Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Ron Paul wins another straw poll

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705

    Ron Paul wins another straw poll

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57274.html

    It strikes me as odd that he supposedly has so much support, but when actual votes are counted his results are so insignificant that it seems like the rumors his supporters stack these events are true. I actually like having him in the race though. He'll hopefully be able to advance some libertarian issues and call out the RINOs on their liberalism. It's really too bad he's so marginalized by the 9/11 lunatics.
    Last edited by PrayingForWar; 06-18-2011 at 08:54 PM.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    He has rabid, not voluminous, support.

    He will fade into the background soon enough. He is marginal and should be marginalized.

  3. #3
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    I will continue to vote for him.

    That is all.

  4. #4
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I'll vote for him.

    Communist, socialists, Marxists, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stompers, white supremacists, Black supremacistst, militant militia, police state apologists, those in favor of all the alphabet soup government agencies, those who want to take my money or tell me what to do with my body while totally ignoring our natural rights, etc. All support the regular two yahoos they give us as a choice. So are folks who vote for them in favor and should be judged by the other groups that vote for them?

    I think I'd rather be associated with a group that doesn't trust the government than those who feel government is the answer. And I am not a conspiracy theorist at all.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    What I find interesting is that the conservative media seems to go out of it's way to keep him out of their polls. He will do well in one poll then outlets like the WSJ will release a poll and he doesn't even show in it.

    I from time to time listen to Hannity on the way to work. It really bothered me when he would be talking about possible candidates he would always leave Paul out. One caller asked him about it and he replied he was a Reagan Conservative and didn't agree with all of Paul's Libertarian Conservative views so he didn't include or support him. At least he was honest about it.

    Years ago there was a man named Dick Luger who ran to be the candidate every cycle. If you asked him a specific question on policy he gave you a specific answer. Many politicians in his party didn't seem to like that since it took away their "wiggle room", so year after year he failed to get the nomination. Ron Paul is learning what this feels like.


    On a side note. I also find it interesting all the GOP pols who have tried to co-opt the Tea Party. I mean, look at the Tea Party Express and Freedom Works. Both these "Tea Party" organizations are run by Dick Armey. He was the House Majority Leader for the Republican Party, for pity sake. Now like a smart pol, he read the tea leaves(excuse the pun) right and has tried to re-brand himself as for small government. Why didn't he try to reduce the size of government when he was in it and had the power to push such an agenda? I hope all the people who say they are tired of the same old song and dance from both parties are not fooled by any of this, but in all honesty I doubt it.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    I'll vote for him.

    Communist, socialists, Marxists, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stompers, white supremacists, Black supremacistst, militant militia, police state apologists, those in favor of all the alphabet soup government agencies, those who want to take my money or tell me what to do with my body while totally ignoring our natural rights, etc. All support the regular two yahoos they give us as a choice. So are folks who vote for them in favor and should be judged by the other groups that vote for them?

    I think I'd rather be associated with a group that doesn't trust the government than those who feel government is the answer. And I am not a conspiracy theorist at all.
    If you're implying that a person is either a Ron Paul supporter or a "Communist, socialists, Marxists, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stomper" I think you're being disingenuous. In fact it seems to me what turns off most conservatives to his politics is his isolationist stance on foreign policy. I'm sure the republican establishment just loves his adversarial position on the fed bank too.

    If I could be convinced by someone I knew to be well educated on economics that the best way to ensure free market stability was to dump fractional reserve banking and be the only country on earth that goes back to gold, I'd support RP that much more. If I had a crystal ball and could see no repercussions from our withdrawing all military forces and influence from the world, I'd be an ardent RP supporter.

    I don't need a crystal ball to know that our withdrawal from the world would allow every "Communist, socialist, Marxist, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stomper, whabbist, despot and their agents" to run wild in the world destabilizing the world's markets, governments and constantly attempt to penetrate our border defenses. Our defense spending would probably have to increase since we'd have to have snipers, gun towers, gunships and constant air patrols over every inch of border.

    Other than those 2 issues I have no problem with his policies. A libertarian can have constitutional values AND believe in a strong national defense which includes military infrastructure around the world, with a banking/monetary system that allows the free market to function. Like I've said many times, I don't pretend to have an understanding of every intricacy and nuance of the monetary system like so many who bloviate to anyone who will listen. It does not make sense to me at all, to readopt a system the rest of the world left behind. There obviously was a problem with it, or else no one would have switched.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by VW_Factor View Post
    I will continue to vote for him.

    That is all.
    this, I feel better knowing i voted for a candidate that will make the necessary changes and not fall into the sorry excuse that third party candidates cant win.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Oh, and how did Paul do in the poll of viewers after the debate, after folks were asked to select a candidate who had just been asked to speak on several different subjects, not of his choosing?

    Anyone? Bueller?

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    SNIP those who want to take my money or tell me what to do with my body while totally ignoring our natural rights, etc.
    It is as though supporters of the main parties fail to connect the dots.

    For example, some support the Republicans and a strong military. In order to have a strong military, you have to spend, spend, spend. And, to do that, you have to borrow, borrow, borrow, driving the national debt up, up, up. At least that's the way its been played, whether its true or not.

    Both major parties are in it for themselves. Just two wings of the Government Party. They promise this, they promise that. But in the end, spending goes up, the debt goes up, we get more laws and regulations, and liberty contracts.

    Wasn't it Patrick Henry who remarked that some men promise to govern fairly, govern wisely. But they intend to govern.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923
    Quote Originally Posted by PrayingForWar View Post

    .......If I could be convinced by someone I knew to be well educated on economics that the best way to ensure free market stability was to dump fractional reserve banking.......

    .......a banking/monetary system that allows the free market to function. Like I've said many times, I don't pretend to have an understanding of every intricacy and nuance of the monetary system like so many who bloviate to anyone who will listen. It does not make sense to me at all, to readopt a system the rest of the world left behind. There obviously was a problem with it, or else no one would have switched.
    You cannot have a free market without a free currency. It just can not be done. If you can explain how to have a Free Market without a free currency I would love to hear it.

    It would be like saying your free to own, buy, sell, trade, any firearm you wish as long as it was made by Springfield and approved by the Federal Government, and that Springfield and the Federal Government arbitrarily decided how many firearms to allow into the system at any given time. That does not sound like freedom to me.

    I admit that this isn't the best example but think for a moment how firearm prices would be effected/manipulated if the Government (or some private entity authorized by government) was able to control how many Firearms entered the system. Remember these approved Firearms are the only ones allowed on the market and you can be jailed or fined for using a different Firearm. The effect the Federal Reserve has on our economy is similar.

    Just because "the rest of the world" leaves something behind or starts something does not mean that it is a good thing. Much of the world is disregarding the natural right to be armed, much of the rest of the world is decreasing individual liberty, much of the rest of the world has higher and higher taxes.

    Your right that there was "a problem" with our monetary system sans a Fiat Currency. The problem was that those who hate freedom and liberty and crave control found that it was not easy enough to manipulate the economy so they wanted to find a system that allowed them to control the economy easier.
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PrayingForWar View Post
    If you're implying that a person is either a Ron Paul supporter or a "Communist, socialists, Marxists, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stomper" I think you're being disingenuous. In fact it seems to me what turns off most conservatives to his politics is his isolationist stance on foreign policy. I'm sure the republican establishment just loves his adversarial position on the fed bank too.

    ]
    Only if you are implying every Ron Paul supporter is a conspiracy moonbat. I know your are bright enough to see what I was doing in that statement. You were trying to demonize Ron Paul because of a few fanatical followers, I was simply pointing out if I was to do the same with the guys you support, they would fair a lot worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    It is as though supporters of the main parties fail to connect the dots.

    For example, some support the Republicans and a strong military. In order to have a strong military, you have to spend, spend, spend. And, to do that, you have to borrow, borrow, borrow, driving the national debt up, up, up. At least that's the way its been played, whether its true or not.

    Both major parties are in it for themselves. Just two wings of the Government Party. They promise this, they promise that. But in the end, spending goes up, the debt goes up, we get more laws and regulations, and liberty contracts.

    Wasn't it Patrick Henry who remarked that some men promise to govern fairly, govern wisely. But they intend to govern.
    Good quote, I must ad that to my file of quotes.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 06-20-2011 at 09:21 AM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post

    .........Wasn't it Patrick Henry who remarked that some men promise to govern fairly, govern wisely. But they intend to govern.

    "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
    ~Daniel Webster
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Goldsboro, NC
    Posts
    160
    Gonna root for the hometown team. He is my rep afterall.
    Yes, blame me for him even being a voice that is heard, but I have to admit, thinks are nice down in south east Texas.

  14. #14
    Regular Member dmatting's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Oh, and how did Paul do in the poll of viewers after the debate, after folks were asked to select a candidate who had just been asked to speak on several different subjects, not of his choosing?

    Anyone? Bueller?
    Not sure what poll(s) you are referring to. How about a link?

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I am asking, not telling. I need provide no link to any particular poll. Look the polls up. Or don't. I don't really care, cuz I know that folks with open and rational minds will, and they will be able to draw appropriate conclusions.

    Moving on.

  16. #16
    Regular Member dmatting's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I am asking, not telling. I need provide no link to any particular poll. Look the polls up. Or don't. I don't really care, cuz I know that folks with open and rational minds will, and they will be able to draw appropriate conclusions.
    Your original post on the subject suggested that you saw poll results that showed Mr. Paul in a more negative light:

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Oh, and how did Paul do in the poll of viewers after the debate, after folks were asked to select a candidate who had just been asked to speak on several different subjects, not of his choosing?
    Emphasis mine, intended to point out that you were referring to a singular poll. You then go on to describe the poll with some specificity. One can only read your post and take from it that you saw this poll.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I step back in just long enough to quote my post, including the line left out when it was quoted (with no indication at all that the post had been altered).

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I am asking, not telling. I need provide no link to any particular poll. Look the polls up. Or don't. I don't really care, cuz I know that folks with open and rational minds will, and they will be able to draw appropriate conclusions.

    Moving on.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by PrayingForWar View Post
    I don't need a crystal ball to know that our withdrawal from the world would allow every "Communist, socialist, Marxist, statist, fascist, authoritarian liberty stomper, whabbist, despot and their agents" to run wild in the world destabilizing the world's markets, governments and constantly attempt to penetrate our border defenses. Our defense spending would probably have to increase since we'd have to have snipers, gun towers, gunships and constant air patrols over every inch of border.

    If by "withdrawal from the world" you mean just bringing our troops home, but continuing to fund, train, and supply all those little "insurgent groups" by shipping them pallets of cash, planeloads of arms, and dozens of "advisors", as we have been doing for the last 100+ years, you are probably correct. All hell probably WOULD break loose.

    But if you mean actually withdrawing ALL our presence--not shipping them arms, cash and advisors, and not using private contractors to help them ship their drugs throughout the world, then perhaps it would actually make a difference.

    Without covert support of these near-stone-age cultures, and the intentional programs of regional destabilization that have been the modus operandi of the Western "Intelligence" community since the Cold War, most of them would just fade back into sociopolitical obscurity, and the worst things to happen would be small, fractional, tribal skirmishes, just like most of the world was before we stuck our noses into their business a the beginning of the 20th century.

    Intentional regional destabilization as a foreign policy has caused more problems in the last 60 years than it ever solved, and is perhaps an even more egregious violation of international law and human rights than 18th and 19th Century Colonialism ever was...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  19. #19
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    I have voted for him, I will vote for him again. I have been elected as a delegate to teh WA Republican convention for him....BTW: He won out in my part of WA, almost won in Spokane, did win a couple places in ID and MT.

    The problem is there is a lot of free publicity for others, that is basically "don't support Ron, he can't win. We need someone that can win".

    No-one oposes him on his principles, only that "he can't win". I do have to admit, he would be the nanny state control freeks worst nightmare.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Not true. I oppose him on principle and principle alone. So do many Americans. It is because of his principles, most very good, some unacceptably (IMO) wacko, that he is unelectable.

    Most of us can support a candidate who has little or no chance in the primaries. (I supported Huckabee in the primaries last time. This time, I am tending toward Cain, but am caught among the large number of really good choices) Common sense dictates that we eventually support acceptably imperfect electable candidates once the field narrows. (I voted for Palin...er...McCain in the general.)

    If enough folks don't do this, we get Obama.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Not true. I oppose him on principle and principle alone. So do many Americans. It is because of his principles, most very good, some unacceptably (IMO) wacko, that he is unelectable.

    Most of us can support a candidate who has little or no chance in the primaries. (I supported Huckabee in the primaries last time. This time, I am tending toward Cain, but am caught among the large number of really good choices) Common sense dictates that we eventually support acceptably imperfect electable candidates once the field narrows. (I voted for Palin...er...McCain in the general.)

    If enough folks don't do this, we get Obama.
    The problem is that the Republican machine tends to churn out people closer to your POV than mine, and then we are frightened into voting for the guy.

    I will not be intimidated for my vote.

    I'm more afraid of a bad Republican than I am of Obama. People know who he is and fight him. Much of his agenda has been blocked.

    Somebody like Romney supports much of the same (I'm going by track record here, not mere meaningless words), but will get a pass because he had an R next to his name.

    Don't believe me? Just look at the Bush years. Where was the Tea Party when he was doubling the national debt? When he said he would sign a renewal of the AWB if it hit his desk (thank God it never did)? When he was pushing the bailouts?

    I'll take Obama over Romney any day of the week.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by PracticalTactical View Post
    I'm more afraid of a bad Republican than I am of Obama. People know who he is and fight him. Much of his agenda has been blocked.
    What are you, some kind of Libertarian, tinfoil-hat-wearing fruit-bat?

    The Republicans have given us over 4 decades of pure Constitutional government, and have done nothing to limit or curtail the Rights of Citizens.

    Well, except for the creation of the EPA and normalization of trade and diplomatic relations with China under Nixon...

    And the granting of amnesty to illegal aliens, and the shifting of our deficit from $700 Billion to $3 TRILLION, and the $125 BILLION S&L bailout under Reagan...

    And that little thing called "Gulf War I" under Bush Sr...

    And we can forget about the Patriot Act, and all the post-9/11 rape and pillage of Constitutional and International Law that happened under Bush II...

    Yeah, we should just vote for the top Republican, because Republicans have done so much to preserve Freedom and Liberty for US Citizens, and have made the USA a model for other nations to aspire to...

    <sarcasm OFF>
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by PracticalTactical View Post
    ...I'll take Obama over Romney any day of the week.
    Then it seems to me that you'd rather gripe about the lack of Liberty than vote for the candidate who you think would abridge it the least. Your choice.

    Thanks for Obama.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    What are you, some kind of Libertarian, tinfoil-hat-wearing fruit-bat?

    The Republicans have given us over 4 decades of pure Constitutional government, and have done nothing to limit or curtail the Rights of Citizens.

    Well, except for the creation of the EPA and normalization of trade and diplomatic relations with China under Nixon...

    And the granting of amnesty to illegal aliens, and the shifting of our deficit from $700 Billion to $3 TRILLION, and the $125 BILLION S&L bailout under Reagan...

    And that little thing called "Gulf War I" under Bush Sr...

    And we can forget about the Patriot Act, and all the post-9/11 rape and pillage of Constitutional and International Law that happened under Bush II...

    Yeah, we should just vote for the top Republican, because Republicans have done so much to preserve Freedom and Liberty for US Citizens, and have made the USA a model for other nations to aspire to...

    <sarcasm OFF>
    Sarcasm noted and understood. And people wonder why I support a government minimalist like Ron Paul.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Then it seems to me that you'd rather gripe about the lack of Liberty than vote for the candidate who you think would abridge it the least. Your choice.

    Thanks for Obama.
    You are taking that quote out of context.

    As I said, I think Romney will push for all that Obama does (because of his past) and get away with it because he's a Republican. That makes him more dangerous than Obama.

    I'll never vote Obama or Romney, I'll go for the Libertarian or Constitution Party candidate, so that I'm really voting for who will abridge liberty less.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •