldnt agree more.

I keep asking this question and no one is bothering to answer it: Who should be the next President?

Everyone's answer, including Ron's, seems to be we should just sit this out and let the cards fall as they may but if the choice is Trump or Clinton how can anyone here not be voting for Trump? Clinton is pure evil and we all know it.

[NoOneButPaul]

Trump is a socialist on health care. He is not closer than Cruz to Ron or Rand on health care. Trump is closer to Bernie Sanders than he is to Rand. You don't think Cruz is for shopping for health insurance across state lines? That is a layup issue that frankly I don't Trump cares about at all. Trump was for an assault weapons ban. He is certainly not better than Cruz on the Second Amendment. Cruz was endorsed by Gun Owners of America.

Literally, NONE of the things you listed are issues where Trump is better than Cruz. My preference of Presidential candidates, as a libertarian, Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, Hillary, Trump, then Sanders.

Cruz is obviously a Goldman Sachs puppet. The fact all of his supporters ignore this simple fact is pretty remarkable.

[erowe1]

Couldnt agree more.

I keep asking this question and no one is bothering to answer it: Who should be the next President?

Everyone's answer, including Ron's, seems to be we should just sit this out and let the cards fall as they may but if the choice is Trump or Clinton how can anyone here not be voting for Trump? Clinton is pure evil and we all know it.

First of all, at this moment the choice isn't Trump or Clinton. Trump has to win the Republican nomination. And out of the people running for it, he's the worst.

Second of all, no, I would not support Trump over Clinton. All of the available evidence says that he would be as bad as her or worse.

[erowe1]

Well Ron, who the hell should be the next President? One of those dudes will be. You didn't run, your son pussed out on us.

Who did you vote for in the general election in 2008 and 2012?

[kahless]

Trump is a socialist on health care. He is not closer than Cruz to Ron or Rand on health care. Trump is closer to Bernie Sanders than he is to Rand. You don't think Cruz is for shopping for health insurance across state lines? That is a layup issue that frankly I don't Trump cares about at all. Trump was for an assault weapons ban. He is certainly not better than Cruz on the Second Amendment. Cruz was endorsed by Gun Owners of America.

Literally, NONE of the things you listed are issues where Trump is better than Cruz. My preference of Presidential candidates, as a libertarian, Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, Hillary, Trump, then Sanders.

Do you really want to go there by bringing up candidate flip-flops when discussing Ted Goldman Cruz, are you kidding me?

Trump is being openly mocked including in last nights debate for continually repeating he will allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines and creating a free market and competition in healthcare. Sanders is for single payer health care. Clearly you have not been paying attention on this issue and are just buying into the anti-Trump talking points without doing your own research. (most likely lies from the Cruz campaign since lying is what Cruz does best)

[CaptUSA]

Couldnt agree more.

I keep asking this question and no one is bothering to answer it: Who should be the next President?

Everyone's answer, including Ron's, seems to be we should just sit this out and let the cards fall as they may but if the choice is Trump or Clinton how can anyone here not be voting for Trump? Clinton is pure evil and we all know it.You should really change your screen name. I think you're missing the point.

[Krugminator2]

Do you really want to go there by bringing up candidate flip-flops when discussing Ted Goldman Cruz, are you kidding me?

Trump is being openly mocked including in last nights debate for continually repeating he will allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines and creating a free market and competition in healthcare. Sanders is for single payer health care. Clearly you have not been paying attention on this issue and are just buying into the anti-Trump talking points without doing your own research. (most likely lies from the Cruz campaign since lying is what Cruz does best)


I have no idea what Cruz has said about Trump or what the anti-Trump talking points are. I have said the exact same things on this forum like a broken record since Trump announced he was running. I have held these views of Trump since I read his book "The America We Deserve" at least ten years ago. Trump is clear that he still supports Canadian style health care.

I don't have any problem with Ted Cruz having a brokerage account with Goldman Sachs or having a wife who works a broker for high net worth clients in a regional Goldman Sachs office. I don't understand why that is supposed to be thing.

[AuH20]

I don't have any problem with Ted Cruz having a brokerage account with Goldman Sachs or having a wife who works a broker for high net worth clients in a regional Goldman Sachs office. I don't understand why that is supposed to be thing.

You don't have a problem with Chad Sweet either? There are so many red flags with Cruz. And I'm speaking as someone who originally sent him money to defeat Dewhurst.

[Krugminator2]

Cruz is obviously a Goldman Sachs puppet. The fact all of his supporters ignore this simple fact is pretty remarkable.


I don't know what a Goldman Sachs puppet is or how Ted Cruz is a Goldman Sachs puppet. It isn't that I am a Cruz supporter. I'll still just end up voting for Rand because he is on the ballot. But I am saying he is the best choice for a libertarian of the candidates running in the Republican and Democratic parties.

[Krugminator2]

You don't have a problem with Chad Sweet either? There are so many red flags with Cruz. And I'm speaking as someone who originally sent him money to defeat Dewhurst.

I have a huge problem with the people around Cruz. I brought it up that he was surrounded by neocons when I first posted on the forums. I have an infinitely bigger problem with Trump.

[abruzz0]

I think I've become okay with a humane sprinkle of authoritarianism. People need to get put back in shape somehow.

[wmmonk]

Vermin Supreme in 2016.

You get all that and a free pony!

+rep for Vermin Supreme support!

[abruzz0]

All aboard the Trump Train, boiz.
I voted for Ron 4 times (2 primaries, 2 generals) out of principle and passion.

But this year, I'm on board with a proven winner who gets on stage and has some balls.

2016 - Year of the MAGA

[GunnyFreedom]

I think I've become okay with a humane sprinkle of authoritarianism. People need to get put back in shape somehow.


All aboard the Trump Train, boiz.
I voted for Ron 4 times (2 primaries, 2 generals) out of principle and passion.

But this year, I'm on board with a proven winner who gets on stage and has some balls.

2016 - Year of the MAGA

Pleasure in wickedness instead of love of truth.

[PierzStyx]

I'm sorry, I'm kind of pissed off right now. I'm actually ticked at Ron for telling me who NOT to vote for, when he didn't run, and sent his son instead..... who literally quit on us, not even midstream. If nothing else, Rand should have stayed in for the Paul ardent supporters.

I'll level with you, I was never a Rand fan. I've registered complaints and criticisms on these very forums about him. But the fact that he stopped wasting money on a losing race isn't one of them. For his career focusing on the Senate is a better bet.

[PierzStyx]

Couldnt agree more.

I keep asking this question and no one is bothering to answer it: Who should be the next President?

Everyone's answer, including Ron's, seems to be we should just sit this out and let the cards fall as they may but if the choice is Trump or Clinton how can anyone here not be voting for Trump? Clinton is pure evil and we all know it.

And Trump is no different! That is the issue. Saying one is better than the other is lunacy. If anything, Hillary is probably better than Trump if you delusionally think the lesser evil is better. Hillary is your standard cookie cutter liberal, like her husband. Trump though is literally a fascist. http://fee.org/articles/waking-up-to-the-reality-of-fascism/

[thoughtomator]

And Trump is no different! That is the issue. Saying one is better than the other is lunacy. If anything, Hillary is probably better than Trump if you delusionally think the lesser evil is better. Hillary is your standard cookie cutter liberal, like her husband. Trump though is literally a fascist. http://fee.org/articles/waking-up-to-the-reality-of-fascism/

Wait, wut?

Are you that thoroughly unfamiliar with her record?

[AuH20]

Wait, wut?

Are you that thoroughly unfamiliar with her record?

Cookie cutter as in associates going missing and being found dead in odd places.

[thoughtomator]

Cookie cutter as in associates going missing and being found dead in odd places.

Ah my mistake. I thought it was cookie cutter as in laughing maniacally about destabilizing the entire middle east and causing Europe to be flooded with Islamic refugees while repeatedly collecting quarter million dollar speaking fees from Goldman Sachs.


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

[enhanced_deficit]

Would Ron Paul support Rubio as GOP nominee - NO

Would Ron Paul support Cruz as GOP nominee - NO

Would Ron Paul support Kasich as GOP nominee - NO

Would Ron Paul support Carson as GOP nominee - NO

Would Ron Paul support Clinton - NO

Would Ron Paul be happy to see end of neocons/money lobbies oligarchy - probably yes.

[erowe1]

Would Ron Paul be happy to see end of neocons/money lobbies oligarchy - probably yes.

That's not on the ballot.