Ron Paul vs Obama

Would you risk our national security and vote for Paul over Obama IF he won the race?

  • Paul

    Votes: 18 60.0%
  • Obama

    Votes: 6 20.0%
  • Anyone but these two

    Votes: 6 20.0%

  • Total voters
    30
Always a reason Paul winning means nothing according to the village idiots.

Nice loaded question btw. How about you ask if we follow Newt's or Mitt's policy how people plan to pay for it... Neocons are nothing but Progressive liberals and prove it more and more everyday.

Ahh yes, the old if your not with me your and idiot mentality. I have an idea, how about you start your own damn poll and ask whatever you like. Or, you can continue to act like bevis and butthead in mine.

Either way works for me by the way.


Ps. Troll harder friend. I know you can do it if you just put your mind into it. Paul says so.....

Weak Question. I answered but did not participate in the poll.

What I did pick up from it is, you are going weak in the knees, searching for an excuse to vote dem. Just come out of the closet.

Not a chance. Your observation skills need work.
 
Ahh yes, the old if your not with me your and idiot mentality. I have an idea, how about you start your own damn poll and ask whatever you like. Or, you can continue to act like bevis and butthead in mine.

Either way works for me by the way.


Ps. Troll harder friend. I know you can do it if you just put your mind into it. Paul says so.....

Weak Question. I answered but did not participate in the poll.

What I did pick up from it is, you are going weak in the knees, searching for an excuse to vote dem. Just come out of the closet.

Not a chance. Your observation skills need work.

This is the second or third thread I have seen you go soft. I do hope I am mistaken.
 

Attachments

  • $dumb-and-dumber.jpg
    $dumb-and-dumber.jpg
    24.8 KB · Views: 17
This guy wants to turn our country into an experiment in libertarian pipe dreams, for his own amusement I suppose, and his insular stand on foreign policy would be a disaster at a time when we do not have as much economic weight to throw around as we used to.
 
I'd vote Paul. In a Gingrich vs Obama or a Romney vs Obama match I wouldn't vote. It wouldn't matter. Bachmann, Paul, Hunstman, and Santorum are the only candidates that are actually conservative. After the past two presidents I don't have a clue why anyone would vote for Romney for anything because he doesn't actually have a position on anything. As for Gingrich... are we voting for Gingrich or the "new and improved" Gingrich 2.0? And what's keeping him from becoming Gingrich 3.5 while in office or downgrading to 1.5??
 
If it gets down to Obama and Paul, i most likely won't vote at all. I don't want EITHER of them in office.

Everyone knows Obama's faults....

Paul come across to me as a goon...I think he's more a liberal than conservative! What clinched it for me is finding out he believes we should cut Israel off from all support. AND that he thinks it's "ok" for Iran to have a nuke. The man is an idiot......
 
I plan to vote third party this election. It doesn't matter, because I don't live in a swing state, and Obama's signing of the NDAA was the last straw. I can't support him.

I'm probably a polar opposite to most Republicans who oppose Paul, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that I like his foreign policy better than Obama's, like Obama's economic policy better (or I should really say dislike it less) than Paul's, and agree with Paul on domestic policy only when it comes to the national security state. And maybe legalizing marijuana (is he for that?).

But Paul won't get the nomination. Right now he's just the flavor of the month. He's being supported by crossover liberals, and also by some Millennials (Millies who aren't liberals are usually libertarians). Ten years from now, someone like Paul but not as extreme might get the GOP nomination and might even win the election. In 2012, no. It's going to be Romney.
 
Why would Ron Paul be a risk to National Security? He's only a risk to the Military Industrial Complex.
 
Always a reason Paul winning means nothing according to the village idiots.

Nice loaded question btw. How about you ask if we follow Newt's or Mitt's policy how people plan to pay for it... Neocons are nothing but Progressive liberals and prove it more and more everyday.

Ahh yes, the old if your not with me your and idiot mentality. I have an idea, how about you start your own damn poll and ask whatever you like. Or, you can continue to act like bevis and butthead in mine.

Either way works for me by the way.


Ps. Troll harder friend. I know you can do it if you just put your mind into it. Paul says so.....

Weak Question. I answered but did not participate in the poll.

What I did pick up from it is, you are going weak in the knees, searching for an excuse to vote dem. Just come out of the closet.

For real.
 
I figure Paul should win this vote with all the online support he seems to have.
.....In all our Nation's trailer-courts......

"A 1992 passage from the Ron Paul Political Report about the Los Angeles riots read, “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.” A passage in another newsletter asserted that people with AIDS should not be allowed to eat in restaurants because “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva”; in 1990 one of his publications criticized Ronald Reagan for having gone along with the creation of the federal holiday honoring the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which it called “Hate Whitey Day.”

Too-Busy To Proof-Read???
(....But, ready to lead a Country?)
323.png
 
I could not vote for Ron Paul under any circumstances. He would be far worse than obama and obama is as bad as we could get. I would vote for a third party even if it meant obama staying in office. Our hope would be the choice taken by Joe Lieberman when he was finagled out of the democrat race, ran as a third party and won.

Paul's foreign policy is based on pretense. Let's pretend that Iran doesn't want a nuclear bomb or would use it if they had it. Let's pretend that islam doesn't really intend to dominate even though it said it does. Let's pretend that the radical fundamentalists aren't.

Domestic policy is based on pretense. Let's pretend that the president can do away with governmental agencies and no one will object. Let's pretend we don't need energy. Let's pretend that he can fumble his way around Washington and no one will notice.
 
I think the OP actually needs help writing poll questions. Because as it stands I don't know how anyone can answer this one either way. You can't write a poll question that first requires an individual to affirm a premise based on an opinion. You want us to first except the premise that national security would be at greater risk under Paul than Obama. That's a premise I simply don't buy into. Believe it or not folks, our military can be scaled down probably quite a bit in terms of the conflicts we engage in and our presence in other countries and still keep this country just as safe.
 

Forum List

Back
Top