What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ron Paul Cant Win

WatertheTree

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
170
Points
48
Everywhere on this board I see people parroting the pundits and the fox news propagandists. Constant meaningless words like 'Ron Paul cant win' and 'unelectable' and 'nutjob'.

Not one time on this board have I seen anyone say why he cant win, why he is unelectable, or why he is a nutjob.

So I created this thread for the same reason I created 'official rick perry jobs plan', cause I think its all hype created by big business and parroted by weak minded fools.


SO PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvG8uWT1sq4&feature=player_embedded]Ron Paul Highlights in 9/22/2011 Presidential Debate - YouTube[/ame]
 

FactFinder

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
2,689
Reaction score
207
Points
83
Ahhhhh, but he can make a poor man think, heh?
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,124
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Because there are alot of people who oppose his policies.

I could support him if i had to. But I dont plan on voting for him. The man is the least Presidential up there.
 

Liberty

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
4,058
Reaction score
549
Points
98
Location
colorado
People said the Americans during the fight for Independence couldn't win either. We all know how that turned out, (THANKS FRENCH!).
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
Because there are alot of people who oppose his policies.

I could support him if i had to. But I dont plan on voting for him. The man is the least Presidential up there.

Our concept of "Presidential" had better change and change fast. Look at the asssholes we keep electing who appear "Presidential".
 

Xchel

Active Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
979
Reaction score
72
Points
28
Location
San Pedro Sula Honduras
there are many reasons to NOT vote for Ron Paul which is why he can't win.

Yeah. Those damn ideas that stem from the ideas of liberty and freedom can NOT be tolerated right?

no there are several reasons that he will never win and they are all things against him..one is his position on foreign policy...he is an isolationist and we all know that isolationism does not make for a successful country.

he believes so much in liberty right? So tell us my dear what is his position on abortion?...oh that is right that all of it should be illegal.

Ron Paul opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act...that is a really big clue on why he will never win

He also said he would not have gotten rid of Jim Crow laws...hmmm interesting since he would have voted against the Civil Rights act..yet you say he is for liberty? Yeah right!

His racism haunts him...

Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report,published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.”...

“What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author--presumably Paul--wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”
 
OP
W

WatertheTree

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
170
Points
48
there are many reasons to NOT vote for Ron Paul which is why he can't win.

Yeah. Those damn ideas that stem from the ideas of liberty and freedom can NOT be tolerated right?

no there are several reasons that he will never win and they are all things against him..one is his position on foreign policy...he is an isolationist and we all know that isolationism does not make for a successful country.

he believes so much in liberty right? So tell us my dear what is his position on abortion?...oh that is right that all of it should be illegal.

Ron Paul opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act...that is a really big clue on why he will never win

He also said he would not have gotten rid of Jim Crow laws...hmmm interesting since he would have voted against the Civil Rights act..yet you say he is for liberty? Yeah right!

His racism haunts him...

Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report,published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.”...

“What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author--presumably Paul--wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”

Thats all you got????

With regards to 1964.
Although majorities in both parties voted for the bill, there were notable exceptions. Republican senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona voted against the bill, remarking, "You can't legislate morality." Goldwater had supported previous attempts to pass Civil Rights legislation in 1957 and 1960 as well as the 24th Amendment outlawing the poll tax. The reason for his opposition to the 1964 bill was Title II, which he viewed as a violation of individual liberty. Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster, including Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-TN), J. William Fulbright (D-AR), and Robert Byrd (D-WV), who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight.

Strait from wikipedia. Paul opposed the bill because he doesnt think the role of the federal government is to legislate morality, same as goldwater. Imagine that, a guy standing up for the liberty of business owners being able to choose who they do business with.

Im not going to even get into something that was written in a political journel some 20 years ago, even if it was the truth.

Please tell me you have something more concrete then this??

PS, I love how you cling to his 'unelectability' because he thinks abortion should be illeagal. Even though he spoke at length on that subject in yesterdays debate with regards to the morning after pill. Considering he is a doctor, and has seen real live abortions I would respect his opinion.
 
Last edited:

JimH52

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
33,640
Reaction score
8,675
Points
1,370
Location
US
I just came by to agree with the thread's title...:lol:
 

Ringel05

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
59,153
Reaction score
15,141
Points
2,180
Location
Duke City
People said the Americans during the fight for Independence couldn't win either. We all know how that turned out, (THANKS FRENCH!).

So the French are gonna send troops and a navy to support Ron Paul? This should be interesting.......... :popcorn:
 

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
there are many reasons to NOT vote for Ron Paul which is why he can't win.

Yeah. Those damn ideas that stem from the ideas of liberty and freedom can NOT be tolerated right?

no there are several reasons that he will never win and they are all things against him..one is his position on foreign policy...he is an isolationist and we all know that isolationism does not make for a successful country.

he believes so much in liberty right? So tell us my dear what is his position on abortion?...oh that is right that all of it should be illegal.

Ron Paul opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act...that is a really big clue on why he will never win

He also said he would not have gotten rid of Jim Crow laws...hmmm interesting since he would have voted against the Civil Rights act..yet you say he is for liberty? Yeah right!

His racism haunts him...

Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report,published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.”...

“What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author--presumably Paul--wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”

Sorry but you're kind of an idiot, someone needed to say it. BTW look up isolationist before you keep making a fool of yourself.
 
Last edited:

FactFinder

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
2,689
Reaction score
207
Points
83
People said the Americans during the fight for Independence couldn't win either. We all know how that turned out, (THANKS FRENCH!).

So the French are gonna send troops and a navy to support Ron Paul? This should be interesting.......... :popcorn:

Since the French are likely to look to the Fed to help them them with their Greek bonds, it seems a bit unlikely. :)
 

GHook93

Aristotle
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,150
Reaction score
3,513
Points
290
Location
Chicago
First, he doesn't have the support from the base of the republican party.
Second, he doesn't appeal to independents.
Third, he is attack material. Let sick people die, get rid of CIA, DHS, FBI, INS etc. Just makes him look nuts.
Fourth, he is the only candidate that can make republicans like me vote for Obama.
 

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
First, he doesn't have the support from the base of the republican party.
Second, he doesn't appeal to independents.
Third, he is attack material. Let sick people die, get rid of CIA, DHS, FBI, INS etc. Just makes him look nuts.
Fourth, he is the only candidate that can make republicans like me vote for Obama.

Another stupid post...

Gotta love the crazy Ron Paul haters lol... Now they will vote for Obama, nice haha.
 

Liberty

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
4,058
Reaction score
549
Points
98
Location
colorado
First, he doesn't have the support from the base of the republican party.
Second, he doesn't appeal to independents.
Third, he is attack material. Let sick people die, get rid of CIA, DHS, FBI, INS etc. Just makes him look nuts.
Fourth, he is the only candidate that can make republicans like me vote for Obama.

all of that crap and you still can't explain where he is wrong.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top