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
Ron Paul couldn't beat Mitt Romney in a debate...he would have no chance against Obama. The debates are Obama's gold...Ron Paul will look silly next to him with his oversized suit, jittering and nervous chuckling and crazy laugh when he is trying to make a point.edit on 30-4-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)
Anyway, here's the facts. Ron Paul will bring the troops immediately, saving the lives of millions. That's not hyperbole. Economically, he will espouse the American notion of living in "the land of the free."
Rhetorically, which of those do you have such a problem with?
My advice, either get some priorities or use that time it takes you to make those 8.94 posts per day over almost two years to fiscally better yourself.
Originally posted by nitestrider
It would be awesome to see Ron Paul Win!! Going up against Obama would be hard though. Obama has a great way with words and can make anything sound good...
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by lives
Anyway, here's the facts. Ron Paul will bring the troops immediately, saving the lives of millions. That's not hyperbole. Economically, he will espouse the American notion of living in "the land of the free."
Rhetorically, which of those do you have such a problem with?
My advice, either get some priorities or use that time it takes you to make those 8.94 posts per day over almost two years to fiscally better yourself.
I'm fine with his foreign policy...but his domestic policy I don't agree with to the point that it overrides the benefits of his foreign policy.
And btw...your math is way off.
Are you offering this as your opinion...or do you have some evidence that Pauls domestic policy overriedes his foreign policy?
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
This post is using a poll that is weeks old and outdated. The latest polls show Obama beating Paul. Out of more than 60 polls conducted over the past year of Paul vs Obama...Paul has only a +1 and +2...outliers. But that doesn't stop it from getting tons of stars from Paul supporters who are illogical and/or don't understand how polls work: www.abovetopsecret.com...
This post is denying a valid hard count of bound delegates just because it is opposite of his own false created reality. If this hard count is correct, it means that Paul is pretty much done in this primary. He tried in my thread to claim they are wrong...he just showed how little he knows about the process. But he continues to just be willfully ignorant and continue to spread false information that these counts are wrong: www.abovetopsecret.com...
So there you go...have your good laugh...or more likely ignore it and agree with what those posts say....even though they are false.
Originally posted by fourthmeal
Outkast Searcher:
I've asked this of you before yet I have not heard back. One question at a time, for clarity?
Do you want the FED?
If so, why and if not, why?
There is just nothing about the last few years that makes Americans feel warm and fuzzy!
Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
For someone who enjoys calling RP supporters delusional the same can be said about you. RP can't beat Romney in a debate? Really? We're entitled to our own opinions but even you need to be told you are dead wrong. RP would walk all over Romney. RP would have a better challenge with Obama and his teleprompter than Romney..... Half of ATS could probably out match Romney in a debate.
We all get you're an Obama supporter and we all get you take every opportunity you can to bash RP & his supporters every chance you can get but when is enough enough? You're not winning any hearts or changing anyone's minds. You're pretty much labeled an anti RP shill at this point, your post history verifies it. I think it would be best if the rest of us just ignored you at for now on because what else do you have to say that you haven't already said in many, many, other threads?edit on 30-4-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)