Will you vote for Ron Paul?

Would you vote for Ron Paul?

  • Yes, I will would vote for Ron Paul

    Votes: 35 50.0%
  • No, I will not vote for Ron Paul

    Votes: 29 41.4%
  • No, I will vote for the Marxist - Obama

    Votes: 6 8.6%

  • Total voters
    70
  • Poll closed .
Ron Paul understands earmarks better than the average bear. He knows that they don't increase spending, but when included in appropriations bills that are already authorized by Congress, they direct the already budgeted funds to specific projects. As a Congressman, if he does not do his part to be certain his constituents get their fair share of money they are going to pay in taxes anyway, he wouldn't be doing his job.

However, given opportunity to do so, I'm pretty sure he would sign legislation that would prevent anybody from being able to use the people's money to buy their votes along with not collecting that money as taxes in the first place.
 
Ron Paul is one of the very few in Congress who consistently votes true to his principles, regardless of what's politically expedient at the time. Remember him getting booed in a 2008 primary regarding blowback on 9/11? I think he knows that many of his views, especially on national security issues and social issues, don't jibe with the base. But he speaks it anyways. That's a big reason why he doesn't make it out of the primaries even though he's one of the few actual conservatives. They're a dying breed I think.

I probably wouldn't vote for him because of his economic policies, but I respect the hell out of him.

ron paul runs around whining about earmarks but never met an earmark he didn't like.

ron paul talks about term limits while making his entire career (and now his sonny boy's) collecting a government paycheck...

all the while not knowing anything about the constitution and being naive about foreign policy.

yeah, hes a keeper. *shakes head*
Well I was talking about things like warrant-less wiretapping, DADT, and water-boarding--where he is vocal in dissenting from the majority on the right even though those positions lose him a lot of votes at the base. However his views on the Federal Reserve get into kooky-ville.

Bottom line is I think he is far less hypocritical and far less of a panderer than an overwhelming majority of the GOP establishment and noobies. But I'm not going to sit here and defend him too much. I can only play devil's advocate so far.
 
Ron Paul is one of the very few in Congress who consistently votes true to his principles, regardless of what's politically expedient at the time. Remember him getting booed in a 2008 primary regarding blowback on 9/11? I think he knows that many of his views, especially on national security issues and social issues, don't jibe with the base. But he speaks it anyways. That's a big reason why he doesn't make it out of the primaries even though he's one of the few actual conservatives. They're a dying breed I think.

I probably wouldn't vote for him because of his economic policies, but I respect the hell out of him.

ron paul runs around whining about earmarks but never met an earmark he didn't like.

ron paul talks about term limits while making his entire career (and now his sonny boy's) collecting a government paycheck...

all the while not knowing anything about the constitution and being naive about foreign policy.

yeah, hes a keeper. *shakes head*
Well I was talking about things like warrant-less wiretapping, DADT, and water-boarding--where he is vocal in dissenting from the majority on the right even though those positions lose him a lot of votes at the base. However his views on the Federal Reserve get into kooky-ville.

Bottom line is I think he is far less hypocritical and far less of a panderer than an overwhelming majority of the GOP establishment and noobies. But I'm not going to sit here and defend him too much. I can only play devil's advocate so far.

But then again, Jesus of Nazareth isn't running this year and we aren't going to find a perfect person or saint to elect. All will have some weaknesses. All will likely have said something or voted for something or supported something or done something that in hindsight they now regret or makes them look bad. All will be imperfect creatures with feet of clay.

I am not 100% on board with all of Ron Paul's foreign policy positions and I agree it gets a bit strange on some of the Federal Reserve and monetary policy issues. I'm not sure he has the education and background to be an expert there, and I don't know whether he would be skilled at choosing the right experts as staffers to advise him. I don't know yet how much of an ideologue he might be.

Then again he has some solid concepts on the role of government, various other issues, and Constitutional integrity that I like very much.

I don't have to dislike him or trash him to choose not not vote for him. And I would like to think I am interested enough in truth and real facts to be persuaded if I am wrong.
 
Ron Paul is one of the very few in Congress who consistently votes true to his principles, regardless of what's politically expedient at the time. Remember him getting booed in a 2008 primary regarding blowback on 9/11? I think he knows that many of his views, especially on national security issues and social issues, don't jibe with the base. But he speaks it anyways. That's a big reason why he doesn't make it out of the primaries even though he's one of the few actual conservatives. They're a dying breed I think.

I probably wouldn't vote for him because of his economic policies, but I respect the hell out of him.

ron paul runs around whining about earmarks but never met an earmark he didn't like.

ron paul talks about term limits while making his entire career (and now his sonny boy's) collecting a government paycheck...

all the while not knowing anything about the constitution and being naive about foreign policy.

yeah, hes a keeper. *shakes head*
Well I was talking about things like warrant-less wiretapping, DADT, and water-boarding--where he is vocal in dissenting from the majority on the right even though those positions lose him a lot of votes at the base. However his views on the Federal Reserve get into kooky-ville.

Bottom line is I think he is far less hypocritical and far less of a panderer than an overwhelming majority of the GOP establishment and noobies. But I'm not going to sit here and defend him too much. I can only play devil's advocate so far.

fair enough. i have a particular distaste for him because i think his distortion of constitutional principles is dangerous.

:redface:
 
I would vote for Paul over Palin in a heartbeat. Also bachmann and trump for that matter. He keeps his position. I like his stance on wasteful wars when we could use the money here.
 
ron paul runs around whining about earmarks but never met an earmark he didn't like.

ron paul talks about term limits while making his entire career (and now his sonny boy's) collecting a government paycheck...

all the while not knowing anything about the constitution and being naive about foreign policy.

yeah, hes a keeper. *shakes head*
Well I was talking about things like warrant-less wiretapping, DADT, and water-boarding--where he is vocal in dissenting from the majority on the right even though those positions lose him a lot of votes at the base. However his views on the Federal Reserve get into kooky-ville.

Bottom line is I think he is far less hypocritical and far less of a panderer than an overwhelming majority of the GOP establishment and noobies. But I'm not going to sit here and defend him too much. I can only play devil's advocate so far.

fair enough. i have a particular distaste for him because i think his distortion of constitutional principles is dangerous.

:redface:

Yeah I kind of sensed that in your first response. :D
 
Well I was talking about things like warrant-less wiretapping, DADT, and water-boarding--where he is vocal in dissenting from the majority on the right even though those positions lose him a lot of votes at the base. However his views on the Federal Reserve get into kooky-ville.

Bottom line is I think he is far less hypocritical and far less of a panderer than an overwhelming majority of the GOP establishment and noobies. But I'm not going to sit here and defend him too much. I can only play devil's advocate so far.

fair enough. i have a particular distaste for him because i think his distortion of constitutional principles is dangerous.

:redface:

Yeah I kind of sensed that in your first response. :D

and here i thought i was an international woman of mystery. :)
 
I would vote for Paul over Palin in a heartbeat. Also bachmann and trump for that matter. He keeps his position. I like his stance on wasteful wars when we could use the money here.

I've been nervous re Paul's unilateral withdrawal of all troops everywhere stance. It would be a bit more palatable if his intent was to do that and leave all that money with the people instead of just use it elsewhere in the government.

I'm looking at Herman Cain as having the best foreign policy so far. He says, if you don't have a specific mission, a clear plan to complete that mission, and a clear picture of what will be success of that mission, you do not put our armed forces in harm's way anywhere for any reason. So if a clear mission, plan of action, and success is not spelled out in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, et al, we keep our warriors home.
 
I do not like that Ron Paul wanted to check with Pakistan before killing UBL, but I guess it is consistant with his views on Freedom and Foriegn Policy.

He wants the US to take of the US and stay out of other Countries business and affairs. He wants to seal the borders completely. He wants to cut off foriegn aid. He will get our check book in order. We need Ron Paul now!
 

Forum List

Back
Top