It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by eLPresidente
There is also a lot of false information about Paul that his supporters try to pass off here, and I don't like people trying to spread lies.
he is racist,
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
I don't think GOPers will vote for Obama...but I do think Trump will run as a third party candidate if Ron Paul would somehow win the nomination...and I think a large percentage of GOPers will vote for Trump as an independent instead of Ron Paul.
I actually think that most of the GOP candidates would endorse Trump as an independent rather than endorse Ron Paul.
Trump has already said he would do this...as a pun very much intended....this is the GOPs trump card against Ron Paul.
And why not...Ron Paul and his supporters are openly gaming the GOP primary...it's no secret that Ron Paul won't endorse any of the candidates if he doesn't win and his supporters aren't transferrable to them. So I say it is fair game for the GOP to sabatoge Ron Paul if he somehow wins...because he isn't willing to be a true part of their party. Do you remember 2008...Ron Paul didn't even attend the GOP convention...he had his own convention just a few miles away...if I were the GOP, I would simply kick him out of the party and not put him on the primary ballots.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
The GOP didn't "hack the vote" to make Paul lose.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Yeah, cause if this happened there and votes were added for Romney, then it probably happened for others too.
And if they can add votes to precinct totals, they can take them away, too. Catch my drift?
This thread should be about if Santorum actually deserves the "win"...but it has been hijacked by Ron Paul supporters to claim that one potential error means the entire election is fraud and that means (in their minds), that Ron Paul won with 80% of the vote...at least.
Sigh...more lies from you, just after saying "you don't like people spreading lies"
Ron did endorse somebody in 08, look it up. He also OPENLY STATED he would endorse anybody that aligned with his views, it doesn't matter what party, its about policies, principles and honoring the Constitution.
Ron didn't attend the GOP convention because he wasn't invited, surprise! (even his delegates were locked out of their own convention) The grassroots threw a rally, IN PROTEST (I thought we were still allowed to do that), and he was the guest of honor, OBVIOUSLY.
You make this way too easy.
I also agree with you here. And I predicted Santorum would win Iowa! So I was right instead of you!
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by eLPresidente
...and what I said is not a lie. He will not endorse the Republican nominee if it is not himself...
To further show his arrogance...he created his own convention like a little child...
Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
So you got caught in 3 lies after saying you don't like it when others spread lies.
Then made up more lies and added some spiel about fantasies and reality to give credibility to your already discredited self.
Stop making it about party loyalty, nobody asked for party loyalty but not openly talking about vote fraud and not participating in actual vote fraud is a GIVEN.
You make it sound like fair elections should be a luxury.
Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
I think the problem with your viewpoint, with me anyway, is you appear not to have any real principle. Your views may be pragmatic like someone who has no real dog in the fight, but you criticize the dogs that are in the fight.
Ron Paul supporters apparently grind on your nerves, but rather than create your own thread topics that suit you, you go into others to stir up #. Paul supporters are passionate, and you don't like it. They are principled, but you don't recognize it. They are making a difference you will never acknowledge.
I don't believe I really care to interact with you in the future, because, frankly, you lower the bar rather than raise it.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What I don't understand is if the GOP is so against Ron Paul that he can't possibly win, WHY is he a member of their party??? If they are hacking the vote to make him lose, why is he even remotely associated with them? It's like he's putting himself on the altar to be sacrificed. He KNOWS the GOP hates him...
It makes no sense to me that he is a Republican. I wouldn't belong to a group that was SO intent on having me lose...
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
I agree completely. My husband and I were talking this morning and we came to the conclusion that Republican voters (those that would vote for Romney or Gingrich) would probably vote for Obama if he was up against Paul. They want the status quo to be maintained. And they THINK Obama will do that better than Ron Paul.
If Obama is just like Bush then the GOP may just vote for him if faced with the possibility of a Paul presidency.
(I personally don't think Obama is like Bush OR that he wants to maintain the status quo, but many do, and most are of the conservative-leaning quadrant)
I don't doubt the vote was hacked by the GOP. It wouldn't be the first time...
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What I don't understand is if the GOP is so against Ron Paul that he can't possibly win, WHY is he a member of their party??? If they are hacking the vote to make him lose, why is he even remotely associated with them? It's like he's putting himself on the altar to be sacrificed. He KNOWS the GOP hates him...
It makes no sense to me that he is a Republican. I wouldn't belong to a group that was SO intent on having me lose...
The GOP didn't "hack the vote" to make Paul lose. The only thing in question is 20 votes for Romney.
Sure, the Ron Paul fanatics will illogically extrapolate that out to say that Ron Paul should of recieved 10,000 more votes than he did...but that is just them being fanatical.
This thread should be about if Santorum actually deserves the "win"...but it has been hijacked by Ron Paul supporters to claim that one potential error means the entire election is fraud and that means (in their minds), that Ron Paul won with 80% of the vote...at least.