Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
preacherman76

Will Ron Paul supporters vote for Romney?

36 posts in this topic

Excellent response. Very interesting point - only one third of the Colonists were in favor of the revolution. I draw many parallels between revolutionary times and now. I would imagine that the Founders were feeling the same frustration and anger a lot of us are feeling today, frustration that some, if not most, people don't perceive.

It's comforting to know that in all likelihood the majority of people back in the 1770's considered the would-be Founders, men we now consider heroes, as lunatics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent response. Very interesting point - only one third of the Colonists were in favor of the revolution. I draw many parallels between revolutionary times and now. I would imagine that the Founders were feeling the same frustration and anger a lot of us are feeling today, frustration that some, if not most, people don't perceive.

It's comforting to know that in all likelihood the majority of people back in the 1770's considered the would-be Founders, men we now consider heroes, as lunatics.

Lunatics? Really? What facts do you have to support your premise? Many thought they were wrong about breaking political ties with England, but lunatics? I think you are reaching on this one. Unless you are talking world wide and not just about the American colonists. But then how many people world wide even knew of the revolution? Most of Asia and Africa probably didn't. Many in Eastern Europe may not have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lunatics? Really? What facts do you have to support your premise? Many thought they were wrong about breaking political ties with England, but lunatics? I think you are reaching on this one. Unless you are talking world wide and not just about the American colonists. But then how many people world wide even knew of the revolution? Most of Asia and Africa probably didn't. Many in Eastern Europe may not have.

Lunatics was probably a bad word choice. It was meant to describe what the Loyalists and others may have thought about the Patriots philosophy of breaking ties with England and creating and new nation. I'm assuming that to some it must have sounded like lunacy.

How about radicals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for rebelling against the King they would have been viewed as traitors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

". Ron Paul has inspired liberty movements in Africa, Europe, and even Korea." Really? I really don't want to suggest that anyone is being delusional, but really?

So what is her thesis? We'd never vote for Romeny, or whoever the Republican candidate may be? See, this is the problem with mr. P; his most... enthusiastic supporters seem to disagree with everything the Republican party stands for, just as much, if not even more so, than the Democs. In other words, Mr. P never had a chance of seriously getting the Republican nomination, did he? What this says more than anything, perhaps, is that the two-party system really has had its day, has it not?

* I thought this comment was pertinent:

Let's say the stars align, magic happens, the nation sees the light, and Paul, by the grace of sheer public will, lands in the Captain's Chair.....

Do you sincerely think there will be an ounce of change? Do you sincerely believe he won't be shown the same film of the Kennedy assassination, in the little secret room, where they tell him "our way or the highway?"

*Insert Morgan Freeman's sarcastic, "Good luck!" from The Dark Knight here*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

". Ron Paul has inspired liberty movements in Africa, Europe, and even Korea." Really? I really don't want to suggest that anyone is being delusional, but really?

So what is her thesis? We'd never vote for Romeny, or whoever the Republican candidate may be? See, this is the problem with mr. P; his most... enthusiastic supporters seem to disagree with everything the Republican party stands for, just as much, if not even more so, than the Democs. In other words, Mr. P never had a chance of seriously getting the Republican nomination, did he? What this says more than anything, perhaps, is that the two-party system really has had its day, has it not?

* I thought this comment was pertinent:

The republican party as well as the democratic party, is a sold out sorry version of thier former glory. We as Ron Paul supporters want to restore what was lost. It wasnt all that long ago the republican party stood for the very things Paul stands for. Its our belief that if this country isnt restored to it constitutional roots, soon we will drive over a economic cliff that will be near impossible to recover from. Excuse us for setting a standard, instead of bowing to constant complete coruption. Our numbers have tripled since 2008, and only promise to continue to grow as more and more war and freedom stripping legislation come down the pike.

Im mean seriously 747, shame on you. Let me get this striaght. We all agree that both parties are courupted to the core. We all agree that government mostly serves special interest. And you want to look down on a man who wants to bring back honesty, the principles of freedom, and sound economic choices, cause he doesnt represent what the party stands for? Let me let you in on something 747, we were never meant to follow these corupted polititions. This is suppose to be a government ran by and for the people. Its US who decide what the republican party stands for. And if Romney is all these dirt bags have to offer, cause of corpret donations, and heavey media bias, well no thanks. I for one would rather be able to sit back and say I told ya so, so that more people begin to understand and demand freedom. " I know not the course others will take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death".

The fires of liberty have already been set, and are spreading to fast to stop. Even if they kill Dr Paul, they cant kill an idea who's time has come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to the title. No I wont vote for Romney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should vote their conscience. But I firmly believe that if Obama wins another term his power grabs will be breathtaking. Far beyond the things he has already done. I predict that even his own party may turn on him because he will bring such condemnation on them. I don't really care for Romney but anyone but OBY will do for me. And if the margin of Romney's loss is within a range that the Paul bots could have made up.... they are going to be anathema for the next four years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a lot of talk about the Paullians doing a write in vote for 'the good doctor' a few months back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should vote their conscience. But I firmly believe that if Obama wins another term his power grabs will be breathtaking. Far beyond the things he has already done. I predict that even his own party may turn on him because he will bring such condemnation on them. I don't really care for Romney but anyone but OBY will do for me. And if the margin of Romney's loss is within a range that the Paul bots could have made up.... they are going to be anathema for the next four years.

Bro, I beg you to consider, what power grabs has 0bama commited, that Romney didnt fully support? I cant think of a thing aside from the health care bill, and 0bama's plan looks pretty similar to Romney's. I agree with one thing, everyone should vote thier conscience, and there is no buts about it. Settling for "the lesser evil" has brought us nothing but evil. Now is not the time to compromise. Now is the time to settle for no less then everything. Or we will soon have nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Excellent response. Very interesting point - only one third of the Colonists were in favor of the revolution. I draw many parallels between revolutionary times and now. I would imagine that the Founders were feeling the same frustration and anger a lot of us are feeling today, frustration that some, if not most, people don't perceive.

It's comforting to know that in all likelihood the majority of people back in the 1770's considered the would-be Founders, men we now consider heroes, as lunatics.

i can hear them now... " part of the greatest nation on earth and they want a revolution! " ..

" ya, crazy lefty liberals! " :lol:

*~

Edited by lightly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should vote their conscience. But I firmly believe that if Obama wins another term his power grabs will be breathtaking. Far beyond the things he has already done. I predict that even his own party may turn on him because he will bring such condemnation on them. I don't really care for Romney but anyone but OBY will do for me. And if the margin of Romney's loss is within a range that the Paul bots could have made up.... they are going to be anathema for the next four years.

Or maybe, and I know I'm talking crazy here, Obama's second term will be just like every other second term president. :rolleyes:

Serious what did Obama do to you to make you so scared of him? I truely don't understand the fear people have of a president who really hasn't done anything that much different than any other president. Does the thought of a reformed health care system scare Americans that much? Because that's the biggest thing Obama has tried to do and I honestly don't see how that makes him a dictator in waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe, and I know I'm talking crazy here, Obama's second term will be just like every other second term president. :rolleyes:

Serious what did Obama do to you to make you so scared of him? I truely don't understand the fear people have of a president who really hasn't done anything that much different than any other president. Does the thought of a reformed health care system scare Americans that much? Because that's the biggest thing Obama has tried to do and I honestly don't see how that makes him a dictator in waiting.

Have you not been aware of our freedoms being systematically stripped away?

Did you miss the part where he signed into law the indefinite detention of American citizens? Where he also signed a bill which names the entire WORLD a battlefield, even the US? Did you know he also signed a bill which made protesting illegal? How about the

, which were massively unpopular?

And this is a guy who had to worry about re-election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Have you not been aware of our freedoms being systematically stripped away?

Did you miss the part where he signed into law the indefinite detention of American citizens? Where he also signed a bill which names the entire WORLD a battlefield, even the US? Did you know he also signed a bill which made protesting illegal? How about the

, which were massively unpopular?

And this is a guy who had to worry about re-election.

No I didn't miss the bill that's been around for over fifty years. Or the bailouts that were started when Bush was in office. Oh yes protests are illegal, that's why they've all stoppped...oh wait people are still allowed to protest in the US and are. Are some of his actions questionable. Of course. Are they a sign of a dictator in waiting? Not in the slightest.

Bush did a hell of a lot more to limit American freedoms and he didn't declare himself king of everything after he won his second term. Hell FDR was elected four times in a row and he didn't crush all who questioned him. So there is zero evidence, none at all, that Obama is suddenly going to wake up after the election and march everyone off into camps. Nothing other than anti-authority paranoia.

Edited by Corp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I didn't miss the bill that's been around for over fifty years. Or the bailouts that were started when Bush was in office. Oh yes protests are illegal, that's why they've all stoppped...oh wait people are still allowed to protest in the US and are. Are some of his actions questionable. Of course. Are they a sign of a dictator in waiting? Not in the slightest.

Bush did a hell of a lot more to limit American freedoms and he didn't declare himself king of everything after he won his second term. Hell FDR was elected four times in a row and he didn't crush all who questioned him. So there is zero evidence, none at all, that Obama is suddenly going to wake up after the election and march everyone off into camps. Nothing other than anti-authority paranoia.

What bill has been around for 50 years? The 2012 NDAA?

And no one said he'd march everyone off to camps. You're inventing a strawman and projecting your image of Ron Paul supporters being paranoid idiots.

Bush was a terrible president, and Obama was elected under the pretense of Hope and Change. All we got was bigger government and more government control over our daily lives. And blaming the bailouts solely on Bush is laughable.

Protesting hasn't stopped, but you can't argue that it hasn't become illegal (to do so in front of the Secret Service, identifiable or not). That has happened under Obama's watch, signed into law by his hand.

Did you also see Obama speaking to Medvedev when he thought he was out of range of the microphones, telling him after the election he'll have more flexibility on the missile defense system? He said this is his "last election", which clearly means he won't have to worry about re-election and will be more freed up to do things the public might disagree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bill Obama renewed has been around since the 60's I believe. The whole "declare martial law" thing. Still not seeing any huge suppression going on.

I overracted and for that I apologise. However I didn't say anything about Paul supporters. Rather my beef is with those who think Obama is scary when there doesn't seem to be any reason why. It's the same as up here with Harper. He couldn't be given a majority because he was scary and had a secret plot. While some of what he's done is questionable there's been nothing overly special. I see the same with Obama. Now as for Paul supporters most are reasonable people who support his ideas and I wish them well. However there are also some supporters who have created an almost cult of personality of Paul who seem to think he is their last hope of freedom. These people are scary.

Did I blame Bush solely for the bailouts? No I didn't. I only pointed out that Bush is the one who got them rolling. If bailouts are a sign of evilness then why isn't Bush still in power? Why did he willingly step down and yet Obama is going to vague, evil things?

If protesting was illegal then anyone protests would be stop and anyone taking part locked up. That's not happening. Therefore protesting in not illegal in the US. There might be some limitations placed on it but it's not a blanket ruling, banning all protests.

Yes I saw the clip and while it was a stupid thing to say I don't think it's a clue to Obama's scary plan. With election season in full force both sides are going to pander to the general population and attack the other side over any slip up. Plus it wouldn't do Obama much good to start working out a new agreement with Russia and then lose the election are then be force to start fresh. Without worrying about a possible change in government and distractions back home full focus could be paid to working out a missile plan deal. And of course there's always going to be policies a good part of the public won't like it. That's the nature of governments. But again I just don't see Obama going all evil in his second term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corp, we're going to disagree on a lot, but I appreciate the candidness and the fact you're willing to apologize. That's refreshing. I apologize to you for saying you want to paint all Paul supporters as idiots. You didn't actually say that, now that I look closer.

A lot of people here, though, like to throw around "Paulites" and "Paulbots", and put us all in the same category. That tends to get annoying. Truthfully, I actually think the man himself is secondary. He's just the facilitator to the cause of people standing up and not accepting the two party system of corruption and greed anymore. Yes, I know he's technically a Republican, but since it's clear the Establishment doesn't want anything to do with him, I consider him outside that particular box. After Paul is out of the picture, the people will still want their personal freedoms and that message will hopefully spread.

All in all, I sincerely hope you're right - that Obama won't take even more measures to limit our personal freedoms and make more of a mockery of the Constitution he swore an oath to uphold. Bush isn't in power anymore because his 8 years were up. And we voted in Obama because he was supposed to be the anti-Bush. And after elected, he became Bush-zilla. I don't think Obama has delivered upon his campaign promise of Hope and Change, in the least. After he got elected, he became a totally different person than the guy who was campaigning. I fear that will happen again after this election, and will be much worse without having to worry about a re-election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, Corp, I think the spirit of Ron Paul supporters is encapsulated nicely by your signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul does have some very good ideas and I think he would be great having a strong position in government and would do a lot of good work. Just personally I wouldn't want him running a country since I find some of his ideas going too far. But give him free reign to clean up corruption or deal with these questionable security measures? Hey let him go nuts.

I think the whole Paulbot thing comes from those who claim that it's either Paul or Revolution. That seem to believe that every politican, except Paul, is ploting to enslave them. That unless Paul wins this election the US will turn into a totalitarian dictatorship. And as a result that anyone who doesn't vote for Paul is a brainwashed fool. This kind of all or nothing outlook is worrying since it seems to imply that some might resort to violence if Paul isn't elected. I don't think it will happen but it does plant the idea. Plus no one, Paul supporters as well, never like to be told that because they have a different viewpoint they must be brainwashed. Thankfully that kind of talk is in the minority. I fact I've only see it on these forums. Just one of those "lovely" ascepts of modern politics we need to deal with. One of the things I like about Paul is win or lose he always seems to remain polite and civil.

Anyway to drag the thread back on topic :P I'm sure some of Paul supporters will vote for Romney but those who are really pulling for Paul will vote for him anyway. Only question is how many people that will be and if it's a big enough number to make the two parties take notice and perhaps do something to make that voting block happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have voted for Ron Paul over Romney in a heart beat but I agree with Glen Beck when he said he would vote for a shoe to keep Obama from a second term so Romney will get my vote.

Besides that from what I understand the two rumored front runners for VP on the Romney ticket are Condoleezza Rice and Ron Paul, either would be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much respect this womans opinion. It is her right not to vote if she has a problem with the candidates.

But, I will say that if 1/3rd of the US voting population supported Ron Paul, we'd see him as the True leader in the delegate count now. The fact is that RP represents 5 to 10% (if lucky) of the GOP base, or around 2 to 5% of the voting population. Once his numbers get up to 33% from 5% I'll really, really try to buy his Cool-Aid.

Paul does have some very good ideas and I think he would be great having a strong position in government and would do a lot of good work. Just personally I wouldn't want him running a country since I find some of his ideas going too far. But give him free reign to clean up corruption or deal with these questionable security measures? Hey let him go nuts.

I agree. I don't think he would make for a strong President. Too much opposition from all sides.

I think the whole Paulbot thing comes from those who claim that it's either Paul or Revolution. That seem to believe that every politican, except Paul, is ploting to enslave them. That unless Paul wins this election the US will turn into a totalitarian dictatorship. And as a result that anyone who doesn't vote for Paul is a brainwashed fool. This kind of all or nothing outlook is worrying since it seems to imply that some might resort to violence if Paul isn't elected. I don't think it will happen but it does plant the idea. Plus no one, Paul supporters as well, never like to be told that because they have a different viewpoint they must be brainwashed. Thankfully that kind of talk is in the minority. I fact I've only see it on these forums. Just one of those "lovely" ascepts of modern politics we need to deal with. One of the things I like about Paul is win or lose he always seems to remain polite and civil.

I agree. The whole RP or Revolution idea is very fanatical and even frightening. That RP has a technical plan to take delegates from other candidates is also frightening. That he has a plan to get into power like the Emperor in Star Wars, by manipulating people's Fear and Preaching Liberty, while taking liberty away from Voters, scares me too.

Anyway to drag the thread back on topic :P I'm sure some of Paul supporters will vote for Romney but those who are really pulling for Paul will vote for him anyway. Only question is how many people that will be and if it's a big enough number to make the two parties take notice and perhaps do something to make that voting block happy.

I think if all the RP voter shunned the voting booth it would be a non-event. Often 50% of voters fail to show. Why would 5% failing to show be noteworthy? Sure Romney is going to need every vote he can get, but I don't think the RP vote will be that big a swing.

Some RP supporters have said they'll vote Obama rather then Romney. And I can't figure that one out. That is like saying if you can't have Abraham Lincoln, you're going to go with Jefferson Davis. The two are Polar Opposites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have voted for Ron Paul over Romney in a heart beat but I agree with Glen Beck when he said he would vote for a shoe to keep Obama from a second term so Romney will get my vote.

Besides that from what I understand the two rumored front runners for VP on the Romney ticket are Condoleezza Rice and Ron Paul, either would be awesome.

I agree. I'd 100% vote Ron Paul if he got the nomination.

Condi Rice has gone on TV today and said 100% that she will not do it.

I'd like to see Collin Powl maybe. But, I think he has retired from Politics.

Rick Santorum has a large percentage of people polled saying he should be VP, but I think he has smoked out and crashed now that he dropped out. I doubt he'll get the VP nod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the crash comes (which even Bernanky openly admits) You all will be wishing you had the courage to step outside the status quo. Actualy you will probably be too worried about finding food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much respect this womans opinion. It is her right not to vote if she has a problem with the candidates.

But, I will say that if 1/3rd of the US voting population supported Ron Paul, we'd see him as the True leader in the delegate count now. The fact is that RP represents 5 to 10% (if lucky) of the GOP base, or around 2 to 5% of the voting population. Once his numbers get up to 33% from 5% I'll really, really try to buy his Cool-Aid.

Yea this is the sad state we are in with most peoples minds. I mean no offense, but you basicaly just said that you will only follow the popular vote. You find safety in thinking like others. Even if others are going to continue to wage wars we in no way can afford. Even if its just a continuation of everything wrong with our government. In the next part im about to quote, you are going to tell us how RP supporters are scary. I personaly find that amazing considering your willfully admited stance in finding comfort in allowing others to think for you. You are even going to let folks like me think for you once the numbers are there. THAT is scary. BTW Many polls have shown that RP is the only one with a chance to beat 0bama.

I agree. The whole RP or Revolution idea is very fanatical and even frightening. That RP has a technical plan to take delegates from other candidates is also frightening. That he has a plan to get into power like the Emperor in Star Wars, by manipulating people's Fear and Preaching Liberty, while taking liberty away from Voters, scares me too.

A technical plan to take delegates? You mean caring enough to show up? Cause thats all that has happened. It is Ron Pauls fault that the others dont have enough supporters who care enough to be there in large numbers?? No one is stopping other supporters from showing up, they just dont care. Or are arrogent enough to think it doesnt matter. And BTW a open Romney supporter saying Ron Paul uses fear to preach his message has got to be the single most hypocritcal thing I have ever seen on these boards. You support a man who has no problem taking every single freedom we have left, cause of some faceless boogyman called terror. It takes courage to fight for freedom. A coward gives up those freedoms for the sake of false security. Know ye not these things?

BTW what liberties do you think the voters have? They have a straw poll that isnt binding in anyway. Not that I agree with that, but again, not Ron Pauls fault.

I think if all the RP voter shunned the voting booth it would be a non-event. Often 50% of voters fail to show. Why would 5% failing to show be noteworthy? Sure Romney is going to need every vote he can get, but I don't think the RP vote will be that big a swing.

Some RP supporters have said they'll vote Obama rather then Romney. And I can't figure that one out. That is like saying if you can't have Abraham Lincoln, you're going to go with Jefferson Davis. The two are Polar Opposites.

No one said they would vote for 0bama. We have said between Romney and 0bama the results will be the same. Wont care who wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.