How can you call yourself Republican and like Obama better than Romney?

Any true conservative would not vote for Obama and any educated conservative would be weary of Romney. The only thing that I can see good in Ron Paul is his ideals of shrinking the government but that's about it. His social and foreign policies are dangerous.

Vote for a douche or a turd sandwich, it really doesn't matter until we have a say in the system and can change the crooks in office.

Since it's already been decided by the real owners of this country that they want Romney, it will be Romney.


So I'm going to vote for Paul, because at least then my voice will be heard. It won't be drowned out by the wave that will sweep Romney into office.


Make a statement, if Paul pulls in good write in numbers it will send a message.

reply to post by AGWskeptic


This is very true, however there's no telling whether or not polls can be manipulated to permanently keep these guys in office. In reality if they really want control, they will find a way to get it, even if they have to kill the good guys to do it.

reply to post by GoldenRuled


I'm thinking I don't have any stars and flags, because people do not want to answer the question, they just answer: Ron Paul 2012, and tell me why they are voting for him.

That's not what I am asking, I am asking if you were voting between Romney and Obama and you call yourself a republican, why in God's name would you lean towards Obama?

Only a few people understand this question and I thanked them for answering. The rest have just been idiots trying to derail this thread. Or idiots spreading Ron Paul talking points and running away when I question those...

reply to post by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

 

your the one that brought up that Ron Paul supporters look to the future. That sounds an awful lot like Obama's campaign slogan forward...It sounds like just a talking point. I question those talking points.

Then you have a real problem with reading comprehension. What I said was when thinking in terms of Politics, you should think more long term. As in 4-8 year time frames. I did not say, "Ron Paul supporters are looking to the future". As a matter of fact, here is my EXACT quote.

When thinking of all things Politics, you must first take off your normal thinking cap, and replace it with a longer term thinking cap. Roughly 4-8 years longer. What you are seeing is a long term Strategy for 2016.

Now please show me where that says, "Ron Paul supporters look to the future"? I even posted a video for you where Israel Anderson from Ron Paul flix, makes a case for why he might vote for Obama. It is a classic example of long term political thinking, which I also explained in my very first post. You should recognize that post, it is the one you clearly misunderstood so you could twist this topic to something off topic... like "What do you think Ron Paul's future is?". Maybe I can answer this stupid off topic question for you.... let me just go grab my Magic 8 Ball and give it a shake

Oops sorry, the Magic 8 Ball said "ask again later"

So why do you continue to avoid the question? i would just like some clarification about what Ron Paul supporters think his future is. Since you continue to avoid the question, I'm thinking you don't know the answer.

Ummm no one knows that answer. Can I read the minds of Ron Paul supporters every where? Do you think I converse daily with every Ron Paul supporters across the Country? The question you asked in your OP, which I answered, is why Republicans would vote for Obama. Not why Ron Paul supporters would vote for Obama. You have managed to derail your own thread, while completely ignoring an answer to your question in the OP. In case you forgot your question, allow me to help. You asked:

Tell me what is so appealing to you as a republican to Obama?

Which I answered by stating that one should think in longer political terms. As a Republican, if you are NOT sold on Romney, then Obama may be a clear choice for you if you are looking forward to the 2016 elections. If Romney were to win the White House, then surely he would run for re-election. Which means in theory, if you are not sold on Romney- you would have to wait until the 2020 election to get a Republican into the White House whom you do support or shares your views. If Obama were to get re-elected, Republicans have a chance to get a Candidate they will support in 2016. Get it yet? Is this plain enough for you? Or would you rather keep going off topic and playing your silly little troll games?

It was clear ever since you told me to, "ask Ron Paul." I think someone doesn't know what he is voting for/on!

edit on 15-7-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

I am not sure what you find so humorous here, how does not knowing what Ron Paul's plans for the future are have to do with knowing the issues when casting a vote?

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Then you have a real problem with reading comprehension. What I said was when thinking in terms of Politics, you should think more long term. As in 4-8 year time frames. I did not say, "Ron Paul supporters are looking to the future". As a matter of fact, here is my EXACT quote.

When thinking of all things Politics, you must first take off your normal thinking cap, and replace it with a longer term thinking cap. Roughly 4-8 years longer. What you are seeing is a long term Strategy for 2016.

Now please show me where that says, "Ron Paul supporters look to the future"?

You must have edited it and replaced it with the other explanation above, sorry if I didn't catch it. However its still the same basis for "Ron Paul supporters look to the future.' If you changed it you should have let me know, because I wouldn't have misquoted you!

Guess what? Ron Paul is retiring after this!!! He backed someone else to be in his congressional seat and he will let Rand Paul run in 2016. He's too old, and it's that simple!

reply to post by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
You must have edited it and replaced it with the other explanation above,

Really now? Try again. The post is on page 2, second post down from the top. NO EDITS. You see when someone edits a post, ATS adds a little line at the bottom saying the post was edited, you can not hide an edit on ATS. So go look at that post and show me the line that says the post was edited at any point in time. Please. I would LOVE to see it! As a matter of fact, here is the whole post as it appears right this second... here is the link, try clicking it.
post by MrWendal


Here is the quote: Try reading it.

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Welcome to your Political education. When thinking of all things Politics, you must first take off your normal thinking cap, and replace it with a longer term thinking cap. Roughly 4-8 years longer. What you are seeing is a long term Strategy for 2016.

If Romney were to win the Presidency, the chances of getting any other Republican into Office in 2016 is minimal at best, because Romney would run for reelection and the Party will of course support the incumbent. The problem is, no one likes Romney. Not even within his own Party. The establishment may be getting behind his Candidacy, but the voters? Not so much. So people are thinking ahead...

If Obama gets reelected, your chances increase to get a Republican into Office in 2016. If Romney wins, your best hope is 8 years of Romney. Perhaps you are sold on Romney- but some of us know better. I have no intention of voting at all... there are no choices that represent me in this election. So come election day, I will stay home or do whatever it is I am doing that day. I advise others to do the same. Do not participate in the game. Let a country elect a President with under 40% of the population voting... in some places one could even call that an illegitimate Government when so few people voted these arseholes into Office.

So where is that "edit" you are claiming I made?

sorry if I didn't catch it.

You should be sorry you didn't READ it. There was nothing to catch.

However its still the same basis for "Ron Paul supporters look to the future.' If you changed it you should have let me know, because I wouldn't have misquoted you!

No it is not the same basis, and also I think I have proven nothing was changed, and I was not misquoted. You sir.. are just plain wrong, and clearly you have a problem with admitting so.

Guess what? Ron Paul is retiring after this!!! He backed someone else to be in his congressional seat and he will let Rand Paul run in 2016. He's too old, and it's that simple!

edit on 16-7-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

Wow.... your investigative skills are pathetic. This is not news, Paul said he would not run for Congress again last year. Here is an ABC news article from July of 2011 discussing Ron Paul not seeking re-election in Congress.
Ron Paul will not seek re-election

Paul said from the start of this Presidential campaign that this was it... he was all in and it was all or nothing. So again, I have to ask you- Why this obsession with Ron Paul? This thread is not about Ron Paul, his supporters, or him not running for re-election. You asked why Republicans would vote for Obama. So do you want to get back on that topic? Do you want to talk more Ron Paul? Or do you want to make more excuses up for the fact that you derailed your own thread and it's not your fault?

Good Assessment.
When I think about our foreign policy in propping up dictators around the world, which we have many in the past and present,
The question that comes to me with the above in mind is:

Do you really think the establishment is going to allow someone in that would take away their power and control?

Think about it!

Originally posted by Em2013
reply to post by AGWskeptic

 

This is very true, however there's no telling whether or not polls can be manipulated to permanently keep these guys in office. In reality if they really want control, they will find a way to get it, even if they have to kill the good guys to do it.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by GoldenRuled

 

I'm thinking I don't have any stars and flags, because people do not want to answer the question, they just answer: Ron Paul 2012, and tell me why they are voting for him.

That's not what I am asking, I am asking if you were voting between Romney and Obama and you call yourself a republican, why in God's name would you lean towards Obama?

Only a few people understand this question and I thanked them for answering. The rest have just been idiots trying to derail this thread. Or idiots spreading Ron Paul talking points and running away when I question those...

Hypotheticals are useless.

Ask who and why, then you'll get a straight answer.

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Really now? Try again. The post is on page 2,
So where is that "edit" you are claiming I made?

Dude, I apologized for missing your point. But the point you made was still the point I made and still the question is relevant. What is the future for Ron Paul? or more precisely, what do YOU think the future is for Ron Paul. I say it's nothing and the movement will die with him. You?

Wow.... your investigative skills are pathetic. This is not news, Paul said he would not run for Congress again last year. Here is an ABC news article from July of 2011 discussing Ron Paul not seeking re-election in Congress.
Ron Paul will not seek re-election

If its not news then why are you posting it? I've seen that interview myself. What's your point?

Check out this news story: www.dailypaul.com...

www.statesman.com...

Paul said from the start of this Presidential campaign that this was it... he was all in and it was all or nothing. So again, I have to ask you- Why this obsession with Ron Paul?

So do you admit that its over, or is there still a future for Ron Paul? I'm not certain because you never address the question yourself. You just write long scary paragraphs trying to explain away why you don't want to answer if you believe that Ron Paul himself has a future in politics after the 2012 elections!

reply to post by MrWendal

 

When thinking of all things Politics, you must first take off your normal thinking cap, and replace it with a longer term thinking cap. Roughly 4-8 years longer. What you are seeing is a long term Strategy for 2016.

What exactly is the 2016 strategy because from what I am hearing from the Paul campaign and many of his supporters, is that it's to elect Rand Paul next time. So is this what you believe, or are you making crap up?

He is NOT going to run again.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
Dude, I apologized for missing your point.

No you didn't, you accused me of going back and editing a post in some grand conspiracy to make you look foolish. So, please go back to my post and show me where it is edited, if you are unable to do that- simply admit you were wrong and your accusation was baseless.

But the point you made was still the point I made and still the question is relevant. What is the future for Ron Paul? or more precisely, what do YOU think the future is for Ron Paul. I say it's nothing and the movement will die with him. You?

No, your point is not the point that I made. Again- you are focusing on Ron Paul. My point was in understanding Politics one must think ahead in 4-8 year terms. That was my point, and that point has nothing to do with Ron Paul. I fail to see what is so difficult for you to understand this. I can not put in more plainly than I already have.

What is the future for Ron Paul? I don't know.. ask Ron Paul. What do I think Ron Paul's future is? I don't know- he has not said. Will the movement die with him? No I do not believe it will and I believe we see plenty of evidence to support that conclusion. How many RNC chairs are now Ron Paul supporters? How many liberty minded people now hold positions within the RNC? Like it or not, Ron Paul supporters are more involved now than they have ever been. Unless they suddenly lose interest and stop participating, which I believe is very unlikely, then the movement will not just die.

If its not news then why are you posting it? I've seen that interview myself. What's your point?

Again- your reading comprehension skills are incredibly poor. I linked the article (not interview so clearly you didnt read it..big shock), to show that your remark about Ron Paul retiring is not some new revelation. He said as much prior to campaigning for President. That is the point. Why was I posting it? As a direct response to your post. That is how conversation and debate works. I must ask what is your point in showing who he endorsed to take his place? Is Ron Paul supposed to not endorse anyone? It has been over a year since he said he would not run. So why is Ron Paul endorsing a person, for a Congressional seat he used to hold and is stepping down from, any type of point you are attempting to make. While we are at it... what even is your point? Because clearly whatever point you are attempting to make now, has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, and it certainly has nothing to do with anything I typed in reply to the OP.

So do you admit that its over, or is there still a future for Ron Paul?

Do I admit what is over? What is the "it" that you are talking about? How am I expected to know what the future holds for Ron Paul? I am not in his mind, I do not know what his plans are. The question you continue to keep asking me is ridiculous. As I have stated MANY times already- I can not possibly know the answer to that question. If you are asking if I think the movement is over- I answered that above. No I do not. Once people awaken and the genie is out of the bottle and the cat out of the bag- you can not put it back inside.

What the future holds for Ron Paul I can not possibly know. That would depend on what Ron Paul chooses to do. Will he remain in the background of politics? I have no idea. Maybe he will simply retire and stay home. That is not my decision, nor is it anything I can possibly know in advance, now is it?

I'm not certain because you never address the question yourself. You just write long scary paragraphs trying to explain away why you don't want to answer if you believe that Ron Paul himself has a future in politics after the 2012 elections!

edit on 16-7-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

Again.. pay attention and try your best to comprehend what I am saying. I will even type really slow- so maybe you can keep up.

I believe Ron Paul can do anything he wants to do. If he wants to retire and stay home and play with his dog and ride a bike- he can do that. If he wants to remain involved in some fashion in politics, I am sure there is a place for him some where. Last time he left politics- he was still involved in politics via a newsletter. So anything is possible, the real question is- Is Ron Paul retiring or does HE plan on remaining involved in Politics in some fashion? And that is a question only Ron Paul can answer. There is NO ONE on ATS who has an answer to that question.

I have attempted to "explain away" nothing and I have dodged no pointless question from you. You simply do not like the answers you are getting. Meanwhile- you have accused me of changing post why derailing your own topic and straying away from the point I made about the topic at hand. So who is really "explaining away" what here? Really... the more you post now, the more silly you look.

Originally posted by Em2013
Any true conservative would not vote for Obama and any educated conservative would be weary of Romney. The only thing that I can see good in Ron Paul is his ideals of shrinking the government but that's about it. His social and foreign policies are dangerous.

Vote for a douche or a turd sandwich, it really doesn't matter until we have a say in the system and can change the crooks in office.

Have you been in the military.. or over seas.. I have and I gotta tell you our foreign policies now are insanely dangerous. We are creating the freedom fighters "terrorist" . We just attacked a civilian vessel today. We are the bad guys. We need to withdrawl our troops, we need to stop funding countries that hate us. We need to rebuild our own and live in a world where we aren't constantly fighting. Let them attack us and then rain hell fire down upon them quickly and in a way no one would dare attack us again.

Ron Paul knows what he is talking about.. you just are able to grasp it

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
What exactly is the 2016 strategy because from what I am hearing from the Paul campaign and many of his supporters, is that it's to elect Rand Paul next time. So is this what you believe, or are you making crap up?

He is NOT going to run again.

edit on 16-7-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

I am making up nothing, and I think it is a certainty that Ron Paul will not run again.

What is the 2016 Strategy from whom exactly?

I have no idea if Rand will run, and neither does anyone else. Know how I know this? Because Rand has not said. What you are "hearing" is what is known as speculation. Then fools like yourself, take that speculation and attempt to pass it off as some type of fact. I don't do that. I don't play those silly games.

What I DID SAY, which again you failed to understand, is that in the minds of some Republicans a Romney Presidency will mean he will hold office until 2016. He will most certainly run for re-election because ALL Presidents do. Party's today do not run others against an incumbent President. Just like we see no Democrats running against Obama this year. Just like we saw no other Republicans run against Bush in 2004. Parties do not run other members against an incumbent President.

So, as a Republican, if you do not support Romney, you have to think about what's next? It is an option to vote for Obama this year, so that you can find a Republican Candidate that you do support in 2016. Instead of being forced to vote Romney for a second term in 2016 because you voted for him in 2012.

Do you get it yet? Does this make any sense to you at all? Or are you still obsessed with Ron Paul which is NOT the topic of discussion to begin with!?

Whoever said evolution is going backwards... I am starting to think may have a very solid point.

Given the choice of Romney or Obama, I am going with Romney, if only to send Holder and Big Sis Napolitano packing. Those two idiots would make the Bush administration proud.

The fact that we have to choose between a Che Guevara wannabe and a RINO says much about the state of politics in the US today.

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Given the choice of Romney or Obama, I am going with Romney, if only to send Holder and Big Sis Napolitano packing. Those two idiots would make the Bush administration proud.

The fact that we have to choose between a Che Guevara wannabe and a RINO says much about the state of politics in the US today.

Its kinda like having to choose between diving into a 1 ft. deep pool (Obama) vs a 2 ft. deep pool (Romney), you're going to get hurt or die doing both but might as well take your chances with the 2 footer.

reply to post by Doalrite


Yes, Ron Paul knows what he's talking about and I'm trying to get everyone I know to vote for him. I don't really care about his quirky social policies, right now we need to focus on ourselves and Ron Paul knows how to fix a lot of it. Unfortunately a single president can't call all the shots, no matter how much Obama wants to make people believe this.

reply to post by MrWendal


It's hard to take you seriously when you write many paragraphs questioning things that I have already explained. Why do you really think I posted the news story about him endorsing someone? It's to show you that he's retiring!!! There's no hidden message there.

But you just did avoid answering my question. I believe I first asked, "What Ron Paul supporters believe to be the future is for Ron Paul?" Then I added, "What do YOU personally believe the future is for Ron Paul?"

You answered with a BS answer, "Only Ron Paul knows what the future is for him." If you follow someone as closely as you claim to follow Ron Paul, then you can read between the lines and draw your own conclusions. Or you can have some shred of hope that he will run again!

This has little to do with Ron Paul and what he plans himself, because as told off by his supporters, the message is supposedly louder than the man himself! Especially after Ron Paul urged his supporters to play by the rules and never even publicly acknowledged the delegate numbers that they spout about. Do you really believe Ron Paul has a future in politics? I'm not sure. It sure doesn't sound like it otherwise you would have answered the question five posts ago and try to back it up with Ron Paul talking points...

If you truly believe in his message then you would hope he runs again right? Even though he is retiring at the end of this year probably after his August festivals.

How can you call yourself Republican and like Obama better than Romney?

Good question. Here's another one ... how can you call yourself a Republican and like Romney?
Seriously .. there isn't much difference between Obama and Romney.
Or is it a case of Republicans are holding their noses and voting for Romney because he's
'less bad' than Obama??

Originally posted by Darkrunner


The fact that we have to choose between a Che Guevara wannabe and a RINO says much about the state of politics in the US today.

I'm a Republican and given the choice....I think I would rather have a Che Guevara wannabe than a corporate Fascist that flip flops on every issue depending on who he is speaking to. Mitt has absolutely no honor, character or platform other than...."Im not Obama" sad.

Even my 85 year old Republican, rightwing, Babtist, racist, mother can see thru transparent Romney and is going to cross party lines and vote for the President. Truth be told, I don't think she likes Mormons.

And I absolutely despise anyone that abuses animals!!! Character counts!!!

www.petside.com...