Serious question for GOPers

#1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
72,734
Likes
42,919
#1
Right now, who do you think is more representative of the sentiments of the party. The party on the whole, not you (although I'dbe interested in who you align yourself with):

Sarah Palin
Ron Paul



The reason I ask is that it seems to me that they have very different priorities and, perhaps more significantly, have completely contradictory views on the role of government on social issues.

Thoughts?
 
#3
#3
I'm a Paul guy, but he is a Libertarian more than a mainstream Republican.

Palin is a mouth who is irrelevant, the sooner that people learn that the better. To answer your question, i'd say neither, though Palin likely has a bigger following among the sheep, Paul among those who are more Independent and less GOP oriented.

But really, why the Palin obsession, LG?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#7
#7
Right now, who do you think is more representative of the sentiments of the party. The party on the whole, not you (although I'dbe interested in who you align yourself with):

Sarah Palin
Ron Paul



The reason I ask is that it seems to me that they have very different priorities and, perhaps more significantly, have completely contradictory views on the role of government on social issues.

Thoughts?

There you go....picking our candidates for us again. But then, you do know what we are thinking!
 
#10
#10
I doesnt really matter. Neither party has any candidates worth a crap. Until we rid ourselves of the party system, this country will continue to fail.
 
#14
#14
What do you mean? Has something come up recently that is different than what he campaigned on?

I don't know. Don't pay attention to him, but I assumed he was sticking to the true independent approach. Is he not?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#19
#19
Paul is a nutjob

Why?

Do you take issue with his:

* Foreign Policy
* Domestic Policy
* Economic Policy

What about him makes him a "nutjob", or are you just parroting what the mainstream news tells you without doing research? Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#20
#20
You mean non-intervention?

Paul is very non-interventionist. He goes as far to say we should close all foreign military bases, as well as rid ourselves of the CIA.

That is what really turned me off about him. Other than his view on Israel/Palenstine and Iraq, his foreign policy was kind of loony. However, he made so much sense to me with his economic views that he is the only candidate I actually donated money to, but if he actually had a shot at winning I'm not sure I could have voted for him. He was more a "principle" candidate to me. Overall, I liked what he stood for more than anything.
 
#22
#22
Why?

Do you take issue with his:

* Foreign Policy
* Domestic Policy
* Economic Policy

What about him makes him a "nutjob", or are you just parroting what the mainstream news tells you without doing research? Posted via VolNation Mobile
I think about 95% of Republicans know he's right on economic policy and then he loses everybody on foreign policy.
 
#24
#24
I think about 95% of Republicans know he's right on economic policy and then he loses everybody on foreign policy.

Specifically, where is he wrong on foreign policy?

If you take away his stance on Iraq/Afghanistan, where is he wrong?

We've been doing the same things since the cold war, maybe try the foreign policy philosophies of the founding fathers?

Regardless, of what you think of his foreign policy leanings, he is so right on economic policy and we are in such a bad bind right now, it's really time we try someone with an Austrian leaning instead of a Keynesian. We can't keep printing money and borrowing from our enemies to finance our lifestyle, it's going to take someone with a solid understanding of economics to right the ship, and Palin ain't it.
 
#25
#25
I think about 95% of Republicans know he's right on economic policy and then he loses everybody on foreign policy.

How quickly times have changed.

Goldwater is rolling in his grave.
 

VN Store



Back
Top