Obama Supporters Need Not Read This - Romney Supporters Better - Paul Supporters Carry This Message

Every election we hold fast to the establishment progressive paradigm setup by the two colluding main stay parties.
Every time we listen to the argument that "the vote for someone not establishment is a vote for the worse of the two". Sorry, not this time.

Ron Paul supporters are united and passionate. The argument is correct, with out the votes of the supporters of Paul, Obama WILL win. Everyone knows this, and you are being told the truth by Paul supporters that they will be casting their votes for him regardless of the tiring threat of another Obama Presidency. Knowing this then, you better start believing, and believing fast, that a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. Passion counts, the Paul supporters are passionate about their guy and are going to vote for him.

I'm telling all true Independents and Republicans to vote Paul, stop thinking you will sway Paul supporters into voting for anyone else. You won't. If we really don't want another Obama Presidency, it's up to the Romney supporters to recognize this and do the right thing. The ball is in their court, because everyone knows where Paul supporters stand. If Obama wins it's not because of Paul supporters, it's because you think that theirs a choice between Obama and Romney.

Romney will overturn Obamacare? No he won't. He'll water it down in a perfect example of the Overton Window. It's a lame argument anyway. While completely wrong in a society based on the philosophy of Liberty and Independence, Obamacare isn't the most dangerous thing the the two colluding parties have passed.

What I want to know is, will Romney overturn the Patriot Act and the NDAA? That's what's important. And no he won't. We all know he will do the same thing as Obama will, either strengthen these bad laws with more legislation of the same ilk, or worse, use them.

I think the whole thing is a lost cause at this point. I'm just spending my free time loading mags these days.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Yep! Doing the same thing over here......

Besides i think as i have always believed. No president can change the government.

Its up to the two parties to dig in and expose those skeletons in the closets.

But, how can that happen when they have to protect tjeir own skeletons from discloure.

In addition to that you know what happens to wistlblowers.....

Obama, Paul, Romney........ All three of them combined couldn't peek far enough into the government to make root changes that would ripple up to the surface where you and i live. No changes for the better, for the people, without a catch.

Keep'n loadin........! You know why? Because eventually everything comes to a head.

How about governmental ground zero.

And it wont start in washington either.

What a tangled web they have weaved!!!

Sigh.

I'm definitely not getting deep into the ping pong of the Ron Paul threads again...but I'll say this much, since Obama's anticipated attack machine got turned on early and it COULD hit on something to sink Romney before the convention. This whole period has been crazy. Who knows......

Having said that. I went to Dr. Paul's Rally and before that I voted for him in the primary. I attended his pre-caucus training session and I saw a caucus for the first time. (Now I know why I should be mad and not just guessing about it.. lol). In short, I've done all one guy can do at this point in time to support him.

I doubt he gets any closer than he is now...and I'm not sure he even wants to be. Changing the message and influencing the topics may have been more the point and that is enough, if it were. It helped.

*IF*.....against all odds.....Romney's boat gets sunk or is even badly damaged and Paul stands in the Convention as more than a spectator, by HIS choice and not just his fans, then I'll support him again. IF Dr. Paul actually came out of the convention in any form for a serious and REAL run like he meant to win and no punches pulled.....I'd support him. Otherwise, Romney gets my vote now because Obama ends the nation as we've known it. Romney at least gets us across to 2016 and we can try again with Rand Paul. We don't get the chance the other way, IMO.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

This sounds very much like the type of post Obama supporters would post.
Vote for Paul, waste your vote and let Obozo ruin us totally.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I like how you are thinking long-term. However, regardless of who wins in 2012 the numbers from 2012 will be felt in 2016. You really think Rand Paul, the son of crazy ole' Ron Paul could win 2016 if even his father had pathetic numbers in 2012? Now if his father had impressive numbers in 2012 then there would be some real cause for concern come 2016. I personally don't give a rats ass about Romney or Obama, they are both evils I would rather not live under for the next four years, but chances are I will be under one of them. I will however give them (their ilk) something to worry about come 2016 by showing them that their grasp isn't so secure and that it is only a matter of time.

Politics remind me of wrestling(wwe).

reply to post by Cassey222

I think I saw things after 9/11 that in 1999 I never would have believed possible in America. That compounded and grew into the financial sector in Bush's second term. Now, I've seen plenty more that even after all I saw the first go 'round, I would not have believed possible in 2008. I'm about through predicting much of anything beyond the very short term because things seem to turn on dimes right now then stop to give change.

Amid all that, yeah, if Rand Paul plays things right I think he could have a strong chance. If people are mad now I think the future will have then irate beyond measure. By 2016, we'll want him all the more. Ron Paul spent a lifetime making deeply personal enemies that Rand Paul doesn't necessarily have. Rand is also a Senator. Ron, just a Congressman. The distinction is actually very large.

Go Rand for 2016, because it's the best long term hope that stands today.

Source

It looks like Ron Paul isn’t going to be officially nominated for the presidency in Tampa.

His backers failed to win a plurality of delegate slots at the Nebraska GOP convention Saturday, leaving the Texas congressman short of the support necessary to have his name placed into contention at the national convention.

According to national party rules, a candidate needs a plurality of the delegates in at least five states to have his name presented for the nomination – by falling short in Nebraska, the last state to hold its convention, Paul came up one state short.

It's over. Yes, Paul supporters are extremely energetic about their candidate. We all agree on that point. But they have also believed their own hyperbole, not understanding that they were nowhere near as effective, popular, or important as they thought they were. Paul traditionally got about 11% of the popular vote--when people were allowed to vote. I don't blame Paul supporters for wrenching out delegates from the caucus system far in excess of Paul's actual support. It has showed the nature of the screwed up caucus system, and for that we should be grateful, then fix it.

But 11% is far less than many modern third-party or alternative candidates have gotten. It doesn't matter what Paul supporters do now. There are not enough of them to make a real difference.

I'm voting Ron Paul, or writing him him...conviction and principle are more important
than being right or swaying a vote to someone I do not care to represent me as
a leader.

Damn the torpedoes and all the idiots who vote for ANY OTHER candidate than their
first choice as leader.....full speed ahead

Originally posted by schuyler
Source

It looks like Ron Paul isn’t going to be officially nominated for the presidency in Tampa.

His backers failed to win a plurality of delegate slots at the Nebraska GOP convention Saturday, leaving the Texas congressman short of the support necessary to have his name placed into contention at the national convention.

According to national party rules, a candidate needs a plurality of the delegates in at least five states to have his name presented for the nomination – by falling short in Nebraska, the last state to hold its convention, Paul came up one state short.

It's over. Yes, Paul supporters are extremely energetic about their candidate. We all agree on that point. But they have also believed their own hyperbole, not understanding that they were nowhere near as effective, popular, or important as they thought they were. Paul traditionally got about 11% of the popular vote--when people were allowed to vote. I don't blame Paul supporters for wrenching out delegates from the caucus system far in excess of Paul's actual support. It has showed the nature of the screwed up caucus system, and for that we should be grateful, then fix it.

But 11% is far less than many modern third-party or alternative candidates have gotten. It doesn't matter what Paul supporters do now. There are not enough of them to make a real difference.

Do think the reason for that is because his message is unwanted by the masses, or because the masses haven't been given his message? Ah, there's the rub. He's a bit ahead of his time, as far as the voting majority goes. Too many old folks and middle agers that check the box next to their registered party without considering anything the candidate has said or done.

Originally posted by mattdel

Originally posted by schuyler
Source

It looks like Ron Paul isn’t going to be officially nominated for the presidency in Tampa.

His backers failed to win a plurality of delegate slots at the Nebraska GOP convention Saturday, leaving the Texas congressman short of the support necessary to have his name placed into contention at the national convention.

According to national party rules, a candidate needs a plurality of the delegates in at least five states to have his name presented for the nomination – by falling short in Nebraska, the last state to hold its convention, Paul came up one state short.

It's over. Yes, Paul supporters are extremely energetic about their candidate. We all agree on that point. But they have also believed their own hyperbole, not understanding that they were nowhere near as effective, popular, or important as they thought they were. Paul traditionally got about 11% of the popular vote--when people were allowed to vote. I don't blame Paul supporters for wrenching out delegates from the caucus system far in excess of Paul's actual support. It has showed the nature of the screwed up caucus system, and for that we should be grateful, then fix it.

But 11% is far less than many modern third-party or alternative candidates have gotten. It doesn't matter what Paul supporters do now. There are not enough of them to make a real difference.

Do think the reason for that is because his message is unwanted by the masses, or because the masses haven't been given his message? Ah, there's the rub. He's a bit ahead of his time, as far as the voting majority goes. Too many old folks and middle agers that check the box next to their registered party without considering anything the candidate has said or done.

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

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

I am pretty sure his message is the problem. Hey students vote for me and I will take away your student loans. Hey nature lover vote for me and I will sell the national parks. Hey woking lady vote for me and I take away laws that protect you from sexual harassment. Hey Parents vote for me and I will take away the Dept of Education. Hey Farmers vote for me I will take away the dept of Ag. Hey truck drivers vote for me I will take away money for highways. Hey women vote for me I will take away your right to chose. It goes on and on.

What are you going to do about the Paul supporters who will switch their vote last minute in order to vote for Obama based on social issues?

That's the question I want answered. In Fact I made a thread about it here.

How can you call yourself a republican if you like Obama better than Romney?

No one but Paul. I will write in Ron Paul before I ever even think about voting Obama or Romney. OP is right. We will not be swayed. We will not vote for the lesser of 2 evils. We will not vote for your candidate. If you want Obama out of office you will vote Ron Paul or you will enjoy another 4 years. Period.

Schuyler says, quoting Politico:

"...It looks like Ron Paul isn’t going to be officially nominated for the presidency in Tampa.

His backers failed to win a plurality of delegate slots at the Nebraska GOP convention Saturday, leaving the Texas congressman short of the support necessary to have his name placed into contention at the national convention..."



Yet, in early May, Fox News reported that Ron Paul had his plurality of at least 5 states:




Btw, Paul DOES HAVE the needed plurality...and then some... No wonder MSM is going the way of the dinosaur!!

Originally posted by GenerationGap
Every election we hold fast to the establishment progressive paradigm setup by the two colluding main stay parties.
Every time we listen to the argument that "the vote for someone not establishment is a vote for the worse of the two". Sorry, not this time.

Ron Paul supporters are united and passionate. The argument is correct, with out the votes of the supporters of Paul, Obama WILL win. Everyone knows this, and you are being told the truth by Paul supporters that they will be casting their votes for him regardless of the tiring threat of another Obama Presidency. Knowing this then, you better start believing, and believing fast, that a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. Passion counts, the Paul supporters are passionate about their guy and are going to vote for him.

I'm telling all true Independents and Republicans to vote Paul, stop thinking you will sway Paul supporters into voting for anyone else. You won't. If we really don't want another Obama Presidency, it's up to the Romney supporters to recognize this and do the right thing. The ball is in their court, because everyone knows where Paul supporters stand. If Obama wins it's not because of Paul supporters, it's because you think that theirs a choice between Obama and Romney.

Romney will overturn Obamacare? No he won't. He'll water it down in a perfect example of the Overton Window. It's a lame argument anyway. While completely wrong in a society based on the philosophy of Liberty and Independence, Obamacare isn't the most dangerous thing the the two colluding parties have passed.

What I want to know is, will Romney overturn the Patriot Act and the NDAA? That's what's important. And no he won't. We all know he will do the same thing as Obama will, either strengthen these bad laws with more legislation of the same ilk, or worse, use them.

The only way this election will change the Office Holder of the Office of the President of the UsA, is to dig up all the dirt possible on Obama and paint the ugliest picture possible of his current term in office. He's done a pretty good job of doing that already. I have an idea he's going to make a power play to stay in office come October. We will see.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Why is this type of thread on ATS?

Why isn't anyone denying ignorance over party shills?

Originally posted by Nite_wing
This sounds very much like the type of post Obama supporters would post.
Vote for Paul, waste your vote and let Obozo ruin us totally.

I'll clarify for you: I'll be voting for the Republican candidate, whoever that turns out to be. A write-in for Ron Paul IS a vote for Obama. Remember Ross Perot, people.

At least the republicans recognize the damage Obamacare is doing. They may be bought and paid for, but they are less likely to continue destroying the middle class ON PURPOSE. And don't forget the tea party people who are republicans. Lesser of two evils, as the classic line goes.

Originally posted by GenerationGap
The argument is correct, with out the votes of the supporters of Paul, Obama WILL win.

Not so fast there buddy..



Rasmussen: Ron Paul Presidential Bid Would Hurt Obama

Yet despite apparent Democratic hopes that a Paul candidacy might cut into Romney’s total, the likely Republican nominee is the winner of a three-way race if the election were held right now. Given that match-up, Romney earns 44 percent support to President Obama’s 39 percent. Paul runs a distant third with 13 percent of the vote.

reply to post by bacci0909


paul preaches to ignorant masses. This baby doctor from texas becomes a joke once he opens up his mouth and spews out absurdities like slamming fiat currency and promotion of a return to a gold standard. Their is a reason that the Austrian school has been dismissed by all major economist across the world and a reason why the Austrian school has failed despite its presence for over 100 years and hundreds of books written, their is a reason why most Austrian economist are struggling to make ends meet. Of course they all attribute this to that of a conspiracy of them being "enlightened" and "above" the rest.


Paul's foreign policy is almost as laughable man is a straight isolationist and his policies would only destroy the US from within.