Question for Ron Paul Supporters

As others have said, it doesn't matter if Obama gets another term. Anyone but RP will be the same, no matter if Democratic or Republicans.

So who cares. Do you think any of the Republicans will be better than Obama just because they're Republicans lol?

You don't seem to understand OP that nobody in this thread gives a damn about either party.

I would rather vote for Ron Paul and take a chance Obama getting re-elected, than not vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the only one I believe can make a difference. If he is not elected, than it doesn't matter id Obama gets reelected or one if one of the republican candidates does. If one other other candidates was to be elected, all it would be is a different face, same corruption.

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

I think RP has supporters across the board - and if We're lucky, He'll "steal" votes from the Janus party (left face: Democrats; right face: Republicans).

I wouldn't worry about "splitting" any party. I would rejoice splitting away from Janus.

If you are wrong how do you feel about four more years of Obama? My question actually was to find out if Paul supporters would support him running third party if they knew it guaranteed an Obama win.

Given that it doesn't matter which of Janus's faces We wind up with, Dem or Rep, I don't want any of 'em, and any of 'em is all the same to Me.

Folks,
You are so locked in Groupie mode, I don't think you are really responding to my question.

Huh???

reply to post by Blaine91555

Your entire premise is built upon assumptions and flawed data, and therefore, your "foregone conclusions" are invalid.
Like the mainstream news media, you pretend Paul is not really a force to be reckoned with. You underestimate his clout. I know the mainstream media has done this for decades...give him no air time and he doesn't stand a chance.
But, the tactic no longer works. Ron Paul has the level of support he does because the PEOPLE want him. Perhaps not quite enough, perhaps more than enough.
You simply DON'T know, but you are presenting a scenario whereby you assume you do.

Paul or bust. I'll write him in if I have to. To me, no other candidate on either side addresses the issues important to me like Paul does. And while I don't agree with him on everything, it's the issues I agree with him on that bring me to vote for him, not the party. Far more than any other candidate. I don't see any other candidate addressing the Fed, State's rights, bringing troops home, pushing a free market and Austrian Economics, etc. like Paul has.

Right or wrong, these are what I support and the reason I won't vote for anyone else. He is the only person I feel has the mindset and understanding to turn our country around.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by Razimus

 

I do agree that his support seems to be among the young and I can't help but wonder if it has a lot to do with his stance on drugs. His problem with older more wise folks I think has a lot to do with his views on foreign affairs and isolationist attitude.

You must be right





You're still not getting it, if Obama wins we lose. If a republican wins, we still lose. We're simply not welcome and it was obvious in 2007, 2008, this year and it will be the same next year. But we picked ourselves up and marched on, if we don't get the GOP nomination, guess what? we'll pick ourselves up again and keep going. We're not playing that game anymore. Its Ron Paul or nothing.

Do you get it?

reply to post by Blaine91555


I don't know if you can call me a Ron Paul supporter (yet), but I definitely would support him as a Libertarian or Independent, even if it meant he would lose.

reply to post by eLPresidente


I'm just being realistic here. We've seen this before with Ross Perot. It worked out as I fear this one would.

I'm not saying he does not have the right to do so and he does. What I'm asking is if his supporters would stick with him knowing they may give the White House to Obama.

I've personally not decided anything yet. Too early for that. I'd like to think I would vote according to what is best for the entire country, rather than risk Obama again. I know for a fact he is dangerous, negative and the most divisive President in my memory. To me getting rid of him is the most important thing facing us as voters.

I am for doing away with the Party System entirely however. That would be the real solution. People are such groupies and treat elections like they are routing for a Football team that it makes it easy for the Party System to stay in place.

reply to post by Blaine91555


I am no political expert and definitely not a Ron Paul supporter but I see why so many do. I can't meet him all the way on things but he is a good man. What I don't get is how people underestimate the amount of support he has within both parties and beyond. If he does run on his own ticket, he will take a large number of voters from both. I truly belive it will be quite significant and unlike Perot's effects which I remember quite clearly as well. I liked Perot even though he talked to dang much for my youthful ears.

I do not believe Ron Paul will win but he will hurt both parties as far as voter turn out goes in my best guesstimate.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I completely respect that. It is an interesting dilemma though. Is it wiser to go for the lesser of evils or vote our hearts. I lean towards using my vote towards what I think is best for all of us.

If he did do that, it would no doubt be an interesting campaign. Thanks for your honest reply.

reply to post by Flint2011


Actually, Perot would have won had he not had that nervous breakdown and gone into the paranoid rants. I think he had it in the bag before that happened.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
...how do you feel about four more years of Obama?

As opposed to what? If Dr Paul doesn't get the Rep. nomination, and doesn't run as an independent, who's the other choice? Four years of Romney? Or, God help us, Newt?

At least Obama's a known quantity as far as policy and what not. Is it better to keep a known scoundrel or to pick a new one, who's agenda/policies are yet to be determined?

I would still consider Obama the lesser of two evils. I, however, refuse to vote for evil, even if it is a lesser one, so I still wouldn't vote for him, either.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

I don't know if you can call me a Ron Paul supporter (yet), but I definitely would support him as a Libertarian or Independent, even if it meant he would lose.

I just have to ask - if you would support him as third party why not support him as a republican. Its obvious (to me anyway) that he is only running as a republican to be able to get air time (little as it has been).

New York Times
November 7, 2012

POLL WORKERS CORRECT VOTER FRAUD

Barack Obama will continue to lead our country along the path of recovery. Yesterday's election was mired with controversy as the initial results showed that Ron Paul actually won the election. The situation was quickly rectified and the fraudulent votes for Dr. Paul were quickly identified and invalidated.

One of the election officials has stated, "It was weird. All these people 'claiming' to be Ron Paul supporters and...get this...actually casting one or more votes for this guy! Can you believe their audacity? Somehow these fraudsters managed to outnumber legitimate voters."

Another worker was quoted as saying, "It's not fair that Ron Paul just waltz in here and steal the election...just because he has a few more insurgents working for him than the other candidates."

The same situation occurred in polls across the country, in all 58 states, and in many cites, including Denver, Dallas, New York, Chicago, and even Honolulu -- the birthplace of Barack Obama. Obviously this was some sort of campaign to disrupt the fair election process this country has enjoyed for decades, if not years. In Mr. Gingrich's speech last night, he congratulated Mr. Obama on his victory and pledged to "work across party lines" to restore the faith of the American subj...er...citizens."

Wow, saw this article in next year's paper! Four more years!

reply to post by AnonymousCitizen


That would not be a surprise at all. "Ron Paul voters were skewing votes by cloning themselves near the voting booths making it look there were more Paul supporters than were actually there!!"

Can you link that website btw?

Originally posted by TXTriker

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

I don't know if you can call me a Ron Paul supporter (yet), but I definitely would support him as a Libertarian or Independent, even if it meant he would lose.

I just have to ask - if you would support him as third party why not support him as a republican. Its obvious (to me anyway) that he is only running as a republican to be able to get air time (little as it has been).

The power of party identification. Same reason a Chevy guy would never buy a Ford. Stupid, assinine, prideful party identification.

reply to post by eLPresidente


I fully get it. The problem is that Obama is a special case here. He is the most divisive in my memory spanning from JFK to now and perhaps is by far the worst evil facing us. On top of his war mongering he is pushing the European Model even as Europe is on the precipice. He simply does not care about the people he serves. He is an Elitist who is a Deity in his own mind.

He is totally ineffective and even having complete control for two years, was so divisive he tore his own Party apart. He cannot even get a Budget passed. He is not a leader but a wanna-be Dictator. Carter was dangerous due to stupidity; Obama knows what he is doing and wants to trash the system and when he took the Oath he crossed his fingers behind his back with the middle finger extended fully. My opinion of course.

Obama scares me like no other President in my lifetime.

reply to post by Blaine91555


I thought the same to but it's still speculative. He had the numbers but they slumped fast and that's a common last minute trend in politics. I always said "What if Perot had won?". I think our nation would have been a hell of a lot healthier than it is right now. He just could not handle the stress though. Most voters knew this. He had the brains but not the strength. All my own opinion though.

reply to post by JessopJessopJessop


Actually I do. Gingrich has become interesting to me and his history if you look beyond his personal transgressions is a pretty good record. I think he would right a lot of the bad that has been done by the last two Presidents.

Romney I see just like you do I think. More of the same old thing. I'm not even considering him. If he wins the nomination, I'd have to agree it's the same thing more or less.

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen

 

Can you link that website btw?

Original piece only posted here.