Ron Paul pulls into second in Iowa

[xj0hnx]

Anti Ron Paul talking points :

-He's unelectable ( no sort of logic backs this up if we're picking the best candidate)
-He's crazy (crazy because he talks about real issues and pwns others at debate? )
-Religious or Evolution beliefs ( I honestly could care less... )

What did I miss there? Because that's really all there is to the anti ron paul crowd. With the other candidates they show you they're idiots by flip flopping, bumbling at debates, being caught with dead hookers... oh, nm, he just cheated on his wife and took bailout money while already being rich....

The good thing is, you don't have to care, because he doesn't run on his personal beliefs, which is why the lunatic hardcore social conservatives don't care for him, because he won't make abortion an issue, and won't make evolution an issue.

 

[zsdersw]

Doubtful, there are a lot of people who support Obama still.

... and even more who support the other GOP candidates.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

And for what? So we can give the poor welfare.. How about giving them a job? Teach a man to fish comes to mind.

Oh but the poor have to work 3 jobs to afford college and health care.... That's what happens when government tries to manipulate free economics. Govt gives out 60k for student loans... And then you wonder why schools are suddenly charging 60k..

Get the government out of it. They don't know any better than we do. Except the difference is... When we as individuals or businesses don't make any profit we suffer and we pay the consequences. When govt is inefficient and bankrupt they can just tax more and pay nothing because it's not their money to begin with.

Why do we think that government can make better decisions than the people? It's sad...

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

Yes, because the days when robber barons were free to do what they want was such a great time for the poor.

 

[fskimospy]

... and even more who support the other GOP candidates.

Not actually true. While there might be a few outlying polls that say otherwise, the majority of polls show Obama winning against every major GOP candidate in a general election matchup at this time.

 

[matt0611]

Not actually true. While there might be a few outlying polls that say otherwise, the majority of polls show Obama winning against every major GOP candidate in a general election matchup at this time.

This is true, but I don't know how useful that polling is when trying to predict the general election outcome. I think its a good tool to decide which candidate will do BETTER against Obama, but until a candidate is chosen I don't think they are very useful. We also don't elect our President by popular vote.

Most of those polls show that Romney and Paul do the best out of the republican candidates against Obama, which makes sense, since Romney is a bit of a moderate and Paul appeals on the civil liberties and foreign policy front.

Which is why nominating anyone but them is idiotic for republicans. They are the only ones that have a chance against Obama. If Newt gets nominated he will crash and burn against Obama.

 

[fskimospy]

This is true, but I don't know how useful that polling is when trying to predict the general election outcome. I think its a good tool to decide which candidate will do BETTER against Obama, but until a candidate is chosen I don't think they are very useful. We also don't elect our President by popular vote.

Most of those polls show that Romney and Paul do the best out of the republican candidates against Obama, which makes sense, since Romney is a bit of a moderate and Paul appeals on the civil liberties and foreign policy front.

Which is why nominating anyone but them is idiotic for republicans. They are the only ones that have a chance against Obama. If Newt gets nominated he will crash and burn against Obama.

I agree, it is much more of a broad indicator of relative strengths between Republican candidates than it is a comparison against Obama, but I do think that the trend shows how unappealing the Republican field is generally. Obama is not terribly popular right now and not one of his challengers is preferred? That seems odd.

I have long agreed that Romney is Republicans' best bet to win the election and I still believe that he is who they will nominate. (If they don't, they are fools) I think that Ron Paul has views that are much too far out of the mainstream in order to be a successful general election candidate and you would see him buried by Obama in short order.

Newt is a circus clown. If the GOP nominates them they deserve to lose.

 

[airdata]

and I don't see Ron Paul as a realistic nominee.

Right... because a realistic nominee wouldn't win debates with their competition.

 

[fskimospy]

Right... because a realistic nominee wouldn't win debates with their competition.

If debate prowess is your standard for who constitutes a realistic nominee, then Newt Gingrich is your man.

I hope nobody here views Newt as a realistic nominee either.

 

[DrPizza]

Please explain in detail what won't work, and why it wouldn't?

Anti Ron Paul talking points :

-He's unelectable ( no sort of logic backs this up if we're picking the best candidate)
-He's crazy (crazy because he talks about real issues and pwns others at debate? )
-Religious or Evolution beliefs ( I honestly could care less... )

What did I miss there? Because that's really all there is to the anti ron paul crowd. With the other candidates they show you they're idiots by flip flopping, bumbling at debates, being caught with dead hookers... oh, nm, he just cheated on his wife and took bailout money while already being rich....

Let's see... selling federal land to help balance the budget. Foolish. Debating this might take half a thread, but suffice to say, once that land is sold, it can't be sold again. One-time sell-offs are just going to kick the ball down the road.

Stopping foreign aid. Sounds very appealing to the ignorant masses. It completely ignores how fragile a lot of international relationships are. If you don't think what happens elsewhere can have some huge dire consequences in the future here, you're pretty naive. i.e. Pakistan.

Elimination of capital gains taxes. That would simply accelerate the concentration of wealth into the hands of the rich. History shows it's not a good thing when the vast, vast majority of wealth is controlled by just a few. People think it's bad now? This would be nothing.

Oh, hurray! If you're terminally ill, you don't have to pay income taxes. Gee, what a great guy! Of course, it seems that the majority of terminally ill people (once survival rate is considered negligible) aren't working. Stage 1 cancer is not "terminally ill." Hospice care time: terminally ill. Making this part of his platform is simply pandering.

Abolish the EPA, because landowners can just sue the polluting companies? Tell you what - let a multi-billion dollar company spill toxic waste in your back yard and see if you have the TIME and MONEY to take them to court. Good luck with that.

Conducts a full audit of the Federal Reserve and implements competing currency legislation to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation.

Wow, sounds great! <magical hand waving happening.>

President Paul will take a salary of $39,336, approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.

This is part of his executive summary. He considers this important enough to put in the executive summary??? Who cares. It's little more than a gimmicky gesture. The POTUS makes far far less than the CEO of probably just about every Fortune 500 company. Again, this is just pandering on his part.

Get rid of the Department of Education. Hmmm... Yeah, NCLB was pretty unpopular. BUT, right now, with Race to the Top and a few other programs, a new common core curriculum that's shared by many of the states, etc., it seems that our education system might finally be set to improve. He'd rather see us continue to languish at near the bottom of the ranking of all industrialized nations? Education is probably the most important area for the future of our country.

He's just going to magically wave his hands and children of illegal immigrants born here will no longer automatically become citizens. Hey Ron Paul & ignorant followers: that's going to take a constitutional amendment.

These forums have discussed unions ad-nauseum before. Nonetheless, his stance on his page against unions is simple pandering to those who don't like unions while unfairly, and intentionally deceiving those people by not explaining *why* unions have political motives to support particular candidates.

Stop the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from interfering with Americans’ knowledge of and access to dietary supplements and alternative treatments.

I do agree that the FDA makes it too financially difficult for approval of many types of treatments, nonetheless, the FDA and FTC do help protect us from a lot of quackery. It's amazing to see someone who is an M.D. support things like holistic medicine which have zero evidence of success. Steve Jobs just might be alive today if he hadn't first attempted use of these "alternative treatments." Medical treatment should be based on evidence, not people trying to make a profit by selling the regurgitated hair balls of their cat for $500 a dose, while simultaneously claiming that big pharma is a scam because they're just trying to make a profit.


I could go on and on. That's not to say that I don't find quite a few things appealing about his ideas. For example, repealing income tax on social security after you're retired? Seriously? I didn't even know that income was taxed. Nonetheless, it's lunch time. A lot of his ideas are simply bat-shit insane ideas that have zero percent chance of ever passing the House or Senate. Much of his foreign policy, while saving money, puts us at much greater risk internationally.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The debates if on the issues. and truthful replies none can defeat paul as his track record proves his creditability. None can match this, Fast talking Obummer can't lie this next round as America knows this EVIL man for what he is now . A debate on the issues none can withstand pauls assail on the facts.
Back when the bailout happened and I believe we were discussing 400 billion . It was I that pointed out and it is written here and so it was to be . I said it was a lie and the truth was 14 trillion . What happened?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Let's see... selling federal land to help balance the budget. Foolish. Debating this might take half a thread, but suffice to say, once that land is sold, it can't be sold again. One-time sell-offs are just going to kick the ball down the road.

Stopping foreign aid. Sounds very appealing to the ignorant masses. It completely ignores how fragile a lot of international relationships are. If you don't think what happens elsewhere can have some huge dire consequences in the future here, you're pretty naive. i.e. Pakistan.

Elimination of capital gains taxes. That would simply accelerate the concentration of wealth into the hands of the rich. History shows it's not a good thing when the vast, vast majority of wealth is controlled by just a few. People think it's bad now? This would be nothing.

Oh, hurray! If you're terminally ill, you don't have to pay income taxes. Gee, what a great guy! Of course, it seems that the majority of terminally ill people (once survival rate is considered negligible) aren't working. Stage 1 cancer is not "terminally ill." Hospice care time: terminally ill. Making this part of his platform is simply pandering.

Abolish the EPA, because landowners can just sue the polluting companies? Tell you what - let a multi-billion dollar company spill toxic waste in your back yard and see if you have the TIME and MONEY to take them to court. Good luck with that.

Wow, sounds great! <magical hand waving happening.>

This is part of his executive summary. He considers this important enough to put in the executive summary??? Who cares. It's little more than a gimmicky gesture. The POTUS makes far far less than the CEO of probably just about every Fortune 500 company. Again, this is just pandering on his part.

Get rid of the Department of Education. Hmmm... Yeah, NCLB was pretty unpopular. BUT, right now, with Race to the Top and a few other programs, a new common core curriculum that's shared by many of the states, etc., it seems that our education system might finally be set to improve. He'd rather see us continue to languish at near the bottom of the ranking of all industrialized nations? Education is probably the most important area for the future of our country.

He's just going to magically wave his hands and children of illegal immigrants born here will no longer automatically become citizens. Hey Ron Paul & ignorant followers: that's going to take a constitutional amendment.

These forums have discussed unions ad-nauseum before. Nonetheless, his stance on his page against unions is simple pandering to those who don't like unions while unfairly, and intentionally deceiving those people by not explaining *why* unions have political motives to support particular candidates.

I do agree that the FDA makes it too financially difficult for approval of many types of treatments, nonetheless, the FDA and FTC do help protect us from a lot of quackery. It's amazing to see someone who is an M.D. support things like holistic medicine which have zero evidence of success. Steve Jobs just might be alive today if he hadn't first attempted use of these "alternative treatments." Medical treatment should be based on evidence, not people trying to make a profit by selling the regurgitated hair balls of their cat for $500 a dose, while simultaneously claiming that big pharma is a scam because they're just trying to make a profit.


I could go on and on. That's not to say that I don't find quite a few things appealing about his ideas. For example, repealing income tax on social security after you're retired? Seriously? I didn't even know that income was taxed. Nonetheless, it's lunch time. A lot of his ideas are simply bat-shit insane ideas that have zero percent chance of ever passing the House or Senate. Much of his foreign policy, while saving money, puts us at much greater risk internationally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPmdKhxMfGk

 

[Nemesis 1]

The good thing is, you don't have to care, because he doesn't run on his personal beliefs, which is why the lunatic hardcore social conservatives don't care for him, because he won't make abortion an issue, and won't make evolution an issue.

I not sure who your talking about . But if the above is about DR. Paul . Meaning if you think Dr. Paul will make evolution/ abortion as Issue not a chance . This man really believes in free choice. He won't stand in the way of your choices . He hates police state.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpWmRFvbtuo

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Polls are not looking good for Ron Paul

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep.../republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...owa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ire_republican_presidential_primary-1581.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ina_republican_presidential_primary-1590.html

 

[Nemesis 1]

Polls are not looking good for Ron Paul

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep.../republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...owa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ire_republican_presidential_primary-1581.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ina_republican_presidential_primary-1590.html

I think Most all here understand the polls are being munipulated so whats your point . Lets wait for the Iowa vote and the follow up . Than all will see threw the media BS lies.

 

[fskimospy]

I think Most all here understand the polls are being munipulated so whats your point . Lets wait for the Iowa vote and the follow up . Than all will see threw the media BS lies.

Manipulated by who?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I think Most all here understand the polls are being munipulated so whats your point . Lets wait for the Iowa vote and the follow up . Than all will see threw the media BS lies.

LMAO!!!!!! So once the polling proves to be true will you call for Ron Paul to drop out of the race?

 

[zsdersw]

Not actually true. While there might be a few outlying polls that say otherwise, the majority of polls show Obama winning against every major GOP candidate in a general election matchup at this time.

The point is that while there are many who idiotically support Obama, there are plenty who idiotically support other GOP candidates.

 

[Nemesis 1]

LMAO!!!!!! So once the polling proves to be true will you call for Ron Paul to drop out of the race?

No . Given the other GOP runners. I would want Dr. Paul to run on independent ensurring their loss. As much as I dislike Obummer I believe the GOP runners would be equally bad if not maybe worse. With obummer in office that would insure a rep house and senate by the midterms to cancel him out.

I still waiting for bloomberg to jump into this race.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Manipulated by who?

Who ever owns the media companies they be corperate so we know they will never back Paul as paul is a real threat to them and also the NWO.

 

[fskimospy]

Who ever owns the media companies they be corperate so we know they will never back Paul as paul is a real threat to them and also the NWO.

Oh, so what you meant is that you're insane.

EDIT: Oh, and WTF? You want Bloomberg? Look man, if there is this nefarious NWO cabal that you think exists, Bloomberg is definitely a part of it.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No . Given the other GOP runners. I would want Dr. Paul to run on independent ensurring their loss. As much as I dislike Obummer I believe the GOP runners would be equally bad if not maybe worse. With obummer in office that would insure a rep house and senate by the midterms to cancel him out.

I still waiting for bloomberg to jump into this race.

It would be hilarious if Ron Paul not only lost in the GOP primaries and Presidential election but in the Texas 14th Congressional district as well.

 

[Chainspell]

LOL @ the people who don't want to accept a change of ideas and just stick to what they think is right, even tho the real world is showing them/it to be wrong.

Evolution... It only comes every several hundred years.

I digress.. Have fun with your old (and PROVEN to be wrong) logic.



Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

 

[Chainspell]

It would be hilarious if Ron Paul not only lost in the GOP primaries and Presidential election but in the Texas 14th Congressional district as well.

Yeah hilarious since he can't get #2 unless he gets #1. And he's not running for #3. Yeah you're hilarious...

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

 

[werepossum]

Polls are not looking good for Ron Paul

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep.../republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...owa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ire_republican_presidential_primary-1581.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ina_republican_presidential_primary-1590.html

Interesting - RCP has removed the Rasmussen, Bill Shipp and Public Policy Polling polls which favored Paul and replaced them with older polls showing Paul a more distant third, rather than simply shifting them downward. CONSPIRACY!

(I'm going only from your first link - my Ron Paul curiosity only extends to one link.)

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Yeah hilarious since he can't get #2 unless he gets #1. And he's not running for #3. Yeah you're hilarious...

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

So you're saying he's not going to run for Congress next year? If he doesn't get the GOP nomination or win as a third party candidate he will end his public service?