GOP’s only hope for a victory in 2008? hint: it is NOT Rudy

[SnyderShrugged]

GOP’s only hope for a victory in 2008? hint: it is NOT Rudy

Look, forget about Rudy Giuliani, are you kidding me? His campaign has more exploitable issues than any presidential candidate I’ve ever seen. The Republican Party is down and it may get worse from here on out if the GOP doesn’t start thinking about the future.

I won’t go into my reasons for believing that Republicans are a lost cause for 2008. As we approach the elections, it is clear Democrats will see little competition from current Republican front-runners. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: If the Republican party wants a shot at upsetting Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama, they’ll need to get off the Bush and Iraq bandwagon and start thinking seriously about where America is, what Americans want and how they’ve responded to war, the GOP’s “freedom” message, and President Bush.

Don’t bother spending energy on taking over Congress, it’ll go to the Democrats with a strong majority in 2008. Republicans cannot overcome the negative Bush image now associated with the party. The pundits and partisans will insist that “Americans are not dumb, they know that other Republicans aren’t Bush”, but if you follow that advice it’ll be to your detriment, trust me! There aren’t enough sound bytes and political tactics in the world that could undo the damage Bush and his fervent supporters have done to the party, though, I know Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter will do their parts to give Republican pundits something to talk about.

What the party needs to do is FOCUS, the Presidential Elections are the GOPs only hope at victory in 2008. If you choose to ignore the facts and American sentiment, you’ll be in for a world of hurt over the next 8 and maybe even 16 years! This is serious, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama won’t give up on their dream of becoming President. They will sit in the oval office and if they team up, 16 years of Democrat’s ruling the White House isn’t out of the question.

Democrats will landslide the 2008 elections if the GOP continues to treat Ron Paul as an outcast rather than a serious contender for the nomination.

The Washington Post published an article about Ron Paul. It bothers me that the Ron Paul movement is compared to the Howard Dean movement of 2004, but the author made some good observations and I’d like to comment. Ron Paul has established the kind of support that only the ‘great Howard Dean’ has had on the Internet, but Ron Paul’s support is a very different kind of support than what Howard Dean enjoyed.

Is Ron Paul the Howard Dean of 2008?
Among the Texas congressman’s loyal, passionate, Web-savvy supporters, that’s not a question. It’s a statement — and a semi-accurate one. Here’s a very important similarity: Like Dean, Paul has been against the war on Iraq from the beginning, setting him apart from the rest of the GOP field.

First things first, draw similarities based on support for the Iraq War if you like, but that fact is no more important than whether a candidate likes Coca Cola or Pepsi. The distinction, however, has taken over every discussion on American politics, in fact the Iraq War has become American politics and will play a major role in who wins the 2008 election. Candidates and political strategists have forced us to stay focused on Iraq because they stand to benefit from it!

Ron Paul is clearly opposed to the war, but much of his opposition comes not from ‘animosity’ or ‘rebellion’ or activism, it comes from a principled strict constitutional philosophy. Ron Paul would tell you that the problem from the beginning was the politicization of the Iraq War and our military. Because we’ve allowed the Iraq War to become politicized, there is so much animosity, hate, and frustration in American politics and it is tearing at the nation’s foundation. On September 11th, we endured a major attack from Islamic fundamentalist extremists, aka terrorists. The nation’s leadership decided to take advantage of our vulnerability and made Americans and the world ‘choose sides’. The division has created a rift that has brought America to its knees and has created partisan bickering in Congress like never before. Our government is dysfunctional because politicians have convinced the country that where you stand on the ‘War’ issue defines who you are and what stand for. War should never define politics nor should politics determine whether War is ‘the answer’ to global conflict.

Ron Paul is against the war for many reasons. The Iraq War was clearly an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation without just cause. The Iraq War is a political war and has been a catalyst for civil war and the other side sees this as a religious and territorial issue. Despite all of the rhetoric about supporting troops and wanting to ’spread democracy’ and ‘liberate Iraqis’ the war has become a profitable war for a number of select corporations and private organizations. Ron Paul recognizes this and unlike the 21st century rendition of the Republican party, he has stood up to the illogical and irrational acts of our President and Congress. Ron Paul has been the voice of reason among a small minority of ‘rational’ characters that call themselves representatives of the people. The biggest problem for Ron Paul is that when everyone accepts passion and irrational partisan arguments over reason and law and when politicians become ‘insane’ and ‘angry’ as a collective, the few reasonable and sane men become the ‘outcasts’ and are labeled ‘radicals’.

The Internet support we’re seeing is not the same kind of support that Dean enjoyed, not even close, it’s a very different kind of support.

Dean’s insurgent campaign effectively used the Web to raise money, rally its supporters and create buzz the year before the 2004 elections, Paul’s campaign throughout the year has singularly relied on the Internet to fuel his engine.

The Internet was a different beast in 2004. There were some social elements, but the ‘Internet’ we keep hearing about with respect to Howard Dean was more a success because of a mass emailing of Democrats and Liberal activists and simply asking for donations online via web advertisements and fans attempting to spread an anti-War, anti-Bush message. Liberal activists have never had a problem mobilizing, they rally around a cause and they are able to take to the streets to show their passion and love for that cause.

Ron Paul is different because he is not spreading a message like “anyone-but-Bush” and the message isn’t strictly based on opposing War because killing people is wrong (even though he knows it is). Ron Paul isn’t paying millions to destroy candidates with ads and books based on lies, bias, and radio talk show host rumors the way Swift Boat Veterans and President Bush’s campaign did in 2004 with Senator John Kerry. What Ron Paul is doing is spreading a message of freedom, he is illuminating the problems with our government, arguing against nation-building and meddling in affairs of other nations, he despises unconstitutional policies that now pass under the guise of ‘national security’ and he is working hard to defend the complete and utter humiliation of our Constitution by Bush’s administration and his rubber-stamping Congressional allies. It is no wonder that Ron Paul has proven critics wrong, raised millions of dollars that put former ‘front-runners’ to shame. In fact Ron Paul has brought in the second highest donation amount from troops that Republicans have learned to exploit beyond belief. (Barack Obama was at the top of the donation list along with other Democrats)

Ron Paul’s popularity has translated to online money: $5.1 million in the third quarter, with at least 70 percent of it coming from online donors, according to Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. He raised about $3.1 million in the first and second quarters — 80 percent of it from online donations.

The money earned is a reflection of two things, as the article properly points out, Libertarianism is on the rise and the Iraq War has become a catalyst for a new movement in America, they call it the “Ron Paul revolution”, but I like to think of it as the “Unamerican” Revolution. Why “Unamerican”? Because every single American that was marginalized, embarrassed, humiliated, coerced and manipulated over the last 7 years has been directly called “Unamerican” or “Unpatriotic” or indirectly referred to as anti-Americans who do not support the troops. I like to think of Ron Paul as the champion of these people, while the “Ron Paul Revolution” is more of a libertarian movement. (also a good thing)

I do see Ron Paul as a revolutionary. He has brought Libertarianism and strict Constitutional theory to the table and offers it in a manner that is non-threatening and understandable. Dr. Ron Paul is a lovable guy and his opposition to the Iraq War is admirable because he truly fights for America, he fights for “the troops”, he does all of this while holding Christian values and spreading a message based on good intention. Ron Paul shines brilliantly above the rest of the tired actors in American government, he is refreshing and he is worthy of the mainstream’s consideration.

For months now, the noted Libertarian — he’s for dismantling the Department of Education and thinks the USA Patriot Act, which allows the government to search personal data, including Internet use, is unconstitutional — has dominated the Republican field on the social-networking sites that serve as a barometer in online enthusiasm.

One of the obstacles that Ron Paul will have to overcome is the idea that his vision of America is ‘Radical’. I’ve frequently read articles pointing out how Ron Paul is an extremist, how he is out of touch with America, how he wants to do away with the Federal Reserve, kill the Department of Education, and take away the Federal Income Tax. Since when is Tax a GOOD thing? Also, many believe that Ron Paul is a Republican to the extreme who opposes war. NO, NO, NO, NO.

It isn’t that Ron Paul and libertarian ideas portrayed in the media are off so-to-speak. They are accurate assessments of what Ron Paul would do if HE was in charge and had absolute power to install a Democracy that more closely resembled the one we inherited from our founding fathers. What most pundits do not understand is the ‘why’. They understand the freedom message that has Ron Paul standing above the rest of the candidates. What people don’t get is why Ron Paul wants to do away with these federal agencies that we’ve become so dependent on.

To put it simply, Ron Paul wants to trim the fat. When Americans get fat off of hamburgers and pizza, the first urge is to hit the gym, take vitamins or drugs, and diet properly. That is exactly what Ron Paul is trying to get America to do. Ron Paul, make that Dr. Ron Paul, is simply trying to put the United States on a diet. Ron Paul is successful because he is a true libertarian who has coupled the ‘freedom’ message with the ‘diet Constitutional’ message. The result? Republicans and Democrats and Americans of all philosophies have turned to listen to the man. It’s like children sitting around a great wise man, listening to stories, warnings, and a message that will help them grow into strong Americans that are free of the rhetoric and free of the hold that partisan hacks have on our country.

The article continues by discussing Ron Paul’s popularity:

He has more Facebook supporters than former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who leads the Republican candidates in national polls. He has more MySpace friends than former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who’s topping the Republican polls in the early primary voting states of New Hampshire and Iowa. His YouTube videos have been viewed more than Romney, Giuliani and Sen. John McCain — combined.

Ron Paul is an Internet sensation, it is no surprise that he found his way to the top of Technorati’s search list. When Paris Hilton was all over the media due to her hot looks, scandalous history and sheer stupidity, not a single other Presidential candidate came close to ranking up there with her. Ron Paul, however, ranked at the top. That’s right, Ron Paul was #1 above Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and Lindsay Lohan among other scandalous celebrity and technology websites that tend to bring in ridiculous amounts of traffic that, sadly, is only rivaled by pornography.

This is a very significant milestone for many reasons, but I’ll tell you why it is ‘revolutionary’. What the statistics tell us is that Ron Paul’s message is resonating with the elite in America. Technology experts, lawyers and a majority of the rare, but valuable, independent thinkers that still remain in America. Early on, there were many allegations that the Ron Paul message was a fraud, because some of his rabid supporters were rigging Internet polls and even Fox News and MSNBC post-Republican debate polls. Much has been made of the numerous Straw Polls that Ron Paul has secured over the so-called ‘front-runners’ Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, at least among ‘unbiased’ and relatively objective supporters.

Guess what? You’re right: Ron Paul supporters are rabid fans and maybe a few have voted a few times or mobilized supporters to win a poll here and there but anyone who cares enough about a candidate might try such techniques, this problem can be easily averted with a simple line of code that disallows multiple votes from the same IP Address! Are Ron Paul’s supporters smarter than the rest? Everyone else could do the same, and I am willing to bet that other candidate’s supporters certainly tried to mobilize mass amounts of people to win polls. In my opinion, I’d probably put Ron Paul supporters at the top of the ladder on the basis of IQ alone. Smart, is relative, but these supporters aren’t dumb, and they are most definitely not done!

Who are the Ron Paul supporters? Some are hackers, the kids everyone makes fun of on television, the movies, the consummate Internet geeks and nerds. Many are America’s brightest who have dropped their life passions in order to fight against what George W Bush has done to our country. The President’s actions have not gone unnoticed, and the brains are out in full force, and they’ve selected Ron Paul because his message makes sense.

But wait, before I’m mauled by Ron Paul supporting nerds –MY PEOPLE– for labeling them, that isn’t where the support stops! In fact, that was simply the beginning and now you have members of society with diverse interests and backgrounds. Sure, the nerds are and were heavily active in promoting Ron Paul’s message online, but if you are as obsessive about the 2008 elections as I’ve been, you’d see something remarkable in the making!

Ron Paul’s speeches prior to the glamorized straw polls, his seemingly invincible argumentation and debate skills, and his lovable and friendly nature have propelled Ron Paul into a visionary and revolutionary status. Don’t take my word for it, watch him speak for yourself and if you can’t make a trip out to see him, at least turn the television on when he’s talking about the problems that plague America and how he’d go about fixing the problems. When the debates or straw poll events are in progress, pay attention to this little freedom fighter from Texas. I promise you one thing, you won’t be disappointed.

“What we’re seeing here is less about Paul being the Dean of this campaign but about the resurgence of libertarianism on the Internet. In the early ’90s, the predominant philosophy on the Net was libertarian. Ross Perot had a lot of support from that group, which kind of faded in the background once the Republicans took control,” said Jerome Armstrong, founder of the progressive blog MyDD and former Internet adviser for Dean. “Now that group has Ron Paul. And they’re more about being independent than about identifying with either parties. It’s a small voice within the Republican party, libertarians, but they’re creating a lot of noise.”

The resurgence of Libertarianism on the Internet is the real Revolution, here. Ron Paul knows it and so do his supporters. I’ve heard him talk, A LOT, and much of how he approached the early part of his campaign was entirely based on selfless reasons. He wanted to lay the foundation for libertarian philosophy, he hoped to defend the Constitution while teaching us all ‘what it means to be American’ and how he would define Liberty and Freedom, words we take for granted. More importantly, Ron Paul wanted to spread a message of freedom and hope, something that this country needs right now.

I can’t look into the future, I won’t tell you with complete certainty that Ron Paul will win in 2008 because there are so many factors and millions of dollars spent to destroy competition down the stretch. What I do know, is that Ron Paul CAN win. Ron Paul knows it, his supporters know it, and no matter what happens, when all is said and done, Ron Paul will change the way America thinks. I may sound like I’m high on Ron Paul, the way some people are high on God, but I am just one man with hope that the United States can become worthy of her amazing history and priceless foundation.

The bottom line is Ron Paul made a connection with millions of fans everywhere in America and millions throughout the rest of the world. He did so by talking about an America that all of us have forgotten, the message was so good that people who hear it become giddy and overjoyed at the idea of a principled politician cleaning up Washington. I mean, seriously, you don’t think he got to the top of Technorati by simply carrying silicon valley and Texas, do you? It takes worldwide visibility to get up there, and Ron Paul managed to do it with very little money. His message has proven invaluable, he represents a real ‘change’ in thinking, and it’s not just a campaign marketing gimmick.

Anyone who takes time out of their lives to help heal this country without resorting to rhetoric, manipulation, false messages of ‘change’, and anger is a hero in my book. Best of luck to Dr. Paul, he’s one one of a kind.

Oh yeah, one last thing I need to address!

“It’s a small voice within the Republican party, libertarians, but they’re creating a lot of noise.”

psst: I’m a proud and registered Clintonian Moderate Democrat

http://whitehouser.com/

[Enter Apotheosis]

Ron Paul advertisements by overzealous fans lose him supporters.

[luckydevil]

I would just add that there is nothing really unique about the republican party/ or a republican candidate talking about getting rid of government departments. Reagan talked about getting rid of departments like the department of education and energy. The 1994 republican revolution entire agenda was about limited and small government. The goal was to get rid of many departments.

[The_cavalierman]

I like Ron Paul

To bad the GOP establishment is ignoring him

[Zguy28]

If I vote for anybody in the GOP it will probably be Huckabee. If I vote at all...

[SnyderShrugged]

Ron Paul advertisements by overzealous fans lose him supporters.


oh, pardon me. I thought this was the tailgate, you know, the place where you post articles and topics about things that interest you.

please forgive me!

[LD0506]

The GOP's best bet for victory will be having Hillary on the ballot. I cannot understand why the Dems continue to select polarizing unelectable candidates.

And here's a note: I'm not a Republican, this is not a partisan view.

[PleaseBlitz]

oh, pardon me. I thought this was the tailgate, you know, the place where you post articles and topics about things that interest you.

please forgive me!

He didnt say you couldnt post, he said that overzealous Paul fans are losing him supporters. And he's right.

[PleaseBlitz]

The GOP's best bet for victory will be having Hillary on the ballot. I cannot understand why the Dems continue to select polarizing unelectable candidates.

And here's a note: I'm not a Republican, this is not a partisan view.

I could vote either way, but im not voting for Hilary, and im certainly not voting for Paul. Obama or Rudy will get my vote unless something changes radically.

[SnyderShrugged]

He didnt say you couldnt post, he said that overzealous Paul fans are losing him supporters. And he's right.


I cant say that it's losing any in significance. It cant be denied that his support has multiplied many fold in the past 6 months. Just the 3Q figures show that.

What is it specifically that is truly "overzealous"?

[PleaseBlitz]

I cant say that it's losing any in significance. It cant be denied that his support has multiplied many fold in the past 6 months. Just the 3Q figures show that.

What is it specifically that is truly "overzealous"?

GOP’s only hope for a victory in 2008? hint: it is NOT Rudy

Paul: U.S. Has 'Dug a Hole' for Itself in Iraq ( 1 2 )

2 landslide straw poll wins for Dr. Ron Paul today ( 1 2 3 )

What Ron Paul Supporters SHOULDNT apologize for ( 1 2 )

Ames Iowa Straw Poll thread ( 1 2 )

Ron Paul Odds Slashed

Poll: Is the Ron Paul Phenomenon spam? ( 1 2 3 )

Congressman Ron Paul's Secret Revealed

Fusion Candidate

Novak endorses Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is no Pacifist ***Dont read if you get angry at Ron Paul threads**

Ron Paul and Opinion Polling

Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand(3rd of the 10 declared)

Ron Paul: Iowans for Tax Relief Prove They Are Not Credible ( 1 2 )

Ron Paul Revolution Halftime Report ( 1 2 3 )

Mancow interviews Ron Paul

Daily show with Ron Paul

Ron Paul's web popularity ( 1 2 3 )


Can we just have ONE all inclusive Ron Paul thread?

[SnyderShrugged]

GOP’s only hope for a victory in 2008? hint: it is NOT Rudy

Paul: U.S. Has 'Dug a Hole' for Itself in Iraq ( 1 2 )

2 landslide straw poll wins for Dr. Ron Paul today ( 1 2 3 )

What Ron Paul Supporters SHOULDNT apologize for ( 1 2 )

Ames Iowa Straw Poll thread ( 1 2 )

Ron Paul Odds Slashed

Poll: Is the Ron Paul Phenomenon spam? ( 1 2 3 )

Congressman Ron Paul's Secret Revealed

Fusion Candidate

Novak endorses Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is no Pacifist ***Dont read if you get angry at Ron Paul threads**

Ron Paul and Opinion Polling

Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand(3rd of the 10 declared)

Ron Paul: Iowans for Tax Relief Prove They Are Not Credible ( 1 2 )

Ron Paul Revolution Halftime Report ( 1 2 3 )

Mancow interviews Ron Paul

Daily show with Ron Paul

Ron Paul's web popularity ( 1 2 3 )


Can we just have ONE all inclusive Ron Paul thread?





umm, I have started exactly 3 Ron Paul threads since August 23rd. Whats the issue again?

[Zen-like Todd]

OMG Who is this Ron Paul you speak of? He sounds fabulous! Please add me to your mailing list and tell me where I can sign over my life savings.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Who's Ron Paul?

Never heard of him.

Must be some internet phenomenon.

[PleaseBlitz]

OMG Who is this Ron Paul you speak of? He sounds fabulous! Please add me to your mailing list and tell me where I can sign over my life savings.

You have a PM. Routing and account numbers included. And yes, i accept PayPal. :)

[PleaseBlitz]

umm, I have started exactly 3 Ron Paul threads since August 23rd. Whats the issue again?

You asked the question.

[Enter Apotheosis]

umm, I have started exactly 3 Ron Paul threads since August 23rd. Whats the issue again?

It seems to be the same small gang of you guys starting those threads and presenting the vast majority of Ron Paul-related material. Even if your personal contribution to the starting of new threads is small, you do participate heavily in most of those other threads and your primary political issue seems to be getting Ron Paul elected (as opposed to dealing with things more specific to you as an individual).

As for everything else, I think PB has me covered.

[Destino]

Ron Paul can't be the hope of the GOP being that his views aren't in line with the GOP. THe GOP is all about the US throwing it's military weight around and cutting back rights in the interest of a never ending war on terror. They are all about empty promises to cut spending when they only want to raise it through the roof with no plan to pay for it.

Ron Paul shouldn't even be considered part of the GOP. Ron Paul is a small government whack job that while interesting has no chance of being elected. People just don't realize how radical his views of government are at this stage in the game.

[SnyderShrugged]

It seems to be the same small gang of you guys starting those threads and presenting the vast majority of Ron Paul-related material. Even if your personal contribution to the starting of new threads is small, you do participate heavily in most of those other threads and your primary political issue seems to be getting Ron Paul elected (as opposed to dealing with things more specific to you as an individual).

As for everything else, I think PB has me covered.

It's a shame that it's the relatively same small group of folks who get all antsy about it too. Personally, It's cool if you don't like him, or even if you dont want to even see his name in a thread title. That certainly doesnt mean that those of us who do like and support this particular candidate cant post items of interest to them.

Please, don't click on the thread if it's a bother to you. I don't click on the numerous threads on the other candidates much either these days. We all can definitely co-exist in the realm of tailgate, in fact it's all our differences that make it so damned fun! :cheers:

[Zguy28]

People just don't realize how radical his views of government are at this stage in the game.Is he the bizarro Ralph Nader?

[Midnight Judges]

Ron Paul can't be the hope of the GOP being that his views aren't in line with the GOP. THe GOP is all about the US throwing it's military weight around and cutting back rights in the interest of a never ending war on terror. They are all about empty promises to cut spending when they only want to raise it through the roof with no plan to pay for it.

Ron Paul shouldn't even be considered part of the GOP. Ron Paul is a small government whack job that while interesting has no chance of being elected. People just don't realize how radical his views of government are at this stage in the game.

At least he's amusing. :D

[Midnight Judges]

Is he the bizarro Ralph Nader?

No, he's bizarro John Mahoney.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f3/Martin_Crane.jpg/200px-Martin_Crane.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Martin_Crane.jpg)

[Fergasun]

It's not about Ron Paul... it should be about 2012 or 2016 or convincing a majority of Americans that an independent liberty-minded person who still doesn't have a "Cold War" mentality would be good for the country.

Seriously, this country is stuck in a "Cold War" mentality. I don't understand why we are fighting terrorism with troops... that didn't do us any good in Korea or Vietnam.... but our country still wants to fight terrorism like the Cold War.

I found my response to people who want to insist "you are living in a pre-9/11 world". Just tell them they are living in a pre-1989 world... we used to be the land of the free and home of the brave.... but don't worry, China lurking just around the corner...

In all honesty I'm starting to come around to a more libertarian standpoint... and I suppose Paul is probably the biggest libertarian-type candidate out there. I even now understand why libertarians and free market type people want us to have open borders (although I will be against it until a) US government stops all the hand-outs and b) other countries do the same).

This is due to the influence of Free Talk Live podcast (still a bit too much of the stoner type) but moreso Dan Carlin, who has become my talk-show host of choice...

[ImmortalDragon]

No, he's bizarro John Mahoney.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f3/Martin_Crane.jpg/200px-Martin_Crane.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Martin_Crane.jpg)

You obviously read the article

[Midnight Judges]

You obviously read the article

Was there a John Mahoney reference?

[Enter Apotheosis]

It's a shame that it's the relatively same small group of folks who get all antsy about it too. Personally, It's cool if you don't like him, or even if you dont want to even see his name in a thread title. That certainly doesnt mean that those of us who do like and support this particular candidate cant post items of interest to them.

Please, don't click on the thread if it's a bother to you. I don't click on the numerous threads on the other candidates much either these days. We all can definitely co-exist in the realm of tailgate, in fact it's all our differences that make it so damned fun! :cheers:
Never said you couldn't post info on him... doesn't change the fact that I can make comments like my first one in response.

I tend to check these threads out to see where the discussion leads, not where it starts. Sometimes that can get more interesting simply because a few of the issues will be debated and sometimes its a waste of time because it turns out to still be about some guy's overall platform and how it sucks compared to some other guys platform (or vice versa).

[SnyderShrugged]

Never said you couldn't post info on him... doesn't change the fact that I can make comments like my first one in response.

I tend to check these threads out to see where the discussion leads, not where it starts. Sometimes that can get more interesting simply because a few of the issues will be debated and sometimes its a waste of time because it turns out to still be about some guy's overall platform and how it sucks compared to some other guys platform (or vice versa).

good points.

[GibbsFactor]

Ron Paul advertisements by overzealous fans lose him supporters.

It's actually being proven the other way around.

Thanks for posting the article. It was a great read for me!

:cheers:

[Teller]

Ron Paul can't be the hope of the GOP being that his views aren't in line with the GOP. THe GOP is all about the US throwing it's military weight around and cutting back rights in the interest of a never ending war on terror. They are all about empty promises to cut spending when they only want to raise it through the roof with no plan to pay for it.

Apparently you've confused W with the GOP. It was he who abandoned us; not the other way around.

[ImmortalDragon]

Apparently you've confused W with the GOP. It was he who abandoned us; not the other way around.
Its not as if he was the only one

[Tarhog]

Don't count out Guiliani. Put him head to head against Hilary effing Clinton and he's going to look like a very attractive candidate to a lot of Americans. The 'attackable' issues that might make it rough for him in the primaries will help him in a general election (moderate positions on a lot of issues Republicans usually run way right on).

My money is still on Guiliani.

[81artmonk]

I do appreciate your zest, but try not to post a novel. thanks

This election will be interesting, since the Republicans don't get it and the dems have shot themselves in the foot with this Iraq or Anti-Iraq stance. They continue to step in it. They say they are against this war yet do everything in their power to support it. They have wasted time doing insane things in congress, with useless bills and grandstanding. Yet waste even more time debating and trying to get Rush Limbaugh cencured on the floor. Are you kidding me. Rush Limbaugh is the most important thing.

Hilary however will win the nod from the dems, the repubs, who knows. Hilary has too many issues. He husband. Her policies and her sopranos-like handling of her opposers.

I guess it will boil down to whether people want a socialist as president or someone else, whoever that may be.

[Teller]

Its not as if he was the only one

Find me one republican saying that W is taking this party in the right direction. I'll be here. ;)

[ImmortalDragon]

I do appreciate your zest, but try not to post a novel. thanks

This election will be interesting, since the Republicans don't get it and the dems have shot themselves in the foot with this Iraq or Anti-Iraq stance. They continue to step in it. They say they are against this war yet do everything in their power to support it. They have wasted time doing insane things in congress, with useless bills and grandstanding. Yet waste even more time debating and trying to get Rush Limbaugh cencured on the floor. Are you kidding me. Rush Limbaugh is the most important thing.

Hilary however will win the nod from the dems, the repubs, who knows. Hilary has too many issues. He husband. Her policies and her sopranos-like handling of her opposers.

I guess it will boil down to whether people want a socialist as president or someone else, whoever that may be.

I don't think people care about socialism that much, I mean who is opposing medicare, medicaid, welfare, and the various other programs?

[SnyderShrugged]

Don't count out Guiliani. Put him head to head against Hilary effing Clinton and he's going to look like a very attractive candidate to a lot of Americans. The 'attackable' issues that might make it rough for him in the primaries will help him in a general election (moderate positions on a lot of issues Republicans usually run way right on).

My money is still on Guiliani.


He certainly does have some strong financial backers and is popular in the media I'm a little more worried about Thompson. His "Dog dont hunt" schtick might endear his to a large chunk of the voters.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Quite frankly I know it is a long shot to have Paul nominated, much so elected

However I am hoping much of his core philosophy grabs the attention of America again

I say again, because this is the philosophy that as LD said, brought Reagan in office and brought the 1994 Republicans into power

It has to be repeated over and over again, because the hardest thing in the government to do is to cut it, reduce it and make it more transparent

Obviously I do not agree with all of his agenda, however Paul is the most principled, and honest candidate, and his ideas of keeping the government out of your life and pocketbook are the foundations of this country

To me its not about 2008, but the direction that the discussion will be headed towards in 2012

[ImmortalDragon]

Find me one republican saying that W is taking this party in the right direction. I'll be here. ;)
The 20-25% who still support him.

[Teller]

The 20-25% who still support him.

Job approval does not equal support for the direction he's taking the party. Incredibly different questions, and it's usually a sample of dems, reps AND indies who are polled.

Like I said, find me ONE. I really think your point is 100% invalid.

[Rdskns2000]

The modern Bush republican party will cease to exist after the 2008 elections.

Guillani could well win the nomination but the Christian Conservatives will not for him or Thompson or Mccain or Romney. They are already grumbling about going third party.


I predict the religious voters will stay home, even Hillary becoming president will not be enough for them to vote for a Republican candidate they don't care for.


Then you will get 2 years of pure socialism as the countries goes from wild right to wild left. The dems will gain majorities they haven't had since LBJ's route of Goldwater in 64. Think is, I think they will overdue it. Going so far to the left that in 2010; they will lose congress.


In 2010 the repubs will get control back but I think a new party will form and start taking over that by 2016- one if not both of the parties will be replaced.

[twa]

Like I said, find me ONE. I really think your point is 100% invalid.

Well I am a die hard Bush supporter,of course I could care less about the damage he does to the Republican party. :laugh:

[Rdskns2000]

Well I am a die hard Bush supporter,of course I could care less about the damage he does to the Republican party. :laugh:


Bush's damages to the party are the war. Everything else the repubs did themselves. They abandoned conservative principles and expanded government under their watch!

[Teller]

Well I am a die hard Bush supporter,of course I could care less about the damage he does to the Republican party. :laugh:


Et tu, Brute? :finger:

;)

[#98QBKiller]

Ron Paul advertisements by overzealous fans lose him supporters.



Yep.

[GibbsFactor]

Job approval does not equal support for the direction he's taking the party. Incredibly different questions, and it's usually a sample of dems, reps AND indies who are polled.

Like I said, find me ONE. I really think your point is 100% invalid.

Rudy.

[Teller]

Rudy.

How so?

[Rdskns2000]

I could vote either way, but im not voting for Hilary, and im certainly not voting for Paul. Obama or Rudy will get my vote unless something changes radically.



Nothing has convinced me to change my opinion- Hillary Clinton is our 44th president.


1. The republican will nominate someone that their real base- Christian base will find unacceptable. While they are talking third party now; I predict that base will just sit at home in 2008.

2. Hillary being a woman will bring new female voters; voting for her, simply because she's a woman. I believe they are enough woman that will vote for Hillary because she's a woman more than the woman who won't for her because she's a woman.

3. Hispanics will note vote Republican this time around.


4. Republican party is imploding from within with retirings, corruption and morale hypocrites who tap their feet in airport bathrooms.

That alone will give Hillary a victory and a landside to give the Socialist complete filibuster proof majorities.

[luckydevil]

Yep.

I can understand why you feel that way, but I would add Obama has some fairly passionate supporters as well.

[GibbsFactor]

How so?

His issue stances are basically the same. That means support for where the country is heading. If he were elected, nothing would change. He may actually be worse then Bush. Bush the third. Yikes.

We'll be in Iran the day after the inagural balls. That is, if we aren't already.

Did you know that he attempted to undue term limits to continue as mayor longer?

[luckydevil]

Rudy is Dick Cheney on steroids. That man will declare war against the entire middle east. For God's sake, Norman Podhoretz is his senior foreign policy advisior.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Rudy is Dick Cheney on steroids. That man will declare war against the entire middle east. For God's sake, Norman Podhoretz is his senior foreign policy advisior.


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

In case anyone was wondering who Podhoretz is

The guy is 77 though, who knows how long he has left

[81artmonk]

I don't think people care about socialism that much, I mean who is opposing medicare, medicaid, welfare, and the various other programs?


I don't agree, but if that is true it's sad. Second, it's not those programs but the government run medical that will ruin us. I don't think a cancer patient wants to wait a year to be diagnosed with cancer, that's all.

But you may be right, I think we have come to a point in our social evolution or lack there of where people want a hand out from the government rather than doing themselves.

[81artmonk]

The modern Bush republican party will cease to exist after the 2008 elections.

Guillani could well win the nomination but the Christian Conservatives will not for him or Thompson or Mccain or Romney. They are already grumbling about going third party.


I predict the religious voters will stay home, even Hillary becoming president will not be enough for them to vote for a Republican candidate they don't care for.


Then you will get 2 years of pure socialism as the countries goes from wild right to wild left. The dems will gain majorities they haven't had since LBJ's route of Goldwater in 64. Think is, I think they will overdue it. Going so far to the left that in 2010; they will lose congress.


In 2010 the repubs will get control back but I think a new party will form and start taking over that by 2016- one if not both of the parties will be replaced.

I acually agree with that asessment. I really, really think Billary will win by default, from so many disgruntled Republicans staying home and not voting.

[GibbsFactor]

I simply feel that private industry will always out do government simply due to bureaucracy. With the way Political Science works, I can't imagine the government creating a sensible socialized program. It's a, not their right and b, impossible with all the red tape. Democratic intentions are good, but they just won't be reality. What government program ever worked? I'd prefer for good competition creating my society, not votes and budget woes. Plus, programs that adhere to me would get my money, not programs that benefit only certain groups of society.

[Fergasun]

The problem with socialized health care is once it's out of the bag you can't put it back in. Just like social security...

[SparkleMotion]

I agree that the zeal of Paul supporters may turn some people off but I strongly disagree with the common "whackjob" label he gets. To me, the whackjobs are the ones who are so starved for power that they change their tune every 6 months and expect the people to buy it. Unfortunately, many people do. If you disagree with Paul's views, formulate a well-thought out argument that shows why you do. So far in the debates, when other GOP candidates like Giuliani and the Huckster have tried to gain points by attacking the "wacky Ron Paul", they and their talking points have been made to look foolish. I'll take Ron Paul's principles, wacky as they seem to some, over the 9/11 politicking of Guiliani and the "we break it we buy it" utter crap from Huckabee. At least he stands for something unflappably real and not political slogans.

[Buddy Dude]

Who's Ron Paul?

Never heard of him.

Must be some internet phenomenon.:laugh: :applause: Good times.

[Prosperity]

Never said you couldn't post info on him... doesn't change the fact that I can make comments like my first one in response.

I tend to check these threads out to see where the discussion leads, not where it starts. Sometimes that can get more interesting simply because a few of the issues will be debated and sometimes its a waste of time because it turns out to still be about some guy's overall platform and how it sucks compared to some other guys platform (or vice versa).

dude, if you want to take high ground then maybe you should prove why his "overzealous" supporters are costing him. He wouldn't even be in the news if it wasn't for his diverse and loyal base of "overzealous" supporters. Internet polls as an example, well Ron Paul on the internet as a whole is a demonstration of that.

His overzealous supporters care about the ideology he is bringing to the table, so that is why they may seem overzealous. Though if you ask me why anyone would be zealous about a guy like Rudy Guiliani for example I wouldn't know what to say.


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

In case anyone was wondering who Podhoretz is

The guy is 77 though, who knows how long he has left

I hope not many more years, he sounds like a nut job

[Zguy28]

dude, if you want to take high ground then maybe you should prove why his "overzealous" supporters are costing him. He wouldn't even be in the news if it wasn't for his diverse and loyal base of "overzealous" supporters.I smell a showdown...:redpunch:




:munchout:

[JMS]

Fact is the only hope for the Republicans for 2008, and beyond is the Democrats. Just as the only hope for the Democrates after Jimmy Carter's administration was the then future and now demonstrated incompetence and corruption of the Republicans.

Both parties ensure each others future existance.

[ImmortalDragon]

Can we just have ONE all inclusive Ron Paul thread?

Since April 4th there have been 20 Obama (search of just Obama) threads and 24 Ron Paul (search of just Paul, minus a Paul McCartney thread) threads. And currently in the poll I created for the Presidential race (I acknowledge its early) there are a few less RP supporters than Obama supporters, so this isn't a huge separation from the norm as you may believe.
There have been 900 posts altogether in those 20 Obama threads, an average of 45 posts per thread. 1198 posts altogether in those 24 Ron Paul topics, an average of 49.9 posts per thread. Now if you believe in the free market, or in this case the ability to have a discussion, Ron Paul brings just as much, if not more, discussion to the table than Obama does.

[Buford]

If I vote for anybody in the GOP it will probably be Huckabee. If I vote at all...

A year ago, I was ready to vote for McCain, thinking he'd walk away with the nomination. But, he's had a meltdown of sorts. Especially with the way he talks now. Something changed with him.

[Zguy28]

A year ago, I was ready to vote for McCain, thinking he'd walk away with the nomination. But, he's had a meltdown of sorts. Especially with the way he talks now. Something changed with him.Yeah, I noticed that about him too.

[GibbsFactor]

I smell a showdown...:redpunch:




:munchout:

Never happen, one side has passion, the other side follows a select few at "chow time". Are they trying to censor?

Who do you think would win?

[Zguy28]

Never happen, one side has passion, the other side follows a select few at "chow time". Are they trying to censor?

Who do you think would win?Between Liberty and EA? I don't know, but it would be interesting. :)

[PrinceNASeem]

IMHO, so far as foreign policy goes, voting for Rudy is equivalent to voting for another 4 years of Bush. Thus, if you are not happy with the status quo I do not see any reason to vote for him. He is just as bellicose and stubborn as Bush. He agrees with the Iraq war and attacking Iran. His whole platform is based on 9/11 because that is the only thing he has. For some odd reason people actually think he did something productive during 9/11. Rudy is all image and no substance. It just goes to show how easily people, especially in the republican party, buy into a facade.

[SkinsHokieFan]

IMHO, so far as foreign policy goes, voting for Rudy is equivalent to voting for another 4 years of Bush. Thus, if you are not happy with the status quo I do not see any reason to vote for him. He is just as bellicose and stubborn as Bush. He agrees with the Iraq war and attacking Iran. His whole platform is based on 9/11 because that is the only thing he has. For some odd reason people actually think he did something productive during 9/11. Rudy is all image and no substance. It just goes to show how easily people, especially in the republican party, buy into a facade.


Rudy's pre 9/11 record in NYC was pretty dandy

You just need to look at NYC 1993 and NYC 2001

He could focus on that and build a presidential campaign off of that time. For some reason, he is running a campaing which would have been effective in 2004, not in 2008

[Henry]

Fred Thompson. The man looks like a President, and in this day and age that's half the battle.

[JMS]

Rudy's pre 9/11 record in NYC was pretty dandy

You just need to look at NYC 1993 and NYC 2001

He could focus on that and build a presidential campaign off of that time. For some reason, he is running a campaing which would have been effective in 2004, not in 2008

By that logic Dukaukis in power duing the Mass Mirical of the early 1980's would have made a "dandy" President too. Fact is New York's crime rate had everything to do with the booming economy during the Clinton years. Even perhaps a court decision from 1973 had more to do with New Yorks recovery over Rudy...

The fact that crime across the country dropped significantly must be factored into Rudy's legacy. The only thing that can be attributed to Rudy is tough talk, and bending civil liberties via the Rico statutes in order to curb organized crime.

[luckydevil]

Fred Thompson. The man looks like a President, and in this day and age that's half the battle.

Fred Thompson, the actor, on Law & Order looks like a president ( the magic of makeup). Fred Thompson, the presidential candidate, looks old and tired.

[PeterMP]

By that logic Dukaukis in power duing the Mass Mirical of the early 1980's would have made a "dandy" President too. Fact is New York's crime rate had everything to do with the booming economy during the Clinton years. Even perhaps a court decision from 1973 had more to do with New Yorks recovery over Rudy...

The fact that crime across the country dropped significantly must be factored into Rudy's legacy. The only thing that can be attributed to Rudy is tough talk, and bending civil liberties via the Rico statutes in order to curb organized crime.

This is a great point that I don't think enough people get. The same period of time made Bush look like a nice fiscal conservative that balanced the budget in Texas. You should worry about somebody that didn't see an improved economy/balanced budget/decrease in crime when in office during the 90's. It was almost impossible to avoid it.

[PleaseBlitz]

Since April 4th there have been 20 Obama (search of just Obama) threads and 24 Ron Paul (search of just Paul, minus a Paul McCartney thread) threads. And currently in the poll I created for the Presidential race (I acknowledge its early) there are a few less RP supporters than Obama supporters, so this isn't a huge separation from the norm as you may believe.
There have been 900 posts altogether in those 20 Obama threads, an average of 45 posts per thread. 1198 posts altogether in those 24 Ron Paul topics, an average of 49.9 posts per thread. Now if you believe in the free market, or in this case the ability to have a discussion, Ron Paul brings just as much, if not more, discussion to the table than Obama does.

Obama has a chance and therefore deserves being discussed.

[Predicto]

A year ago, I was ready to vote for McCain, thinking he'd walk away with the nomination. But, he's had a meltdown of sorts. Especially with the way he talks now. Something changed with him.

He looks OLD.

[SkinsFanAnt]

Ron Paul is the best candidate out there right now, period. I'm glad he's a popular voice in the coming election, however, he will not win. He has aligned himself with the Republican party and there is no way in hell the majority of this country or even his own party, is going to support or put this guy in a position to win.

He's too integral of a candidate, makes too much sense, and isn't Hollywood enough. That's exactly what this country doesn't want and is the reason why Bush stole the elections twice and got away with it....people are indifferent to evil and will dismiss any guy like Ron Paul because he's 'too good to be true'.

[SkinsFanAnt]

He looks OLD.

See...this is a perfect example of how truly shallow Americans are.

[Thanos]

Too bad Ron Paul comes across on tv like George Carlin's brother on LSD.

[Zguy28]

Ron Paul is the best candidate out there right now, period. I'm glad he's a popular voice in the coming election, however, he will not win. He has aligned himself with the Republican party and there is no way in hell the majority of this country or even his own party, is going to support or put this guy in a position to win.

He's too integral of a candidate, makes too much sense, and isn't Hollywood enough. That's exactly what this country doesn't want and is the reason why Bush stole the elections twice and got away with it....people are indifferent to evil and will dismiss any guy like Ron Paul because he's 'too good to be true'.Why doesn't Ron Paul become independent then? Surely he would carry his zealous internet followers with him.

[SkinsFanAnt]

It just goes to show how easily people, especially in the republican party, buy into a facade.

They don't just buy into a facade...they buy into the idea of maintaining the status quo which is what conservatism is all about. They would rather harm themselves along with others (Bush) rather then let the grip of power slip from their fingers. In my opinion, anyone who can still support the GOP after what has happened to this country and to Iraq, is either extremely greedy, extremely ignorant, or a mixture of both.

[SkinsFanAnt]

Why doesn't Ron Paul become independent then? Surely he would carry his zealous internet followers with him.

Exactly...I don't know why he doesn't...but my guess its because he's see's himself as an 'old' republican....which in my opinion is a lame cause to stick with a political party that is in shambles.

[Zguy28]

Exactly...I don't know why he doesn't...but my guess its because he's see's himself as an 'old' republican....which in my opinion is a lame cause to stick with a political party that is in shambles.I'm waiting for him to pull a Zell Miller in 2008 and throw his support behind the Dem candidate.

[twa]

I'm waiting for him to pull a Zell Miller in 2008 and throw his support behind the Dem candidate.

Ain't much chance of that :laugh:

It's amusing listening to his anti-war johnny come lately supporters try to "understand" his reason for aligning with the Reps.

[GibbsFactor]

Exactly...I don't know why he doesn't...but my guess its because he's see's himself as an 'old' republican....which in my opinion is a lame cause to stick with a political party that is in shambles.

He gave up his house seat in 1984 to make a run in 88 as a Libertarian, he was the third party candidate behind Bush I and Dukakis. He may have gotten 4% of the vote, still finished third.

He is a Republican and is making a statement to get his party back on track. I'm not sure he thought he'd do as well as he is when he announced his candidacy earlier this year. Many believed his goal was simply to spread his message. He has said that he needs the GOP to get on the debates and allow his message to be heard. He has said he would not run as a third party candidate, but that was before all of his popularity soared to the heights it is today.

The truly upsetting issue will come if he does in fact win many primaries and still doesn't get the GOP nod. At that point might be to late.

Many say that if he wins the GOP nod, he's their best shot. What happens if he's in position to win the nod but the convention boycotts him in early September?

He may, at that point, depending on his following, announce a Libertarian candidacy. He may even announce one earlier then that if he doesn't do so well in the primaries.

But the short answer for now is that he needs the air time the GOP debates gives him and right now, he's a Republican.

[Thiebear]

Libertarian this time..
It doesnt matter who wins after that, both sides do the same thing.

[ImmortalDragon]

Obama has a chance and therefore deserves being discussed.

So we should go with anyone the media says to go with?

[SkinsHokieFan]

By that logic Dukaukis in power duing the Mass Mirical of the early 1980's would have made a "dandy" President too. Fact is New York's crime rate had everything to do with the booming economy during the Clinton years. Even perhaps a court decision from 1973 had more to do with New Yorks recovery over Rudy...

The fact that crime across the country dropped significantly must be factored into Rudy's legacy. The only thing that can be attributed to Rudy is tough talk, and bending civil liberties via the Rico statutes in order to curb organized crime.


Certainly the national economy had an impact on the progress NYC made during the 1993-2001 period

I never denied that in any way

Yet all politics are still local, and NYC was quite frankly an over regulated POS until Rudy came into office and dealt with a city council that had 90 percent Democrats. To minimize his record in NYC prior to 9/11 is silly

[ImmortalDragon]

Why doesn't Ron Paul become independent then? Surely he would carry his zealous internet followers with him.
The Democrats and Republicans hold a monopoly over our system. Unless you're made of money (i.e. Ross Perot) you end up spending all your time just to get on the ballot at each state.
Also, he's served 20 years in Congress as a Republican.

[Zguy28]

The Democrats and Republicans hold a monopoly over our system. Unless you're made of money (i.e. Ross Perot) you end up spending all your time just to get on the ballot at each state.
Also, he's served 20 years in Congress as a Republican.I know the Senate is not as big of campaign, but Lieberman did it in Connecticut.

And with all of these supposed followers of his, I don't imagine it would be too hard to get a 1000 sigs in each state. I think that is the requirement isn't it? If he can't get that many, maybe he's not as popular as some think.

[ImmortalDragon]

I know the Senate is not as big of campaign, but Lieberman did it in Connecticut.

And with all of these supposed followers of his, I don't imagine it would be too hard to get a 1000 sigs in each state. I think that is the requirement isn't it? If he can't get that many, maybe he's not as popular as some think.
Each State has its own ballot access laws to determine who may appear on ballots and who may not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_access#Ballot_access_in_the_United_States_o f_America

He's said he doesn't want to go 3rd party, but if he does end up 2nd overall in the primaries he could have the following to pull off some sort of 3rd party run. It would just help sure up a Democratic president though.

[SnyderShrugged]

Too bad Ron Paul comes across on tv like George Carlin's brother on LSD.


I always feel tired when I read stuff like this. It's funny because this is all the naysayers ever come armed with, it seems. Rarely does anyone bring out actual issue stances that he has. It appears to be petty name calling at times.

How specifically and when has Ron paul ever protrayed this type of persona to you? (Crazy, Kooky, on LSD, etc)

What specific language was used and what specific actions did he perform to bring on a comment like this?

I'm open and willing to discuss this with candor and without spite. Really, it's confusing to me and I'm sure many supporters as to where this unfounded perception comes from.

Thanks in advance for walking me through it.

[Teller]

His issue stances are basically the same. That means support for where the country is heading. If he were elected, nothing would change. He may actually be worse then Bush. Bush the third. Yikes.

We'll be in Iran the day after the inagural balls. That is, if we aren't already.

Did you know that he attempted to undue term limits to continue as mayor longer?

Yes.

But this is the third time I've had to explain this in this thread. I said, "the direction of the PARTY." The direction of the party does not equal the direction of the country; or in this case the direction of the president.

I asked for one example of a republican who was happy with the direction that Bush is taking the PARTY, and I have yet to see one.

Even twa who will defend Bush to the death, mentioned that he doesn't care about the "damage" Bush has done to the party.

[GibbsFactor]

Yes.

But this is the third time I've had to explain this in this thread. I said, "the direction of the PARTY." The direction of the party does not equal the direction of the country; or in this case the direction of the president.

I asked for one example of a republican who was happy with the direction that Bush is taking the PARTY, and I have yet to see one.

Even twa who will defend Bush to the death, mentioned that he doesn't care about the "damage" Bush has done to the party.

I suppose I'm not sure what your asking then. Define "direction of the party".

[jbooma]

The GOP's best bet for victory will be having Hillary on the ballot. I cannot understand why the Dems continue to select polarizing unelectable candidates.

And here's a note: I'm not a Republican, this is not a partisan view.

BINGO

Hillary is getting great press but the problem with her is you already know where you stand. The ones who are against her are being quiet.

Ruddy will beat Hillary if that is the election.

I would love to see either Gore or Powell get into the mix though :)

[luckydevil]

The only one who can beat Hillary is Obama...... that is not going to happen.

The Clinton machine is one hell of a beast. They know what they are doing.

[GibbsFactor]

The only one who can beat Hillary is Obama...... that is not going to happen.

The Clinton machine is one hell of a beast. They know what they are doing.

I'm banking on the need for change. She doesn't bring it.

[Teller]

I suppose I'm not sure what your asking then. Define "direction of the party".

Republicans are about small government. Bush expanded it drastically.
Republicans are about less spending and government waste. Bush hasn't vetoed a single spending bill that I know of.
Republicans are about protecting what is OURS; be it our country, our money, our families. Bush is giving our country to Mexico.
Republicans are about tax cuts. Well, Bush is too, albeit as war spending spirals out of control.
Republicans value the life of one Amerian soldier over the lives of 10,000 on the other side. Bush has configured our rules of engagement so as to sacrifice our troops to save Iraqis.
Republicans appreciate the rule of law, and strive to live by it. Bush has repeatedly violated the very Constitution he swore to uphold, through illegal wiretapping and mail opening programs. (I still want the bastard impeached over that.)

There are countless other examples, GF, but you get the idea. We clearly didn't elect the man we thought we did; and as republicans, we need to get back to our core principles. I still believe conservatism is the most attractive political stance in this country; and it's far more easily defendable than liberalism.

The problem is, the uneducated section of the voting block sees Bush as representing conservatives and the GOP right now -- which is MILES from the truth -- and is causing untold harm to our party. We need a pure, to-the-bone conservative, to put our ideas back out there, and get us back on track. Unfortunately, I don't see one...or at least one that's electable...this time around.

[SnyderShrugged]

Republicans are about small government. Bush expanded it drastically.
Republicans are about less spending and government waste. Bush hasn't vetoed a single spending bill that I know of.
Republicans are about protecting what is OURS; be it our country, our money, our families. Bush is giving our country to Mexico.
Republicans are about tax cuts. Well, Bush is too, albeit as war spending spirals out of control.
Republicans value the life of one Amerian soldier over the lives of 10,000 on the other side. Bush has configured our rules of engagement so as to sacrifice our troops to save Iraqis.
Republicans appreciate the rule of law, and strive to live by it. Bush has repeatedly violated the very Constitution he swore to uphold, through illegal wiretapping and mail opening programs. (I still want the bastard impeached over that.)

There are countless other examples, GF, but you get the idea. We clearly didn't elect the man we thought we did; and as republicans, we need to get back to our core principles. I still believe conservatism is the most attractive political stance in this country; and it's far more easily defendable than liberalism.

The problem is, the uneducated section of the voting block sees Bush as representing conservatives and the GOP right now -- which is MILES from the truth -- and is causing untold harm to our party. We need a pure, to-the-bone conservative, to put our ideas back out there, and get us back on track. Unfortunately, I don't see one...or at least one that's electable...this time around.



HH, I think that you are confusing today's GOP with actual conservatives. Something I did for years too.

The part no longer represents those values in practice, despite playing the part on the surface. Otherwise we wouldnt have seen so many left leaning bills passed through a republican run congress. We don't have many real small government conservatives left in the party at all. Only those who talk the principles up without backing the words up with action.

In short, I miss the GOP that I once knew!!

[Teller]

HH, I think that you are confusing today's GOP with actual conservatives. Something I did for years too.

The part no longer represents those values in practice, despite playing the part on the surface. Otherwise we wouldnt have seen so many left leaning bills passed through a republican run congress. We don't have many real small government conservatives left in the party at all. Only those who talk the principles up without backing the words up with action.

In short, I miss the GOP that I once knew!!

Yeah, I do to, but you only have to go back to Reagan to find it, which really wasn't all that long ago.

There's another Reagan out there somewhere, he's just not in this field.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The only one who can beat Hillary is Obama...... that is not going to happen.

The Clinton machine is one hell of a beast. They know what they are doing.

I agree. When Hillary gets the nomination, its simply a countdown until innauguration

[GibbsFactor]

Yeah, I do to, but you only have to go back to Reagan to find it, which really wasn't all that long ago.

There's another Reagan out there somewhere, he's just not in this field.

Okay, I gotcha. I stand by that Romney, Thompson and Guiliani are fine with this direction. Just look at their issue stances for confirmation.

It's the new conservative, AKA neocons and all of them are. They're more democrat then republican and the democrats are more socialist then Karl Marx.

[SnyderShrugged]

Yeah, I do to, but you only have to go back to Reagan to find it, which really wasn't all that long ago.

There's another Reagan out there somewhere, he's just not in this field.


Of course I am saying this with bias, but why dont you consider Paul as very close to Reagan's original platform? It is actually very close, but goes further towards conservatism than even Reagan did.

I remamber Reagan even pulling troops out of the ME stating it was a mess and that he didnt want troops there in it.

All other issues are very similar and in fact, the 2 Rons were fairly close in those days.

[Teller]

Of course I am saying this with bias, but why dont you consider Paul as very close to Reagan's original platform?

Maybe at some point I could, but right now I've got SEROIUS Ron Paul fatigue. (And that's not good this early.) I just feel like everytime I turn around someone's trying to shove him down my throat. It really has gotten tiresome.

I understand supporting your candidate, and wanting to get the word out, but the "Ron Paul Sneezed Today" threads are getting more than old.

[Fergasun]

Ron Paul represents a pre Cold War America. The Cold War lasted for such a long time its shadow hangs over all politicians and politics even all these years after. Our leaders still have a Cold War mentality... American politicians had no problem with diplomacy... we even were friends with Stalin. Jimmy Carter has given the American people the worst impression on diplomacy. I would welcome the change Ron Paul would offer... but there are way too many people who enjoy still living like the Cold War exists.

What is Ron Paul's stance on Israel?

[DjTj]

Yeah, I do to, but you only have to go back to Reagan to find it, which really wasn't all that long ago.

There's another Reagan out there somewhere, he's just not in this field.Actually, there isn't another Reagan out there.

There isn't another JFK out there, even though the Democrats keep looking for one. There isn't another Clinton out there (well there is, but she's not exactly the same Clinton). There isn't another FDR or Teddy Roosevelt or Lincoln or Jefferson. We've been searching for another George Washington for two centuries now, but we haven't found him yet.

Every candidate is different, and every election cycle is different. Circumstances change and issues change. Parties change.

The fundamental values you list as Republican may have only existed during eight years of Reagan's Presidency, and even then, you could almost certainly find instances where Reagan himself deviated from those ideals. Lincoln's Republican Party was the one that first greatly expanded federal power, and the entire small government philosophy didn't really become part of the platform until Barry Goldwater in the 1960's. The social conservatives didn't really get on board until Nixon's southern strategy. The evangelicals didn't really become a strong political force until Roe v. Wade.

The truth is that there are no core principles that can really be traced back through the history of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party - political parties, especially large and powerful political parties, will shift their views to stay in power. They have done it many times before and they will do it again.

Don't waste too much energy trying to find the next Reagan ... you'll be waiting a long time.

[Fergasun]

So where's the next DjTj going to come from?

[SnyderShrugged]

Maybe at some point I could, but right now I've got SEROIUS Ron Paul fatigue. (And that's not good this early.) I just feel like everytime I turn around someone's trying to shove him down my throat. It really has gotten tiresome.

I understand supporting your candidate, and wanting to get the word out, but the "Ron Paul Sneezed Today" threads are getting more than old.


I dont think thats accurate, and believe me, I follow those threads!! lol

There has been a huge increase in news and excitement lately, that has been brought on by the 3Q financials, but there havnt been any more Paul threads than Obama/Clinton? et al threads.

I know that personally, I have tried to limit the threads I start on Ron Paul because of feelings like yours that were starting. I have only started 3 since Aug 23rd.

I am actually sorry if threads that have him as the topic offend some. I don't understand why the negative reaction when we see threads on other candidates and topics that occur just as often. But I'm ok with it and will try to do my best to limit myself going forward more.

[PeterMP]

Of course I am saying this with bias, but why dont you consider Paul as very close to Reagan's original platform? It is actually very close, but goes further towards conservatism than even Reagan did.

I remamber Reagan even pulling troops out of the ME stating it was a mess and that he didnt want troops there in it.

All other issues are very similar and in fact, the 2 Rons were fairly close in those days.

There's a HUGE difference in the presentation of their beliefs for this country if nothing else, but it seems to me there is also a HUGE difference in their vision for this country. Reagan invisioned a great (and yes also dominant) America that was respected (and yes also feared) by the world. Paul seems to want an America that is similar in many respects to what it was prior to WWI.

If Paul has a grand vision for the US w/ respect to the rest of the World, the future, and how it fits together (my guess is that he doesn't- he just doesn't like the direction where things are going/have gone and is just trying to swin against the tide w/o a real plan where to go), then he needs to get beyond the details and express it in some sort of articulate manner.

Anyway regurgitating Reagan's policies isn't a blue print for success (and by that I don't mean just political success). The country has changed and the world has changed. The problems we face today are different. This is actually an issue I have with the "Bush tax cuts". The mantra often is cutting the taxes worked for Reagan. Yes, but it was a different economy w/ different issues. Even when faced w/ the same problem, time tends to change the best solution. If Germany invaded France tomorrow, we wouldn't say, 'Well, dust off the plans/weapons from WWII because it worked so well last time.'

[DjTj]

So where's the next DjTj going to come from?You don't need a "next" DjTj when I'm still here. :silly:

[GibbsFactor]

Ron Paul represents a pre Cold War America. The Cold War lasted for such a long time its shadow hangs over all politicians and politics even all these years after. Our leaders still have a Cold War mentality... American politicians had no problem with diplomacy... we even were friends with Stalin. Jimmy Carter has given the American people the worst impression on diplomacy. I would welcome the change Ron Paul would offer... but there are way too many people who enjoy still living like the Cold War exists.

What is Ron Paul's stance on Israel?

That they can handle themselves.

[Teller]

I dont think thats accurate, and believe me, I follow those threads!! lol

There has been a huge increase in news and excitement lately, that has been brought on by the 3Q financials, but there havnt been any more Paul threads than Obama/Clinton? et al threads.

I know that personally, I have tried to limit the threads I start on Ron Paul because of feelings like yours that were starting. I have only started 3 since Aug 23rd.

I am actually sorry if threads that have him as the topic offend some. I don't understand why the negative reaction when we see threads on other candidates and topics that occur just as often. But I'm ok with it and will try to do my best to limit myself going forward more.

I'm not indicting you, SS. Not at all. I think you're a strong poster who picks his battles well. I'm also well aware of the fact that you only start threads when you actually have something to say.

Hell, I'm not really criticizing ANY of the Paul supporters personally. It's just the atmosphere, the climate, the...whatever. I don't really know what it is. I just know it feels like overkill right now.

[isle-hawg]

Snyder, The Republican party is NOT going to nominate Ron Paul for president. He is for limited government which is not at all what the Republican party is about no matter what is said.

If I were a Paul adviser, I would advise him to withdraw his bid for the Republican nominee now, and instead start immediately running as either the Libeterian nominee or an Independent. He would be an extreme longshot to win going up against the two political party machines but would at least have a chance and could really help shake up things in a good way, the way Ross Perot did before he went Kooky and dropped out and later back in.

[ImmortalDragon]

Snyder, The Republican party is NOT going to nominate Ron Paul for president. He is for limited government which is not at all what the Republican party is about no matter what is said.

If I were a Paul adviser, I would advise him to withdraw his bid for the Republican nominee now, and instead start immediately running as either the Libeterian nominee or an Independent. He would be an extreme longshot to win going up against the two political party machines but would at least have a chance and could really help shake up things in a good way, the way Ross Perot did before he went Kooky and dropped out and later back in.
ROSS PEROT HAD MONEY, you don't stand a chance without money.

[ImmortalDragon]

On the topic of Regan, Ron is the only person who sounds anything like him. I don't know too much about Regan, but I've started listening to some of his speeches.



As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in south Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace or do they mean we just want to be left in peace. There can be no real peace if one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us.

Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the constitution is out-moated. He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader and he said he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document. He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best.

From Ronald Regan's 1964 speech at the RNC.

[Predicto]

Yeah, I do to, but you only have to go back to Reagan to find it, which really wasn't all that long ago.

There's another Reagan out there somewhere, he's just not in this field.


Except Reagan didn't really stand for those things either.

Go back to Goldwater.

[SnyderShrugged]

Except Reagan didn't really stand for those things either.

Go back to Goldwater.


Thats actually correct. Reagan picked up the Goldwater baton and was very close on many platform items to him. It was in Reagan's second term when he seemed to veer away from his paleo-conservative/libertarian roots.

The Goldwater comparrison could also be used when witnessing the growth of Ron Paul's grassroots support too. I hope it ends up better!!

[The_cavalierman]

I agree. When Hillary gets the nomination, its simply a countdown until innauguration

I cannot agree SHF,

You underestimate the amount of republican hate attached to anyone named Clinton.

The GOP wants us to nominate Hillary as that alone will rally their base.

The Dems would do well to nominate someone without the Clinton baggage.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I cannot agree SHF,

You underestimate the amount of republican hate attached to anyone named Clinton.

The GOP wants us to nominate Hillary as that alone will rally their base.

The Dems would do well to nominate someone without the Clinton baggage.

I know what you mean, but I think Hillary would get far more independent support then people think

You are pointing out potential Clinton baggage, which I think could be a factor, but I think Clinton nostalgia will be even greater

Hillary, to her credit, has really done a remarkable job since going into the Senate of re-molding her image to be a pragmatic moderate

[twa]

Unless the Libs dessert her it is pretty much a lock at this point.

[GibbsFactor]

I'm not indicting you, SS. Not at all. I think you're a strong poster who picks his battles well. I'm also well aware of the fact that you only start threads when you actually have something to say.

Hell, I'm not really criticizing ANY of the Paul supporters personally. It's just the atmosphere, the climate, the...whatever. I don't really know what it is. I just know it feels like overkill right now.

I can't speak for everyone but I've become more vocal about him because too many people don't know who he is. We on the Internet have used this "Free Media" as a tool to get the word out about him. I know I'd be less inclined had the media gave him his fair due.

The fact that some label him a radical and kook make people like me want to explain his positions.

Just so you know, SS is responsible for my finding of Paul. Now, I'm volunteering to help get the word out, getting people to sign the petition to get him on the ballot here in VA. I've gone to fundraisers and only want people to see his message, then decide for themselves. I will admit, on teh Internets we have overkilled a bit, but that's all we have had.

:cheers:

[GibbsFactor]

I cannot agree SHF,

You underestimate the amount of republican hate attached to anyone named Clinton.

The GOP wants us to nominate Hillary as that alone will rally their base.

The Dems would do well to nominate someone without the Clinton baggage.

I know a lot of people in DC that feel he should be added to Rushmore. People look at Bush and Clinton and realize how wrong they were.

[SnyderShrugged]

I can't speak for everyone but I've become more vocal about him because too many people don't know who he is. We on the Internet have used this "Free Media" as a tool to get the word out about him. I know I'd be less inclined had the media gave him his fair due.

The fact that some label him a radical and kook make people like me want to explain his positions.

Just so you know, SS is responsible for my finding of Paul. Now, I'm volunteering to help get the word out, getting people to sign the petition to get him on the ballot here in VA. I've gone to fundraisers and only want people to see his message, then decide for themselves. I will admit, on teh Internets we have overkilled a bit, but that's all we have had.

:cheers:



wow!!! awesome!! I had no idea. :cheers:

I've also been doing much on my own time and dime. My wife is just as passionate about this campain and now both of our extended families have gotten into it, my folks included.

I have never been too active in politics beyond the tailgate before this year. I donated all the way up to the max already and over the next two quarters, so will my wife. No candidate has ever lit this kind of spark in us before. It feels so good to actually care about the leadership and direction of our country again.


Oh yeah, I'm not 100% sure, but I think Luckydevil and maybe TWA here on ES is responsible for me learning of Ron Paul, but that was years ago.

[GibbsFactor]

wow!!! awesome!! I had no idea. :cheers:

I've also been doing much on my own time and dime. My wife is just as passionate about this campain and now both of our extended families have gotten into it, my folks included.

I have never been too active in politics beyond the tailgate before this year. I donated all the way up to the max already and over the next two quarters, so will my wife. No candidate has ever lit this kind of spark in us before. It feels so good to actually care about the leadership and direction of our country again.


Oh yeah, I'm not 100% sure, but I think Luckydevil here on ES is responsible for me learning of Ron Paul, but that was years ago.

His message is empowering! I've never felt a better purpose for the me, the group and this country!

[SnyderShrugged]

His message is empowering! I've never felt a better purpose for the me, the group and this country!


I hear ya bro!! This is something I wish we could explain to the pundits and old media when they seem perplexed over it all.

[ImmortalDragon]

His message is empowering! I've never felt a better purpose for the me, the group and this country!
No offense, but its this kind of stuff that makes us sound like a cult.

[SnyderShrugged]

No offense, but its this kind of stuff that makes us sound like a cult.

How so?

[GibbsFactor]

Well, I don't want that.

I do want my income back, I do want my country to get its ass back together, pay only for the services that adhere to me. I'd like to keep my rights and stop worrying about war and the national debt. I don't want to pay for lazy ass neighbor, I'd like to have more job opps from free market giving him that chance and reason to be from better services and programs from private industry. But that's just me.

[luckydevil]

You are pointing out potential Clinton baggage, which I think could be a factor, but I think Clinton nostalgia will be even greater

Yep, the day she trods out Bill, it's over.

[Rdskns2000]

Fred Thompson. The man looks like a President, and in this day and age that's half the battle.


He looks like Elmer Fudd. He's all flash and no substance. I seriously doubt the guy gave serious thoughts to what his stances are on the issues. The next time the repubs have a debate; I think he will get crushed.

[ImmortalDragon]

How so?
I don't know, I just get that feeling >_>


He looks like Elmer Fudd. He's all flash and no substance. I seriously doubt the guy gave serious thoughts to what his stances are on the issues. The next time the repubs have a debate; I think he will get crushed.

I agree, hes unbelievably vague every time I listen to him or read what he has said. Just look at his statement on his homepage:

We are steeped in the tradition of honor and sacrifice for the greater good. We are proud of this heritage. I believe that Americans are once again ready to achieve this greater good: which is nothing less than the security, prosperity, and unity of our country.

[SnyderShrugged]

He looks like Elmer Fudd. He's all flash and no substance. I seriously doubt the guy gave serious thoughts to what his stances are on the issues. The next time the repubs have a debate; I think he will get crushed.



I think there might be one this week on cspan (not 100% on that though)

[ImmortalDragon]

I think there might be one this week on cspan (not 100% on that though)
October 9th at 4pm EST on CNBC

[twa]

He looks like Elmer Fudd. He's all flash and no substance. I seriously doubt the guy gave serious thoughts to what his stances are on the issues. The next time the repubs have a debate; I think he will get crushed.


How can he look like Elmer and be all flash?...are you saying his speech is flashy?

As far as the debates, I look forward to seeing what he's got.

[ImmortalDragon]

How can he look like Elmer and be all flash?...are you saying his speech is flashy?

As far as the debates, I look forward to seeing what he's got.
Well he is an actor, he's probably going to use that to his advantage

[SnyderShrugged]

October 9th at 4pm EST on CNBC


Why would they hold Fred T's first ever public debate at 4PM? Hmmm. thats an odd time for something of that nature, isnt it? Time tp fire up the DVR!

[twa]

Well he is an actor, he's probably going to use that to his advantage

Yeah, there is name and facial recognition that will likely benefit him, but I just can't understand the "flash" bit.

I kinda like him,but flash is not something that he brings to the table.

He certainly is not gonna get votes in a beauty contest. :laugh:

[SnyderShrugged]

Yeah, there is name and facial recognition that will likely benefit him, but I just can't understand the "flash" bit.

I kinda like him,but flash is not something that he brings to the table.

He certainly is not gonna get votes in a beauty contest. :laugh:


maybe if jeri is standing on his arm. She's a milf!

[twa]

maybe if jeri is standing on his arm. She's a milf!

Now SHE does bring a little something to the table :laugh:

Speaking of wives...any word on RP's? :(

I haven't heard anything recent and hope she's recovering fine. :2cents:

[SnyderShrugged]

Now SHE does bring a little something to the table :laugh:

Speaking of wives...any word on RP's? :(

I haven't heard anything recent and hope she's recovering fine. :2cents:

Last I heard was that she is fully recovered, but is laying low some. She had to have a pacemaker put in, I think.

Carol Paul seems like such a sweety, grandmotherly lady. Class act all the way. I owe her a debt of gratitude because she talked him into running again this time. She said America was ready for his message now.

indeed!