Ron Paul Mega-Thread (Mergeness)

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the point is that Perot split the Conservative/Republican vote allowing Clinton to win as a minority president then the statement above is nonsensical on its face. Perot was a third party candidate taking votes from the Republican nominee (the great conservative standard bearer George H.W. Bush ) while Paul is running in the Republican primary.
Click to expand...
Exactly right. I don’t understand why folks keep claiming he will siphon off the Republican vote when he is running as a Republican.

Meanwhile ... I received this from his campaign:

Ron Paul Excluded in Iowa
June 19, 2007


Iowans for Tax Relief and Iowa Christian Alliance will host a presidential candidates forum on Saturday, June 30th in Des Moines. Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Tommy Thompson, and Tom Tancredo will participate.

Ron Paul, however, will not participate. Why? Because he wasn’t invited.

We heard about this forum from numerous supporters in Iowa who asked why Dr. Paul was not going to participate. Those supporters assumed that Dr. Paul was invited.

The campaign office had not received an invitation so we called this morning; thinking we might have misplaced the invitation or simply overlooked it. Lew Moore, our campaign manager, called Mr. Edward Failor, an officer of Iowans for Tax Relief, to ask about it. To our shock, Mr. Failor told us Dr. Paul was not invited; he was not going to be invited; and he would not be allowed to participate. And when asked why, Mr. Failor refused to explain. The call ended.

Lew then called Mr. Steve Sheffler, president of the Iowa Christian Alliance, to talk with him. Mr. Sheffler did not answer so Lew left a message. He has yet to respond.

Why are the Iowans for Tax Relief and the Iowa Christian Alliance excluding the one Republican candidate who scored at the top of every online poll taken after the MSNBC, Fox News, and CNN debates? Why are they denying Iowans the opportunity to hear from the Republican presidential candidate whose popularity is growing by the day?

We couldn’t get answers to these questions from Messrs. Failor and Sheffler. Maybe you’ll have better luck. Their contact information is below.

It's ironic that on the same day we learned the Iowans for Tax Relief and the Iowa Christian Alliance excluded Dr. Paul from their candidates forum, we received a call from ABC News confirming Dr. Paul’s participation in its nationally broadcast August 5th debate to be held in Des Moines.

Kent Snyder, Chairman
Ron Paul 2008


Contact Information

Edward Failor
Iowans for Tax Relief
2610 Park Avenue
Muscatine, Iowa 52761
Phone: 563-288-3600 or 877-913-3600
Fax: 563-264-2413
E-mail: [email protected]

Steve Sheffler, President
Iowa Christian Alliance
939 Office Park Road, Suite 115
West Des Moines, Iowa 50265
Phone: 515-225-1515
Fax: 515-225-1826
E-mail: [email protected]
Click to expand...
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070620/ap_on_el_pr/bloomberg_politics

NEW YORK - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Tuesday switched his party status from Republican to unaffiliated, a stunning move certain to be seen as a prelude to an independent presidential bid that would upend the 2008 race.

"If he runs, this guarantees a Republican will be the next president of the United States. The Democrats have to be shaking in their boots," said Greg Strimple, a Republican strategist in New York who is unaligned in the race.

Throughout his 5 1/2 years as mayor, Bloomberg has often been at odds with his party and Bush. He supports gay marriage, abortion rights, gun control and stem cell research, and raised property taxes to help solve a fiscal crisis after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. (in other words, he's a dhimmicrat) (Yes, I agree with a couple of those positions, but take them as a whole, he's a dummyrat)
 
#1831

Ron Paul Blocker Is McCain Senior Advisor
Posted June 20th, 2007 by antiwar

The Chairman of Iowans for Tax Relief, Ed Failor, is a Senior Advisor to the McCain Campaign in Iowa. Everyone calling him should be aware of that.
563-288-3600 or 877-913-3600; Fax 563-264-2413; e-mail

http://www.dailypaul.com/


By standing his ground in the GOP....he is forcing the party to "**** or get off the pot" on what they believe, to decide what THEY want the party platform to be.

A tax Relief organization not wanting Paul (Dr No) to attend. wow this party
 
Mr Johnny-come-lately here... but I have to go all the way back to this:
Marshall said:
What I thought was weak though, was his answer when asked if he beleived the Government was responsible for 9-11 and if it was a whitewash. Instead of replying with a simple "No", he paused and said, "There's no evidence of that".
Click to expand...

His answer is more powerful than just "No".
One does not "believe" in things that are facts.
I've often thought it funny that people who assert that evolution and global warming are incontrovertible truths still make repeated references to "believing" in them.
Do I personally believe in global warming? No. I think the evidence, which I have to admit exists, is really sketchy.
Do I believe in Boyle's law? It's not a relevant question. Boyle's law has almost 350 years of evidence to back it up. PV=k whether I like it or not.

So Dr. Paul's response is actually better than just "No". There is no evidence, there is no argument, and despite what anybody personally feels about it, the objective truth is that it's not the Government's doing.

Various People consistently said:
Ron Paul is unelectable
Click to expand...

There's a very simple reason why I'm supporting him.
Every single day I go through my life, I think to myself at some point, "It doesn't have to be this way, and that really pisses me off".
Whether it's when I'm fighting with my low-flow toilet,
or when I'm wasting 1-2 hours a day in my car,
or praying that my friend Pvt. Pidcock comes home in one piece,
or any of the hundreds of things I could point out on a daily basis that the government is actively screwing up for me.

There's only one guy who is giving me hope that some day these things may actually be different. Is he unelectable? Maybe, but I'll give you the only two reasons why.

First, because of you. If you think that Fred is better, just say so. Enumerate reasons, come up with bullet points, and convince us with logic. Electability is not part of this conversation, though - RP supporters don't really give a &^%$ about hairstyles. We get upset when you try to make that part of the conversation, because as the old addage goes: if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

If you think hair is important in a candidate, say so out loud. If you don't, stop encouraging those who do think it's important. Personally, I think we should find a way to diplomatically point them out for the bad citizens they are.

Second, he's unelectable because of our parents. Well, at least mine. Think about how many people you know who aren't "connected" - people who don't even know that digg exists. People who would agree with this man, but aren't getting the message. I have a new kid and am broke as heck right now, but I'm doing my part by talking to my brothers, my parents, my in-laws, and everyone else I know who would agree with him - if they only knew about him.

Lastly, my wife brought up a very, very good point last week.
The Nixon vs. Kennedy debates in 1960 are generally credited for Nixon's loss - he just wasn't good on television.
We have a brand new medium this time around, too. Of all the Republican candidates out there, there's only one who is using it fully.
 
All Republicans are unelectable. The press says so. The surveys say so. Why not vote for a Dem? At least you'll be voting for a winner. Who wants to vote for a loser? Losers aren't electable.

This has been a service of the Circular Logic Club.
 
All Republicans are unelectable. The press says so. The surveys say so. Why not vote for a Dem? At least you'll be voting for a winner. Who wants to vote for a loser? Losers aren't electable.

This has been a service of the Circular Logic Club.
Click to expand...

:D
 
What if...

Everyone voted for the person they thought best suited for the job, whether or not such a person was "electable"?

~~

"Look, the gang survey says you're going to be raped or have your head smashed with a bat. Now, we're giving you a vote. Which do you want?"

"How about letting me go?"

"Well, you can vote for that, but you're throwing your vote away. Only Jimbo supports that, so you'd at best have two votes of ten for letting go. The survey supports head smashing highest, rape second. You've got decent odds of getting rape, as long as those Republicrats don't fix the election. Why not vote for something achievable? It's better than head smashing."

"I still prefer being let go."

"Snicker, yeah, but it ain't gonna happen. Only an idiot would vote for something unattainable. This is the art of compromise. Now, of the practical choices you have, do you want a head smashing or a raping?"

"Vote for rape, Jimmy! I like being let go, too, but it's not practical!

"If you vote with me, we might have three out of ten! One more and it's an almost certain win!"

"But what if we lose? Oh, I don't know! Picking an unpopular choice just seems so hard, and dumb. I think I've got to go with rape. You're not going to get out of it. It's the only viable choice!"

"I agree, Jimmy. I like being let go and all, but it's just not in the cards this time. Pick rape. Letting go is just going to take votes away from rape and increase the chances of head smashing. It would be YOUR FAULT for us getting hurt."

Do me a favor: DON'T VOTE:barf:
 
Marshal said:
If you think it is, to you, great. Unfortunately, how you see it, only counts one. How it comes across to tens of thousands of others is what counts. Perception my son.
Click to expand...

If your emotional reaction to his response wasn't satisfactory, there's nothing I can say about it. I prefer to use reason.

You just demonstrated my point. As I already pointed out, no Ron Paul supporter cares about hair. You're an intelligent, thought-provoking human being. You're obviously not one of the people who thinks great hair is an important presidential quality. You also seem to have the ability to reason with people.

Why, then, would you spend all of your effort destroying what we have going? What's the logic in showing up, peeing in everyone's wheaties, and leaving us without a better alternative?

I'll admit you have done better than most, in that you pointed out actual issues you disagree with. But electability simply isn't a valid issue. If you admit that you, personally think that great hair is important in a president, that's another story. I don't think you do. But since you are implying that it actually is important, you are being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Plain and simple: it doesn't have to be that way. All that needs to happen is for rational people to stop agreeing to treat this like the vote for Homecoming king.
 
If your emotional reaction to his response wasn't satisfactory, there's nothing I can say about it. I prefer to use reason.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you come up with an emotional response? I saw him, saw what he said, how he said said, and it impressed me to a different conclusion than you. Call it insight, call it experience, call it seeing that same behavior have an imposed "questioning/suspicious" meaning many times before, on purpose. Call it whatever you wish, but to call it emotional is just incorrect.

Look, I'm being the realistic one here, you're not looking anywhere but strait forward with blinders on. I'm pointing out to you, 10's of thousands of people saw the interview and many, as I did, came away with the same impression of what he may have meant. So, whether it is right or it is wrong, it's how RP said what he did that creates impression and perception. That is truly what matters. It was a mistake on his part.

If he truly believes the government had nothing to do with it, he should have not paused......then said....., "there's no evidence of that", leaving some question to his thoughts. He should have just come right out and said, "Heck no! Let there be no mistake, I do not think that has any merit whatsoever, it's unfounded and is not my view." He would have cut off his critics and competition at the knees and made his own row a lot easier to hoe.

So if he's not elected and people point to this, don't tell me perception has nothing to do with it.

Perception has elected many and cost many an election. It was a big mistake on his part.


Lastly, I don't know what your obsession with hair is but you lost me.
 
Look, I'm being the realistic one here, you're not looking anywhere but strait forward with blinders on. I'm pointing out to you, 10's of thousands of people saw the interview and many, as I did, came away with the same impression of what he may have meant. So, whether it is right or it is wrong, it's how RP said what he did that creates impression and perception. That is truly what matters. It was a mistake on his part.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see the scientific poll that shows that conclusion.

or was it on a news story somewhere:rolleyes:
 
I'd like to see the scientific poll that shows that conclusion.

or was it on a news story somewhere
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I doubt you'll find a scientific poll done on all things Ron Paul has said so don't hold your breath. Why don't you call a pollster and ask them to book one, if you can get them to believe there's enough interest, maybe they'll do it. Otherwise, you can defer to logic.
 
Look, I'm being the realistic one here, you're not looking anywhere but strait forward with blinders on. I'm pointing out to you, 10's of thousands of people saw the interview and many, as I did, came away with the same impression of what he may have meant. So, whether it is right or it is wrong, it's how RP said what he did that creates impression and perception.
Click to expand...
I believe that--but I believe that the majority of humans are idiots who don't really understand their native tongue and instead react like Pavlov's dog to a small collection of emotive words. So when Giuliani says, "Blah blah blah freedom! blah blah blah America! blah blah blah Islamo-fascist! blah," they'll cheer. Ron Paul's answer contained none of that demagogic crap, so the viewers only heard "blah blah blah because we blah blah blah," and booed.

I can say, "OJ killed Nichole because she had Ron Goldman there when he showed up," and the same idiots will hear, "blah blah blah because she blah," and conclude that I'm blaming Nichole for her murder. It doesn't matter that I'm discussing motive, not making excuses. None of the intellectual content of the discussion matters. The bell rings; the dog slobbers and yelps.

--Len.
 
None of the intellectual content of the discussion matters. The bell rings; the dog slobbers and yelps.
Click to expand...
There are many who will listen to the lies and smooth talk of a groomed Master Manipulator than to the simple truth backed by facts.
Sad really.
 
This reminds me of the people on this forum critical of SAF because they demanded DC comply with the court order to let people register and own guns.

"Who is this SAF who endorses registration? I think I'll have to take a closer look at this "Second Amendment Foundation" and their position."

IOW, if you want to find something suspicious, you probably will.

"I don't care if Ron Paul's record is 98% "no" votes in Congress, 100% Constitutional and pro gun and pro life. He's SHIFTY! I better vote for one of those OTHER politicians who SAYS the right things."

Bush Sr promised us no new taxes and no gun control. Bush Jr promised us no snoopy police state. The Republican Congress promised to lower taxes. So, how's that working out for ya?

But at least they SAID the right things.

And why vote for someone who's "unelectable" when an electable criminal is handy?
 
There are many who will listen to the lies and smooth talk of a groomed Master Manipulator than to the simple truth backed by facts.
Sad really.
Click to expand...

What's sad is that when those you put down for for not looking through the glass, when doing so on your candidate, you go ape crazy and dang near have convulsions.

Wait, we're just suppose to look though the BS on everyone but Ron Paul. I see.
 
Ask the dude that posted this, that's what I call BS.

There are many who will listen to the lies and smooth talk of a groomed Master Manipulator
Click to expand...

My point was, I question things every candidate says, especially things that pop up in your face as this did with RP. But to listen to you RP supporters, if you question something RP has done or said you automatically believe all BS every other candidate spouts. That's been a ongoing trait of you guys in this whole thread.

If you don't back Ron Paul, you're a neo-con. If you don't back Ron Paul you're an idiot. If you don't back Ron Paul you against the constitution. If you question Ron Paul you're a sheep that believes everything every other candidate says. And even some rambling about hair, whatever that's all about? It's a terrible tactic and one that does nothing but make you all look childish with a cultish attitude.
 
i dont think i've ever said ron paul was the perfect candidate... but i don't bash other candidates either. I try to use some common sense when looking at his policies, especially foreign policy.

Would you want someone coming into your house smashing your tables, maybe killing one or two of your children, making people who hate them come over and have a gunfight with them while you're cowering in a corner getting another of your children killed?

Don't worry its for your own good. and we're keeping OUR people safe doing it! you'll be ok.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Ron Paul v.s. Fred Thompson
Replies
12
Views
747
Biker
Biker
S
  • Locked
Key GOP Group Endorses Ron Paul
Replies
17
Views
702
obxned
O
O
  • Locked
Question about Ron Paul.
Replies
10
Views
529
ArfinGreebly
ArfinGreebly
A
  • Locked
who suffers the view that Ron Paul has more than a 1% chance?
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
A
  • Locked
A Reason to vote for Ron Paul...
Replies
8
Views
374
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top