Bad Timing for Ron Paul

#1
volinbham

volinbham

VN GURU
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
69,701
Likes
62,084
#1
Given the general public disdain for a bail-out I would imagine if this occurred during the primaries, old Ron Paul might end up being the Republican nominee.

He's kooky at times but he's been on this financial drumbeat for a long-time criticizing the easy credit, dollar destruction moves of the Fed.

Would he have had a shot if this happened last January?
 
#2
#2
volinbham said:
Given the general public disdain for a bail-out I would imagine if this occurred during the primaries, old Ron Paul might end up being the Republican nominee.

He's kooky at times but he's been on this financial drumbeat for a long-time criticizing the easy credit, dollar destruction moves of the Fed.

Would he have had a shot if this happened last January?
Click to expand...

Maybe, but many have been critical of this practice for some time, he was just more vocal about it.
 
#3
#3
volinbham said:
Given the general public disdain for a bail-out I would imagine if this occurred during the primaries, old Ron Paul might end up being the Republican nominee.

He's kooky at times but he's been on this financial drumbeat for a long-time criticizing the easy credit, dollar destruction moves of the Fed.

Would he have had a shot if this happened last January?
Click to expand...

I doubt it, I still don't think he would have gotten much support given that he basically wants us to go back to a confederacy again, and get rid of the federal reserve and CIA. His stance on Iraq alone would have disqualified him from winning the Republican primary even with his economic prophecies.
 
#4
#4
it's possible, but the endorsement by David Duke and the inordinate amount of 9-11 Truthers for Paul would have tanked his candidacy.
 
#5
#5
He sure knows his economy, there's no debating that. But, if the GOP sees McCain as outside the box, then Paul is out of the hemisphere for them.
 
#6
#6
Ron Paul would be someone I would consider over Obama, you know, if he was the nominee. But then again, Fred Thompson is another.
 
#7
#7
nickknx865 said:
Ron Paul would be someone I would consider over Obama, you know, if he was the nominee. But then again, Fred Thompson is another.
Click to expand...

interesting that you would choose free market capitalists (for the most part) over a socialist when it's Paul or Thompson vs. Obama, but you seem squarely behind the socialist when it's Obama vs. McCain.
 
#8
#8
MG1968 said:
interesting that you would choose free market capitalists (for the most part) over a socialist when it's Paul or Thompson vs. Obama, but you seem squarely behind the socialist when it's Obama vs. McCain.
Click to expand...

Ehh, McCain was never my cup of tea.
 
#10
#10
Ron Paul would be a good 3rd party candidate, unfortunately he's too smart and realizes you would have to be a billionaire to finance a legitimate 3rd party run.
 
#11
#11
There is never a bad time to tell the truth. If people don't want to listen, what more can you do?
 
#12
#12
oklavol said:
Ron Paul would be a good 3rd party candidate, unfortunately he's too smart and realizes you would have to be a billionaire to finance a legitimate 3rd party run.
Click to expand...

3rd parties need to realize that they're never going to win if they continually try to win only the big prize. If that rat bastard Bernie Sanders can get elected to the Senate, I bet Bob Barr could go back to DC as a Libertarian member of the House, perhaps even run for governor of GA.
 
#19
#19
nickknx865 said:
That he might be. But like McCain, I've really never fancied him.
Click to expand...

why, because he doesn't promise to steal from the rich and give to the poor?

If you like Ron Paul and Fred Thompson, there's no reason why Newt shouldn't be high on your list.
 
#20
#20
MG1968 said:
why, because he doesn't promise to steal from the rich and give to the poor?

If you like Ron Paul and Fred Thompson, there's no reason why Newt shouldn't be high on your list.
Click to expand...

The thing about Newt is, I've never really liked him. It's not that I don't think he's qualified, I just have never really favored him.
 
#21
#21
I like Ron Paul, too bad the majority of Republicans nominated an old world republican like McCain instead.
 
#22
#22
I like Paul as well, but I wasn't about to associate myself with the 9-11 Truthers and white supremacists counted among some of his more vocal supporters.
 
#23
#23
MG1968 said:
I like Paul as well, but I wasn't about to associate myself with the 9-11 Truthers and white supremacists counted among some of his more vocal supporters.
Click to expand...

If he came out and said, "I'm Ron Paul and I'm fighting to get the white supremecist vote", that would be one thing, but he didn't campaign for their vote. Instead, they chose to cling to him. Nothing he can do about who choses to support him or what their motives are.

As far as the war, by now, the war is a moot point in some ways because of the success of The Surge.

To me, what difference does it make if this country is attacked from external forces (Islamic terrorists) or is collapses internally (rampant socialism in America's mainstream and an unsteady financial system)? Both are equally dangerous and both threaten this republic. If we don't have a sound fiscal policy here in this country, folks, we won't be able to finance anymore future battles with Islamic terrorists in the long run.
 
#24
#24
it's true he didn't campaign for their vote, but by hinting that he thought that America brought on 9-11 through it's foreign policy, he immediately endeared himself to the Alex Jones' of the world. It's also worth mentioning that Paul did NOTHING to distance himself from these people.
 
#25
#25
MG1968 said:
it's true he didn't campaign for their vote, but by hinting that he thought that America brought on 9-11 through it's foreign policy, he immediately endeared himself to the Alex Jones' of the world. It's also worth mentioning that Paul did NOTHING to distance himself from these people.
Click to expand...

All Paul said about 9-11 was our foreign policy has consequences, sometimes unintended. Bin Laden has said himself that he attacked us because we have a military force in the Islamic Holy Land.

No one deserves to get lung cancer, but it is a possible eventual consequence if you smoke. I'm not defending the action of Bin Laden and his crazy yokels by any means, but the CIA isn't talking nonsense when they talk about foreign policy blowback.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top