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 David9176
Quite frankly i think you guys are about to get played.
It makes sense though. Ron Paul can't endorse Mitt Romney because Romney doesn't share the same principles....but Paul's son can, and Ron Paul will endorse his son....but even if he didn't endorse his own son...it wouldn't matter anyway....because it will be perceived that way regardless.
Romney and Paul are supposedly friends...and Ron paul simply doesn't go after Romney like he does the other candidates. I noticed it before in earlier debates, but it was really apparent last night and I commented about this on the thread covering the debate as it ended.
What do you guys think? Does this sound plausible or am i over thinking this?
(edited numerous times)edit on 23-2-2012 by David9176 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by phishfriar47
reply to post by WeRpeons
Which is exactly why it would need to be Paul/Romeny not Romney/Paul
Win-Win for everyone involved...even down to Rand IMO
Originally posted by TheAnswerTo1984
reply to post by eLPresidente
I know people don't want to hear this, but I think Ron should really step back and think about this. This ticket would be a guranteed win in November. There is no way that with Romney's money and Paul's support that it's going to lose to Obama. With that said, we have to put Romney in the white house. That sucks. But it's also a guranteed VP spot for Ron Paul and the man can do so much more with a guranteed VP spot than a 3rd party run that will more than likely do nothing but hand Obama a second term.
This shouldn't be seen as selling out. It's not as long as Paul is able to do what he wants to do as VP. This should be seen as the guranteed spot that it is. Imagine what Paul could do as VP... I think people really need to think about this before screaming sell out.
Originally posted by Habit4ming
I didn't read all the comments, since I just dealt with this issue on numerous threads on another site...so, if this has already been posted, I apologize.
Here's an interview with Doug Wead, explaining the FICTIONAL Romney/Paul alliance:
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by Habit4ming
I didn't read all the comments, since I just dealt with this issue on numerous threads on another site...so, if this has already been posted, I apologize.
Here's an interview with Doug Wead, explaining the FICTIONAL Romney/Paul alliance:
Good post, it reinforces what I was saying earlier about this Romney/Paul bullShlop
Originally posted by colbe
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by Habit4ming
I didn't read all the comments, since I just dealt with this issue on numerous threads on another site...so, if this has already been posted, I apologize.
Here's an interview with Doug Wead, explaining the FICTIONAL Romney/Paul alliance:
Good post, it reinforces what I was saying earlier about this Romney/Paul bullShlop
Ron Paul doesn't attack Romney in the debates. Explain, each one of them is trying to win the nomination. Very strange....
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by colbe
Originally posted by eLPresidente
Originally posted by Habit4ming
I didn't read all the comments, since I just dealt with this issue on numerous threads on another site...so, if this has already been posted, I apologize.
Here's an interview with Doug Wead, explaining the FICTIONAL Romney/Paul alliance:
Good post, it reinforces what I was saying earlier about this Romney/Paul bullShlop
Ron Paul doesn't attack Romney in the debates. Explain, each one of them is trying to win the nomination. Very strange....
Ron Paul doesn't hit Romney?
You've never seen this ad?
The REALITY is Ron Paul is trying to separate himself from the other 2 anti-Romney candidates. Ron Paul is fighting for the Tea Party / anti-Romney vote.
He doesn't NEED to attack Romney because it would be a WASTE of time.
I'd recommend you to stop trying to make something of what isn't there.
Originally posted by David9176
It won't be Ron Paul as VP.
It's going to be Rand Paul (VP) as Mitt Romney's running mate.
Originally posted by Darkinin
Such a thing will never happen at this point, and there are even good explanations for what is happening right now.
First off, Ron Paul has been campaigning in hopes of winning the nomination for the Presidency, it's too late now for Paul to decide that he's going to go and betray his voters by going for VP. Remember, this is the kind of guy that won't rule out a third party run just because he can't literally see the future.
As for his not attacking Romney directly all the time? Well, why would he need too right now? Santorum and Newt are already tearing Romney to shreds, and Paul is the only candidate right now who has to actually rely on donations from his supporters, and not from a very wealthy person, or two, or a whole bank. Letting the two anti-Romneys, who Paul could in all likely hood destroy in a 1 on 1 confrontation with ease, attack Romney while Paul conserves his campaign's war chest is a good and valid strategy.
Plus there's another thing that has to be taken into consideration, and it's that the man has out right denied that any such alliance has taken place. Now, tell me, how often has Paul lied about his stance on the issues, or even his plans? Let me tell you, Never.