Here's why Ron Paul can't win.....

[SnakeEater]

I believe the sheeple have been to mentally conditioned to ever vote in large numbers for a great man like Dr. Paul. It saddens me that a true patriot has no chance in a now formerly great nation. Below is a comment taken from freerepublic, this guy is not alone in his views.:banghead:

As a Conservative, I can’t support Rudy’s social views but am not concerned as he will not be the candidate.
The person and his supporters who are dividing the GOP and who will make it possible for a Dem to win is the
wing nut Ron Paul and his anti war and blame America views.
A real Michael Moore clone.

Because everyone knows Michael Moore is a stalwart supporter of the Constitution.

 

[Flyboy]

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."
--Rudy Guiliani

In other words, freedom means doing what you're told.

 

[High Planes Drifter]

Ever hang out in Arfcoms General discussion forum? Its full of folks like that, they drink the GOP kool aid.

 

[SnakeEater]

Some more comments from ordinary folks. These are our Republican allies.

I have NEVER understood why liberaltarians assume that they deserve a voice in conservative politics

As far as I’ve ever been able to tell, libertarians are nothing more than liberals who happen to own guns and are not as wealthy as elite liberals, so they are bothered by taxes.

True, the ones who are worse and part of this lot are the constitutional party wing nuts.

Yep. They seem to think that limited government means no government/anarchy.

 

[Erebus]

In responce to SnakeEater's post....... That's scarey.....

 

[Ian Sean]

Why in the world this election garbage is even starting this early is beyond me.

But on topic...Ron Paul has my support, and my one like minded buddy just ordered me a Ron Paul bumper sticker.

I plan on getting involved in his campaign...only "real" choice I see. Though Fred Thompson is interesting also.

 

[High Planes Drifter]

Though Fred Thompson is interesting also.

I just cant get over Thompsons' support of the Patriot act. Of course if the 2008 election pins him against Obama, Hillary, or another ultra lib, I'll swallow that pill and vote for him in spite of it.

 

[Autolycus]

It truly is a sad state of affairs when both the Democrats and the Republicans feel that the constitution is not a necessary document. Even worse when they let their social values or religious beliefs guide their policy and the laws they make.

The actions of both parties are starting to disgust me.

The anti-gun trend of the Democrats disturbs me a lot. The party is full of very socially conscious people but unfortunately they are not capable of understanding what moral responsibility truly means.

An example of thisthat I do not believe is that national healthcare, while a noble and great sounding idea, is good for the country. Nor do I believe in any sort of socialized medicine. I do agree with the idea of helping people here with the social ills that our society faces. However I do not feel it is the place of government to do this. I do very much agree that it is wrong of the government to disallow women to have complete control over their bodies when it comes to pregnancy. I feel that the government should not try to ban abortion in any sense as it is a private matter and not their business.

I am also strongly opposed to the prohibition on gay marriage. How is it the business of the government to regulate whether 2 two people, of any gender, get married or not? Marriage is a religious institution and ideal, not a government one. If they can regulate that I think they should also be able to regulate who can get baptised, who can get a funeral with a priest, and other institutions which have a religious nature and which religion plays a part of.

I do enjoy the overall trend of the GOP to support the free market (though this trend is slowly fading) and the support of the 2nd Amendment. However though I am also growing tired of the Republican party's flag-waving for the war in Iraq. We are in a country where we have no reason to be there. We are not making much forward progress are we. Why can't they set some clearly defined objectives or a deadline? Why didnt they declare war as defined by the Constitution?

Why does our government need the ability to listend to "terrorists" without getting a warrant? Why do we need to let the government invade our privacy? Why does the government need to give us all an ID (the Real ID act)? Why does the government deny people the right to a speedy trial (Padilla and the Guantanamo Bay prisoners)? Why is the government acting abroad fighting a war without declaring war in the proper manner as defined by the Constitution? Why did the President declare "Mission Accomplished" on May 1st, 2003, when the war is still raging on today?

And my biggest beef with the GOP is the idea that if you do not support the war in Iraq you are a terrorist sympathizer, unpatriotic, or an outcast? The war is the biggest issue we face. The GOP has deviated from the ideals which it was found, and that really is disheartening to me. Our foreign policy is in shambles and we are not being seen by the world in a positive light.

Either way I will support Ron Paul simply becuase I believe in what he is saying. He may not be able to win, according to some, but he is at least trying to bring the country back to its roots.

 

[R127]

Actually Anuzis' attempt to keep Paul out of the debates just got shut down by the tens of thousands+ of Paul's supporters. Paul dominates the after-debate polls. Most of America doesn't vote. Most of Paul's supporters do. He has more than a good chance at winning.

 

[telomerase]

It truly is a sad state of affairs when both the Democrats and the Republicans feel that the constitution is not a necessary document.

Yes, especially since it's in such as-new condition... it hasn't been used much since 1913!

 

[Pilgrim]

I am also strongly opposed to the prohibition on gay marriage. How is it the business of the government to regulate whether 2 two people, of any gender, get married or not? Marriage is a religious institution and ideal, not a government one.

If the government would get out of giving tax considerations and benefits based on marital status, then your premise holds water.

Pilgrim

 

[Autolycus]

Well why not give gay couples who are married the same benefit?

Personally I dont think that married people should be given any tax breaks. Personally I would rather go to a fairtax and just use a sales tax.

 

[SoCalShooter]

And my biggest beef with the GOP is the idea that if you do not support the war in Iraq you are a terrorist sympathizer, unpatriotic, or an outcast? The war is the biggest issue we face. The GOP has deviated from the ideals which it was found, and that really is disheartening to me. Our foreign policy is in shambles and we are not being seen by the world in a positive light.

Either way I will support Ron Paul simply becuase I believe in what he is saying. He may not be able to win, according to some, but he is at least trying to bring the country back to its roots.

Agreed. I do not appreciate the fact that when we ask questions of the current admin we are seen as terrorist sympathizers. That is a government that has lost touch with its people.

 

[xd9fan]

the only reason Ron Paul cant win is the American people themselves.
Ron is doing his part........will "the people", even conservatives do theirs.

 

[politicalgeek]

More than likely I will "throw away" my vote on Dr. Paul. Some of his views are borderline extreme, but he is a refreshing voice in the political world. And who knows? I hope he lasts long enough to make it to the Ohio Primary next March. Our Libetarian candidate for Govenor last fall had the 3rd most succesful canadicy throught the nation for the LP. Required to have 5,00 signatures for the petition to be on the ballot, his campaign had over 13, 000 and took 67,000 votes. Not even close to a majority, but each election cycle where 3rd party or refreshing, common sense choices gain some support is a victory towards the greater good. For those of us who support Ron Paul in his Presidential Bid, we may have a defeat next year but the more support for someone of his caliber and type, the more the MSM will pay attention. It may take a few years, but eventually someone of this common sense mentality will be elected to higher office. Meanwhile we can work within our local and state offices to elect more like him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Peirce

 

[ServiceSoon]

the only reason Ron Paul cant win is the American people themselves.
Ron is doing his part........will "the people", even conservatives do theirs.

Ding ding ding. We have a winner. Ron Paul can win!, but only if we the people do our part. For what ever reason the media doesn’t give him the proper coverage. They also say the polls were rigged. Ron doesn’t take money from special interest, so he isn’t rich, thus he can’t advertise like other candidates can nor can he buy the presidency.

You have absolutely no reason to worry about splitting votes thus giving the win to the Democratic person. If Ron Paul doesn't get the Republican candidacy then he will bow out. I think very few people would “write him in” if he lost the Republican candidacy and declined to run for president. It is our job to make sure he gets the Republican candidacy. Now go tell a friend about Ron. Research here to learn about Ron Paul's stance on varioius issues so you can educate your peeps.

 

[seektruth]

Ever hang out in Arfcoms General discussion forum? Its full of folks like that, they drink the GOP kool aid.

I've noticed that. There is some screwed up logic floating around over there.

 

[politicalgeek]

One very good thing is the amount of "free" advertisement he is getting for his campaign. With exception to Hannity's "interview", most of the MSM has allowed to Dr. Paul to explain his positions and elaborate on his ideology, much more so than the 30 second debates allow him. He also comes off more polished and better prepared on the various interviews than the debates.

If there was every any ounce of doubt in my mind to vote or not for this man, it was solved about 5 minutes ago while watching the video from CNN this morning. When asked about invading Korea if the North crossed the 38th into the South, his answer was a very simple "go to congress", when the reporter followed up by asking if the commander in chief had the authority, Dr. paul said no. It is refreshing to have someone understand the role and limitations the high office has.

 

[seektruth]

I think Rudy screwed up with his response in the 2nd debate. All its done is bring more attention to Ron Paul.

And Ron can win! If people would vote for who they think is the best candidate rather than using the "I don't want to throw away my vote" logic, he just may have a chance. Of course, that's assuming it isn't rigged right from the start.

BTW, I've noticed something in the supporters of Ron Paul. Many of them have never registered to vote before or don't normally vote. I think we know why that's the case. These people represent what may be a substantial segment of voters that will show up to vote even though they've never voted before, and guess who their votes will go to.

 

[Kali Endgame]

I predict that Ron Paul will loose the nomination and we will again be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. Our democracy is in serious need of a major overhaul.

 

[Prince Yamato]

For all the bitching about the Patriot Act, has it really affected anyone's life... at all? I can't think of one way in which it has affected mine. Or because I'm not alarmed, am I not paying attention? I think when Libertarian ghosts haunt a building, they say, "Patriot Act" instead of "Boo".

 

[ArmedBear]

I think when Libertarian ghosts haunt a building, they say, "Patriot Act" instead of "Boo".

LOL It's true.

Sadly, Yamato's wise wisecrack will likely be lost on most of my fellow libertarians here.

I guess I differ from many Lib's because I believe that not everything in politics is equally important, or that every possible chicken little scenario survives a reality check.

Personally, I'm a lot more concerned with things that have happened like "Assault Weapons" bans, Kelo, Raich, the EPA given carte blanche to regulate CO2 (essentially all forms of fuel use anywhere, any time, as well as breathing), the ongoing Drug War and its consequences like no-knock searches and dead innocents, and the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act (approved by the Judicial Oligarchy). And I am more concerned with current threats like more "campaign finance reforms", the "fairness doctrine", more gun bans, irrational support for Kyoto, and an utter lack of response to nukes in the hands of the worst of the worst.

I can list more.

Compared to them, in terms of real negative impact, USA-PATRIOT hasn't lived up (down?) to the hype. I don't like a lot of it, but as a grownup I can sit back and think about what matters more and what matters less.

Frankly, it pales compared to the extension of the Commerce Clause to mean "the Federal Government can regulate anything and everything, any time, anywhere."

BTW my general sense of priorities is shared in large part by a LOT of mainstream libertarians. Look around The Volokh Conspiracy, Tech Central Station, Instapundit, and myriad other corners of the blogosphere. The 1%ers aren't the people who can swing an election. The 10%ers ARE. That would be the "South Park Republicans", the "Goldwater Republicans", paleoconservatives, classical liberals, libertarian independents, etc. The Democrats have hated Bush since day 1. The people who have driven his approval ratings down from 55% to 35% are generally the people I've listed, and we'll vote accordingly. Many of us have given up on the LP, for various reasons. But we're out there, in good-sized numbers, and we try not to "waste our votes," whatever that means.

Things to ponder, if you want to WIN.

 

[Avenger29]

No one other than a Republican or Democrat candidate will win because of what I like to call the idiot factor. By this I mean the people that vote along straight party lines always, regardless of the views of the person who is running. In my state, we have straight-party voting, where the voter can select all of the canidates of a single party running for the various offices with one push of a button. The politicians, as you can imagine, love this.

When independent or third party candidates start winning a significant portion of house or senate seats, then chances will start looking up for a third party presidential candidate.

 

[ArmedBear]

what I like to call the idoit factor

LOL

Keep 'em coming.

ADDENDUM: Looks like it's been edited. My C&P was the original text, though.

 

[Flyboy]

Bear, if you're reduced to picking on simple and obvious typos, rather than arguing on the merits, perhaps you ought to re-think your position.