AP: Ron Paul platform no longer "fringe"...is now mainstream.

[Dr.Drock]

People who are going to vote for Paul are people who agree with Paul.

People who agree with Perry are going to vote for Perry.

The infighting only leads to animosity and hard feelings.

That's always a danger of political discourse. What's even more dangerous is the fear and ignorance inherent in the notion that 'we must defeat Obama at any cost'. That simply bullshit. It very possible for the Republicans to nominate someone even worse, and in my estimation, meat puppets like Romney and Perry are exactly that.

Here we disagree, in more ways that one.

It is important that we defeat Obama at any cost, even if I have to vote for Ron Paul.

Because of Supreme Court nominations.

Justice Ginsburg has said she is not retiring, she's 78. Justice Breyer is 73.

I heard the same stuff during the Clinton years and in 2000, then Bush was elected and he made Clinton look like 90 year old IRS accountant in terms of fiscal conservatism.

 

[Stashman]

...lol what?

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

If you were to look up what a true conservative is than you'll find that Ron Paul is the only true conservative out there.

 

[Liberty]

...lol what?

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

If you were to look up what a true conservative is than you'll find that Ron Paul is the only true conservative out there.

ron is a classical liberal, like our founders.

 

[Google]

Once a fringe candidate, Paul shaping 2012 race - Yahoo! News

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Ron Paul, once seen as a fringe candidate and a nuisance to the establishment, is shaping the 2012 Republican primary by giving voice to the party's libertarian wing and reflecting frustration with the United States' international entanglements.

glad he is getting a little bit of attention...far less than he deserves though.

Paul has the Ability to say some very smart things. I love his ideas about auditing the Fed, However His Isolationist Foreign Policy Ideas are not Practical in a Global Economy.

The dude never fails to ruin a good speech with one or two wacky statements. Not a real contender for the WH, and everyone knows it.

I'm certain you would agree that the nation's debt and deficit spending are unsustainable. Yet, the next statement would be that it is vital for America to continue to support dictators so long as they are in agreement with us. America spends trillions in foreign countries, and it is money not well spent.

The Afghanistan War is the single most longest war in America's history, and no one has any idea what victory looks like. In Syria and Yemen their leaders allow the US to bomb strategic targets while denying any involvement to their people. The resentment our foreign policy is creating far outweighs any benefit.

It irritates me to no end when conservatives say "yeah Paul has some really good ideas about our monetary policy, but he's wrong about everything else", and then dismiss him as unwinnable.

Those people don't understand what the motivation behind the Tea Party is all about. Ron Paul hasn't changed, the Republican Party has.

 

[Divine Wind]

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

If you were to look up what a true conservative is than you'll find that Ron Paul is the only true conservative out there.

ron is a classical liberal, like our founders.

Proof even his fans aren't sure what he is. I have nothing against Ron Paul. I just see nothing special about him either.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If you were to look up what a true conservative is than you'll find that Ron Paul is the only true conservative out there.

ron is a classical liberal, like our founders.

Proof even his fans aren't sure what he is. I have nothing against Ron Paul. I just see nothing special about him either.

Again, what does his particular label to particular people matter?

If I say he's like liberals from the 1770's or conservatives from the 1930's who cares? Both could be right.

 

[Divine Wind]

Again, what does his particular label to particular people matter?

If I say he's like liberals from the 1770's or conservatives from the 1930's who cares? Both could be right.

It's not the labels that matters as much as the fact Ron Paul's message to the population is so muddled that even his own followers are confused as to what he is and where he stands. As I mentioned earlier, he's clearly a Libertarian who is running under Republican colors because the LP is a joke.

 

[dblack]

It's not the labels that matters as much as the fact Ron Paul's message to the population is so muddled that even his own followers are confused as to what he is and where he stands. As I mentioned earlier, he's clearly a Libertarian who is running under Republican colors because the LP is a joke.

He's running as a Republican because the Republicans, along with their Democrat partners, have locked out all other alternatives. His message is a hundred times more clear and consistent than any of the commercial candidates. Calling it muddled is hilarious in it's inaccuracy and hypocrisy.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Again, what does his particular label to particular people matter?

If I say he's like liberals from the 1770's or conservatives from the 1930's who cares? Both could be right.

It's not the labels that matters as much as the fact Ron Paul's message to the population is so muddled that even his own followers are confused as to what he is and where he stands. As I mentioned earlier, he's clearly a Libertarian who is running under Republican colors because the LP is a joke.

Tell me one of his messages, with quotes from him, that you think is "muddled"?



I think people don't know how to label him because the labels themselves have been hijacked.

George Bush a conservative? LOL

John McCain calls himself libertarian? LOL

 

[Divine Wind]

He's running as a Republican because the Republicans, along with their Democrat partners, have locked out all other alternatives. His message is a hundred times more clear and consistent than any of the commercial candidates. Calling it muddled is hilarious in it's inaccuracy and hypocrisy.

While I appreciate your opinion, it would actually matter if it was backed up with fact and references.

 

[Divine Wind]

Tell me one of his messages, with quotes from him, that you think is "muddled"?

Going by the results where even his followers don't know what he is.

Do you think he'd pull all of our troops out immediately, in the first year or just "initiate" a return during his four years as President?

Foreign Policy

If elected President, Ron Paul will continue his efforts to secure our borders, hunt down the 9/11 terrorist planners (who are still at large), safely withdraw our troops from Iraq and other countries around the world, and finally overhaul the intelligence apparatus in cooperation with intelligence professionals rather than political opportunists.

 

[dblack]

So, I was just thinking.. the kind of reaction Ron Paul provokes from fans of the commercial candidates is a little like what would happen if a real, Olympic wrestler joined the WWF.... "Dude, I don't think you quite get what we have gong on here. Now go away stop spoiling it for everyone."

 

[Divine Wind]

He's running. No one is stopping him. I'm just saying I'm not voting for him. If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine. It's still a free country, right?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Tell me one of his messages, with quotes from him, that you think is "muddled"?

Going by the results where even his followers don't know what he is.

Do you think he'd pull all of our troops out immediately, in the first year or just "initiate" a return during his four years as President?

Foreign Policy

If elected President, Ron Paul will continue his efforts to secure our borders, hunt down the 9/11 terrorist planners (who are still at large), safely withdraw our troops from Iraq and other countries around the world, and finally overhaul the intelligence apparatus in cooperation with intelligence professionals rather than political opportunists.

Osama is dead, so I'm sure he'd pull all our troops out immediately, well he'd try to.

The neocons from both parties in the houses surely wouldn't let that happen one way or another.

 

[Ame®icano]

well id vote for a broken toaster over obama, but i wouldnt be happy about it.

If broken toaster doesn't win, it just because more people voted for a brick wall.

 

[Ame®icano]

...lol what?

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

The fact: Obama, an obvious socialist, wears Democrat clothing. Not dishonest at all.

 

[Divine Wind]

Tell me one of his messages, with quotes from him, that you think is "muddled"?

Going by the results where even his followers don't know what he is.

Do you think he'd pull all of our troops out immediately, in the first year or just "initiate" a return during his four years as President?

Foreign Policy

If elected President, Ron Paul will continue his efforts to secure our borders, hunt down the 9/11 terrorist planners (who are still at large), safely withdraw our troops from Iraq and other countries around the world, and finally overhaul the intelligence apparatus in cooperation with intelligence professionals rather than political opportunists.

Osama is dead, so I'm sure he'd pull all our troops out immediately, well he'd try to.

The neocons from both parties in the houses surely wouldn't let that happen one way or another.

If that were true, then why vote for Ron Paul?

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

The fact: Obama, an obvious socialist, wears Democrat clothing. Not dishonest at all.

Straw man argument, but since you mention it, just because the Democrats are dishonest, does that mean it's okay for Republicans to be dishonest?

 

[dblack]

He's running. No one is stopping him. I'm just saying I'm not voting for him. If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine. It's still a free country, right?

Sure. I don't care at all about your vote. But what you 'just said' was that...

Ron Paul's message to the population is so muddled that even his own followers are confused as to what he is and where he stands.

which is laughably inaccurate. You were called on it and then did nothing but dodge. Even most of Ron Paul's detractors realize that his message is anything but muddled. Not everyone agrees with him, but what distinguishes him from the commercial candidates is his consistency and his clarity.

 

[Ame®icano]

Going by the results where even his followers don't know what he is.

Do you think he'd pull all of our troops out immediately, in the first year or just "initiate" a return during his four years as President?

Foreign Policy

Osama is dead, so I'm sure he'd pull all our troops out immediately, well he'd try to.

The neocons from both parties in the houses surely wouldn't let that happen one way or another.

If that were true, then why vote for Ron Paul?

The fact Paul, an obvious Libertarian, wears Republican clothing. It's dishonest.

The fact: Obama, an obvious socialist, wears Democrat clothing. Not dishonest at all.

Straw man argument, but since you mention it, just because the Democrats are dishonest, does that mean it's okay for Republicans to be dishonest?

You called it, my friend. And I agree with dishonesty part, with addition, just because politicians on both sides are dishonest, doesn't mean we have to swallow it.

Sooo, if liberals and progressives side with Democrats, why is hard to accept that conservatives and libertarians side with Republicans?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Osama is dead, so I'm sure he'd pull all our troops out immediately, well he'd try to.

The neocons from both parties in the houses surely wouldn't let that happen one way or another.

If that were true, then why vote for Ron Paul?

The fact: Obama, an obvious socialist, wears Democrat clothing. Not dishonest at all.

Straw man argument, but since you mention it, just because the Democrats are dishonest, does that mean it's okay for Republicans to be dishonest?

You called it, my friend. And I agree with dishonesty part, with addition, just because politicians on both sides are dishonest, doesn't mean we have to swallow it.

Sooo, if liberals and progressives side with Democrats, why is hard to accept that conservatives and libertarians side with Republicans?

Because that's not reality, there's nothing conservative about the republican party, we have 2001-2007 when they had full power as a great sample size. They made Clinton look like a conservative icon.

For db I can't give much reason for voting for Paul. I probably won't vote in the next election. If I vote for whatever mainstream dem or rep is up there it's like choosing which cheek on the backside of a pig is cleaner.

In a beautiful fantasy world of inputting the only real conservative in gov't into the presidency, Dr. Paul, he could at least slow the america/economy destroying neocons and liberals of the dem and rep parties.