More than likely I would give my vote to the Libertarian Party and help boost their legitimacy. But there is still a lot to unfold between now and then, and we don't know who the nominee will be for either party. Paul is still in it to win it.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Congressman Paul said it, so it must be true.
dross they are going to burn you in effigy at the next rally if you keep up this negativism.
If Paul runs 3rd party AFTER losing as a Republican than he is even worse then the sniveling Unioncrats here in WI who want a recall every time they lose.
He says he is a Republican. He says he is on the team. He is asking the team to give him the starting QB position. If the team decides to put him on the bench and he then throws a snit and quits the team, he has zero integrity and it was all about him, not the team. Even when you are injured and out of the game, you stand on the sidelines in pain and cheer on YOUR team, the team to which you pledged your loyalty.
This has been my biggest point of contention with him from day one. If he was a third party candidate today, he would have my vote today.
He says he is a Republican. He says he is on the team. He is asking the team to give him the starting QB position. If the team decides to put him on the bench and he then throws a snit and quits the team, he has zero integrity and it was all about him, not the team. Even when you are injured and out of the game, you stand on the sidelines in pain and cheer on YOUR team, the team to which you pledged your loyalty.
This has been my biggest point of contention with him from day one. If he was a third party candidate today, he would have my vote today.
Uhhhhh where are you getting this idea? He's been explicitly asked about if he would run 3rd party numerous times so far leading up to the primaries. He's flat out said every time that he has zero intention of running 3rd party, nor could he see a conceivable scenario that would cause him to. If you really want to quibble, he won't say with 100% certainty that he wouldn't, but, as I said before, he sees no conceivable scenario in which he would. That's about as close to a "no ****ing way" as you'll get. He's never (as far as I've seen) stated that he would or intended to or was considering running 3rd party. I really don't know where you got the idea that he would do so. Maybe from all the MSM douchebags who constantly ask him about that or what other candidate he would support after he dominates polls and debates? I don't know.
Anyway, glad I could resolve your biggest point of contention with him.
It is not an idea, it is opinion based on his response in a recent interview in a video linked by Rambone. Since I have more experience than most humans when it comes to doing interviews, for me, watching one tells me a lot. I didn't go looking for dirt on Paul. Rambone put up a link and asked us to watch it, I did and did so with no preconceptions.
In addition, third party is not my idea, it is my response to the concept when others propose it. Paul says a lot of stuff that comes out of his mouth sideways. Loyalists tend to miss it, agree with it or explain it away. That is my opinion and it is not based on emotion, it is based on my observations.
The fact is, if he had stepped away from the money trough and addicition of power he would have earned my vote. He knows he is unelectable, even if you don't. That calls in to question his true motives. It leads me to speculate, like I do on all candidates.
Does that help you understand my perspective on Paul? Or do you just disagree with me even though it is my opinion?
No means no and an absolute refusal to answer no means maybe or yes, not an implied no.
What is your definition of a RINO?
In addition, third party is not my idea, it is my response to the concept when others propose it. Paul says a lot of stuff that comes out of his mouth sideways. Loyalists tend to miss it, agree with it or explain it away. That is my opinion and it is not based on emotion, it is based on my observations.
The fact is, if he had stepped away from the money trough and addicition of power he would have earned my vote. He knows he is unelectable, even if you don't. That calls in to question his true motives. It leads me to speculate, like I do on all candidates.
Does that help you understand my perspective on Paul? Or do you just disagree with me even though it is my opinion?
No means no and an absolute refusal to answer no means maybe or yes, not an implied no.
What is your definition of a RINO?
I would also ask this:
Why is it so bad for RP to cut a deal with Romney to be his VP and defeat Newt? That seems to be unacceptable.
Is it really OK to step aside and let Newt possibly win? I am not a Romney lover, I am talking about playing to win. Is Paul just about Paul or Team Republican? Team USA. He wears the Republican Jersey yet I never hear anything about how he can help if he loses the nomination. The history of man shows major battles lost with that "all or nothing" mentality that have in turn lead to losing the entire war.
Now argue with me how he is a Strategic genius.
Then tell me he is not using the Republican party the same way Hillary used the State of New York. How is he better then her in that respect?
I would be Ok with most of this if he would just admit to it. Deny and Lie ryhme to me.
Why is it so bad for RP to cut a deal with Romney to be his VP and defeat Newt? That seems to be unacceptable.
Is it really OK to step aside and let Newt possibly win? I am not a Romney lover, I am talking about playing to win. Is Paul just about Paul or Team Republican? Team USA. He wears the Republican Jersey yet I never hear anything about how he can help if he loses the nomination. The history of man shows major battles lost with that "all or nothing" mentality that have in turn lead to losing the entire war.
Now argue with me how he is a Strategic genius.
Then tell me he is not using the Republican party the same way Hillary used the State of New York. How is he better then her in that respect?
I would be Ok with most of this if he would just admit to it. Deny and Lie ryhme to me.
I will vote for RP in the Primary. If he doesn't get the nomination, I will back whoever is.
This is not a time in our nation to split the vote. Four more years of Obama will be a death touch to our country. Obamacare would not get repealed and once that gets out, there is no taking it back.
I like quite a bit of what RP stand for, but I'm still more conservative that libertarian. I would not sacrifice losing to Obama voting 3rd party.
I really hate the fact that the field sucks SOOO bad when we need someone good the most.
This is not a time in our nation to split the vote. Four more years of Obama will be a death touch to our country. Obamacare would not get repealed and once that gets out, there is no taking it back.
I like quite a bit of what RP stand for, but I'm still more conservative that libertarian. I would not sacrifice losing to Obama voting 3rd party.
I really hate the fact that the field sucks SOOO bad when we need someone good the most.
Well I'm not sure how you think he's at the money trough or has an addiction to power, but I guess it isn't relevant to this discussion. I also think he's electable. I also think that even if he isn't elected, his campaign really puts ideas on the table that weren't before, which I see as still a great thing. It seems as though your assumptions about his character arise from the assumption that he doesn't see what he's doing as feasible or worthwhile from a values perspective. This I will vehemently disagree with, and I think that the conclusions you draw on a false premise are enormously wrong.
In regards to his not giving a strict "No" on running 3rd party....I see that more as a pretty much never, but never say never sort of thing. I really don't think he would try to do it. He didn't do it last election, and I really can't see why he would this time. On this I suppose I could see how you might assume that not saying 100% no means that he might, but I don't. Difference of opinion I suppose. In my estimation, I believe Ron Paul really has no intention of running 3rd party. He's not flip flopped or really done something contrary to what he's said that I've seen, so I see no reason to automatically assume that he has intentions of running 3rd party when he said he didn't.
And my definition of a RINO would be a politician with an R behind their name that doesn't stand for the ideas of low taxes, limited govt, etc. What I think we disagree on is that all republicans should stick together no matter what. If a republican candidate is a traitor to the founding ideals of the United States and to the touted principles of his party, I don't see how not supporting that candidate somehow makes you disloyal. I don't give two ****s about parties. What I care about is issues. I really could not care one single bit if a candidate has an R or a D behind their name. More often than not, I see them as being essentially the same. I don't buy into the whole us vs. them game where we lose no matter who wins. I don't think Ron Paul should support a candidate or not run 3rd party just so some fascist republican can win the election. If he doesn't want to do it for whatever reason, fine. But, I place no moral imperative on him one way or another. I honestly think that many republican candidates being elected would far worse for the country in the long run than having Obama elected again.
And another point on loyalty. The republican establishment has dicked over Ron Paul so many ways that I can't see how it should ever be expected that he owes them a damn thing. He hasn't gotten a lot of party support. Even the Tea Party, which started on his ideals, has mostly disowned him after being taken over by neocons. Republican media constantly calls him a kook or says he can't win and then only asks him about who else he would support as he's polling 2nd or 3rd. It's beyond absurd.
My basic stance: **** the Republicans. **** them long and **** them hard. They're hypocritical ****s who have more in common with democrats than anyone else. I think they're mostly fascist pigs who are more concerned with power grabbing than anything else. I'm ideologically libertarian, so of the two major parties I side more with republican ideals. However, republicans don't even hold to their own ideals. I have absolutely zero loyalty to the party. I only care about issues. The main issue, in fact probably the only real issue, being freedom. Which is pretty much the single value our country was founded upon. **** anyone who tries to take that away from me, D or R.
And as for this: I place a high value on people taking a stand for their principles and not compromising. That is exactly what has made Paul's message resonate with so many people. He believes in liberty, and won't compromise on that. I think that people taking that stand and being true to it can and has had enormous impact throughout history. I see the idea of freedom being renewed as infinitely more important that influencing which commie fascist wins the next election. Maybe I'm just idealistic, but I will never, ever vote for Romney or Newt, or any politician so opposed to my ideals, regardless of whether or not they're a "lesser evil."
Paco Bedejo
Master
Last edited:
Great radio piece from Jerry Doyle talking about the misconceptions of Ron's foreign policy:
http://youtu.be/xw7lWUmt-yc
http://youtu.be/xw7lWUmt-yc
Yeah, I get all that. It is what he does not say that bothers me. Like he never says who wrote his infamous news letters. The man is a genius but he expects me to belive he is an idiot on that subject?
Keeping the lens on Paul, how will you feel when the day comes that you look back on today and find he was using you just to build his Sons brand. The Paul family is no differnet then the Bayh family, just a few paces to the right.
He does not resonate with so many people, just strongly with the same people. This is a link from the FB page of a liberal, Obama loving friend of mine. Of the posts made in the first 25 minutes, I agree with some of them.
Why The Ron Paul Camp Thinks This Time Will Be Different | TPM2012
Let me mold this a bit more, if I were to vote for Paul in the primary, what will he do with my vote? How will he leverage it?
If the answer is win the primary and go after Obama. Lose the primary and go home or go third party then I have no use for him at all.
If we get invaded, we the people will save our own as**s. If the economy collapses, we the people will save it. If we starve, we will feed ourselves. But POTUS appoints SCOTUS and that right now is a huge issue. After the Primaries are over, that issue will still be here. That is not a Primary issue, it is a party vs party issue in November.
Living in Wisconsin I see that on a State level right now. We have had issues here right now with Right to Carry, Governor, Judges, State Senators, State Reps, LEO's, Schools, Jobs and Taxes in the same month. I am seeing three recalls swirling around my zip code alone as I type. I see the tactics being used.
No, for me it is not OK to ask for my vote in the Primary (first quarter) and then walk off the field before half time because you disagree with the plays being called so you can sit in the stands and watch me get my a** kicked in the 4th quarter and say you are not responsible for the loss because you are not on the field calling the shots.
No, 30 years of supposedly being consistent does not offset quitting today. The definition of loyalty does not play that way. I would rather start and finish with 10 then start with 11 and end with 10.
I have read many posts by Paul supporters stating he will never endorse anyone. Great, then I will never vote for him. I disagree with his tactics. They don't serve my needs.
If the answer is win the primary and go after Obama. Lose the primary and go home or go third party then I have no use for him at all.
If we get invaded, we the people will save our own as**s. If the economy collapses, we the people will save it. If we starve, we will feed ourselves. But POTUS appoints SCOTUS and that right now is a huge issue. After the Primaries are over, that issue will still be here. That is not a Primary issue, it is a party vs party issue in November.
Living in Wisconsin I see that on a State level right now. We have had issues here right now with Right to Carry, Governor, Judges, State Senators, State Reps, LEO's, Schools, Jobs and Taxes in the same month. I am seeing three recalls swirling around my zip code alone as I type. I see the tactics being used.
No, for me it is not OK to ask for my vote in the Primary (first quarter) and then walk off the field before half time because you disagree with the plays being called so you can sit in the stands and watch me get my a** kicked in the 4th quarter and say you are not responsible for the loss because you are not on the field calling the shots.
No, 30 years of supposedly being consistent does not offset quitting today. The definition of loyalty does not play that way. I would rather start and finish with 10 then start with 11 and end with 10.
I have read many posts by Paul supporters stating he will never endorse anyone. Great, then I will never vote for him. I disagree with his tactics. They don't serve my needs.
When has Paul pledged allegiance to the Party? Is that really how you view being a Republican? That's a dangerous view; a misplaced loyalty, in my opinion.
That would make about as much sense as being Obama's VP. Their platforms are irreconcilable.
Have you considered a career in motivational speaking?
Haha, it certainly wasn't in 2008 when he (rightfully, IMHO) supported Baldwin...
Jay Leno after-show interview:
http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/Backstage:-Ron-Paul/1374530
http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/Backstage:-Ron-Paul/1374530
Genetics, mostly.
It's an opinion. We all know that. Why does it bother you so much when someone posts something that is critical of Paul? You've made multiple personal attacks on me for it, implied and explicit. And now you're targeting someone who actually does support Paul simply because he feels Paul can't/won't win the nomination/general election.
Do you have something with which to rebut his position? Some argument that invalidates his premise perhaps?
Why is it such a crime in your eyes to say about Paul what others are saying about Romney, Newt, Bachman, Perry, et al.?
Paco Bedejo
Master
Every single candidate is electable...unless they screw up & don't get their names on the ballots of enough states. What has been presented as a fact, is actually a guess of what millions of voters will do. All of the matter-of-fact nay-saying is disrespectful to our political process & is getting old. Grow up.
Site Supporter
Members online
- Chance
- renauldo
- Ark
- yeti rider
- radar8756
- cjacobs
- duff
- Michigan Slim
- steveIU
- Gabriel
- Itchytriggerfinger
- JRR85
- Mark-DuCo
- Bstarkey_46947
- nucular
- pewpewINpewpew
- CZ Top
- Greg1
- shotgun131313
- PistolBob
- BigMoose
- Pyro
- parson
- dfcrane
- themaintman
- wtburnette
- joe138
- grillak
- Born2vette
- bwframe
- Timjoebillybob
- joeyd
- 5point9
- freekforge
- papa6x
- oze
- WebSnyper
- deo62
- shootersix
- crookcountygo
- ComeJesuscome
- Milo
- littletommy
- gamshar
- BeDome
- tatic05
- Rio
- tradertator
- historian
- sofrosune