PDA

View Full Version : Why does Paul continue to put up with the hate?




Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:22 PM
Ron Paul always does well in the debates. Even if his delivery is off, the sincerity of his message always resonates with the audience. Evidence of this comes in both the applause and the boos he receives. The applause from the people who recognize his dedication to liberty, and boos from the people who fear such dedication.

However, no matter how well he does in the debates, or how strongly his message is received, it is crystal clear that Republicans absolutely hate Paul. Even on stage, they treat Paul like an ignorant child rather than the educated adult that he is. Watching this disgusting treatment of a legitimate, honest and powerful candidate is intolerable.

The question I ask is why? Why does he continue to take this abuse?

Although still early in the primary season, I think it is becoming clear that Paul will not crack third place in any states. While third place is amazing for an anti-establishment candidate like Paul, I think his campaign could accomplish so much more with a third party. This would be a true "revolution," in every right.

What does Paul and his supporters want more than anything else? Liberty. Will this happen through the GOP? Not as long as they know they have power indefinitely. What Republicans need is to learn that if they forget their roots, the roots of the Constitution, they will be out of power.

With Paul running as a third party candidate, there would be no way the GOP could win the White House. Will that mean a Democrat at the top? More than likely. But frankly, I'm at the point where Democrats and Republicans are no different, and looking objectively at the last few administrations, the only Democratic president was much more "conservative" than George Bush.

Paul has a chance winning as a third party candidate, especially if Bloomberg joins in February. Besides, would you rather Paul continue the GOP campaign and not get the nomination, or would you rather Paul be on the ballot for President, even if as a third party candidate? I think the answer is clear.

I think New Hampshire should be a time to assess this question. If Paul doesn't get second place or higher, then I believe he should seek a third party nomination before "sore loser laws" take effect and keep him off the ballot in some states (the law says in around six states that a person who lost in a primary for one party cannot run in the election under another party; this includes Texas).

Paul is a once in a life-time candidate, and frankly, we will be hard pressed to find another candidate with the same message who will do as well as Paul has in grassroots and fundraising. If the GOP will not respect him, there are third parties who will.

Sorry, just my two-cents for the night.

Richandler
01-05-2008, 08:22 PM
He has too. If Ron goes off on anyone the campaign is done. His humbleness has kept him in this race and I wouldn't want anything else in a President.

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:24 PM
He has too. If Ron goes off on anyone the campaign is done. His humbleness has kept him in this race and I wouldn't want anything else in a President.

Of course. He is a good man and above the puerile insults. I mean, on a broader scale, why does he put up with a party who despises him?

idiom
01-05-2008, 08:26 PM
He only needs to be in second or third after Super tuesday. Everyone else will tap out and his exposure will sky rocket as he becomes serious.

In a general election he needs one party behind him, otherwise he has two parties hating him.

Paulitician
01-05-2008, 08:26 PM
Of course. He is a good man and above the puerile insults. I mean, on a broader scale, why does he put up with a party who despises him?
Because he'd be completely shut out if he didn't.

moostraks
01-05-2008, 08:27 PM
THird party candidates are given even less respect...he stands up for old Republican values and has served this country well as a Republican, it is his party, and they are the defecters...

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:28 PM
Because he'd be completely shut out if he didn't.

Not necessarily. Sure, he wouldn't be in the "Republican Primary Debates," but again, what's the point if he'll be shut out of the nomination. I think he has the support now to cross the threshold of the CPD debates that will occur after the nomination, and we'll definitely get a chance to vote for him in the general election where as we wouldn't if he doesn't get the nomination.

blakjak
01-05-2008, 08:29 PM
Although still early in the primary season, I think it is becoming clear that Paul will not crack third place in any states.

I'm slowly coming to this realization too. The core Republican base is just not open to accepting Paul's anti-war stance.

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:30 PM
THird party candidates are given even less respect...he stands up for old Republican values and has served this country well as a Republican, it is his party, and they are the defecters...

But at what point do you say the GOP is dead? If they treat Paul, one of their own, like a kooky outsider, then they are no GOP I ever knew, and I don't think they have any hope of coming back.

I just want a chance to vote for Ron Paul, and I don't think Republicans will allow him to get the nomination. In fact, I think they would do everything in their power to stop it (FOX forum, per example)

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:32 PM
I'm slowly coming to this realization too. The core Republican base is just not open to accepting Paul's anti-war stance.

Which is absolutely sad. The core Republican base no longer cares for limited government, limited spending, and a sensible foreign policy. Paul is too great of a man to waste his time with such vermin.

RPFTW!
01-05-2008, 08:32 PM
Its his personality, RP is a nice humble quiet guy, lets just let him be himself

literatim
01-05-2008, 08:32 PM
They are doing to Paul what they did to Reagan.

Paulitician
01-05-2008, 08:32 PM
Well then that's just life... it does not end with Ron Paul. Beside, the fight has barely begun. We've finished just 1 state. Why finish off your chances by going off the Republican ticket when we're not even past Super Tuesday yet?

N13
01-05-2008, 08:34 PM
I'm slowly coming to this realization too. The core Republican base is just not open to accepting Paul's anti-war stance.

He could solve that by asking them how they plan on paying for their wars, by raising taxes or increasing the debt.

Put them on the defensive.

Dieseler
01-05-2008, 08:37 PM
The other candidates aside from Ron Paul prove that evolution exists.
Have you seen the movie Idiocy yet lol?

Dr. Paul was cool enough to make it through the initial five on one assault. Very Impressive.
I would have been on somebody's ass at that point.
Cool heads prevail.
Dr. Paul took it in the end. His maturity and knowledge shined through where the others were plainly just lacking or lieing.

WilliamC
01-05-2008, 08:37 PM
Yet another newbie suggesting 3rd party...too many of these lately. Even with the disrespect from the neocons it is far easier to use the pre-existing Republican party structure to run in than go for a third party run, which has zero chance of success.
Folks, if you really support Ron Paul then follow his lead and let him decide where he can best win. Right now the continual drumbeat for him to quit the Republican race is counterproductive. Why don't we try and drive the neocons out instead?

Giuliani was there on 911
01-05-2008, 08:39 PM
I have no fucking idea and if he loses I'm not going to blame the MSM, I'm blaming him ! I don't give a shit if that's just how he is as a person, that's how I am too. But when we're talking about something as unbelieveably important as running as president on Ron Paul's policies then I would turn into a mean son of a bitch in a split second.

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:39 PM
Well then that's just life... it does not end with Ron Paul. Beside, the fight has barely begun. We've finished just 1 state. Why finish off your chances by going off the Republican ticket when we're not even past Super Tuesday yet?

I definitely agree with you. I'm more inclined to push him to jump now, but I understand the desire to wait till Super Tuesday. My main concern is just the Sore Loser laws in the six states. But, if things don't work out how we all want them too, I think he should definitely jump to a third party.

Hey, he did it once before!

Caulfield
01-05-2008, 08:41 PM
Yet another newbie suggesting 3rd party...too many of these lately. Even with the disrespect from the neocons it is far easier to use the pre-existing Republican party structure to run in than go for a third party run, which has zero chance of success.
Folks, if you really support Ron Paul then follow his lead and let him decide where he can best win. Right now the continual drumbeat for him to quit the Republican race is counterproductive. Why don't we try and drive the neocons out instead?

In all honestly, there's more of a chance of Paul winning as a third party candidate rather than driving all the neocons out of the Republican Party. Of course, you can accomplish the latter with a shot at the former. Show the Republicans that the libertarian voice in the GOP can't be ignored any longer by costing them four years in the white house.

Peace&Freedom
01-05-2008, 09:15 PM
In all honestly, there's more of a chance of Paul winning as a third party candidate rather than driving all the neocons out of the Republican Party. Of course, you can accomplish the latter with a shot at the former. Show the Republicans that the libertarian voice in the GOP can't be ignored any longer by costing them four years in the white house.

It's not either/or. In a brokered convention scenario, Paul could gain 25-30% of the total delegates, 2 other candidates could get 30%---no one has the 50%+1 delegates needed to win prior to the con. Paul goes for and gets the LP nomination. Let's say his fundraising wave (money bombs) continue, and he shows in the polls in late spring and summer as the best candidate versus Hillary/Obama.

He can walk in to Minneapolis and demand the Republican nomination based on 1) already being on the ballot in November, splitting the conservative vote if they don't pick him, 2) being a proven fundraiser who will run a competitive race with or without the GOP, 3) doing better in the polls against Hillary/Obama. If he's rejected, it's the GOP who decided to lose the election. I think the rank and file delegates will go for Paul under this scenario. So Paul can use having a 3rd party line as leverage to get the Republican line.

Paul10
01-05-2008, 09:16 PM
....

blakjak
01-05-2008, 09:18 PM
He would need a billion dollars to run third party. No one is going to pay attention.

You're forgetting inflation. He would need two billion dollars!

Laja
01-05-2008, 09:24 PM
It's not either/or. In a brokered convention scenario, Paul could gain 25-30% of the total delegates, 2 other candidates could get 30%---no one has the 50%+1 delegates needed to win prior to the con. Paul goes for and gets the LP nomination. Let's say his fundraising wave (money bombs) continue, and he shows in the polls in late spring and summer as the best candidate versus Hillary/Obama.

He can walk in to Minneapolis and demand the Republican nomination based on 1) already being on the ballot in November, splitting the conservative vote if they don't pick him, 2) being a proven fundraiser who will run a competitive race with or without the GOP, 3) doing better in the polls against Hillary/Obama. If he's rejected, it's the GOP who decided to lose the election. I think the rank and file delegates will go for Paul under this scenario. So Paul can use having a 3rd party line as leverage to get the Republican line.

BRILLIANT!

time4change
01-05-2008, 09:29 PM
In all honestly, there's more of a chance of Paul winning as a third party candidate rather than driving all the neocons out of the Republican Party.I don't post here often, but I'm always reading, and seriously...what's with all the mysterious 3rd party threads/posts popping up lately? How many times have reporters asked him this question, and now we've got to read these threads over and over? The primaries are just getting warmed up, and unlike many others, Ron Paul has the funds to fight till the end. You either want him for President, or you don't. Hoping he'll run 3rd party after NH makes me think that YOU DON'T.

Reminds me of Mark Strauss from the CNN YouTube debate:

Mark Strauss #1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mkJcFY1VsCE
Mark Strauss #2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=e7Qly0NQnUA

familydog
01-05-2008, 09:37 PM
Gotta love all this defeatist talk when the first primary hasn't even taken place.

anewvoice
01-05-2008, 09:39 PM
Because he has been dealing with this in Congress for 20+ years. This isn't new to him.

traitorist
01-05-2008, 09:43 PM
Gotta love all this defeatist talk when the first primary hasn't even taken place.

it's not defeatist, it's called talking about where Ron Paul and the campaign could use improvements. the debate tonight clearly showed me that Ron Paul doesn't seem ready to engage the enemies. is he waiting? what for? does he even have it in him? then what is the point of his revolution? to just sit there and let the traitors talk and take up valuable debate minutes?

Cigaboo
01-05-2008, 09:44 PM
Its his personality, RP is a nice humble quiet guy, lets just let him be himself

I agree. He isn't superman. He does his best, but he still has to stay true to himself to continue being genuine.

familydog
01-05-2008, 09:48 PM
it's not defeatist, it's called talking about where Ron Paul and the campaign could use improvements. the debate tonight clearly showed me that Ron Paul doesn't seem ready to engage the enemies. is he waiting? what for? does he even have it in him? then what is the point of his revolution? to just sit there and let the traitors talk and take up valuable debate minutes?

This crap talk about having more of a chance in a third party and he won't ever be able to get third in a primary sounds pretty defeatist to me.

MadViking10
01-05-2008, 09:52 PM
This crap talk about having more of a chance in a third party and he won't ever be able to get third in a primary sounds pretty defeatist to me.

I'm going to go on record and say this. IF Ron Paul loses the Republican nod and doesn't run third party, it's over. I would vote for someone else. I want him to fight right up to the end. I dont care how much it costs or what the chances are.

CountryRoads
01-05-2008, 10:06 PM
Of course. He is a good man and above the puerile insults. I mean, on a broader scale, why does he put up with a party who despises him?

He has to. 3rd party candidates cannot win in America because the other two just soak up the issues that the 3rd party candidates talk about until the 3rd party fades away from no being able to get elected. The system is set up to not allow a 3rd party power.

SeanEdwards
01-05-2008, 10:11 PM
Of course. He is a good man and above the puerile insults. I mean, on a broader scale, why does he put up with a party who despises him?

There's only one political game in this country, and it's based on two parties. Paul's use of the GOP as the vehicle to promote his libertarian ideals is now being revealed as genius. Paul has single-handedly done more to create libertarian political influence in America than the Libertarian party has done in their entire existence.

CountryRoads
01-05-2008, 10:13 PM
There's only one political game in this country, and it's based on two parties. Paul's use of the GOP as the vehicle to promote his libertarian ideals is now being revealed as genius. Paul has single-handedly done more to create libertarian political influence in America than the Libertarian party has done in their entire existence.

Yep and the Republican business globalization chickenhawk machine HATES him for it. Fox News and the neo-cons will go to considerable lengths to stop Ron Paul.

sasha_2008
01-05-2008, 10:19 PM
This is about more than Ron Paul. It is about saving this country by introducing the younger people to the concepts of individual liberty, limited government and the Constitution. The presidential campaign is a means to an ends. A peaceful revolution is the real goal. Ron Paul is a patriot and will stand proudly and take the abuse.

StarKissed
01-05-2008, 10:41 PM
Sometime during the Democratic Debate, the blonde lady asking some questions, reran a part of their debate for them and pointed out the ugliness of them at each other's throat. She let them know that the negativitly was not appreciated by the audience, and wanted to hear what they had to say for themselves.

The same type of audiences were watching when the other Republicans treated Dr. Paul badly, so I know the audience isn't going to have good thoughts on this.

The audience expected grown men to act respectively toward each other, in fact, they demanded it.

I know, I also wish he could be a little more assertive, but that is not him, and we may not need to worry about it anyway. Respect him for who he is...it just become a strong point.

Sometimes the people will see what they need to see.

noztnac
01-05-2008, 10:46 PM
I'm slowly coming to this realization too. The core Republican base is just not open to accepting Paul's anti-war stance.

You are right if we don't expose people to the realities of war. Check out my What is war?thread.

steve005
01-05-2008, 10:53 PM
bump

BreakYourChains
01-05-2008, 10:57 PM
it's not defeatist, it's called talking about where Ron Paul and the campaign could use improvements. the debate tonight clearly showed me that Ron Paul doesn't seem ready to engage the enemies. is he waiting? what for? does he even have it in him? then what is the point of his revolution? to just sit there and let the traitors talk and take up valuable debate minutes?

Some people are unreal here. Very quick to point blame and fingers. Can we do any better? Is he not just a human like us? Ron Paul is a gentleman, and a statesman. For me personally, I would have him no other way. He makes the others look childish, and if you guys think he has to stoop to their level to win, what is all of this for? He is principled and has integrity.

Please, do not start this ignorant talk of a 3rd party run. We are early in this race. Much can happen between now and September, when the Republican Convention is held. Who knows what can happen? Not all of the delegate votes must vote for their elected man. Many are open. Minds and hearts can be changed. Have patience, and stop knocking Dr. Paul.

We must all remember how we got the Clinton's in the first place....the winning percentages were not that great for Bill Clinton, because Ross Perot entered the race. Ron Paul is ready to engage the enemies....these stooges on the stage are just lackies for the enemy. They do not respect Ron Paul, nor do they deserve to sit on the same stage as him. As far as Bloomberg mentioned earlier, give me a break! What a progressive piece of work! Another billionaire, running for what purpose? They are preparing for US, guys. They do not want us to WIN, and will do anything they can to stop this revolution. Please, stay the course!

danberkeley
01-05-2008, 11:07 PM
Of course. He is a good man and above the puerile insults. I mean, on a broader scale, why does he put up with a party who despises him?

TROLL!!!

OptionsTrader
01-05-2008, 11:09 PM
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/FRONTPAGE/801050301

Crickett
01-06-2008, 01:13 AM
He could solve that by asking them how they plan on paying for their wars, by raising taxes or increasing the debt.
.


Man you have that right..all he has to do is get SOMEONE to ask THAT question. WOW. It sure would be hysterical to ask that question FIRST to Huckabee..omg. I smile just thinking about it..LOL

ZenX
01-06-2008, 01:16 AM
He was able to be pretty frank with Moyers in the recent interview. He fully understands that the major media outlets are very vested in the status quo and current "war."