Ron Paul supporters

[LI0NSFAN]

I meet some more die hard Ron Paul supporters today handing out flyers that said Ron Paul was the only answer to beat Obama. I did a little Q&A with them and for the most part they were nice and humored me. I asked them a question that seemed to piss them off and they walked away from me. What might that question be you ask, I simple asked "How does Ron Paul plan on winning when the last third party to win a single electoral vote was 50 years ago and the last guy to take more than 50 electoral vote was a guy named Theodore Roosevelt?" They did not have anything to say to that and just walked away from me. I normally I do not talk politics but this year my blood is boiling a little with people voting 3rd party so they don't have to vote for Romney and they fully believe that the 3rd party person they will vote for can win the election. I am all for voting for who you think is the best candidate any year but this year. To me this year comes down to voting for based n how you feel Obama did the last 3 1/2 years. If you are ok with his job vote for Obama, if you are upset with the direction of the country then you need to vote for Romney. To many people voting straight ticket kills any chance for a 3rd party to win. ok rant over

[kieefer]

Rant heard and accepted with the same feelings.

What burns me up is that RP knows what is at stake and surely knows that Mitt really is the only solution to getting this marxist out of office. He should throw his support to Mitt and the R-Party that got him as far as he's been.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Ross Perot split the vote and resulted in the election of Clinton in most recent memory of such things. I do alot of communication on facebook and other places regarding politics and current events with many different folks. The Ron Paul supporters (yes all of them, never met one that was not), are so heck bent on supporting him, regardless of his chance of winning the election that they are, in my opinion, going to effectively get Chancellor O re-elected. The Ron Paul supporters that I have conversed with are zealots for the man, they have no openness for an alternative or for the betterment of the country EVEN if their idol does not have a chance of winning. They are purists, in that they will not accept anything but their accepted standard, which is of course Ron Paul.

Personally, I admire some of the viewpoints of Ron Paul, however his foreign policy is absurd to me. Kinda like Nevil Chamberlain of the 30's. Head in sand mentality or so is my opinion on it. However, Ron Paul's fiscal stance I just about completely agree with.

I personally do not like Romney, never have had much love for the man, but I did vote for him in the last republican presidential runoff for the 2008 election because I was suspicious that John McCain had another secret vendetta to blow up another air craft carrier. jk

This election, that is if we have one, I will bite one of my shotgun shells and vote for Romney, as I too think that if Chancellor O gets in again it will be pretty much the end of our representative republic as we know and understand it to be at this time.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I voted third party several times. Nary once entertained the delusion that a third party candidate might win. Victory is not the point. Its not whether you win or lose, its how you play the game.

Vote for the right ideas and the right man. It the right man ain't available then vote the wrong man with the right ideas. A principled nincompoop with the right ideas will do a better job than a super-genius with suck ideas. Or at least it is a charming theory. Just because yer smart don't guarantee you are also wise. Don't vote for the lesser evil of two candidates whom you despise near equally. OTOH if you are real fond of a major party candidate then go ahead and vote for him. Makes no never-mind to me.

That said, if by some incredible miracle Harry Browne had ever won then he would have been the best president we have seen for quite awhile. I'm not a PaulBot but I like Ron Paul fine. OTOH Harry Browne was an exceptional man, much better than Clinton, Dole, Albert Gore Jr, G.W.Bush, or Ron Paul.

Anyway, please view the following thrird party motivational video. Tis but a scratch. I've had worse. C'mon you pansy! Had enough, eh? Its just a flesh wound. The black knights always triumph. Oh I see... Running away are you? You yellow mustards come back here and take what's coming to you!

[media=]

[/media] Edited July 21, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[TMF]

We're on a Monty Python kick today, ain't we? ...waiting patiently for demands of a shrubbery.

[TrickyNicky]

I voted third party several times. Nary once entertained the delusion that a third party candidate might win. Victory is not the point. Its not whether you win or lose, its how you play the game.

Vote for the right ideas and the right man. It the right man ain't available then vote the wrong man with the right ideas. A principled nincompoop with the right ideas will do a better job than a super-genius with suck ideas. Or at least it is a charming theory. Just because yer smart don't guarantee you are also wise. Don't vote for the lesser evil of two candidates whom you despise near equally. OTOH if you are real fond of a major party candidate then go ahead and vote for him. Makes no never-mind to me.

That said, if by some incredible miracle Harry Browne had ever won then he would have been the best president we have seen for quite awhile. I'm not a PaulBot but I like Ron Paul fine. OTOH Harry Browne was an exceptional man, much better than Clinton, Dole, Albert Gore Jr, G.W.Bush, or Ron Paul.

Anyway, please view the following thrird party motivational video. Tis but a scratch. I've had worse. C'mon you pansy! Had enough, eh? Its just a flesh wound. The black knights always triumph. Oh I see... Running away are you? You yellow mustards come back here and take what's coming to you!

[media=]

[/media]

Very well said Lester.

As I've said numerous times, we might have a chance at getting someone worth a damn in office if we'd start voting for people we believe in as opposed to voting for those we believe can win.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

[media=]

[/media]

That is one of my favorite parts of ANY Monty Python Movie !!

Originally I was strongly behind Herman Cain in the beginning.

[kieefer]

Very well said Lester.

As I've said numerous times, we might have a chance at getting someone worth a damn in office if we'd start voting for people we believe in as opposed to voting for those we believe can win.

That's what the primary election was for was it not?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Sure was, Kieffer.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

Ditto 6.8.

[LI0NSFAN]

That's what the primary election was for was it not?

+1

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Aw, Hell, the bots want their way. Let's just change the system to suit them.

[sigmtnman]

If you are not convinced, ignore our certainty. Don't be tempted to substitute our judgment for your own.

From the first catch-phrases flung at a child to the last, it is like a series of shocks to freeze his motor, to undercut the power of his consciousness. 'Don't ask so many questions, children should be seen and not heard!'–'Who are you to think? It's so, because I say so!'–'Don't argue, obey!'–'Don't try to understand, believe!'–'Don't rebel, adjust!–'Don't stand out, belong!'–'Don't struggle, compromise!'–'Your heart is more important than your mind!'–'Who are you to know? Your parents know best!'–'Who are you to know? Society knows best!'–'Who are you to know? The bureaucrats know best!'–'Who are you to object? All values are relative!'–'Who are you to want to escape a thug's bullet? That's only a personal prejudice!'

In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.

When you force a man to act against his own choice and judgment, it's his thinking that you want him to suspend.

-Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged,

[Guest 6.8 AR]

In the third quote, we have been living that way for way too long. We have gotten stuck having that as our

baseline. I find myself contradicting myself all too often, so it is hard to rationalize my political thoughts

sometimes, but it is due to a long line of political clap-traps being set along the way that have been concreted

in our society.

We have to reverse that trend quickly, or we won't survive. I don't know that Ron Paul can or would do much

better, and that if there is such, a fix is in. The way I see it, my vote can work one of several ways. One would be

to get someone out of office. Another would be to vote for the closest candidate to my ideas. The last would be

to spoil for the wrong candidate. I see that as a choice, not as much a compromise, but because there is a great

potential for tragedy with one remaining in office. Granted, the choice is an acceptance for the slower tyranny

in my thoughts, but one who can be less dangerous. I would rather have someone who agreed with Goldwater,

like she says in that link you sent me. I hope you understand how frustrated all this makes me.

[LI0NSFAN]

I also hate that if I vote who best fits my values and goals, I would be taking a vote away from the candidate that actually has a chance of winning. I by no means feel that Romney is the guy that is going to turn the country around in 4yrs but I am terrified that if I don't vote for him that in 4yrs there will be no reason to vote in an election ever again. I feel that 4 more years of the current situation is going to collapse the US as we know it.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Lions Fan

[sigmtnman]

In the third quote, we have been living that way for way too long. We have gotten stuck having that as our

baseline. I find myself contradicting myself all too often, so it is hard to rationalize my political thoughts

sometimes, but it is due to a long line of political clap-traps being set along the way that have been concreted

in our society.

We have to reverse that trend quickly, or we won't survive. I don't know that Ron Paul can or would do much

better, and that if there is such, a fix is in. The way I see it, my vote can work one of several ways. One would be

to get someone out of office. Another would be to vote for the closest candidate to my ideas. The last would be

to spoil for the wrong candidate. I see that as a choice, not as much a compromise, but because there is a great

potential for tragedy with one remaining in office. Granted, the choice is an acceptance for the slower tyranny

in my thoughts, but one who can be less dangerous. I would rather have someone who agreed with Goldwater,

like she says in that link you sent me. I hope you understand how frustrated all this makes me.

I absolutely understand and I'm not sure Ron Paul could or would do much better either; or Johnson for that matter. The issue is with the media and societies willful participation in the irrational.

It is wrong to get upset with folks who have made a choice that is not be in agreement with the masses. There is a rush to label folks who support the ideas of libertarianism and absolute freedom as Paulites because he is the closest person or group of persons who have similar ideas. The media picks up on it and then smears the people who support those ideas and the masses run with it. The media works in it's own interest as it is owned for the most part by multi national corporations who have no vested interest in the country, the Constitution or the principles of the Founders. The people employed by the media are a product of the modern pragmatic ideals perpetuated in modern Universities.

On another note...

I disagree with Rand on religion and a number of other things, but I believe she had a firm grasp on how political correctness, abdication of responsibility and pragmatism were the downfall of society.

In the Bible, I see Objectivism at it's best. In my opinion Ayn had issues with the mysticism that surrounds many religions and the false altruism of many religious followers. The Bible has no place for laziness, wishi-washiness and many of the other things, as does Objectivism.

Revelation 3:16

So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Proverbs 10:4-5

⁴ He becometh poor that dealeth with a slack hand: but the hand of the diligent maketh rich.

⁵ He that gathereth in summer is a wise son: but he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I really agree with you about the labels. I thought the sarcasm bled through because you know I don't normally

get into the chit chat "bot" stuff, but the thing that stuck to my ribs about that audio you messaged me about

was her explaining the smearing by using the words like "extreme" as an example and then consider how long

ago that interview was taped. This stuff has been going on for as long as this country has been around, just like

the media. It was just the written word before technology took it up notches, but the end result has been smearing

all along since the very beginning.

The media has but one goal:to get one agenda across the finish line. It was created under the auspices of being

news and people think reporters are honestly reporting the news. Eventually they begin to tire of the negativity

and lump it all together when other sources of news(which may have a different agenda, altogether) surfaces.

Yes, FOX News, is the other one. They say all of it is crap. They fell for the trap before they realized what the trap

was and who set it.

I, too disagree with her about her beliefs on religion the same as you. I may be interpreting her differently from some

but her arguments are basically sound. She was absolutely right about political correctness and politics, in general.

I think some folks are reasonably anxious about this election, including myself, and would like to make certain the

election is very one-sided, and in the age we live in there are less than desirable labels we tend to be guilty of using

due to intellectual laziness.

[sigmtnman]

[Oh Shoot]

Ross Perot split the vote and resulted in the election of Clinton in most recent memory of such things....

To claim that you have to give Bush Sr. most all of Perot's votes, but exit polls show close to an even siphon from both candidates, with about 25% of Perot voters saying they wouldn't have voted at all had he not been on the ballot.

I remembered that from long ago, but don't remember this and couldn't seem to find it right off -- if all the Perot votes were given to Bush, he'd have won the popular vote, but would that have also swung the electoral to him?

- OS

Edited July 22, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest ThePunisher]

All you Paulbots and Johnsonites, it is real admiral that you support them based on your principles, but how important are the principles of SAVING our nation that has LIBERTY and FREEDOM from a Marxist/communist, that is hellbent on transforming America as you've always known into a socialist/communist nation. You never heard this communist rhetoric about Carter or Clinton or even Kerry; although we know they are liberals, but they never wanted to transform America into a communist nation.

If you are determined to support third party candidates, then you are complicit in joining the PARASITIC left Libtards in destroying America. If you hate what America represents, then become a parasitic taker like the Libtards, and see your beloved nation become like Greece and eventually like a Third World country enslaved to Russia and China. You presently have the liberty to vote for any candidate you want to choose, but freedom is the result of your choice. Please don't join the rest of the parasites.

It is no doubt in my mind and most gun owners minds here at TGO that Obama is gonna make an assualt on the 2nd A. I heard Neal Boortz tonight that he believes Obama will make an executive order to outlaw personal private ownership of guns, and then let the courts decide the outcome. Do you want to take a chance on losing your gun rights? Any rational person who loves the 2nd A should not take that gamble on wasting your vote for a 3rd party candidate when it only ensures the commie's re-election. Wake up to the harsh reality of what an Obama re-election presents to your liberty and freedoms, and not waste your vote. Let your personal principles become secondary to the more important principles of saving America this time around.

[Oh Shoot]

... I heard Neal Boortz tonight that he believes Obama will make an executive order to outlaw personal private ownership of guns,...

That's a mighty strong prognostication, even for Neal ... he say that on radio or somebody's TV show?

- OS

[Guest ThePunisher]

That's a mighty strong prognostication, even for Neal ... he say that on radio or somebody's TV show?

- OS

It was on the radio tonight.

[TMF]

If you are determined to support third party candidates, then you are complicit in joining the PARASITIC left Libtards in destroying America. If you hate what America represents, then become a parasitic taker like the Libtards, and see your beloved nation become like Greece and eventually like a Third World country enslaved to Russia and China. You presently have the liberty to vote for any candidate you want to choose, but freedom is the result of your choice. Please don't join the rest of the parasites.

If you don't vote for one of the two parties then you hate puppies.

Vote Romney.... for the children.

When you vote third party, you ride with Hitler.

If you vote for what you believe in, you hate America.

Edited July 22, 2012 by TMF 18B

[Guest ThePunisher]

If you don't vote for one of the two parties then you hate puppies.

Vote Romney.... for the children.

When you vote third party, you ride with Hitler.

If you vote for what you believe in, you hate America.

I believe you're confused with the Libtards beliefs that Romney and the R's don't care about autistic kids, that they hate clean air and water, and that they want to shove grandma over the cliff in a wheelchair.

Yes voting third party this go around will ensure America re-electing someone as dangerous as Hitler. I believe OS has said something to the effect that Obama is evil, possibly as evil as the anti-Christ himself.

I believe that your personal principles should be secondary to the more important principles of saving America from this dangerous and evil person in the WH this go around. I still believe we can salvage America, but only by defeating Obama in November.

Even all Paul and Johnson supporters surely have seen what a dangerous president Obama is, and the possibility of completely destroying America if he is re-elected. Or maybe not.

Just remember, I truly believe that Obama and his Marxist cronies surrounding him are the only ones that hate America.

[TMF]

I believe you're confused with the Libtards beliefs that Romney and the R's don't care about autistic kids, that they hate clean air and water, and that they want to shove grandma over the cliff in a wheelchair.

Yes voting third party this go around will ensure America re-electing someone as dangerous as Hitler. I believe OS has said something to the effect that Obama is evil, possibly as evil as the anti-Christ himself.

I believe that your personal principles should be secondary to the more important principles of saving America from this dangerous and evil person in the WH this go around. I still believe we can salvage America, but only by defeating Obama in November.

Even all Paul and Johnson supporters surely have seen what a dangerous president Obama is, and the possibility of completely destroying America if he is re-elected. Or maybe not.

Just remember, I truly believe that Obama and his Marxist cronies surrounding him are the only ones that hate America.

Well, I'm voting for Romney in November. I'm doing it simply to oust Obama, not because I think Romney is fit to be President; he is simply more fit than Obama. Of course, that is like giving me the choice of having sex with either Rosanne Barr or Keith Richards. Clearly there is no good choice there, but if it was a choice I was forced to make I'd have to choose Rosanne Barr.

I just take issue with the emotional pleas and accusations at those that have chosen principles over all. I don't think that Paul supporters are "complicit" or want to see the destruction of America any more than you do and I think it's unfair to to accuse them of such. While I'll agree that every vote against Obama counts, I'm stopping short of putting it on their shoulders in regards to blame in splitting the vote. Perhaps the blame should reside with the Republican party for backing such weak candidates and career politicians. If they did that maybe we wouldn't have so many people prepared to defect.

Edited July 22, 2012 by TMF 18B