“Ron Paul WILL be the next POTUS! This is HOW it will happen”!

Originally posted by xZodiacx
so true!! never looked at it like the way he explains it. He's pretty much just taking votes for the Republican party if he runs as an independent. Only thing is is that if this does happen, then it may split the republican votes and Obama will win...As much as I want him to, I just do not see it. Check this illuminati card out. He is a puppet that will ensure Obama's victory.

So if you have Satan (Obama), and then you have the son of Satan (Romney), I should vote for the lesser of the two to keep Obama (Satan) out of the picture? Most RP supporters will not vote for the lesser evil. Like me, most RP supporters will write RP in on the ballot. Romney will not be any better (if not worse) than Obama. At least I can walk away from the voting station with a smile on my face for making the decision I feel to be right.

reply to post by Propulsion


With Santorum dropping from the race there is zero chance of an open convention.Like it or not Romneys has won at this point.Or in other words Ron paul will have to wait until next time unless he believes the 3 strikes your out rule.

he is getting 10% of the republican votes

in a genral election he'd lose by 40 pts

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
I like some of Paul's policies but I'm hesitant to vote for him considering his views on gay rights, women's rights, etc...

His views on gay rights are that he is not gay himself, he has been married for many years, and he believes marriage between homosexual couples (which is the biggest gay rights issue of the day) should be decided by the church and not by the government. I wholeheartedly believe in this. I don't think we can have a free society if we discriminate against people like the way that were doing. And personally he is very much pro life. Although he would not decide himself as president what the law should be against abortion, he does believe it is a state issue. So why would you hesitate to vote for him, and what makes Romney at this point any better?

My Contribution to the Campaign

Ron Paul 2012!

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
What if Romney takes on Paul as a running mate?

Dude not even Romney from 4 years ago could be Romney's running mate, THEY TOO have nothing in common.

LOL

reply to post by Propulsion


Believe me, I agree with you 100%. I will vote for RP, but based on the fact that some of these cards have actually come true (i.e. WTC and Pentagon bombings, BP oil spill, possibly the Olympics this summer). It just makes me nervous. ATS has led me to believe that TPTB have devised an intricate sort of plan for everything that goes on in our World.

Originally posted by Allenb83

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
I like some of Paul's policies but I'm hesitant to vote for him considering his views on gay rights, women's rights, etc...

His views on gay rights are that he is not gay himself, he has been married for many years, and he believes marriage between homosexual couples (which is the biggest gay rights issue of the day) should be decided by the church and not by the government. I wholeheartedly believe in this. I don't think we can have a free society if we discriminate against people like the way that were doing. And personally he is very much pro life. Although he would not decide himself as president what the law should be against abortion, he does believe it is a state issue. So why would you hesitate to vote for him, and what makes Romney at this point any better?

Not everyone goes to church or follows Paul's religious ideologies. Therefore, leaving it to the church is an invalid argument. Although I do believe the government should stay out of personal lives to a certain degree, there needs to be a federal decision to legalize same sex marriage. It's a right everyone deserves.

Paul is also against funding Planned Parenthood aka basic health care rights for women and even men. I understand the value of state rights but federal involvement is also very important and necessary.

This is why I'm hesitant to vote for someone who has some radical ideas.

Also, Paul is for state rights but bashed Rick Perry (who is the douche of the century) for ordering an executive decision for young girls to get the HPV vaccine. Perry is the governor of a state. It wasn't a federal issue, it was a state one. Who cares? I found that to be extremely hypocritical on Paul's part although I understood the doctor's side of the argument completely.

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
What if Romney takes on Paul as a running mate?

Ron Paul has integrity.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal

Originally posted by Allenb83

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
I like some of Paul's policies but I'm hesitant to vote for him considering his views on gay rights, women's rights, etc...

His views on gay rights are that he is not gay himself, he has been married for many years, and he believes marriage between homosexual couples (which is the biggest gay rights issue of the day) should be decided by the church and not by the government. I wholeheartedly believe in this. I don't think we can have a free society if we discriminate against people like the way that were doing. And personally he is very much pro life. Although he would not decide himself as president what the law should be against abortion, he does believe it is a state issue. So why would you hesitate to vote for him, and what makes Romney at this point any better?

Not everyone goes to church or follows Paul's religious ideologies. Therefore, leaving it to the church is an invalid argument. Although I do believe the government should stay out of personal lives to a certain degree, there needs to be a federal decision to legalize same sex marriage. It's a right everyone deserves.

Paul is also against funding Planned Parenthood aka basic health care rights for women and even men. I understand the value of state rights but federal involvement is also very important and necessary.

This is why I'm hesitant to vote for someone who has some radical ideas.

Also, Paul is for state rights but bashed Rick Perry (who is the douche of the century) for ordering an executive decision for young girls to get the HPV vaccine. Perry is the governor of a state. It wasn't a federal issue, it was a state one. Who cares? I found that to be extremely hypocritical on Paul's part although I understood the doctor's side of the argument completely.

Thats the whole idea of liberty. Ron Paul has a religion that he follows. It is something very personal to him. Nobody has to follow his religion or go to church on a regular basis in order to get married. There are many churches out there that would marry same sex couples if the law allowed it, as has happened in areas where it has been legalized. Dr. Paul wants government out of the decision because it should be an individual right. I believe we don't need the government to tell us that something is OK or not OK. It is up to us the people to make the decision of what is best for us.

Health care is not a right, it is something that either you, your children (eventually), or someone else, will have to pay for. At the present moment you do however have the right to choose wether or not you carry health insurance. Give Obama or Romney another 4 years and I wouldn't be so sure.

So please tell me how giving us our freedom to choose, without shouldering the burden of others is a radical idea?

Dr. Paul is for the constitution. Mandating that children and young adults get a vaccine without the freedom of the parent or emancipated minors choice is not following our constitutional rights, and it was a bad idea on Perry's part. So yeah, our rights are being taken away... who cares, right?

reply to post by schuyler

Did you even listen to the video posted in the OP? he can run as a 3d party AT the convention.

Originally posted by schuyler
Ron Paul will not win the nomination. The only way he could win is for him to pick up every single one of the remaining 770 delegates to be chosen.

Unless the others all die in a polish airliner type crash.

Originally posted by Allenb83

Originally posted by SeventhSeal

Originally posted by Allenb83

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
I like some of Paul's policies but I'm hesitant to vote for him considering his views on gay rights, women's rights, etc...

His views on gay rights are that he is not gay himself, he has been married for many years, and he believes marriage between homosexual couples (which is the biggest gay rights issue of the day) should be decided by the church and not by the government. I wholeheartedly believe in this. I don't think we can have a free society if we discriminate against people like the way that were doing. And personally he is very much pro life. Although he would not decide himself as president what the law should be against abortion, he does believe it is a state issue. So why would you hesitate to vote for him, and what makes Romney at this point any better?

Not everyone goes to church or follows Paul's religious ideologies. Therefore, leaving it to the church is an invalid argument. Although I do believe the government should stay out of personal lives to a certain degree, there needs to be a federal decision to legalize same sex marriage. It's a right everyone deserves.

Paul is also against funding Planned Parenthood aka basic health care rights for women and even men. I understand the value of state rights but federal involvement is also very important and necessary.

This is why I'm hesitant to vote for someone who has some radical ideas.

Also, Paul is for state rights but bashed Rick Perry (who is the douche of the century) for ordering an executive decision for young girls to get the HPV vaccine. Perry is the governor of a state. It wasn't a federal issue, it was a state one. Who cares? I found that to be extremely hypocritical on Paul's part although I understood the doctor's side of the argument completely.

Thats the whole idea of liberty. Ron Paul has a religion that he follows. It is something very personal to him. Nobody has to follow his religion or go to church on a regular basis in order to get married. There are many churches out there that would marry same sex couples if the law allowed it, as has happened in areas where it has been legalized. Dr. Paul wants government out of the decision because it should be an individual right. I believe we don't need the government to tell us that something is OK or not OK. It is up to us the people to make the decision of what is best for us.

Health care is not a right, it is something that either you, your children (eventually), or someone else, will have to pay for. At the present moment you do however have the right to choose wether or not you carry health insurance. Give Obama or Romney another 4 years and I wouldn't be so sure.

So please tell me how giving us our freedom to choose, without shouldering the burden of others is a radical idea?

Dr. Paul is for the constitution. Mandating that children and young adults get a vaccine without the freedom of the parent or emancipated minors choice is not following our constitutional rights, and it was a bad idea on Perry's part. So yeah, our rights are being taken away... who cares, right?

Oh goodness.

Let's not suck off Paul that much, ok?

The idea of marriage isn't committed to organized religion. Two people have a right to engage in marriage if they wish to do so. Having the government (State or Federal) prohibit you from doing so because of a religious institution is downright backwards and disgusting.

Paul supports the other Republicans when it comes to cutting funding for Planned Parenthood. The idea is insane and idiotic. What did he once say when it came to health care? Leave it to charities? I lol'd hard at that.


"Mandating that children and young adults get a vaccine without the freedom of the parent or emancipated minors choice is not following our constitutional rights, "

Get over it. HPV leads to cancer and there's nothing wrong with securing children from getting the virus considering it's highly infectious. It's the only decent thing Perry ever did.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


So very wrong about HPV vaccine.

This is what happens when the mis-informed spout off of things they are not educated on. If you're having difficulty, follow the money, that is the easiest and usually more accurate way to tell how things really go.

You also need to learn what Planned Parenthood is all about, who started it, and what that person believes in. May you not fall out of your chair and hurt yourself once you do.


The rest is just opinion and you're granted that, but you're speaking 1/2 truths the entire time. For shame, something about ATS denying something but I forget.

Originally posted by fourthmeal
reply to post by SeventhSeal

 

So very wrong about HPV vaccine.

This is what happens when the mis-informed spout off of things they are not educated on. If you're having difficulty, follow the money, that is the easiest and usually more accurate way to tell how things really go.

You also need to learn what Planned Parenthood is all about, who started it, and what that person believes in. May you not fall out of your chair and hurt yourself once you do.


The rest is just opinion and you're granted that, but you're speaking 1/2 truths the entire time. For shame, something about ATS denying something but I forget.

Someone disagrees with your opinion and they're called uneducated. Ouch. Well, we know where you how you handle criticism of a politician you like...but I'll bite.

Planned Parenthood has been through much harsh criticism from the right wing media mainly because of abortion procedures, which consists of 3% of Planned Parenthood's services. But we'll pretend it's big bad and evil because it's more fun that way.

ATS used to be about denying ignorance until the Paulbots sailed in and wrecked the place. I agree with the guy's policies to a certain degree, but it's a shame this site is full of Paultards. Oh well.

That's America.

I'm not a Paulbot. I'm a sovereign human being with decent reasoning abilities, while still being able to accept the strange world we live in and all the atrocities around me.

That said, I support the guy. Labeling someone for the sake of "putting them in their place" is a well-established propaganda technique, just FYI if you weren't already aware of what you were doing.

Now, let's deal with the meat of this post, that Planned Parenthood is some evil thing. Maybe.

- Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger….

“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
www.brainyquote.com...

Margaret Sanger in Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12….

“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

Regardless,
Why should government fund that? Why should I, a taxpayer, fund what I don't believe in?

Originally posted by SeventhSeal

Originally posted by fourthmeal
reply to post by SeventhSeal

 

So very wrong about HPV vaccine.

This is what happens when the mis-informed spout off of things they are not educated on. If you're having difficulty, follow the money, that is the easiest and usually more accurate way to tell how things really go.

You also need to learn what Planned Parenthood is all about, who started it, and what that person believes in. May you not fall out of your chair and hurt yourself once you do.


The rest is just opinion and you're granted that, but you're speaking 1/2 truths the entire time. For shame, something about ATS denying something but I forget.

Someone disagrees with your opinion and they're called uneducated. Ouch. Well, we know where you how you handle criticism of a politician you like...but I'll bite.

Planned Parenthood has been through much harsh criticism from the right wing media mainly because of abortion procedures, which consists of 3% of Planned Parenthood's services. But we'll pretend it's big bad and evil because it's more fun that way.

ATS used to be about denying ignorance until the Paulbots sailed in and wrecked the place. I agree with the guy's policies to a certain degree, but it's a shame this site is full of Paultards. Oh well.

That's America.

I think once people find out about Obama's plan to stay in Afghanistan another 10 years will help RP even more. I think after tonight's announcement Obama will lose a lot of the fan base except for the shills who pull for him...So this could be another ticket for RP to slide in between and take center stage...

This will help RP become POTUS, because Obama will lose popularity and no one would want Romney, because Romney would do the same thing if he was in Obama's shoes...There is light for the good Dr..

Listen, if Ron doesn't win, the Country is going to get worse than it is right now because Obamney definitely doesn't have our best interests at stake here. Apparently that's what the majority craves so.... what can you do. Harp at us and cut us down when Paul loses and yet turn around and cry when the Country gets in worse shape.

-okay-

I swear you all are addicted to chaos and control by government.


I still hold hope that the younger gen will keep going how they have been and finally something good will happen when they get to voting ages etc. They are who we got to rely on now. I hope to heaven a lot of future govt seat holders will have Ron's views (the good ones; not all are great of course) and we'll weed the nasty out of the senate, HoR, Congress and Potus and FINALLY go back to fully constitutional rights, where WE run the govt, we hire the govt, we fire the govt, they work for us and talk with us, not us work for them and them talk FOR us.

Somewhere, somehow, the majority of the People forgot that we ARE the govt's employers.

*blinks*

reply to post by sarra1833


TRUTH.

I'd also stand behind any non-corrupt politician after removing IRS, FED, etc. and after returning to Constitutional ways.

RP is a lone wolf and that's that, FOR NOW.

We may not get another chance though.

This is the same guy that got kicked off stage at a tea party meeting on THIS THREAD


Found the video of it