You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
I could see that one coming as I was typing the OP. Maybe there should be a bumper sticker that says "McCain is the Republican nominee because you were too stupid to vote for RP".
__________________
Jeff Wisener
350Z Editor
Nissan Sport Magazine
The average person doesn't know who Ron Paul is. It's not very surprising though because the average person has no idea what their own candidate stands for.
__________________
Our forefathers made one mistake. What they should have fought for was representation without taxation. Fletcher Knebel
Straight up. I live in a small republican town and all of the bumper stickers I see say Ron Paul. A couple of people even rented out an old store and made it the Ron Paul Freedom Hall. This is one time that the rest of America should have thought like Mississipians. IRS=FTL I had almost 30% of my paycheck taken out for taxes this week.
That and the complete and total disregard of his campaign by the media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zland
it was amazing how they basically acted like he was not even in the room during the debate wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tquill
The average person doesn't know who Ron Paul is. It's not very surprising though because the average person has no idea what their own candidate stands for.
^ All of the above are reasons.
I also find it amazing that he is the only candidate that even mentions the Constitution in any of his speeches. The other candidates appeal to our emotions and bumper sticker issues like healthcare, healthcare, healthcare. climate change, climate change, climate change, or Muslims, Muslims, Muslims.
You hear NOTHING about the real threat to our freedom, i.e. runaway government, because both McCain and Obama are beneficiaries of large government.
Straight up. I live in a small republican town and all of the bumper stickers I see say Ron Paul. A couple of people even rented out an old store and made it the Ron Paul Freedom Hall. This is one time that the rest of America should have thought like Mississipians. IRS=FTL I had almost 30% of my paycheck taken out for taxes this week.
Ron Paul shot himself in the foot with the one issue which would have galvanized so many of us who otherwise adhere to most of the Constitutional principles that he preaches, and that is the war in Iraq.
The bottom line is that Americans will fight against those who oppress or attempt to terrorize (though in contemporary times it has been getting harder to rally overly comfortable and myopic Americans to such a cause considering the number of liberals on the coasts), and regarding the hyperbole thrown around about this war, we're winning it and polls are beginning to show evidence that the citizens believe so as well. As such, Paul's message about ignoring Iraq and "minding our own business" was digested by the average American (which I believe still leans right center) as foreign to our culture.
Had Paul supported the effort in Iraq, but perhaps with a leaner strategy, he would have gained serious traction IMO. The other problems with his libertarianism revolve around an inability to understand that there is no Constitution without a shared morality expressed in law, and the need to keep that traditional structure whole in our culture.
The rest of his message is fantastic, and needed. It just couldn't overcome how wrong he has been on Iraq, despite what the media would have us all believe most Americans 'think'. Most Americans are not in favor of leaving Iraq in an unhealthy state, and most are not in favor of losing.
Because he was so in favor of ignoring the rest of the World -- something quite a few Republicans are not a fan of. He had my vote economically, he sure as hell didn't on foreign policy (or lack thereof for that matter). If you took someone else's stance on foreign affairs and kept Ron Paul's economics/taxes/etc, you'd have the perfect candidate.
Because he was so in favor of ignoring the rest of the World -- something quite a few Republicans are not a fan of. He had my vote economically, he sure as hell didn't on foreign policy (or lack thereof for that matter). If you took someone else's stance on foreign affairs and kept Ron Paul's economics/taxes/etc, you'd have the perfect candidate.
Ron Paul got the competent vote. Just about every competent person voted for him, and even a lot of fools. Unfortunately that just happens to be a small number.
>> If you took someone else's stance on foreign affairs and kept Ron Paul's economics/taxes/etc, you'd have the perfect candidate.
Well, I liked Ron Paul's stance. Dump the freeloading rest of the world. Bring our military home from Europe and Asia too, and stop funding their defense while they take advantage of us and create more socialism.
We already took Saddam out, which I liked, but let's bring our people home as no army succeeds as an occupying force. If Iraq (or anyone else) becomes a problem, just take out their leaders in a short and not very costly attack. Let them know it's their responsibility to not threaten us. It's not our responsibility to give them anything.
The president isn't supposed to engage our military. He's supposed to lead it AFTER congress declares war. And congress only declares was when the majority of us feels threatened. So when that happens, we can go back, and rightfully so.
If Ron Paul is so wonderful, why did he get so few votes?
