Ron Paul Victorious Again- Ron Paul Follows Up Iowa Win With Win In New Hampshire

deprave

New Member
Ron Paul won the debates last night, this reporter becomes visibly upset that he has to mention it

[video=youtube;KfDJfvYH6CY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfDJfvYH6CY[/video]
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Obama..........Period.
... and a vote for anybody other than Dr Paul is a vote against America, truth, justice, your mother, freedom, reason, honesty, love, puppies, children, ice cream, veterans, sunshine, laughing and orgasmic sex. 2 periods..
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Ron Paul didn't win the debate. He won the measured results on Twitter but that's meaningless since his people over-whelmed the voting. He stumbled a few times and did only ok. There is no disagreeing with what you say but the fact remains: A vote for Paul (if he runs as a independant), it only takes votes from the Republicans which in turn helps the Dems. The real question should be do you want Obama again for another 4 years or a Republican- ANY REPUBLICAN? A vote for Paul is a wasted vote, like Ralph Nadar and many others before him.
 

notoriouszig

Active Member
Ron Paul didn't win the debate. He won the measured results on Twitter but that's meaningless since his people over-whelmed the voting. He stumbled a few times and did only ok. There is no disagreeing with what you say but the fact remains: A vote for Paul (if he runs as a independant), it only takes votes from the Republicans which in turn helps the Dems. The real question should be do you want Obama again for another 4 years or a Republican- ANY REPUBLICAN? A vote for Paul is a wasted vote, like Ralph Nadar and many others before him.
Did you watch the same debate i watched? Paul directly answers questions... I can't say the same for any of the other candidates - they go for easy applause. This kind of defeatist attitude towards Ron Paul is what will put Obama right back into office. If we vote for him we will win, it's that simple. There is a reason the media is blacking him out. There is a reason why pundits use talking points like "he's unelectable", or "a vote for RP is a vote for Obama". These kind of ideas spread (just like they're designed to do) not because they're factual, rather because they don't require any additional investigation. This is what propaganda looks like.

The other candidates dodge questions, Paul does not. Paul is consistent, the other candidates are not. Again, he can and WILL win if we vote for him. Why aren't we talking about Romney running as an independent? Or any other candidate for that matter? Last I checked Paul was doing very well. It seems as though we are only supposed to be doubting Paul, but not anyone else. Hmmmm.... I wonder why????

Propaganda is subtle, but its effect is devastating.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
no, he won't. ronald the millionaire will NEVER carry florida in a general.

kerry's states + florida = 271. game over.
If you like Obama, then vote for Obama. If you like Romney, then vote for Romney. Why would anybody wring their hands thinking, "oh my God, I must vote for the winner". Vote your fucking conscience, let the chips fall where they may.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
If you like Obama, then vote for Obama. If you like Romney, then vote for Romney. Why would anybody wring their hands thinking, "oh my God, I must vote for the winner". Vote your fucking conscience, let the chips fall where they may.
i don't ever recall saying anything of the sort.

all i was pointing out is the impossibility of a paul presidency.
 

beardo

Well-Known Member
i don't ever recall saying anything of the sort.

all i was pointing out is the impossibility of a paul presidency.
If he doesn't win the majority of people- the 99%, will lose and you and people like you will be to blame
 

fenderburn84

Well-Known Member
I guess the thing I don't get, is how he can really change any thing? He said he won't be an executive order kind of president, but the only other way would be congress and if you have been paying attention as I'm sure all here have, they won't agree on shit. So I guess that's what really bewilders me.
 

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
I guess the thing I don't get, is how he can really change any thing? He said he won't be an executive order kind of president, but the only other way would be congress and if you have been paying attention as I'm sure all here have, they won't agree on shit. So I guess that's what really bewilders me.
Which is why I LOL at either sides presidential candidates talking about tax reform. You have to get congress to agree, it is the purse strings that they control that give them the power.
 

deprave

New Member
I guess the thing I don't get, is how he can really change any thing? He said he won't be an executive order kind of president, but the only other way would be congress and if you have been paying attention as I'm sure all here have, they won't agree on shit. So I guess that's what really bewilders me.
Well he will do a lot, bring the troops home, end the drug war, etc...all possible without congress...Republican's will definitely go with him on stuff if it makes them win votes...Democrats agree with him on social liberties.. It is more likely he would get the most done..There is a lot he wants to do that both parties agree on especially if he was president and not a congressman.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
i don't ever recall saying anything of the sort.

all i was pointing out is the impossibility of a paul presidency.
I don't think "impossible" means what you think it means. If the majority of people vote for Ron Paul then he will be the next president.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
The real question should be do you want Obama again for another 4 years or a Republican- ANY REPUBLICAN? A vote for Paul is a wasted vote, like Ralph Nadar and many others before him.
The REAL question is: "Why do you think there is ANY difference between ANY Republican, other than Dr Paul and Obama?"
It's like being given the choice of "do you want your left or right nut cut off".
 

Parker

Well-Known Member
I guess the thing I don't get, is how he can really change any thing? He said he won't be an executive order kind of president, but the only other way would be congress and if you have been paying attention as I'm sure all here have, they won't agree on shit. So I guess that's what really bewilders me.
He'll reverse others executive orders. The president controls the troop movement so he can bring them home.
 

fenderburn84

Well-Known Member
He'll reverse others executive orders. The president controls the troop movement so he can bring them home.
You think he will? Not just campaign slogans, do you honestly think he is going to shut down the military industrial complex. I like some of the stuff he talks about, but my gut tells me were he to get in a few things would change but nothing "important". You know what I mean?
 
Top