Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: howardroark on January 21, 2012, 10:41:02 PM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/22/politics/pol-sc-paul/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/22/politics/pol-sc-paul/index.html)
After a second-place finish in New Hampshire, the Paul campaign signaled early that the candidate was looking farther ahead than even Florida, which is the next primary state on the calendar.
A campaign aide told CNN that Paul is focusing heavily on the states of Nevada and Minnesota, which hold caucuses instead of primaries.
The aide said Paul is buying broadcast and cable ads in both states, and described the size of the ad buy as significant.
-
Lets help him purchase these ads guys! 8)
-
smart move. if it become a bloody mess between newt and romney, paul could sneak in ;)
-
smart move. if it become a bloody mess between newt and romney, paul could sneak in ;)
Ron Paul is committing political malpractice w his campaign. He has got to be the worst of the worst in how he campaigns. I'm serious, if he had even 5% of the fight towards Obama that newt has he would be at the top.
BUT NO, RP and his most fervent fans save all their fire for fellow repubs. it's beyond absurd how he and they are going about this.
-
Ron Paul is committing political malpractice w his campaign. He has got to be the worst of the worst in how he campaigns. I'm serious, if he had even 5% of the fight towards Obama that newt has he would be at the top.
BUT NO, RP and his most fervent fans save all their fire for fellow repubs. it's beyond absurd how he and they are going about this.
Question: Are you involved with the Ron Paul campaign in any way shape or form?
Because if you're not, you really have no way of knowing how his campaign is run.
-
Question: Are you involved with the Ron Paul campaign in any way shape or form?
Because if you're not, you really have no way of knowing how his campaign is run.
I have donated money to both him and his son.
I'm talking about perception in the GOP party. RP decided to run as a Repub and not a libertarian, so it seems only common sense to at least give the primary voters what they want, someone who will destroy Obama and take him on like the survival of the nation depends on it.
I have been saying this from day one. RP does not take the right posture to win.
-
Nevada will be the make or break for Paul.
-
Nevada will be the make or break for Paul.
I still hold to my contention that RP has no intention of winning, but s looking for something else.
-
I still hold to my contention that RP has no intention of winning, but s looking for something else.
This is just freaking delusional. I have no idea why you keep saying this over and over and over. You've told everyone on this board that Paul doesn't want to win several dozen times. I think that's an odd message for a Paul supporter to post all over the place with high repetition.
At any rate, everyone here knows how you feel about this as you've sure said it enough. Is it really important for you to keep pounding in a negative opinion of Paul? If you convince people he doesn't really want to win, they're not going to vote for him even if they like him.
If this is really what you think, contact the campaign and let them know what you think they're doing wrong instead of posting it a zillion times here.
-
This is just freaking delusional. I have no idea why you keep saying this over and over and over. You've told everyone on this board that Paul doesn't want to win several dozen times. I think that's an odd message for a Paul supporter to post all over the place with high repetition.
At any rate, everyone here knows how you feel about this as you've sure said it enough. Is it really important for you to keep pounding in a negative opinion of Paul? If you convince people he doesn't really want to win, they're not going to vote for him even if they like him.
His actions tell me that. There is no valid explanation for his refusal to go after Obama forcefully and directly and loudly when that is what most primary voters want, someone w a killer instinct to take on the communist in the WH.
People are not going to vote for rp in the primary so long as he shows no real conviction to attack Obama like a steamroller.
-
His actions tell me that. There is no valid explanation for his refusal to go after Obama forcefully and directly and loudly when that is what most primary voters want, someone w a killer instinct to take on the communist in the WH.
People are not going to vote for rp in the primary so long as he shows no real conviction to attack Obama like a steamroller.
can you answer the other points of my post please. Because I'm totally at a loss lol..
-
can you answer the other points of my post please. Because I'm totally at a loss lol..
Whatever, I told you the reality of the situation. Cry all you want about it.
-
I have donated money to both him and his son.
I'm talking about perception in the GOP party. RP decided to run as a Repub and not a libertarian, so it seems only common sense to at least give the primary voters what they want, someone who will destroy Obama and take him on like the survival of the nation depends on it.
I have been saying this from day one. RP does not take the right posture to win.
Since when has Ron Paul given voters what they want? The entire reason why he has a following is because he's principled and consistent. In other words, he doesn't play politics, he speaks the truth.
-
Whatever, I told you the reality of the situation. Cry all you want about it.
I'm not fucking crying about anything. I just asked you to address the rest of what I said. Instead you just posted the same thing you always post when asked about this.
Why are you posting this over and over and over?
Why not contact the campaign with your suggestions instead?
You say you support Paul but don't you think it's not the greatest idea to attempt to convince people he doesn't want to win? You post it so often it goes beyond an opinion to you trying to convince people it's true. Why would people want to switch their vote to Paul if they think he doesn't want to win?
Simple fucking questions. You're the one that posts this over and over, I think other Paul supporters are entitled to ask a few questions if that's what you're going to do.
-
Since when has Ron Paul given voters what they want? The entire reason why he has a following is because he's principled and consistent. In other words, he doesn't play politics, he speaks the truth.
And? He still has to win to get in a position t do anything. Most of the GOP primary voters want Obama sent packing and attacked. That is the truth. Knowing that, if RP refuses to attack Obama forcefully, he will never move beyond his core base in the primary.
-
And? He still has to win to get in a position t do anything. Most of the GOP primary voters want Obama sent packing and attacked. That is the truth. Knowing that, if RP refuses to attack Obama forcefully, he will never move beyond his core base in the primary.
Ron Paul "refuses" to attack Obama? How do you figure?
-
Ron Paul "refuses" to attack Obama? How do you figure?
I have watched every single debate, so far RP has barely said a peep directly about Obamas horrible presidency. It's always theory, generalities, which is fine, but when you get that small moment, you have to make it count. RP does not do that against Obama. He does against fellow repubs, but never against Obama. That may be fine for his die hards, but he won't expand his ase in the primary beyond where he is w that tact.
-
Ron Paul "refuses" to attack Obama? How do you figure?
When 3333 has said this in the past I've gone out and gotten examples for him of where Paul has directly attacked Obama or the ideas put forth by Obama but some how this has never been good enough for 3333... I think 3333 needs Paul to stand on stage and call Obama a communist traitor that wants to destroy America. He's not happy with Paul just making a case for why Obama's ideas don't work and are unconstitutional. He wants Paul to be a little more like Ann Coulter or something.
-
this campaign is going to be BLOODY between newt and mitt if they stay close.
romney will spend $200 mil of his own damn money to win this thing. Newt will literally throw tomatoes. UGLY!
Santorum will fizzle. Ron paul will stay in a quiet 3rd.
And watch out at the convention for his team of delegates to pull some wild ol shit. "Look, these two knuckleheads are an embarassment, and neither in electable. SEnd them both home, put me in the race, and I'll beat obama" - Ron Paul, summer 2012. That would rock!
And I don't put it past ron paul to break the rules. He knows the system is fixed, he knows how to fight. He's not a pussy like those other 3 chicken hawks. His delegates are insanely loyal.
if the other 2 look like shit, ron paul may win just by being the quiet gentleman onstage who was right all along. Screaming like an idiot (newt and mitt) won't work for ron paul.
-
I have watched every single debate, so far RP has barely said a peep directly about Obamas horrible presidency. It's always theory, generalities, which is fine, but when you get that small moment, you have to make it count. RP does not do that against Obama. He does against fellow repubs, but never against Obama. That may be fine for his die hards, but he won't expand his ase in the primary beyond where he is w that tact.
::) Paul has had very limited time in all of the debates and most of the questions have been geared to put Paul on the spot and defend what he believes. He's used that time to let people know why he's right. If he had used that time to ignore the question and go after Obama he'd be even lower in the polls. Look at fucking Santorum, even when he was far below Paul in the polls he usually got twice if not more time than Paul so he can afford to attack Obama. Come on, have you been watching these debates?
And isn't it funny that Paul is polling higher than Santorum right before the last night's primary vote and he loses to Santorum... hmmm... and the joke that happened in Iowa.... The truth may very well be that Paul did better than it looks like he did.
-
I have watched every single debate, so far RP has barely said a peep directly about Obamas horrible presidency. It's always theory, generalities, which is fine, but when you get that small moment, you have to make it count. RP does not do that against Obama. He does against fellow repubs, but never against Obama. That may be fine for his die hards, but he won't expand his ase in the primary beyond where he is w that tact.
He attacks the policies of Obama, not his character, mainly because Obama's character is not brought up in the REPUBLICAN nominating process... That is also why Ron Paul has greater appeal among general election voters - he is not seen as some rabid, frothing at the mouth, Big-R Republican who only says the things he does because a Democrat is in the White House.
-
When 3333 has said this in the past I've gone out and gotten examples for him of where Paul has directly attacked Obama or the ideas put forth by Obama but some how this has never been good enough for 3333... I think 3333 needs Paul to stand on stage and call Obama a communist traitor that wants to destroy America. He's not happy with Paul just making a case for why Obama's ideas don't work and are unconstitutional. He wants Paul to be a little more like Ann Coulter or something.
I'm saying what works w GOP primary voters. As an Obama voter and someone who donated money to him, you don't get.
-
I'm saying what works w GOP primary voters. As an Obama voter and someone who donated money to him, you don't get.
Go fuck yourself, now just answer the goddamned simple questions put to you...
-
3333, I understand your approach, and quite frankly like it, but you have to understand that your approach is not the only approach that's good for winning. Your approach is to appeal to the already existing Republican base. Ron Paul's approach is to add new people into the Republican base. Whether you like it or not, the kind of heated rhetoric you're advocating turns off most people and is not a good strategy for adding new voters.
-
He attacks the policies of Obama, not his character, mainly because Obama's character is not brought up in the REPUBLICAN nominating process... That is also why Ron Paul has greater appeal among general election voters - he is not seen as some rabid, frothing at the mouth, Big-R Republican who only says the things he does because a Democrat is in the White House.
I am talking about the primary, not the general. And yes, Obama needs to be attacked like the survival of this nation depends on it. anything less will fail.
-
3333, I understand your approach, and quite frankly like it, but you have to understand that your approach is not the only approach that's good for winning. Your approach is to appeal to the already existing Republican base. Ron Paul's approach is to add new people into the Republican base. Whether you like it or not, the kind of heated rhetoric you're advocating turns off most people and is not a good strategy for adding new voters.
Well unless he is going third party, what he is doing now is not going to result in victory.
-
333, why don't you go hang out with the idiots on the Hannity forums... They actually think Paul is for Obama and is only in this to secure Obama a win.
-
Well unless he is going third party, what he is doing now is not going to result in victory.
you dont know that, 33.
delegates can change their mind. it's an insanely crooked system that allows for that. remember that shit with hilary where she said the super delegates may choose her DESPITE what the coters said?
if no candidate gets a majority, polls show newt and mitt both getting beaten by obama, and the general feeling is that both of them are shitty options - the super delegates can LEGALLY pick someone else. This is where they broker deals. Ron paul gets the nod, with the agreement he'll keep romney as eep and newt gets to be sec of whatever the hell he wants.
-
333, why don't you go hang out with the idiots on the Hannity forums... They actually think Paul is for Obama and is only in this to secure Obama a win.
Why don't you wake up to reality. I hate vanity, but if RP wants to win, what he is doing now is not going to work.
As far as the debates, crying over the lack of questions is pointless, why isn't RP more assertive and pull a Reagan "I paid or this microphone" moment?
-
Despite Paul getting the least amount of time in the debates and Santorum for no reason sometimes getting the most amount of time, Paul has continued to climb in the polls... Paul also still gets the least amount of time in the media, yet he keeps adding support.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
How in the hell do you call this a failure and say that Paul doesn't want to win? ::)
-
Despite Paul getting the least amount of time in the debates and Santorum for no reason sometimes getting the most amount of time, Paul has continued to climb in the polls... Paul also still gets the least amount of time in the media, yet he keeps adding support.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
How in the hell do you call this a failure and say that Paul doesn't want to win? ::)
Because he even said he does not see himself in the WH. That is a direct quote.
-
Because he even said he does not see himself in the WH. That is a direct quote.
yea I just read your quote ::) You're taking it out of context to mean he doesn't want to win which is pure horse shit.
-
yea I just read your quote ::) You're taking it out of context to mean he doesn't want to win which is pure horse shit.
How does he plan on winning if he does not even envision winning?
-
How does he plan on winning if he does not even envision winning?
stop being like that, 33.
he doesn't obsess about it when he lays down at night. he thinks about his faimly, his achievements, etc.
not some *****damn government job.
wow, it's like your trying so hard to talk yourself into backing romney or newt over ron paul.
-
People forget Paul spent lkke 100,000 dollars in SC and fuck all in Florida so how could anything bit a poor showing happen there? Also, every other candidate has been down then up and down again, this is no different for Paul, the only difference is the media claims it to be over for him when in reality we are only 2% into the delegate count.
-
How does he plan on winning if he does not even envision winning?
He didn't say he doesn't envision winning. ::) Now you're putting words in his mouth with your own context. The difference is between someone like Newt who just wants to be president for the title and someone like Paul who is doing it out of duty for the country, because he wants the right thing for America. That use to be a popular. Even Bush ran with that notion in the 2000 election although I didn't believe it. Ron Paul is real, consistent and he's humble... Qualities some of us still prefer over fakes like Newt.
Why is it that you constantly demand answers from others here but when a few simple questions or points are made you absolutely refuse to address them every single time?
You didn't actually address the points made in this post... You rarely do.
Despite Paul getting the least amount of time in the debates and Santorum for no reason sometimes getting the most amount of time, Paul has continued to climb in the polls... Paul also still gets the least amount of time in the media, yet he keeps adding support.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
How in the hell do you call this a failure and say that Paul doesn't want to win? ::)
-
newt and mitt are playing the game ton win the bandwagon hearts of the media and flipflopping repubs who still can't pick one.
ron paul is playing to stock up delegates so he can be a solid 3rd and unflawed comapred with the top 2 in Tampa fo convention.
I bet ron paul is feeding $ to superpacs to keep newt viable should romney start to pull away ;)
-
3333, just address the points. Posting that we're not worthy to be asking is not acceptable. ::)
-
3333, just address the points. Posting that we're not worthy to be asking is not acceptable. ::)
What point do you want me to address?
-
Wait, Ron Paul didn't jump into the lap of the d-bag reporter and tell him that his lifelong dream is to be POTUS, and that he closes his eyes on his red, white & blue pillow every night, listening to old reagan speeches on audio while msasturbating to conservative stalwart Pat nixon?
fuuuck, then i better vote romney.
-
Wait, Ron Paul didn't jump into the lap of the d-bag reporter and tell him that his lifelong dream is to be POTUS, and that he closes his eyes on his red, white & blue pillow every night, listening to old reagan speeches on audio while msasturbating to conservative stalwart Pat nixon?
fuuuck, then i better vote romney.
Here is the proper answer:
"Absolutely, because unless i am elected to reverse course and stop Obama's horrible policies, we are heading for the abyss"
-
Here is the proper answer:
"Absolutely, because unless i am elected to reverse course and stop Obama's horrible policies, we are heading for the abyss"
"proper"?
No. Ron Paul gave us his honest answer.
imagine telling your employer "I lay down every night and i DREAM of being an assistant shipping manager". He's laugh you out of the room for being such a dipshit suckup. And for being insincere.
The fact you have to dive this far to pick on ron paul.... sad. criticizing the man for not answering a Q about his pre-sleep ritual, and you be all pissed off.
-
"proper"?
No. Ron Paul gave us his honest answer.
imagine telling your employer "I lay down every night and i DREAM of being an assistant shipping manager". He's laugh you out of the room for being such a dipshit suckup. And for being insincere.
The fact you have to dive this far to pick on ron paul.... sad. criticizing the man for not answering a Q about his pre-sleep ritual, and you be all pissed off.
No, I am explaining why he is not in 1st place in the GOP PRIMARY.
Again - this is the GOP PRIMARY, not the OBAMA VOTERS W REMORSE DO OVER
-
3333, just address the points. Posting that we're not worthy to be asking is not acceptable. ::)
There are several points that you ignored in the posts above. Just read them and address them instead of acting like your opinion is the only one that matters.
Start with the simple point that Paul's campaign should be considered a success. He's been gaining in the polls and this is despite the fact that the media gives him far less time in both the debates and in coverage. That's not crying about it, those are the facts that are easily proven. If he had equal time perhaps he would be right up there with Romney. Instead of blaming the clear bias against him in this area, you blame Paul. These are points that deserve a better answer from you than posting some diatribe about how we're not worthy to challenge your opinion and we "just don't get it" ::)
-
I define success as winning and sending that communist wretch and traitor in the WH back to Kenya on a muslim prayer mat followed by Aunt Zeutuni, Michelle, the brats, and Uncle Omar on a replica Amistad across the ocean manning oars in the bottom of the ship.
Paul has done much better this time than last - absolutely. He has garnered a following and a very passionate one at that.
But right now he needs to move ahead of Romney and Mittens. So far he is not doing that w the GOP primary voters. do you not see that?
-
I define success as winning and sending that communist wretch and traitor in the WH back to Kenya on a muslim prayer mat followed by Aunt Zeutuni, Michelle, the brats, and Uncle Omar on a replica Amistad across the ocean manning oars in the bottom of the ship.
Paul has done much better this time than last - absolutely. He has garnered a following and a very passionate one at that.
But right now he needs to move ahead of Romney and Mittens. So far he is not doing that w the GOP primary voters. do you not see that?
You still missed major points that should be considered. Why do you refuse to factor how the media has delt with Paul in both the debates and in coverage? You think it's not relevant when he gets a fraction of the time the rest do? Even giving Santorum twice the time when he was at a quarter of what Paul was in the polls? You can't admit that? You would rather blame Paul when it's very likely that he would be even higher in the polls if they didn't pull this shit with him in the dabates and coverage? And I'm not crying about it, these are easily provable points that do matter.
-
You still missed major points that should be considered. Why do you refuse to factor how the media has delt with Paul in both the debates and in coverage? You think it's not relevant when he gets a fraction of the time the rest do? Even giving Santorum twice the time when he was at a quarter of what Paul was in the polls? You can't admit that? You would rather blame Paul when it's very likely that he would be even higher in the polls if they didn't pull this shit with him in the dabates and coverage? And I'm not crying about it, these are easily provable points that do matter.
It is what it is, but he does not help himself by not forcefully taking over the stage like Reagan did when faced w similar stuff.
-
so the media could have ANYTHING to paint him as crazy, aggressive, unhinged, or out of control? nope, RP can't give them an ounce of that.
-
so the media could have ANYTHING to paint him as crazy, aggressive, unhinged, or out of control? nope, RP can't give them an ounce of that.
They tried the same thing w Reagan. And reagan was a political steamroller.
-
They tried the same thing w Reagan. And reagan was a political steamroller.
sorry, but the media 2012 is a shitload different than the media 1980.
back then, it was a 30-minute news show at 630 every night. none of thise 24/7 punditry.
ronald reagan would be mitt today.
-
sorry, but the media 2012 is a shitload different than the media 1980.
back then, it was a 30-minute news show at 630 every night. none of thise 24/7 punditry.
ronald reagan would be mitt today.
Idiot.
-
right. i forgot. msnbc and drudge and foxnews were all the rage in 1980.
-
right. i forgot. msnbc and drudge and foxnews were all the rage in 1980.
Do you even know Reagan's past? Romney was not even close to being a reaganite and he specifically rejected rejected reagan.
-
Do you even know Reagan's past? Romney was not even close to being a reaganite and he specifically rejected rejected reagan.
Sure - http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/27/reagan-the-liberal/
Read about it in detail. Reagan was quite the liberal governor who changed gears because he wanted to be president- Very mitt like.
and he did a lot of libereal things in office too. but you disliked my mitt comparison, even tho it's accurate.
-
Sure - http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/27/reagan-the-liberal/
Read about it in detail. Reagan was quite the liberal governor who changed gears because he wanted to be president- Very mitt like.
and he did a lot of libereal things in office too. but you disliked my mitt comparison, even tho it's accurate.
Having read reagans' diaries and looking at Mittens, putting the two in the same sentence is absurd.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Reagan raise taxes, increase spending, and increase the role of government as Governor? Mitt has a better record than that.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Reagan raise taxes, increase spending, and increase the role of government as Governor? Mitt has a better record than that.
He even had a flip-flopping past lol...
-
And, TBH, Reagan's record as President wasn't much better than his record as Governor... Sure, he started off with a bang, but government spending on all things, not just on the military, exploded. I see a lot of people saying this bullshit about the Democrats preventing Reagan from cutting the things he wanted to cut - but as President, couldn't he have at least forced the Congressional Democrats into a compromise to at least freeze spending in real terms? That alone would have done a lot to control his record-setting budget deficits. And of course, after his large initial tax cut, he hiked taxes numerous times.
-
i remember romney calling out reagan in 2008... "I'm not gonna raise taxes..." when asked if he'll do what reagan did.
that was the debate whisper question where "he raised taxes" appeared in someone's earpiece.
-
i remember romney calling out reagan in 2008... "I'm not gonna raise taxes..." when asked if he'll do what reagan did.
that was the debate whisper question where "he raised taxes" appeared in someone's earpiece.
Romney is the worst of the worst. I prefer newt over Romney.
-
Romney is the worst of the worst. I prefer newt over Romney.
Newt has never seen a government program he hasn't liked. His "conservative opportunity society" is simply code for "Big Government Republicanism," Lincoln style. I much prefer Mitt, who at least has private sector experience of cutting down businesses to size.
-
newt attacks obama all day. but his lifetime policies speak volumes.
obama trashed bush, got into office, and didn't chnage a damn thing.
newt would trash obama, get into office, and woudln't change much.
-
Newt has never seen a government program he hasn't liked. His "conservative opportunity society" is simply code for "Big Government Republicanism," Lincoln style. I much prefer Mitt, who at least has private sector experience of cutting down businesses to size.
I'll post a few things later about mittens old positions on Coal. he is as bad as Obama.
-
newt attacks obama all day. but his lifetime policies speak volumes.
obama trashed bush, got into office, and didn't chnage a damn thing.
newt would trash obama, get into office, and woudln't change much.
Do you remember the mid to late 90's ? Clinton and Newt actually were the most fiscally prudent duo we have had in a long time and he got welfare reform through.
-
Do you remember the mid to late 90's ? Clinton and Newt actually were the most fiscally prudent duo we have had in a long time and he got welfare reform through.
yes, then newt turned into a spend-happy idiot in the 2000s.
Newt just rolls with what is popular at the time. Clinton got responsible with $, and so newt rolled with it.
Bush spent like a drunken sailor, and newt cheered it on while spending his own $ like a drunken sailor just to be on the bandwagon. Tiffany's anyone?
Now he's suddenly a conservative, huh? riiiiight. compared to mitt, yes. comared to rpaul? fck no.
-
yes, then newt turned into a spend-happy idiot in the 2000s.
Newt just rolls with what is popular at the time. Clinton got responsible with $, and so newt rolled with it.
Bush spent like a drunken sailor, and newt cheered it on while spending his own $ like a drunken sailor just to be on the bandwagon. Tiffany's anyone?
Now he's suddenly a conservative, huh? riiiiight. compared to mitt, yes. comared to rpaul? fck no.
LOL. He was not speaker then. hastert was really the enabler for bushs garbage.
-
LOL. He was not speaker then. hastert was really the enabler for bushs garbage.
no, but he was on fox and other outlets defending bush for 8 years.