Will Paul voters fall in line?

[The T]

I'm not sure what you're asking. What opposed to what? Romney's record opposed to Obama's?

WHY should Romeny stay in the private sector and NOT run for office when the government has regulated private business into submission?

Is he NOT a citizen from that sector that can best address the damage Government has done?

Your logic is rather convoluted...

Using that logic nobody should stay in the private sector. Regardless, his record in Mass. indicates that no, he can't best address the damage that government has done, because he doesn't fundamentally believe in limited government. He should stay in the private sector because that's what he's good at, whereas governing is not something he's good at.

Sorry...I don't buy it.

Massechussetts will abide on it's own...and deal with themselves.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

WHY should Romeny stay in the private sector and NOT run for office when the government has regulated private business into submission?

Is he NOT a citizen from that sector that can best address the damage Government has done?

Your logic is rather convoluted...

Using that logic nobody should stay in the private sector. Regardless, his record in Mass. indicates that no, he can't best address the damage that government has done, because he doesn't fundamentally believe in limited government. He should stay in the private sector because that's what he's good at, whereas governing is not something he's good at.

Sorry...I don't buy it.

Massechussetts will abide on it's own...and deal with themselves.

That's your prerogative.

 

[The T]

Using that logic nobody should stay in the private sector. Regardless, his record in Mass. indicates that no, he can't best address the damage that government has done, because he doesn't fundamentally believe in limited government. He should stay in the private sector because that's what he's good at, whereas governing is not something he's good at.

Sorry...I don't buy it.

Massechussetts will abide on it's own...and deal with themselves.

That's your prerogative.

As a man of Liberty? You bet it IS.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Sorry...I don't buy it.

Massechussetts will abide on it's own...and deal with themselves.

That's your prerogative.

As a man of Liberty? You bet it IS.

If you were a man of liberty you would be for unregulated businesses...

 

[The T]

That's your prerogative.

As a man of Liberty? You bet it IS.

If you were a man of liberty you would be for unregulated businesses...

I am and for the Intent of the Founders and Commerce.

 

[PredFan]

I'm a Paul supporter, I nominated him here in Illinois - but I'm not going to waste my vote on Mickey Mouse if it comes down to Romney or Obama.

I want that tyrannical pseudo-socialist, pseudo-fascist Obamafuck out of office...

Romney is a twisted fuck, but he's way less twisted than Obama. Obama is doing everything in his power to create an authoritarian fascist USA. I don't think Romney has the balls to pull big government bullshit - Romney would be nothing more than a placeholder, then finally in 4 years we may get another libertarian or Tea Party candidate to back as libertarians...

I suppose my point is that I'm not going to waste my vote. I'm voting AGAINST Obama....

Any smart individual would not waste their vote to get that tyrannical fuck out of office.

Obama is the opposite of everything we Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters stand for.

So is Mitt Romney.

False, as I have already explained.

 

[Mr.Nick]

As a man of Liberty? You bet it IS.

If you were a man of liberty you would be for unregulated businesses...

I am and for the Intent of the Founders and Commerce.

I've seen businesses in my community that were open for 30-70-100 years closed...

 

[The T]

If you were a man of liberty you would be for unregulated businesses...

I am and for the Intent of the Founders and Commerce.

I've seen businesses in my community that were open for 30-70-100 years closed...

As have I...And what were the reasons for closure?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama is the opposite of everything we Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters stand for.

So is Mitt Romney.

False, as I have already explained.

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

 

[PredFan]

So is Mitt Romney.

False, as I have already explained.

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

 

[dblack]

False, as I have already explained.

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Right... the godfather of "Obamacare" is going to lead the charge to repeal it. Wow. If Robamney can sell that, he can sell anything - I'll give him that much.

"All the people, some of the time. Some of the people all of the time." etc ...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

False, as I have already explained.

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Romney says he wants to do all of this, but there's the problem. Aside from the warmongering, I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth. His record in Mass. belies his rhetoric now.

 

[Paulie]

Some here seem to think the bulk of Ron Paul supporters will fall for some kind of lesser-of-two-weevils nonsense and begrudgingly support Romney. I think you're wrong:
Eric Wen: Can The Romney Campaign Co-opt The Ron Paul Movement? Fat Chance | The New Republic

Can the Romney Campaign Co-opt the Ron Paul Movement? Fat Chance
Eric WenMay 19, 2012 | 12:00 am


When Ron Paul released a statement earlier this week informing supporters that “moving forward … we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primary states that have not yet voted,” it was easy to imagine Mitt Romney’s campaign staff quietly rejoicing. The Congressman’s staff was quick to clarify that he was not officially suspending his efforts for the nomination, but it was hard to see this as anything other than the end of the Paul campaign—and, in turn, the beginning of Romney’s cooptation of it.

As Barack Obama’s campaign proved in 2008 after its bruising primary fight against Hillary Clinton, a party that’s been unified in time for the national convention is its own reward. But bringing Paul’s supporters into the fold would also seem to have a special attraction for the Romney campaign: The Massachusetts governor earned plenty of votes in the primary, but he never quite inspired the enthusiasm of the Paul movement, which has regularly attracted thousands of committed supporters to rallies. It’s only reasonable for Romney to hope he can transfer some of that fervor—especially from young people, a demographic President Obama himself seems to be targeting—to his own campaign.

Having spoken with a wide swathe of young Paul voters, however, I’ve learned that’s an exceedingly unlikely proposition. Paul may have been running for the Republican nomination, but what he produced was a movement whose identity revolves around his own personality and his professed libertarian ideology. It’s a movement with hardly any affinity for the GOP—and for a man like Romney least of all.

It’s telling that Paul supporters almost uniformly refer to Paul’s bid for the presidency as a “movement” or “revolution,” rather than a “campaign.” To ask about their allegiance to the party is, for many of them, to make a category mistake. “It’s not a matter of partisan politics,” says Casey Given, an organizer for the University of California Berkeley chapter of the Youth for Ron Paul group. “It’s more about the ideas than the party.” Indeed, a common refrain among Ron Paul supporters is that the Republican Party needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

Generally, Paul’s supporters speak of his campaign as something more akin to a political science or philosophy seminar, than a campaign for public office. Paul’s message has always encouraged his supporters to believe there’s much more at stake than temporary occupancy of the Oval Office. “It’s not designed to win votes, it’s designed to illuminate the right path forward for both the U.S. and its role in the world and how we manage the economy,” says Jacob Arluck, an organizer for Cornell University’s Youth for Ron Paul chapter.

In the words of Cliff Maloney, the former Pennsylvania Campus Coordinator for the Paul campaign, who has since been hired by Paul’s congressional office, “They don’t want anybody that’s going to give them rhetoric, they want someone that will give them the truth.” And, having been given access to the “truth,” Paul’s supporters are refusing to abandon their candidate. “They will stick with him until he says he drops out of the race or when he wins the race,” Maloney says. “[Ron Paul supporters] would do anything for Dr. Paul’s message.”

But even if they’re reconciled to the fact that Paul won’t win this year, many young voters don’t think of their support for Paul as a lost cause. The college-aged students who comprise the Paul campaign’s base was attracted to him in part because they hoped even if he didn’t win him the election, his organization could at least shape the political discourse for years down the line. “Being the party of old white rich men will not be a winning strategy in the future,” says Given. But that’s a strategy that depends on their staying firm to their principles and not transferring their allegiance to another candidate this year. “After 2012 is over, the Republican Party is going to have no choice but to realize that the future of the party is in more of a classically conservative libertarian direction,” says Pinter. “That’s where the youth is voting.”

Unsurprisingly, then, when I asked Paul supporters whether they would be voting for Romney this year, every single one of them said definitely not, and they insisted other Paul supporters they know wouldn’t either. “I think it would be very difficult for Ron Paul supporters to sleep at night and support someone that represents a lot of the principles that they disagree with,” said Tyler Koteskey, who called Romney a “liberal in conservative sheepskin.” Indeed, for some, the very suggestion that they might vote for Romney was an insult. “Personally, I would not vote for Romney,” said Mike Pinter of UC Davis. “I have conservative principles that can, under no circumstances, rationalize a vote for Romney.”

Needless to say, Barack Obama faced nothing like these challenges when he wooed disaffected Hillary supporters in 2008. Paul’s fans, it seems, will insist on continuing to divide the GOP, unless, and until, they can take it over entirely.

Some here seem to think that Ron Paul supporters are somehow a special group of voters that are supposed to be bowed to. I disagree. While I agree that Paulbots will not budge I think the normal Paul supporters will so whatever they deem is best for their wallet and lives like the rest of us. You may label that logic anyway you like but I prefer the term "reality"

The problem with your analysis of the situation is that Paul supporters don't believe that Romney will be any better for their wallets and lives.

You guys need to grasp one simple concept: We think Romney and Obama suck equally. Neither one of them is good for this country. Putting Romney in doesn't change a mother fucking thing.

 

[dblack]

Some here seem to think that Ron Paul supporters are somehow a special group of voters that are supposed to be bowed to. I disagree. While I agree that Paulbots will not budge I think the normal Paul supporters will so whatever they deem is best for their wallet and lives like the rest of us. You may label that logic anyway you like but I prefer the term "reality"

The point is that Paul supporters are far less likely to sacrifice their principles than supporters of the commercial candidates. Whether our views should be "bowed to" is up to the Republican party as a whole. What I want the party to do is "put up or shut up". Either start taking liberty and limited-government seriously, or quit pretending.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Some here seem to think the bulk of Ron Paul supporters will fall for some kind of lesser-of-two-weevils nonsense and begrudgingly support Romney. I think you're wrong:
Eric Wen: Can The Romney Campaign Co-opt The Ron Paul Movement? Fat Chance | The New Republic

Some here seem to think that Ron Paul supporters are somehow a special group of voters that are supposed to be bowed to. I disagree. While I agree that Paulbots will not budge I think the normal Paul supporters will so whatever they deem is best for their wallet and lives like the rest of us. You may label that logic anyway you like but I prefer the term "reality"

The problem with your analysis of the situation is that Paul supporters don't believe that Romney will be any better for their wallets and lives.

You guys need to grasp one simple concept: We think Romney and Obama suck equally. Neither one of them is good for this country. Putting Romney in doesn't change a mother fucking thing.

So what you're saying is all Paul supporters practice group think and are incapable of having independent thought.

Several in this thread have already proven you wrong and me correct.

 

[Oddball]

False, as I have already explained.

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Yes....My fucking 4th Amendment liberties.

Repeal USAPATRIOT Act.
Repeal FISA and NDAA.
End ECHELON and Carnivore.
Abolosh DHS and TSA.
Throw Holder and his criminal minions into prison for Fast and Furious.

None of which Vinnie Vitalis, the police state Stalinist, will do.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Yes....My fucking 4th Amendment liberties.

Repeal USAPATRIOT Act.
Repeal FISA and NDAA.
End ECHELON and Carnivore.
Abolosh DHS and TSA.
Throw Holder and his criminal minions into prison for Fast and Furious.

None of which Vinnie Vitalis, the police state Stalinist, will do.

I like your hyperbole.

By the way as I'm sure you're aware those ideas would have to originate and survive congress first. Matters not who the president is if it doesn't make it to their desk.

 

[Paulie]

Some here seem to think that Ron Paul supporters are somehow a special group of voters that are supposed to be bowed to. I disagree. While I agree that Paulbots will not budge I think the normal Paul supporters will so whatever they deem is best for their wallet and lives like the rest of us. You may label that logic anyway you like but I prefer the term "reality"

The problem with your analysis of the situation is that Paul supporters don't believe that Romney will be any better for their wallets and lives.

You guys need to grasp one simple concept: We think Romney and Obama suck equally. Neither one of them is good for this country. Putting Romney in doesn't change a mother fucking thing.

So what you're saying is all Paul supporters practice group think and are incapable of having independent thought.

Several in this thread have already proven you wrong and me correct.

Who DOESN'T practice group think? It's an inevitable human characteristic.

Not that I think it's considered group think to believe that neither Romney nor Obama are viable choices. If it's group think to say that there's no damn good reason for choosing a perceived lesser of 2 evils, then call me a robot.

Incidentally, I happen to think that believing we only have 2 choices in November is the biggest group think fallacy of them all.

 

[Paulie]

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Yes....My fucking 4th Amendment liberties.

Repeal USAPATRIOT Act.
Repeal FISA and NDAA.
End ECHELON and Carnivore.
Abolosh DHS and TSA.
Throw Holder and his criminal minions into prison for Fast and Furious.

None of which Vinnie Vitalis, the police state Stalinist, will do.

I like your hyperbole.

By the way as I'm sure you're aware those ideas would have to originate and survive congress first. Matters not who the president is if it doesn't make it to their desk.

This is true, but in the event that something disastrous DOES reach either of their desks, the real question is can they be counted on to veto it.

Romney has already said he would have signed the NDAA, and quite frankly that's good enough for me.

 

[PredFan]

You explained, I disagreed. Romney's record, in my opinion, indicates that he is exactly what I've been calling him, an Obama clone.

Untrue.

Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, repeal =/= support.
Romney wants to cut some government programs, Obama does not.
Romney will appoint a conservative to the SCOTUS, Obama, a liberal.
Romney will approve the Keystone Pipeline, Obama won't.
Romney will cut taxes, Obama will increase them.

Need any more?

Right... the godfather of "Obamacare" is going to lead the charge to repeal it. Wow. If Robamney can sell that, he can sell anything - I'll give him that much.

"All the people, some of the time. Some of the people all of the time." etc ...

Even if I give you Obama/Romneycare, the rest of them prove that he's not exactly an Obama clone. Which was my point.