I Wouldn't Vote for Ron Paul but Find About 1/2 His Supporters The Best of USA

[IndependntLogic]

This is the one area in which I find the RP supporters more admirable than Dems or Republicans - at least in what they say they'll do (we'll see in November).
Everyone whines about how horrible our government is.
"Oh the deficit!"
"Oh The Corporate Control of GE / Halliburton or whatever company represents the other side!"
"The waste!"
"The hypocisy!"
"The needless wars!"
"The waste of drug enforcement!"
and so on.
Dems whine about it.
Repubs whine about it.
But no one will stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate who they'll stick by, come election time.
Except Ron Paul supporters.
So how are they treated by everyone who whines a btiches about how crappy our politicians are?
They are demonized, ridiculed and called names.
Okay, about half of them have it coming. We've all seen them: "Vote for my candidate and agree with me on everything or your are a Statist, Nazi, Nanny-State loving, dog molester!"
Those whackjobs make Ron Paul and his other supporters look pretty crazy. Newsflash for that segment of Paul supporters: Dems and Repubs are voting for their candidates because they like their positions better, not because they're Statist Nazis. Sometimes it is that simple.
But I admire the more civil and reasonable Ron Paul supporters for sticking by their guns.
I agree with Ron Paul on giving away taxpayer money to foreign politicians, the waste of the drug war, the fact that Iraq and most of our wars were alll bull shit and a theft of our money to enrich the military industrial complex and a few other issues.
If I didn't disagree with him so vociferously on so many other issues, I would vote for him and guess what?
That would NOT be a wasted vote.
It would send a message that I'm tired of the same old BS.
I think that's the message that Ron Paul voters intend to send and it's very, very valid.

 

[Avatar4321]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

I dunno if that would fix, recycling and trading between dems and reps back and forth certainly isn't working though.

 

[Avatar4321]

I dont see why we can't reform the parties.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I dont see why we can't reform the parties.

They won't reform until they feel the need to, they won't feel the need to until ppl stop voting for them.

 

[Avatar4321]

If people stop voting for them then a smaller and smaller more fringe group have control of the power structure. I think thats what the radicals want.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If people stop voting for them then a smaller and smaller more fringe group have control of the power structure. I think thats what the radicals want.

I view both the parties as radical groups acting against americans best interests.

So what you fear happening, is in my opinion already happening.

 

[Avatar4321]

You may be correct there.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

 

[Avatar4321]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

That's precisely why we need people involved trying to change things. You can change things looking in and complaining about them.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

We americans are like the enabling family members of a drug user. In this example the politicians are the drug users and votes are the drugs.

Until we completely cut them off and let them hit rock bottom, they aren't going to change. Hell they're nowhere near rock bottom, we still shower our politicians with love, money and power.

 

[Avatar4321]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

We americans are like the enabling family members of a drug user. In this example the politicians are the drug users and votes are the drugs.

Until we completely cut them off and let them hit rock bottom, they aren't going to change. Hell they're nowhere near rock bottom, we still shower our politicians with love, money and power.

I really dont want to see rock bottom. Because while there may be some who think we are too big to fail and things wont get that bad, I know things can get far worse than they are today.

I think it would be wise to start uniting with fellow citizens in our local communities to make provisions for the worst.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

We americans are like the enabling family members of a drug user. In this example the politicians are the drug users and votes are the drugs.

Until we completely cut them off and let them hit rock bottom, they aren't going to change. Hell they're nowhere near rock bottom, we still shower our politicians with love, money and power.

I really dont want to see rock bottom. Because while there may be some who think we are too big to fail and things wont get that bad, I know things can get far worse than they are today.

I think it would be wise to start uniting with fellow citizens in our local communities to make provisions for the worst.

I don't think rock bottom for politicians is the same as rock bottom for americans, I think the opposite is true.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because we have turned into a Corporatacracy. The candidate with the most money wins 90% of the time in any election for a national post.
Citizens United has exponentially exacerbated that problem. Now corporations have more voting power than people. So do unions. The problem is only the GOP is supporting that particular brand of BS.

I have a lot of Liberal views - especially when it comes to social issues. Pot illegal? Really? THAT's important? To women get married in Oregon and I'm supposed to be as whacked out about it as Rick Santorum?
But while they are whining about the deficit, NONE of the candidates are talking about ending off-shoring profits earned solely in the USA. Or about stopping the subsidies to Big Oil. And so on.
There is no common sense party. At least not that I see.
So while I don't agree with a lot of Ron Paul says, I agree with the need to send a message: This BS doesn't wash anymore.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

Because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

That's precisely why we need people involved trying to change things. You can change things looking in and complaining about them.

If that's what the party needs, why do 'Establishment' Republicans work so hard to marginalize us?

 

[GuyPinestra]

why would someone have to "stick to their guns and forward a third party candidate" in order to fix the problem?

because the 2 established parties have no interest in fixing things themselves, that's why...

we americans are like the enabling family members of a drug user. In this example the politicians are the drug users and votes are the drugs.

Until we completely cut them off and let them hit rock bottom, they aren't going to change. Hell they're nowhere near rock bottom, we still shower our politicians with love, money and power.

^^^ this! ^^^

 

[Jroc]

Like I said before most Ron Paul people will support the Republican nominee. Who cares about the loons they can do what they want.

 

[Crackerjack]

Like I said before most Ron Paul people will support the Republican nominee.

Not likely. But keep hoping.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Like I said before most Ron Paul people will support the Republican nominee. Who cares about the loons they can do what they want.

Obviously this isn't official or anything, but i'd say about 1 in 20 of the Ron Paul supporters i know will vote for Mitt. We don't support big gov't fascists regardless if they have a D or R in front of their name.


EDITED: Whoopsy if you read before i edited.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Like I said before most Ron Paul people will support the Republican nominee. Who cares about the loons they can do what they want.

Obviously this isn't official or anything, but i'd say about 1 in 20 of the Ron Paul supporters i know won't vote for Mitt. We don't support big gov't fascists regardless if they have a D or R in front of their name.

I'd have to agree with you. It may even be as high as 10 - 15%. These people are SERIOUSLY pissed off and tired of the status quo.