Ron Paul Can't Win

#776
#776
nbakerld said:
The point is he really isn't informed enough to even know a significant difference between them.
Click to expand...

Of course he isn't. Everybody knows that the only politically astute people on planet Earth are Ron Paul supporters.
 
#777
#777
GAVol said:
Of course he isn't. Everybody knows that the only politically astute people on planet Earth are Ron Paul supporters.
Click to expand...

If you say so. I really don't see what difference Newt would make, and it seems clear the Republican party is agreeing with me based on how he finished in Iowa.

I think Perry, Bachmann, Johnson, and Cain are significantly different from Obama. Not all necessarily better.
 
#778
#778
nbakerld said:
Obama tried to pass a bill that would cut spending. It was a meaningless attempt, but that's what you'll get with Newt. Obama has an aggressive foreign policy. Newt is the wrong guy to cut entitlements and repeal Obamacare. He likes to "fix" big government, not eliminate it. You are unfamiliar with his track record.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is, on foreign policy Obama is carrying out the Bush policies to a T. NEOCONS should love the guy.
 
#788
#788
I've come to the conclusion that Paul is the biggest RINO of them all. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I keep getting told that voting on principle is preferable to voting for the best of two bad choices and if that's the case, the running on principle should be part of the deal. Ron Paul is a libertarian, he switched to the GOP because of the LP's image as the "red-headed-stepchild" of US politics. So rather than run on principle, RP chose political expediency because "it's too hard" to get elected as a Libertarian.

There is plenty of commonality between the LP and GOP and if the US had a parliamentary form of government, an LP/GOP ruling coalition could do some truly remarkable things. Sadly, RP and his supporters prefer to stand alone, invoking Goldwater and Buckley, and cast stones at anybody who even somewhat disagrees with them.
 
#789
#789
MG1968 said:
I've come to the conclusion that Paul is the biggest RINO of them all. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I keep getting told that voting on principle is preferable to voting for the best of two bad choices and if that's the case, the running on principle should be part of the deal. Ron Paul is a libertarian, he switched to the GOP because of the LP's image as the "red-headed-stepchild" of US politics. So rather than run on principle, RP chose political expediency because "it's too hard" to get elected as a Libertarian.

There is plenty of commonality between the LP and GOP and if the US had a parliamentary form of government, an LP/GOP ruling coalition could do some truly remarkable things. Sadly, RP and his supporters prefer to stand alone, invoking Goldwater and Buckley, and cast stones at anybody who even somewhat disagrees with them.
Click to expand...

Other than Paul's stance on foreign policy, this might be his second biggest problem.
 
#790
#790
MG1968 said:
I've come to the conclusion that Paul is the biggest RINO of them all. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I keep getting told that voting on principle is preferable to voting for the best of two bad choices and if that's the case, the running on principle should be part of the deal. Ron Paul is a libertarian, he switched to the GOP because of the LP's image as the "red-headed-stepchild" of US politics. So rather than run on principle, RP chose political expediency because "it's too hard" to get elected as a Libertarian.
Click to expand...

This is your assessment of what's going on in RP's head. He's addressed this.

He actually has more in common with traditional conservatism (Russel Kirk) than he does libertarianism. The neocons hijacked the party, and he wants to take it back. Warmongering was not a Republican tendency...all the wars were started by Democrats. Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative (in action) in a long time. If you are happy with the Republican party as is, I don't really know what to say to you.
 
#791
#791
nbakerld said:
This is your assessment of what's going on in RP's head. He's addressed this.

He actually has more in common with traditional conservatism (Russel Kirk) than he does libertarianism. The neocons hijacked the party, and he wants to take it back. Warmongering was not a Republican tendency...all the wars were started by Democrats. Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative (in action) in a long time. If you are happy with the Republican party as is, I don't really know what to say to you.
Click to expand...

The Civil War...?
 
#792
#792
therealUT said:
The Civil War...?
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. I was talking about recent history. WWI-Vietnam, but yeah I blame Lincoln for not avoiding war. Nobody died at Fort Sumter. No harm no foul. It didn't have to escalate from there. Lincoln's forces initiated the next 8 conflicts.

BTW, Lincoln was a whig without a party.
 
#793
#793
MG1968 said:
I've come to the conclusion that Paul is the biggest RINO of them all. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I keep getting told that voting on principle is preferable to voting for the best of two bad choices and if that's the case, the running on principle should be part of the deal. Ron Paul is a libertarian, he switched to the GOP because of the LP's image as the "red-headed-stepchild" of US politics. So rather than run on principle, RP chose political expediency because "it's too hard" to get elected as a Libertarian.

There is plenty of commonality between the LP and GOP and if the US had a parliamentary form of government, an LP/GOP ruling coalition could do some truly remarkable things. Sadly, RP and his supporters prefer to stand alone, invoking Goldwater and Buckley, and cast stones at anybody who even somewhat disagrees with them.
Click to expand...

He ran as a Republican in the late 1970's and embraced Reagan when he was elected in 1980. He moved away from the GOP for his 1988 presidential campaign, but then came back to an even more liberal GOP.

He didn't leave the GOP, the GOP left him.
 
#799
#799
Rasputin_Vol said:
Out of all of the candidates out there, his platform is the closest to Reagan's or Goldwater's. And it ain't even close.
Click to expand...

don't recall Reagan ever favoring drug legalization/decriminalization, nor do I recall him being an isolationist

where did Paul stand on Reagan's aggressive engagement with the Soviet Union? Pershing II missiles? Does Paul support arming Israel or even Saudi Arabia with Patriot missile batteries?
 
#800
#800
MG1968 said:
don't recall Reagan ever favoring drug legalization/decriminalization, nor do I recall him being an isolationist

where did Paul stand on Reagan's aggressive engagement with the Soviet Union? Pershing II missiles? Does Paul support arming Israel or even Saudi Arabia with Patriot missile batteries?
Click to expand...

Would Reagan have supported RomneyCare?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top