The Guardian UK is asking for our opinion on 2a and Ron Paul

No NAU · Jan 19, 2008

imported post

You have to register to post but your opinion will be read by a lot of folks.

Ron Paul places second in Nevada
Your thoughts on his best ever result
January 19, 2008 6:15 PM
Ron Paul places second in Nevada. Now that's news.

Bad news for Rudy Giuliani, whose Florida-or-bust strategy likely didn't account for America's mayor losing to the likes of Paul in Iowa and Michigan as well.

Good news for Mitt Romney, who's watching John McCain's image recede in the rear-view mirror. For a few hours anyway.

Interesting news for the rest of us. Does America really want a return to the gold standard? Concealed weapons to become commonplace? We know you Ron Paul supporters are online. Tell us what you think of the man's coup earlier today

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2008/01/ron_paul_places_second_in_neva.html

katsung47 · Jan 19, 2012

The ruler of this country let Paul be in second place in Nevada. It's only a gimmick. The election is a manipulated one. Ron Paul is an unfavorable of the Inside Group. His loss is designated by a rigging election though he should have won the election if there was an honest voting system.

The Nevada case is a trick to cheat people.

1. A small state won't affect the general election. So they award him a second place to show it's "democratic". A second place means nothing in campaign.

2. It's a tactic to lure more money from people of grievance(to urge Paul's supporters continue to donate more money. That money finally will go to media's wallet.) to support its propaganda machine. After all, you won't win. So why not squeeze more money from you by increasing your confidence a little bit.

3. To show people that the election is fair. He is an unfavorable, he was still in second place. That proves our system is "fair". Though the reality is, Paul may be the leading candidate in Iowa, New Hampshire and other states. They(Feds) moved his votes to his rival's.

Daylen · Jan 19, 2012

uho, where is Dr. Morgan, its a zombie thread!

CommonMan101 · Jan 19, 2012

Kinda funny four years passed between first and second post but it almost fits as contemporary anyway. I guess kat just couldn't let it lie there in the history bin.

Lemme guess... New to the forum, was digging around and found something interesting but didn't see how old it was.

It happens. Still funny though.

katsung47 · Jan 27, 2012

Ron Paul has no chance. The ruler of this country rigged the election to pick up their own puppet because they control the voting system. They justify the result by faked poll because they control media.

Here is the proof. People found Ron Paul is the most popular candidate in Internet. Because Internet is open place. Ron Paul got most support from military, that's can't be rigged because the donation is there.

Quote, "

Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

http://www.rtr.org/videos/26054/37762/ron-paul-will-win-the-presidenti

RTR.org - Watch - Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

Uploaded by GetRenewable on Jan 11, 2012

This is Proof: Ron Paul will win the presidential election in 2012. These are the main candidates for the upcoming elections. Notice the number of Likes and dislikes on each video. Ron Paul Dominates all by Thousands of percent. This is our new President. Dr. Ron Paul. Please keep up the good work and victory is ours. Gain Liberty. End Debt. Vote Ron Paul! New Hampshire Speech By All Presidential Candidates. PLEASE VIEW EVIDENCE: Below...

Rick Santorum: [link to www.youtube.com]
(1489 views - 9 likes 76 dislikes)

Newt Gingrich: [link to www.youtube.com]
(3,082 views - 16 likes / 124 dislikes)

Jon Huntsman: [link to www.youtube.com]
(3,087 views - 35 likes 100 dislikes)

Mitt Romney: [link to www.youtube.com]
(20,600 views - 335 likes 690 dislikes!!) and they call him the winner! hahahah

RON PAUL: [link to www.youtube.com]
(129,000 views - 3,916 likes - 44 dislikes.)

Now YOU tell me who is gonna win. It's an obvious landslide victory."

I still say Paul has no chance because this is a covert totalitarian. They control election system and play you people fool.
Quote:
Just look at how 'successful' Ron Paul was against John McCain and Mitt Romney in his bid for the 2008 nomination. He led all kinds of gallup and straw polls, he even led the way in raising funds via internet campaigning...yet how much success did he have in securing the nomination?

hermannr · Jan 27, 2012

Note the Iowa caucus this year. Ron Paul was poised to win it, until the State party chair said, "we cannot allow this to happen" and all of a sudden Santorum is the guy to beat. I wonder if thay took some plays from the democrats and a lot of dead people voted???? Or as they say in Seattle: Vote early, vote often.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9044

Note, this guy says there were 53 people at his caucus..the list says 79?

Jack House · Jan 28, 2012

CommonMan101 said:
Kinda funny four years passed between first and second post but it almost fits as contemporary anyway. I guess kat just couldn't let it lie there in the history bin.

Lemme guess... New to the forum, was digging around and found something interesting but didn't see how old it was.

It happens. Still funny though.

It's a bot~

katsung47 · Feb 9, 2012

As long as they controlled the voting system, you never can elected a representative of your own.

Nevada vote fraud official
Jeffrey Phelps February 7, 2012
Denver Conspiracy Examiner

Once again, the 2012 election season brings the worst out of establishment politicians as Nevada GOP officials steal another election from Ron Paul
As it turns out, just as in Iowa, the likelihood that Ron Paul should have actually been the winner is very high. Not only did CNN show live coverage of a special late evening vote count in a populated Las Vegas precinct that had Ron Paul winning by almost 60%, statistics are showing that Ron Paul may have actually won the entire caucus by approx. the same margin, had in not been for another round of State GOP election fraud that is seemingly never going to be address by the powers that be, for obvious reasons.

Perhaps the most obvious aspect of the situation, however, may be the fact that Nevada is a known Libertarian state, Ron Paul has basically campaign there since his last attempt at the white house, his numbers have almost doubled in every state since then, yet Nevada state GOP ‘officials’ expect everyone to believe he actually received fewer votes there in 2012 than he did in 2008?

http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/nevada-vote-fraud-official

katsung47 · Feb 22, 2012

Quote, "(If you want Ron Paul to become America's next President, then the work you do for him over the next 3 MONTHS is absolutely crucial. Register as a Republican and become a Ron Paul "delegate" as soon as possible. Click below to learn more on how to become a Ron Paul delegate.)

* He has never voted to raise taxes.

* He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.

* He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.

* He has never voted to raise congressional pay.

* He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

* He voted against the Patriot Act.

* He voted against the Iraq war.

* He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

LINK REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Links to hate sites are not welcome here.

Dreamer · Feb 22, 2012

CommonMan101 said:
Kinda funny four years passed between first and second post but it almost fits as contemporary anyway. I guess kat just couldn't let it lie there in the history bin.

Lemme guess... New to the forum, was digging around and found something interesting but didn't see how old it was.

It happens. Still funny though.

The aversion to "zombie threads" is a symptom of the 30-second attention span mentality of today's culture. For some strange reason, many people on the Net seem to be genuinely offended when someone revives an old thread that wasn't on their radar. It's like people are offended by the history of a forum, and have some sort of problem with anyone bringing up historical topics--even if they are relevent or pertinent to current topics of discussion.

Put on your big boy panties, and deal with it...

since9 · Feb 29, 2012

Dreamer said:
The aversion to "zombie threads" is a symptom of the 30-second attention span mentality of today's culture. For some strange reason, many people on the Net seem to be genuinely offended when someone revives an old thread that wasn't on their radar. It's like people are offended by the history of a forum, and have some sort of problem with anyone bringing up historical topics--even if they are relevent or pertinent to current topics of discussion.

Put on your big boy panties, and deal with it...

Bingo!

Those who have an aversion to it call it "thread necromancy." I call their aversion "necrothreadphobia."

Jack House · Mar 1, 2012

since9 said:
Bingo!

Those who have an aversion to it call it "thread necromancy." I call their aversion "necrothreadphobia."

Is an aversion to necromancy such a bad thing?

Gil223 · Mar 1, 2012

Elect a Zombie in 2012 (interesting segue from the OP's topic)...

My opinion about our Second Amendment is that it establishes the one right that insures we keep all the others. My opinion about Ron Paul is that he appears to be a very strong supporter of AII, and I agree with roughly as many of his views as those with which I disagree. But, nontheless, he is a politician, and the smart pol's play to the audience in front of them. If you are not a particularly popular (i.e. - liberal) pol, any opinion you may have expressed at any point in your entire life will come back to bite you in the ass. I believe RP is a bit too radical/honest to be electable... if one naively believes our votes actually "elect" anybody.

Somehow, the transition that diverted this thread from "The Guardian UK is asking for our opinion on 2a and Ron Paul" of the OP, into the upcoming election and zombies, slipped right past me. All the Guardian (UK) requested was opinions about 2A and this particular candidate. Pax...

katsung47 · Mar 7, 2012

This says it all

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Honest Ron Paul.jpg

katsung47 · Mar 24, 2012

Thousands Gather In Standing room only for Ron Paul in Kansas City Union Station February 18, 2012

katsung47 · Apr 7, 2012

Media camara

katsung47 · Apr 20, 2012

http://www.politifake.org/image/pol...2012-peace-prosperity-politics-1330439272.jpg

unelectable-vs-electable-ron-paul-2012-peace-prosperity-politics-1330439272.jpg

katsung47 · May 4, 2012

Where is media?

katsung47 · May 18, 2012

Ron Paul is unelctable because the voting system is controlled by the Feds. They pick up their own puppet through rigged election and justify it by fake poll. (because they also control the media.) Only one thing they couldn't control - they couldn't rigged the attendence of the campaign meeting. That's how you see in these pictures. Of course, media never report it. You only see it in Internet.

katsung47 · Jun 2, 2012

Bryan Spencer Speaks about Rigging St. Charles Caucus

[video=youtube;OuQIMfMVMYg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuQIMfMVMYg&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLD8DC0EA3C9F4C1C1[/video]

The Guardian UK is asking for our opinion on 2a and Ron Paul

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member