Why Ron Paul has a better chance to win against Obama.

[Hugo Chavez]

During the 08 election I tried to bring the point up that several on the left would actually vote for Paul but was largely told that I was wrong.  Repubicans would say that the only reason anyone on the left liked Ron Paul was to put a candidate up that can't win.

Ron Paul is the ONLY republican that will actually take votes from the left.  None of the other republican candidates will, maybe a small amount for Romney but that's it. It becomes even more clear considering how and in what areas Obama has pissed off his own base which are areas they agree with Ron Paul on but none of the other republican candidates represent.

Must Watch Check this out!!!  Glad I'm not the only one saying it this time!!!  and on FOX

Warning: The word POOP is banned for this thread

[Hugo Chavez]

Is Ron Paul More Progressive Than Obama?

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/04/28/is-ron-paul-more-progressive-than-obama/

[Hugo Chavez]

Ron Paul: a Liberal Viewpoint

I am a liberal. I believe in whatever social or political solution best serves the common good, even if it means raising taxes and expanding the government. As a tree-hugger, I haven't owned a car since 1994 - I've commuted to work on foot for over a decade. Dennis Kucinich is by far my favorite living Democrat. Hell, prove to me a nation can best achieve prosperity, peace, stability, and freedom within a Communist framework and you can call me Comrade.


But I will be hanging up my Green Party affiliation in the near future in order to register as a Republican, to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries. Here's why:


Foreign Policy: Ron Paul is the strongest, most unequivocal, anti-interventionist and anti-war figure on the board right now. He'd pull us the hell out of Iraq and put an end to all the US meddling abroad that makes us the most hated nation in the world. He's in favor of monetary policies which, unlike the current system, would make it much harder for the military-industrial complex to write itself unlimited loans against America's future for its bloody adventures today. And, unlike Obama, Clinton, and all the Republicans, Paul does not kowtow to AIPAC, which is lobbying heavily for a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran.


Freedom: Ron Paul can rightfully boast to be the top defender of Constitutional American freedoms in the country. In an era where the Patriot Act, the Military Comissions Act, and any number of illegal executive orders from the White House have essentially turned the US into a totalitarian state, our freedoms need more protection than ever. There is no other candidate with a record that even comes close to Ron Paul in this area.


Finances: Ron Paul is the only candidate on the map who will act to repeal the Federal Reserve. Everyone else is too chicken-shit to touch this absolutely crucial issue. A sound monetary system, as Paul has championed for decades, would end inflation, stabilize the economy, drastically improve the national deficit, force the Federal government to better account for its spending practices… and eventually obviate the Federal Income Tax. This would mean that all the untold trillions of dollars that we have been funneling into the pockets of private (and war-financing) banks since 1913 would stay with taxpayers... the vast majority of us.


Federal Subsidies: Ron Paul is against all corporate welfare, and his voting record in Congress reflects this without exception. Ending corporate welfare, aside from being the fair thing to do, would save taxpayer money and force companies to respond to the needs of consumers rather than to artificial government incentives. In the farming industry it could also have the additional effect of allowing Mexican farmers to compete with American agri-business on a level field… and reduce the economic pressure to immigrate to the US illegally.


Free Trade: Ron Paul opposes NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, and the WTO.


Caveats: I'm tempted to question Paul's Libertarian policies on environmental issues… but the top polluter in America is the military, which would be drastically less active under non-interventionist leadership. I do disagree with his pro-life stance on abortion… but he interprets the Constitution as not giving the federal government authority on the matter either way. I lean towards a system of medicine such as the one in France or Canada... but Paul's approach to de-regulation would make prescription drugs more affordable and alternative treatments more available (and there's the annoying fact that Paul is a medical doctor himself… he might know a little about heathcare). Then there's immigration: I'm equally uncomfortable with pretty much every side of this issue, so consider me neutral… Paul's a hard-ass on this one, and his stance is as responsible and consistent as it is unforgiving.


Paul the Person: I have my disagreements with him here and there, but this I can say: His integrity in the public sphere is beyond question. His commitment, consistency, and courage with regard to safeguarding the rights and interests of Americans is unparalleled. His positions on virtually every issue are clear, well-reasoned, and a matter of public record. He is the most intellectually rigorous and yet bullshit-free candidate on the field. There is very good reason that he is the clear favorite for President on the Internet, and the one the corporate media most seek to suppress. In terms of sheer quality, he demolishes all his Republican rivals and makes short work of virtually all the Democrats. With the possible exeption of Kucinich, Paul is the only person in the public eye I can comfortably endorse for President in this race.


Ron Paul has made me a Republican. Bugger.

http://www.dailypaul.com/948/ron-paul-a-liberal-viewpoint

[Hugo Chavez]

a while back I listened to one progressive talk show host explain why progressives should not bail on the left to support Ron Paul.  He took a moment to say this, because he had Ron Paul on the program several times and had he had received a very positive response from listeners, so much so that the host, I think it was Hartmann, had to make a case against Paul.  I lol'd at that.  Another liberal radio show, Ed Schultz, Ron Paul after a while was identified before each appearance as a favorite on the show by listeners.

Now again we have liberals who feel like they have to make a case of why progressives should not support Ron Paul: WHY WOULD THEY NEED TO DO SO?  BECAUSE A LOT OF THEM ARE SUPPORTING RON PAUL!!! 

"Liberalism", "Progressivism" and "Ron Paul Libertarians"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/03/1013106/-Liberalism,-Progressivism-and-Ron-Paul-Libertarians

[Hugo Chavez]

RON PAUL REVOLUTION: a liberal re-thinks Ron Paul

[Hugo Chavez]

Ron Paul is Bill Maher's New Hero

Bill Maher "I'd Vote For Ron Paul"

[Hugo Chavez]

p/u

About Me: Who I am personally is not that important. Politically I am a Progressive or if you prefer Liberal. I differ from Ron Paul in many areas, but those disagreements will mean little to nothing if the United States collapses under the empire it has built. These are the points on which I feel all progressives and/or Liberals can rally for Ron Paul.

As an addendum to my previous paragraph,since it has come up several times in the past. In terms of political philosophy I tend to fall somewhere between Social Democracy and Libertarian Socialism. I don't care much for for the national leadership of the of the two major parties, but many of the third parties seem too disorganized and bothered by infighting to mess with.

1.) An end to the unconstitutional wars of occupation and nation building that is bankrupting us.

2.) An end to the use of torture and warrant-less wire-taping, that make a mockery of our values and dose not make us safer from terrorist.

3.) An end to the imperial Presidency that uses a cult of personality to prop up corporatist puppets that are replaced every four to eight years.

4.) An atmosphere in Washington that will allow for the repealing of laws like the PATRIOT Act.

5.) An to the drug war and useless departments like the BATF, TSA, and Homeland Security.

6.) Complete transparency of the Federal Reserve and holding it accountable to Congress. (added 6/14/2011)
Other web sites:

http://progressivesforronpa...
(Not my Blog but still an awesome source bringing together progressives and liberals for Ron Paul's campaign.)

[Hugo Chavez]

Why true liberals should love Ron Paul…
awesome vid in this link:

http://www.h4cblog.com/why-true-liberals-should-love-ron-paul

[Hugo Chavez]

I've ran across several polls like this!!!! 

Would LIBERALS (not libertarians) vote for Ron Paul?? WHY

Yes, liberals would vote for Ron Paul.  11 52.38%
No, Liberals would die rather then vote for a GOP candidate.  5 23.81%
I don't know / I am not sure.  5 23.81%

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/elections/189166-would-liberals-vote-ron-paul-since.html#ixzz1X3iVEynS

[Hugo Chavez]

Ron Paul Will Beat Obama in 2012

[Hugo Chavez]

Jon Stewart Very Positive on Ron Paul

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/87964.html

[Hugo Chavez]

Jack Cafferty: Ron Paul Deserves More Attention

[Hugo Chavez]

This is a good one lol... On the view, the liberals supporting what Ron Paul says while the lone conservative attacks Ron Paul.

And these issues are even bigger today with many liberals that have turned against Obama as Obama has pretty much done what Bush did or worse.  RON PAUL IS THE ONLY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE THAT WILL SNAG A GOOD SECTION OF LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE VOTES!!!  And you won't lose republican votes, even anti-Paul republicans will vote for paul over Obama.

[Emmortal]

This is a good one lol... On the view, the liberals supporting what Ron Paul says while the lone conservative attacks Ron Paul.

And these issues are even bigger today with many liberals that have turned against Obama as Obama has pretty much done what Bush did or worse.  RON PAUL IS THE ONLY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE THAT WILL SNAG A GOOD SECTION OF LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE VOTES!!!  And you won't lose republican votes, even anti-Paul republicans will vote for paul over Obama.

My blood pressure went up 50 points listening to that horrible crab. I feel sorry for the man who has to stick his penis into that.

[Soul Crusher]

Once he starts slashing welfare and seeks to end ss and medicare the far left will race back to obama.

[Hugo Chavez]

Once he starts slashing welfare and seeks to end ss and medicare the far left will race back to obama.

so you're saying that if them dirty libs vote for Ron Paul they will regret their vote and wish they had voted for Obama?  So fucking what lol... they is no take backs after the election lol..

Besides, You're wrong about him seeking to end SS and Medicare.  In this video he says he has not emphasised any of that but would like for there to be a way for young people to opt-out of those programs.  He says you don't have to deal with those programs to get our financial house in order.  That's not something he can do on his own anyway so even an opt-out idea would be very hard to pass if Ron Paul were president.

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

LISTEN TO WHAT LIBS ARE SAYING AFTER WATCHING THIS VIDEO:

lmka July 24th, 2011 at 3:01 pm «
Instead of hating Ron Paul, who actually is VERY MUCH on our side on many of the most important issues, what we ought to be doing is making a strong case against his libertarian economics. We need to offer our own vision to challenge him in this area. Dismissing him as a kook is about the kookiest thing we could be doing right now.

In fact, some of the fundamental points Paul makes here about the government and the economy are points any serious lefty would make. For example, he points out that most of the domestic spending is actually going to corporations, in one way or another, and that the regulation doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do, and that domestic programs in general often don’t do what they are supposedly designed to do, that most of the massive spending we do is a boondoggle, and that the biggest part of that is the military. Who on the Left can disagree with any of this? Paul states clearly and without hedging that corporatism is the problem. WHO ON THE LEFT CAN DISAGREE WITH THIS?

Paul’s points about our monetary system are also right on. Our money has almost no value, and though he doesn’t say this, what value it does have comes from its role as the global currency for trade, which in turn is almost entirely based on our military Empire. In essence we are recklessly spending devalued dollars on activities – such as military global dominance and agricultural subsidies – which are themselves counterproductive, rather than productive for our economy.

When Ron Paul says that the money for education should be cut, he’s obviously wrong. This is one area where government spending can be very very productive. It’s an area where we should spend more. Paul says that he would not cut social security and medicare, but we need to demand stronger assurances from him on that, and we need similar assurances on welfare, foodstamps and unemployment. It is right and necessary for any decent society to have a strong social safety net, ESPECIALLY in times like these. We need this EVEN IF it requires deficit spending. We need to make it clear that WHAT money gets spent on matters far more than HOW MUCH gets spent. A deficit spent on bombs destroys our society. A deficit spent on basic human needs and education and infrastructure does not. We may not need a deficit at all, but we should not fear having one, as long as the money is well spent.

We should foreground return to GlassSteagall. THIS and not deficit reduction is the key to stablizing our currency.

Paul says that he’s like to start cutting medicare and social security by allowing youngsters to opt out. Well, that’s the best way of cutting it that I’ve heard of, but it’s transparently wrong. What happens when these opt-outers get sick, or become old, and don’t have enough money, Ron? Are we supposed to then leave them to die in a ditch? Come ON, man. Think about it. It’s part of the legitimate and necessary role of government to provide basic guarantees. What we need, instead of Too Big Too Fail, is a boat of prosperity that no one gets pushed out of.

Ron Paul is no kook. Even where he is wrong, he is at least trying to address real problems, and he’s on our side on many of our most important issues, AND he has an incredibly strong national following. Now you can convince yourselves that all those people following Paul are bigots, but if that’s true, then why do they agree with him that we shouldn’t support Israel’s crimes? A lot of people in this country struggle with bigotry, including a lot of lefties, but if we would only open our damn eyes, we’d see that a groundswell of demand for a better society is happening. We are letting our ancient prejudices get in our own way.

freesociety July 24th, 2011 at 6:08 pm «
Ron Paul is the only honest man with guts left in all of Washington, D.C., and in truth he is far more sympathetic to the plight of the middle-class and the poor than OBOMBA will ever be. It is time for us all to recognize that.

Look I’m a progressive, but OBOMBA has been the most Reich-Wing, Warmongering-Neocon, anti-FDR, pro-Wall-Street, pro-Corporate, anti-progressive, anti-Main-Street, anti-Civil-Liberties U.S. President in the entire history of the Democratic Party. I can no longer support him.

He, and his carefully chosen circle of corrupt Corporate advisors and War-Hawks, have displayed open contempt and hatred in public for “The Left“.

And he’s not ending any of the Wars, he’s got 5-WARS going on simultaneously on his watch (much more than Bush) — even though the Democratic Party won the Elections way back in 2006 on the platform of “ending the Wars“. And remember that George Bush by himsef could never have cut Social Security because the Democratic Party resistence would have been too great. But Obama can and will. That’s his agenda.

So let’s get serious here. It is time to totally and completely reject, repudiate, and oppose this man. He is not one of us, and he never will be.

But what’s the alternative you ask?

Well, actually there is one honest man running for President, and while I don’t agree with each and every position of his — Ron Paul is outstanding on many of the real big issues (Stopping the Wars & Occupations, Stopping the corrupt Bank Bailouts looting, Stopping Corporate-Subsidies, Stopping NAFTA/GATT/FTAA, Restoring our Civil Liberties and The Bill of Rights, Legalizing Drugs, stablizing the U.S. Dollar before it becomes worthless, etc.), and he would represent a leap frog improvement and a transformational improvement over OBOMBA or any of the GOP-Establishment hacks.

He would also bring honest political debate back to the public square, and unlike all the others — his career shows that he cannot be bought-off and he would not be a just puppet for the Central Bank Monopoly, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, War Profiteers, the War Establishment, and the global Empire seekers.

And Ron Paul — unlike OBOMBA actually has respect for “The Left“, and has worked side-by-side on issues (Auditing the Fed, Cutting Military Funding) with genuine progressives like Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, Alan Grayson, Barney Frank, and others.

For people who (mistakenly) think Ron Paul is just “another Republican”, I offer these video links below. Watch them first before you make up your mind, and you will then begin to realize that Ron Paul is really an honest and principled man, who has the guts and political courage to take on the War Establishment, the crooked Central Bank Monopoly, Wall-Street and the big banks. We need that.

Four more years of multiple Wars will totally doom Social Secruity & Medicare, and Barry Obama is perfectly happy with that. Obama wants his Wars and Police-State, and he would sooner give Bush a medal-of-honor (he already did that for his crooked CIA father) than repudiate his horrifying and corrupt Foreign Policies.

So Ron Paul in 2012 is the only path to an actual positive change and a return to an honest dialog in this (otherwise hopeless) Country.

Watch these videos below, and then you’ll understand:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Here’s an article which also sums up the choice that is facing us:
http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/04/ron-paul-a-lesser-evil/

Ron Paul 2012.
Help him win the Primaries in 2011-2012 now, and change the whole dialog in this Country.



athena1 July 25th, 2011 at 12:28 am «
Honest question for fellow progressives:

How would Ron Paul be worse for the country than Obama?

I know Ron Paul is almost definitely a racist, and that he holds genuinely kooky ideas about the gold standard, etc. But how could he be worse than Obama for the country, and the world, if he were president?

Looking at it another way, who would be worse: Bush or Ron Paul? Because I absolutely do believe that Obama has actually been more of a neocon devil than even Bush.

[Hugo Chavez]

READ THOSE COMMENTS ABOVE.

I have an excellent point.  As you yourself 333386 have pointed out, a good portion of the left feels absolutely betrayed by Obama and those people as you've pointed out don't want to vote for him.  But if you put Obama up against someone like Perry or Bachmann, many of them are going to vote for Obama because they really HATE everything about Perry, Bachmann, Palin etc.

Would libs vote for Palin?  NO
Would libs vote for Bachmann? Hell NO
Would libs vote for Perry? HELL NO
Would libs vote for Romney? a few
Would libs vote for Ron Paul?  YES, OBVIOUSLY I'VE SHOWN THAT A GREAT MANY LIBS ARE PISSED OFF ENOUGH TO DO JUST THAT TO OBAMA BECAUSE RON PAUL MATCHES SOME OF THEIR MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES.

Your sure bet to beating Obama is Ron Paul because of this!!!.  Obama supporters KNOW ABOUT THIS AND FEAR IT SO MUCH THEY ARE WRITING ARTICLES TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY THE LEFT SHOULD NOT SUPPORT RON PAUL.  Why are they writing about it?  Because liberals ARE bailing on Obama to support Ron Paul!!!!!  They're afraid of this because it's happening!!!!

[Deicide]

so you're saying that if them dirty libs vote for Ron Paul they will regret their vote and wish they had voted for Obama?  So fucking what lol... they is no take backs after the election lol..

Besides, You're wrong about him seeking to end SS and Medicare.  In this video he says he has not emphasised any of that but would like for there to be a way for young people to opt-out of those programs.  He says you don't have to deal with those programs to get our financial house in order.  That's not something he can do on his own anyway so even an opt-out idea would be very hard to pass if Ron Paul were president.

People don't like looking at the finer details of his stuff Hugo.

[Hugo Chavez]

People don't like looking at the finer details of his stuff Hugo.

I'm not talking about that in this thread.  This thread is only to show that Ron Paul will get a significant chunk of progressive votes that otherwise would go to Obama.  I'm only pointing out that the evidence shows a great many progressives are pissed off enough at Obama and that Ron Paul matches them on some of their most important issues.  The post you quoted are posts made by liberals saying exactly that!!!  And it's all over the internet and progressive radio.  These guys will vote for Paul even though they disagree with him on other issues.  But they will not vote for people like bachmann or Perry.  That's the point of this thread, that Ron Paul can win because of this and even has a better chance than someone like Bachmann, Perry or even Romney. 

[Hugo Chavez]

Come on, when the left is saying stuff like this and pointing to Ron Paul, it has great importance to this election:

"Look I’m a progressive, but OBOMBA has been the most Reich-Wing, Warmongering-Neocon, anti-FDR, pro-Wall-Street, pro-Corporate, anti-progressive, anti-Main-Street, anti-Civil-Liberties U.S. President in the entire history of the Democratic Party. I can no longer support him."

[Deicide]

I'm not talking about that in this thread.  This thread is only to show that Ron Paul will get a significant chunk of progressive votes that otherwise would go to Obama.  I'm only pointing out that the evidence shows a great many progressives are pissed off enough at Obama and that Ron Paul matches them on some of their most important issues.  The post you quoted are posts made by liberals saying exactly that!!!  And it's all over the internet and progressive radio.  These guys will vote for Paul even though they disagree with him on other issues.  But they will not vote for people like bachmann or Perry.  That's the point of this thread, that Ron Paul can win because of this and even has a better chance than someone like Bachmann, Perry or even Romney. 

I am not so sure. Most liberals I know don't like his fiscal ideas and lots of other stuff but maybe you are right?

[Deicide]

Come on, when the left is saying stuff like this and pointing to Ron Paul, it has great importance to this election:

"Look I’m a progressive, but OBOMBA has been the most Reich-Wing, Warmongering-Neocon, anti-FDR, pro-Wall-Street, pro-Corporate, anti-progressive, anti-Main-Street, anti-Civil-Liberties U.S. President in the entire history of the Democratic Party. I can no longer support him."

That's one guy but who knows? Maybe there are more of them.

[Hugo Chavez]

Dude, it's not just one guy, this whole entire thread is showing where there is quite a bit of support for Ron Paul.  Please read the thread.  This is all from Liberal sources...

I'll freaking post more:

“I'm a progressiv­e, but I like Ron Paul. He's a common sense guy like me. Obviously I don't agree with everything he believes, but he is the best guy to restore the progressiv­e agenda.
He has the personal integrity to resist the dark forces in government­.
He will end the wars and bring all our troops home from all around the world and save about $400 b/yr
He will end the drug war which will generate $100 b/yr.
He will get Israel out of our public affairs and shut off their intelligen­ce gathering and influence.
He will negotiate peace with Muslim countries and eliminate the terror threat.
He will refocus American industry away from gimmicks and towards excellence­.
He will decentrali­ze government­. I agree that the role of the central government should be limited. Things like environmen­tal and business regulation do need to be centralize­d.
He has never said that he is the final law. He respects that America belongs to American's and thus we decide the direction of the country. I actually believe that we have a better shot at national healthcare with Paul than any other.
He respects the constituti­on. We the people are the government­. He's basically saying that if we believe in something than make it happen through amendments to the constituti­on.
He is the best choice for progressiv­es and conservati­ves. No more secret forces (neo-cons) running the government­.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/trisailer/ron-paul-elections_b_939004_105952595.html

[Deicide]

Dude, it's not just one guy, this whole entire thread is showing where there is quite a bit of support for Ron Paul.  Please read the thread.  This is all from Liberal sources...

I'll freaking post more:

“I'm a progressiv­e, but I like Ron Paul. He's a common sense guy like me. Obviously I don't agree with everything he believes, but he is the best guy to restore the progressiv­e agenda.
He has the personal integrity to resist the dark forces in government­.
He will end the wars and bring all our troops home from all around the world and save about $400 b/yr
He will end the drug war which will generate $100 b/yr.
He will get Israel out of our public affairs and shut off their intelligen­ce gathering and influence.
He will negotiate peace with Muslim countries and eliminate the terror threat.
He will refocus American industry away from gimmicks and towards excellence­.
He will decentrali­ze government­. I agree that the role of the central government should be limited. Things like environmen­tal and business regulation do need to be centralize­d.
He has never said that he is the final law. He respects that America belongs to American's and thus we decide the direction of the country. I actually believe that we have a better shot at national healthcare with Paul than any other.
He respects the constituti­on. We the people are the government­. He's basically saying that if we believe in something than make it happen through amendments to the constituti­on.
He is the best choice for progressiv­es and conservati­ves. No more secret forces (neo-cons) running the government­.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/trisailer/ron-paul-elections_b_939004_105952595.html

Let's hope you are right.

[Hugo Chavez]

5 Reasons Progressives Should Join the Ron Paul Revolution

There aren't many people still calling Ron Paul's ideas radical.  In fact, his credibility in the eyes of many has only been fortified since his 2008 candidacy due to his consistently accurate analysis. His 2012 presidential campaign is in full swing, armed with a formidable war chest, impressive straw poll victories, and the same resonating message of peace and liberty. Yet, he has been completely ignored by the progressive media.

It almost seems as though the progressive media chooses the Republican challenger by simply reporting on the people they love to hate. They exhaustively write about Romney and Bachmann, clearly casting them as the prime targets. They use their precious news space to endlessly speculate about Sarah Palin and Rick Perry who aren't even in the race yet. And, once again, they seem to be distracting their readers with mundane mind-numbing drivel and typical wedge issues instead of real issues. But they don't have enough ink to cover Ron Paul?

Perhaps the reason they avoid discussing Ron Paul is that many progressives may find his message appealing, and you can't have that from a guy with an "R" after his name.  If progressives were principled enough to cast aside labels, they would likely find Paul to be the candidate most suited to fulfill their concerns.

Here are five reasons progressives should support Ron Paul for president in 2012:

Reasons listed Here: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/07/5-reasons-progressives-should-join-ron.html