Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Ron is no republican..... fiscally I love the man, but thats where it stops for me.
On national defense, he is a 1st class idiot
If elected President, Ron Paul will continue his efforts to secure our borders, hunt down the 9/11 terrorist planners (who are still at large), safely withdraw our troops from Iraq and other countries around the world
Yeah, right. Just like when Biden said that he could vote for McCain. You lefties are always trying to pick the repub challenger.
You people know that Paul would be the one person Obama could beat. Also, why would you vote for somebody that conservative? Your saying you could vote for someone very liberal, or you could vote for someone very conservative? I don't think so.
The polls have shown that Paul does better against Obama than most of the other candidates, so how is he the only candidate Obama would beat?
Overall, I like Ron Paul, but he does have his problems. National defense is a major weakness, he's a fringe player, and I don't think he would capture the republican base. Obama would be a shoe-in if he was nominated, just like when McCain was nominated, I knew there was no chance.
Overall, I like Ron Paul, but he does have his problems. National defense is a major weakness, he's a fringe player, and I don't think he would capture the republican base. Obama would be a shoe-in if he was nominated, just like when McCain was nominated, I knew there was no chance.
If Ron Paul were the nominee Obama would have to defend his foreign policy to a very war weary electorate. Ron Paul would get that vote, and the polls indicate that a majority of Americans are now against these wars. Not to mention Ron Paul being the most credible candidate on the economy.
Ron Paul is an isolationist...try and sell that to the republicans.
The polls have shown that Paul does better against Obama than most of the other candidates, so how is he the only candidate Obama would beat?
Overall, I like Ron Paul, but he does have his problems. National defense is a major weakness, he's a fringe player, and I don't think he would capture the republican base. Obama would be a shoe-in if he was nominated, just like when McCain was nominated, I knew there was no chance.
McCain lost because the GOP image was tarnished from the Bush presidency and there was no way the center vote was going right.
If anything, McCain's tough foreign policy pushed the moderates farther away.
The polls have shown that Paul does better against Obama than most of the other candidates, so how is he the only candidate Obama would beat?
Overall, I like Ron Paul, but he does have his problems. National defense is a major weakness, he's a fringe player, and I don't think he would capture the republican base. Obama would be a shoe-in if he was nominated, just like when McCain was nominated, I knew there was no chance.
McCain lost because the GOP image was tarnished from the Bush presidency and there was no way the center vote was going right.
If anything, McCain's tough foreign policy pushed the moderates farther away.
If Ron Paul were the nominee Obama would have to defend his foreign policy to a very war weary electorate. Ron Paul would get that vote, and the polls indicate that a majority of Americans are now against these wars. Not to mention Ron Paul being the most credible candidate on the economy.
Ron Paul is an isolationist...try and sell that to the republicans.
Well now you're changing the argument. Were we discussing Ron Paul vs. Obama or Ron Paul vs. the Republicans? It's going to be difficult to win the Republican nomination no doubt about that, and he's obviously not the leading candidate at the moment but things are changing. He's polling in third for the Republican nomination right now which indicates that even Republicans are becoming war weary, and look at a lot of the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010. They're much more skeptical of the wars than the traditional Republican establishment. Republicans like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash represent that new Republican position on foreign policy.
As for "isolationist" that's a misnomer, Ron Paul doesn't want to isolate us in the world. He's a noninterventionist.
Laura Burkett, a conservative Republican from Coralville, Iowa, didn't give Ron Paul a second thought in the 2008 presidential contest, turned off by his calls for an end to military action around the globe and unswayed by his warnings that the nation was teetering on economic implosion.
"I really thought he was a nut," Burkett said. "Everything he said, I thought, 'This is ridiculous.'"
Four years later, reeling from the nation's fiscal decline and what she says is an unprecedented federal expansion into Americans' lives, Burkett is an ardent supporter who plans to do anything she can to make the Texas congressman the GOP nominee.
People like Burkett show how far Paul's candidacy has come from four years ago, and signal the potential he has to shake up the GOP contest, most immediately at Saturday's Ames straw poll.
Ron Paul comes in from the fringe - latimes.com
This article focuses quite a bit on Ron Paul's expanding base of support, and how he'll potentially do very well at the Ames Straw Poll later today.
Overall, I like Ron Paul, but he does have his problems. National defense is a major weakness, he's a fringe player, and I don't think he would capture the republican base. Obama would be a shoe-in if he was nominated, just like when McCain was nominated, I knew there was no chance.
McCain lost because the GOP image was tarnished from the Bush presidency and there was no way the center vote was going right.
If anything, McCain's tough foreign policy pushed the moderates farther away.
It wouldn't have mattered who the Republican nominee in 2008 was they were going down.
Ron Paul is an isolationist...try and sell that to the republicans.
Well now you're changing the argument. Were we discussing Ron Paul vs. Obama or Ron Paul vs. the Republicans? It's going to be difficult to win the Republican nomination no doubt about that, and he's obviously not the leading candidate at the moment but things are changing. He's polling in third for the Republican nomination right now which indicates that even Republicans are becoming war weary, and look at a lot of the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010. They're much more skeptical of the wars than the traditional Republican establishment. Republicans like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash represent that new Republican position on foreign policy.
As for "isolationist" that's a misnomer, Ron Paul doesn't want to isolate us in the world. He's a noninterventionist.
My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
Most republicans are rational enough to realize that there's bases we could close around the world. We don't need to be in all the countries we're in. Paul is the only candidate that will actually close those bases.
While I would love to see us leave them all, I know that Paul would not walk into the oval office and close every one of them. Once you're in that office and the intel reports come in and the pressure from military generals advising you not to close hits you, it's not so easy to just brush it aside and close them all anyway.
I don't agree with everything Paul says but he is the only Republican i would vote for over Obama.
Well now you're changing the argument. Were we discussing Ron Paul vs. Obama or Ron Paul vs. the Republicans? It's going to be difficult to win the Republican nomination no doubt about that, and he's obviously not the leading candidate at the moment but things are changing. He's polling in third for the Republican nomination right now which indicates that even Republicans are becoming war weary, and look at a lot of the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010. They're much more skeptical of the wars than the traditional Republican establishment. Republicans like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash represent that new Republican position on foreign policy.
As for "isolationist" that's a misnomer, Ron Paul doesn't want to isolate us in the world. He's a noninterventionist.
My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
Then you made a claim that the polls show to be incorrect.
Forget 'liberals' for this argument. Just focus on moderate democrats disappointed with Obama, independents, etc.Ron Paul is an isolationist...try and sell that to the republicans.
Well now you're changing the argument. Were we discussing Ron Paul vs. Obama or Ron Paul vs. the Republicans? It's going to be difficult to win the Republican nomination no doubt about that, and he's obviously not the leading candidate at the moment but things are changing. He's polling in third for the Republican nomination right now which indicates that even Republicans are becoming war weary, and look at a lot of the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010. They're much more skeptical of the wars than the traditional Republican establishment. Republicans like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash represent that new Republican position on foreign policy.
As for "isolationist" that's a misnomer, Ron Paul doesn't want to isolate us in the world. He's a noninterventionist.
My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
Then you made a claim that the polls show to be incorrect.
I'm not going to hang my hat on any poll, Kevin. At the end of the day, I would be right and the polls would be wrong. Having said that...I do like Paul for the most part, but he's not electable.
Most republicans are rational enough to realize that there's bases we could close around the world. We don't need to be in all the countries we're in. Paul is the only candidate that will actually close those bases.
While I would love to see us leave them all, I know that Paul would not walk into the oval office and close every one of them. Once you're in that office and the intel reports come in and the pressure from military generals advising you not to close hits you, it's not so easy to just brush it aside and close them all anyway.
It would be very disappointing if that happened.
Forget 'liberals' for this argument. Just focus on moderate democrats disappointed with Obama, independents, etc.Well now you're changing the argument. Were we discussing Ron Paul vs. Obama or Ron Paul vs. the Republicans? It's going to be difficult to win the Republican nomination no doubt about that, and he's obviously not the leading candidate at the moment but things are changing. He's polling in third for the Republican nomination right now which indicates that even Republicans are becoming war weary, and look at a lot of the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010. They're much more skeptical of the wars than the traditional Republican establishment. Republicans like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash represent that new Republican position on foreign policy.
As for "isolationist" that's a misnomer, Ron Paul doesn't want to isolate us in the world. He's a noninterventionist.
My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
He's got the best shot of getting that vote for a few reasons...he's the only one tough on the Fed, and people have been waking up to the problems with the fed. His social policy best fits with moderates because he'd leave the Federal government out of issues like abortion and gay marriage. Moderates who'd like someone less fiscally liberal but more socially liberal would vote for Paul over Obama any day of the week.
The rest of the GOP field is basically the same old thing we've seen for over 10 years.
Well let's be realistic. None of us can really understand what goes on in daily intel briefings, the situation room, etc. I really don't think it would be very easy to just close down 150 bases like that.
Did you miss the 2010 midterms? Independents went right.Forget 'liberals' for this argument. Just focus on moderate democrats disappointed with Obama, independents, etc.My original comment was directed at liberals saying they could vote for Paul. I don't believe that for a second, sorry. It was like whan Biden stated he could vote for McCain.....nice rhetoric, but.....
He's got the best shot of getting that vote for a few reasons...he's the only one tough on the Fed, and people have been waking up to the problems with the fed. His social policy best fits with moderates because he'd leave the Federal government out of issues like abortion and gay marriage. Moderates who'd like someone less fiscally liberal but more socially liberal would vote for Paul over Obama any day of the week.
The rest of the GOP field is basically the same old thing we've seen for over 10 years.
Independents for the most part lean to the left.....I don't think they will go hard right, IMO. This is the group that will elect the next president.
Base of each party are basically the same old thing over the last 10 years....not just the GOP.
I think you and I are just going to disagree on this, Kevin. When it comes to the voting box...each party wants their party to win. It's the independents that will decide.
