Author Topic: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.  (Read 11801 times)

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #25 on: September 05, 2011, 11:41:01 AM »
Let's hope you are right.
You don't have to hope I'm right, you have to hope republicans can see that I'm right.  I know I'm right.  It's clear that many progressives would vote for Obama but hardly any of them would vote for any of the other republican candidates.  The point here is that this fact that a section of progressives would vote for Ron Paul makes HIM MORE ELECTIBLE THAN THE OTHER REPUBLICANS!!!

Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #26 on: September 05, 2011, 11:46:17 AM »
You don't have to hope I'm right, you have to hope republicans can see that I'm right.  I know I'm right.  It's clear that many progressives would vote for Obama but hardly any of them would vote for any of the other republican candidates.  The point here is that this fact that a section of progressives would vote for Ron Paul makes HIM MORE ELECTIBLE THAN THE OTHER REPUBLICANS!!!

We'll see what happens, we'll see.
I hate the State.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2011, 12:10:08 PM »
"Ah, hello. My name is dadank. Please don't be offended by the title, I do actually have an interesting topic for you to ponder, but first, let me tell you a bit about myself. I'm progressive and Ron Paul supporter, as well as a Marijuana Activist. I like recycling and trying to save the Earth and value my health and nutrition above all else. Now, I have some few gay friends, not many, but I'm not a gay hater or a homophobe, in case you were wondering. Now, onwards..."
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread729745/pg1

I'm progressive and I'd take R. Paul over Obama
"Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like he wants to do more for my agenda than Obama. Since kucinich won't run, I don't know who else I can trust to actually represent my views on the most important issues. Paul wants to actually end our empire and actually end the war on drugs and actually hold corporations responsible. Those are both things I think a president can really affect and things that we desperately desperately need. I'm willing to risk him throwing me to the wolves on consumer protection issues because I think congress could sufficiently balance those tendencies. my biggest worry is that he'd let the market determine environmental issues but as far as I know Obama hasn't done much there either.

Honestly, last time I really evaluated Paul was in 08. I thought he was surprisingly agreeable then but I still held out hope Obama would address the military industrial complex, war on drugs, and be much stronger on gay rights. Since he's ignored the first two and left the activists to take up the last issue I just don't see many reasons to support him over Paul. Any progressives care to tell me what I'm missing here?"
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/mma.cfm?go=forum.posts&thread=1840515&forum=2&page=1&pc=257

And more and more just like these!!!

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #28 on: September 05, 2011, 12:12:21 PM »
GOpers would rather swear off sodomy than watch that RPaul clip.

George Whorewell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7362
  • TND
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #29 on: September 05, 2011, 12:14:57 PM »
Hugo-

Fringe lunatics on right and left typically start to sound the same after a while.

Not saying RP is one of those, but on some issues he is completely off the reservation.

Conservatives outnumber libs in the country by 3 to 1. The fact that he appeals to some libs means nothing. He won't get his parties nomination so this is a dead issue.

Appealing to the left wing whackjobs is a bad thing. It hurts the base, it alienates the sure thing GOP voter and it virtually guarantees a D victory in 2012. You really think libs are going to vote Republican just because the Republican happens to be Ron Paul? They would rather have 4 more years of Osama.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2011, 12:15:51 PM »
We'll see what happens, we'll see.
It's in the hands of republican voters.  I'm thinking republicans will nominated someone like Perry, Palin or Bachmann which will force the progressive left to vote for Obama when many of them really don't want to at this point.

I know I'm right that progressives are identifying with Paul on Major issues they stand for and as such are willing look past things they don't like about him especially since those things they don't like about him would be extremely hard for Ron Paul to get congress to do but the things they like about Paul, the president can have a giant effect on.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #31 on: September 05, 2011, 12:23:30 PM »
FACT: Conservatives hate Obama WAY MORE than they dislike Ron Paul = they will vote for Paul over Obama, that's in the bag.
FACT: Paul will take a chunk of liberal votes away from Obama where no other republican candidate can.
FACT: Ron Paul leads Obama 46 percent to 43 percent among independents.

This means if you nominate Ron Paul, you win the election.  Only Ron Paul can snag people that otherwise would have voted for Obama because of the issues progressives are raising.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #32 on: September 05, 2011, 12:28:41 PM »
BOOM BITCHES!!!!!!!!! WATCH THIS!!!


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #33 on: September 05, 2011, 12:33:16 PM »
Ron paul would, without a doubt, beat obama.  I know a lot of ppl who loved ron paul because they hated traditional repubs.  They voted obama.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #34 on: September 05, 2011, 01:19:21 PM »
I think some republicans on this forum are still neocon at heart.  They'll go for a neocon disingenuously waving a tea party flag over the person who inspired the tea party to begin with.  I mean look, Bachmann was all neoconish under Bush, they lost the election and she changed her tone overnight?  Got the tea party religion lol...  Hell even Bill Kristol identifies her as a fellow neocon lol...

And look at Perry... He's already getting the old group of neocons back together.  Even Donald Rumsfeld is helping out.
"Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped organize Rick Perry's foreign policy and national security briefing in Austin last Wednesday, Rumsfeld's staff confirmed today. ...included former Rumsfeld aides Doug Feith, Daniel Fata, and William Luti, as well as the magazine's Andrew McCarthy and others ."

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #35 on: September 05, 2011, 01:38:14 PM »
And look at Perry... He's already getting the old group of neocons back together.  Even Donald Rumsfeld is helping out.
"Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped organize Rick Perry's foreign policy and national security briefing in Austin last Wednesday, Rumsfeld's staff confirmed today. ...included former Rumsfeld aides Doug Feith, Daniel Fata, and William Luti, as well as the magazine's Andrew McCarthy and others ."


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH  There's your neocon candidate.  go fuck a duck if you vote perry.  just jam it right in.  quack.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #36 on: September 05, 2011, 02:46:14 PM »
 :(

The Neocon Supermajority

Joe Klein:


let's assume the worst: say Iran is working on a bomb; say it acquires one in the next few years. Only Benjamin Netanyahu and assorted American neoconservatives believe - or pretend to believe - that Iran might actually use it, given Israel's overpowering ability to strike back.


McLaughlin & Associates poll from May 2009:


If Iran is able to produce a nuclear weapon, nearly eight in ten voters (79%) say it is likely that Iran will provide nuclear weapons to terrorists to attack an American city.


American Neocons: 240 million strong--and growing.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/neocon-supermajority

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #37 on: September 05, 2011, 05:34:59 PM »
He's getting hammered from everywhere but what these tools don't understand is that with every mocking attack, his base grows and gets more fired up.



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40061
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #38 on: September 05, 2011, 05:38:20 PM »
For every progressive he gets, he will lose 2 soccer sluts once the media convinces them he wants to end Dept of Ed.   

The media is using Ron Paul and will turn on him and destroy him like you can't believe.   He will be turned in to the crazy uncle in the attic and be lucky to break 40. 

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #39 on: September 05, 2011, 05:43:01 PM »
Of the current crop of Republicans... Ron Paul is the only one I would vote for to be honest.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #40 on: September 05, 2011, 06:22:11 PM »
For every progressive he gets, he will lose 2 soccer sluts once the media convinces them he wants to end Dept of Ed.   

The media is using Ron Paul and will turn on him and destroy him like you can't believe.   He will be turned in to the crazy uncle in the attic and be lucky to break 40. 
Why do you say that?  His argument against the dept. of ed. is very good.  Maybe he will convince more that they are the problem and their money would be best used at the local state level.  The stupid thing has only been around since 1979 and shit has sure not improved as a result.
Quote
“First, the Constitution does not authorize the Department of Education, and the founders never envisioned the federal government dictating those education policies.

Second, it is a huge bureaucracy that squanders our money. We send billions of dollars to Washington and get back less than we sent. The money would be much better off left in states and local communities rather than being squandered in Washington.

Finally, I think that the smallest level of government possible best performs education. Teachers, parents, and local community leaders should be making decisions about exactly how our children should be taught, not Washington bureaucrats.

The Department of Education has given us No Child Left Behind, massive unfunded mandates, indoctrination, and in some cases, forced medication of our children with psychotropic drugs. We should get rid of all of that and get those choices back in the hands of the people.”



LOL, look who I found talking about it: ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40061
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #41 on: September 05, 2011, 06:34:48 PM »
Yawn.   I'm talking reality, not idealism.   The msm loves Ron Paul when he attacks other repubs.   The second me mentions the words Obama and fail, it's over.   

Ron Paul will be turned into a racist, neo-confederate, radical, 911 cter, and will get crushed.   

Plus, where is he going to get the money to run from? 

I like Ron Paul, but he is going nowhere.   And it's his own fault to be honest.   His issues are my issues by and large, but how he goes about this is a destined fail.    It's maddening too since he does not want to seem to change it up a bit.   

Unless he changes things soon, he is going nowhere in this primary.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #42 on: September 05, 2011, 06:40:06 PM »
Wanting to Abolish the Department of Education Is Not Radical

As recently as 1996, the Republican party platform declared, “The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education.” Ah, bright hopes of youth.

The Department of Education was created as a straight political payoff to the teachers’ unions by Pres. Jimmy Carter (in return for their 1976 endorsement). According to the National Center for Education Statistics, DE’s original budget, in 1980, was $13.1 billion (in 2007 dollars), and it employed 450 people. By 2000, it had increased to $34.1 billion, and by 2007 it had more than doubled to $73 billion. The budget request for fiscal 2011 is $77.8 billion, and the department employs 4,800.

All of this spending has done nothing to improve American education. Between 1973 and 2004, a period in which federal spending on education more than quadrupled, mathematics scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress rose just 1 percent for American 17-year-olds. Between 1971 and 2004, reading scores remained completely flat.

Comparing educational achievement with per-pupil spending among states also calls into question the value of increasing expenditures. While high-spending Massachusetts had the nation’s highest proficiency scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, low-spending Idaho did very well, too. South Dakota ranks 42nd in per-pupil expenditures but eighth in math performance and ninth in reading. The District of Columbia, meanwhile, with the nation’s highest per-pupil expenditures ($15,511 in 2007), scores dead last in achievement.

Like the WIC program, which was originally aimed at low-income pregnant and nursing women and babies but has expanded to cover 50 percent of American infants, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was designed to aid low-income and minority populations in 1965, but has since morphed into the No Child Left Behind law, which affects every student in the country.

The Education Department has done more than waste money. Busy bureaucrats have created reams of paperwork for teachers and administrators, pushed dubious curricula, such as bilingual education, and adopted manifold extra-educational missions. The department’s website lists hundreds of programs that bear little to no relation to schooling, including the “Spinal Cord Injuries Model Systems Program,” the “Small Business Innovation Research Program,” “Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights,” the “Predominantly Black Institutions Program,” “Life Skills for State and Local Prisoners,” “Institute for International Public Policy,” “Grants to States to Improve Management of Drug and Violence Prevention Programs,” “Grants to Reduce Alcohol Abuse,” and the “Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program,” to name just a handful. No one checks. There is no accountability. There are no consequences for failure, except perhaps requests for even greater funding next year.

The Department of Education is a great, burbling vat of waste, and it is not extremist to say so.

cont...  http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229936/wanting-abolish-department-education-not-radical/mona-charen

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #43 on: September 05, 2011, 06:42:54 PM »
Yawn.   I'm talking reality, not idealism.   The msm loves Ron Paul when he attacks other repubs.   The second me mentions the words Obama and fail, it's over.   

Ron Paul will be turned into a racist, neo-confederate, radical, 911 cter, and will get crushed.   

Plus, where is he going to get the money to run from? 

I like Ron Paul, but he is going nowhere.   And it's his own fault to be honest.   His issues are my issues by and large, but how he goes about this is a destined fail.    It's maddening too since he does not want to seem to change it up a bit.   

Unless he changes things soon, he is going nowhere in this primary.
you were supporting Bachmann and she said the same thing about the dept of ed.. ::)  As far as those other things you mentioned, he got nailed on that stuff in the last election, most of which turned out to not be true and even the media cleared him.  It's already out in the open now so why are progressives who know about that stuff still supporting him?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40061
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #44 on: September 05, 2011, 06:55:11 PM »
you were supporting Bachmann and she said the same thing about the dept of ed.. ::)  As far as those other things you mentioned, he got nailed on that stuff in the last election, most of which turned out to not be true and even the media cleared him.  It's already out in the open now so why are progressives who know about that stuff still supporting him?


I would get rid of the DOE, EPA, DHS, EEOC, DOL, ATF, DEA, Energy Dept., et al. 

My point was that Ron Paul has not been attacked yet by the media like the others and once it happens, boy you ain't seen nothing like what they will do to him once he starts attacking Obama.  The msm uses Paul as a patsy and a proxy to wage attacks on others in the GOP.   

Btw - progressives are the biggest joke of all.  They abandoned Hillary because of their one night stand with the cool black dude w rap and woke up w aids.   Now these jilted lovers are looking for revenge and think they can live w rp.   Maybe in some issues, sure, but the FED?   LMFAO!   

The entire progressive agenda relies on massive spending, debt, and loose money.   

JBGRAY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2038
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #45 on: September 05, 2011, 07:12:09 PM »
He is unelectable.  He is too old and some of his ideas are simply too far out.  I believe he advocated a "Flat Tax" at one time, which would put millions more under the poverty line. 

On top of that, he does not hold any favor at all with the powerful Israeli lobbies such as AIPAC and their equally powerful Evangelical Christian allies.......many top Evangelicals serve as advisers to the President, and top Israeli officials have his ear 24/7.

On top of that, the majority of the media market, outside of Fox News, AM Talk Radio, and a few online news sources serve as nothing more than campaign mouthpieces for the Democratic Party.

Obama WILL win again...and it won't even be close.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #46 on: September 05, 2011, 07:47:30 PM »

I would get rid of the DOE, EPA, DHS, EEOC, DOL, ATF, DEA, Energy Dept., et al.  

My point was that Ron Paul has not been attacked yet by the media like the others and once it happens, boy you ain't seen nothing like what they will do to him once he starts attacking Obama.  The msm uses Paul as a patsy and a proxy to wage attacks on others in the GOP.  

Btw - progressives are the biggest joke of all.  They abandoned Hillary because of their one night stand with the cool black dude w rap and woke up w aids.   Now these jilted lovers are looking for revenge and think they can live w rp.   Maybe in some issues, sure, but the FED?   LMFAO!  

The entire progressive agenda relies on massive spending, debt, and loose money.  
You're shitting me lol... Ron Paul hasn't been attacked by the media yet?  Jesus, how in the hell have you missed the attacks on Paul?  Also the thread was not created to support progressives, only to show that a faction will vote for Paul over Obama.


Why would you say that progressives are opposed to criticism of the fed?  O'Really?


Kucinich: End the Fed




Go to 3:00 minute mark to hear nader agree the fed needs audited and or ended.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #47 on: September 05, 2011, 07:53:06 PM »
He is unelectable.  He is too old and some of his ideas are simply too far out.  

Who *IS* electable?

Mitt- He wrote obamacare, which everyone hates.  He's a freaking weirdo, a mormon which some people hate, and flipflops worse than anyone this side of John kerry.

Bachmann - God and her hubby told her to be an undercover agent to infiltrate the IRS.  When she's not crouching in bushes spying, she's lying about her husband using federal dollars to un-gay people.

Perry - Crooked as can be, served for almost a decades as a DEM, forced little girls to get HPV vaccinations, and flipflopped on many major issues in the last YEAR.

I'd say they are ALL unelectable, based upon having some serious flaws.  And one of them is going to win, and will have a pretty good chance at beating obama.  

Paul being old, while being a doctor, a veteran, a lifetime conservative... who says he's any less electable than a subservient religious zealout or two RINO flipflooperS?

doison

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3448
  • Rum Ham
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #48 on: September 06, 2011, 04:27:50 AM »
Who *IS* electable?

Mitt- He wrote obamacare, which everyone hates.  He's a freaking weirdo, a mormon which some people hate, and flipflops worse than anyone this side of John kerry.

Bachmann - God and her hubby told her to be an undercover agent to infiltrate the IRS.  When she's not crouching in bushes spying, she's lying about her husband using federal dollars to un-gay people.

Perry - Crooked as can be, served for almost a decades as a DEM, forced little girls to get HPV vaccinations, and flipflopped on many major issues in the last YEAR.

I'd say they are ALL unelectable, based upon having some serious flaws.  And one of them is going to win, and will have a pretty good chance at beating obama.  

Paul being old, while being a doctor, a veteran, a lifetime conservative... who says he's any less electable than a subservient religious zealout or two RINO flipflooperS?

If all things were equal and the media treated Paul as the serious contender his straw poll numbers (with voter support from both sides) show he deserves to be, he would very likely win the 2012 presidential election.  Even better, in a scenario where the number of Americans who actually show up and VOTE for Ron Paul compared to the number of Americans who SAY they would vote him is in a percentage range comparable to the average "actually do vote for" to "say will vote for" percentage range of top candidates over the last half dozen presidential elections, Ron Paul would likely win by a landslide.

However, for some reason or another, you still see so many Ron Paul "supporters" claim that they want him to win.....but won't vote for him because they don't believe he can win...which is likely due (at least in part) to the high number of "18-25 year age bracket" internet slackers who, as the first generation to be entrenched since birth in the "everyone gets a trophy, every child is a gifted genius, etc.," pussification of America, having never nurtured their inherent competitive drive are self-defeating by default and preach to each other their belief (thus making it a self-fulfilling prophecy) of how their vote doesn't matter and of how the Illuminati/NWO type "elite" run the world and decide Presidential election results, will convince themselves and anyone that will listen that Ron Paul can't win, so there's no reason to stop bitching about the government and playing video games to hike their jobless asses to the voting booth and actually register an official vote for Ron Paul as their choice for President.  

I'm still holding out hope that some kind of "word-of-mouth" movement gets going where people begin lose the idea that Ron Paul isn't electable and realize that the only reason Ron Paul is unelectable is because his supporters are the people most vocal about insisting it.  

I'd like to see Ron Paul win the GOP nomination, but if he doesn't and the GOP doesn't nominate a legitimate fiscal conservative in his place, I'm voting Ron Paul in 2012 even if I have to carve his name into the electronic voting machine's screen.
Y

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.
« Reply #49 on: October 26, 2011, 03:36:31 PM »
If all things were equal and the media treated Paul as the serious contender his straw poll numbers (with voter support from both sides) show he deserves to be, he would very likely win the 2012 presidential election.  Even better, in a scenario where the number of Americans who actually show up and VOTE for Ron Paul compared to the number of Americans who SAY they would vote him is in a percentage range comparable to the average "actually do vote for" to "say will vote for" percentage range of top candidates over the last half dozen presidential elections, Ron Paul would likely win by a landslide.

However, for some reason or another, you still see so many Ron Paul "supporters" claim that they want him to win.....but won't vote for him because they don't believe he can win...which is likely due (at least in part) to the high number of "18-25 year age bracket" internet slackers who, as the first generation to be entrenched since birth in the "everyone gets a trophy, every child is a gifted genius, etc.," pussification of America, having never nurtured their inherent competitive drive are self-defeating by default and preach to each other their belief (thus making it a self-fulfilling prophecy) of how their vote doesn't matter and of how the Illuminati/NWO type "elite" run the world and decide Presidential election results, will convince themselves and anyone that will listen that Ron Paul can't win, so there's no reason to stop bitching about the government and playing video games to hike their jobless asses to the voting booth and actually register an official vote for Ron Paul as their choice for President.  

I'm still holding out hope that some kind of "word-of-mouth" movement gets going where people begin lose the idea that Ron Paul isn't electable and realize that the only reason Ron Paul is unelectable is because his supporters are the people most vocal about insisting it.  

I'd like to see Ron Paul win the GOP nomination, but if he doesn't and the GOP doesn't nominate a legitimate fiscal conservative in his place, I'm voting Ron Paul in 2012 even if I have to carve his name into the electronic voting machine's screen.