Ron Paul can win!

[scorpio1980]

I can't believe I have finally found an article in the media stating the obvious. People really are starting to wake up. A great article.
Robin Koerner: Ron Paul Can Win

[Gabo]

Great article! I think it really does summarize precisely why Ron Paul has a chance this election. We'll see if he ends up winning, but he's definitely not the long shot the media makes him out to be.

[illbreaker]

I would really like for Ron Paul to win. Something tells me Romney will most likely be the candidate running against Obama.

[scorpio1980]

I have voted in so many polls this year that I can't even remember how many. It is in the multiple 100's for sure. The one thing I see in common with these polls is that Ron Paul wins roughly 90% of them. Sometimes they get taken down by the media, because Ron Paul will have like 80% of the vote. The media is so biased towards him, but I do see that changing. The people are waking up, and the media knows they can only lie to the people when the people are willing to accept the lies. The people are starting to not accept the lies anymore.

Remember for Ron Paul to have a chance he has to win the primary. You have to register republican in order to vote in the primaries. I am registered independent. Can I vote in the republican primaries registered as an independent?

[Chizalia]

Oh Lord. Tell me you guys are astro-turfing.

You are, aren't you? That idea is more comforting than the alternative.

[scorpio1980]

Originally Posted by Chizalia

Oh Lord. Tell me you guys are astro-turfing.

You are, aren't you? That idea is more comforting than the alternative.

No not astroturfing. Simply spreading a message that Ron Paul actually can win in 2012! Astroturfing is spreading a message making something look like it's artificially grassroots. Ron Paul's message is truly grassroots.

[russianrocket]

lol I'm almost certain that voting for Ron Paul, will get you put on some list, somewhere or other.

[Solipsist]

You know, it kills me to have to register Republican to vote for the guy, but probably not half as much as it kills him to have to run in the Republican party just for the exposure.

btw, thanks for the article. From one with degrees in History, I can say that it was quite insightful.

[scorpio1980]

Originally Posted by Solipsist

You know, it kills me to have to register Republican to vote for the guy, but probably not half as much as it kills him to have to run in the Republican party just for the exposure.

btw, thanks for the article. From one with degrees in History, I can say that it was quite insightful.

Yea I don't like that fact either. I wish he could run as an independent, but he tried that already in 1988, and it doesn't work out very well.

[Curtis2011]

I would like to see him win the nomination just to see the giant political ****storm that would entail immediately afterwards.

Just imagine all of the members of the media having to give coverage to his campaign after purposefully ignoring him for so long. They would even have to invite him onto all the channels to speak simply because he would be the Republican candidate and all the news stations are expected to cover the Presidential election in full detail.

[scorpio1980]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

I would like to see him win the nomination just to see the giant political ****storm that would entail immediately afterwards.

Just imagine all of the members of the media having to give coverage to his campaign after purposefully ignoring him for so long. They would even have to invite him onto all the channels to speak simply because he would be the Republican candidate and all the news stations are expected to cover the Presidential election in full detail.

I know. That would be one of the best things I can imagine. He would finally have an almost unlimited potential to speak to the American public.

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by scorpio1980

I know. That would be one of the best things I can imagine. He would finally have an almost unlimited potential to speak to the American public.

Aye. I don't know if his views are supported by a majority of Americans, but he would have a lot more support than he currently does if the media gave him the normal amount of attention that they give to anyone else.

[James Fletcher]

It would be great if he got the nomination.

As far as winning the election goes?

According to Gallup Obama currently holds the lowest approval rating since Jimmy Carter, which is quite significant considering how low Bush dipped in his second term.

However, Obama still has a legion of blind supporters for the GOP nominee to contend with in 2012.

[Lil Chris]

I voted for him last time, (I had to write it in) it's simply amazing how the media just shuts him out.

[NoJobRob]

I'm not registered to vote here in Hawaii yet, but I'm going to register soon, and vote for Ron Paul. I don't agree with him on every tiny little thing, but he's the only candidate who would get to the root of the country's problems, and that is more important than anything. Then once we get back to being a stable country, we can offer free healthcare and all the rest.

I'm one of those people who doesn't just blindly follow along with a political party. Both sides have good things to offer and good philosophies on certain things, so why can't we just have the best of both worlds? Too much work? LOL

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by NoJobRob

I'm not registered to vote here in Hawaii yet, but I'm going to register soon, and vote for Ron Paul. I don't agree with him on every tiny little thing, but he's the only candidate who would get to the root of the country's problems, and that is more important than anything. Then once we get back to being a stable country, we can offer free healthcare and all the rest.

I'm one of those people who doesn't just blindly follow along with a political party. Both sides have good things to offer and good philosophies on certain things, so why can't we just have the best of both worlds? Too much work? LOL

Yeah that's my opinion. I want to agree with the Republican party, but then their mainstream candidates come out with irrational ideologies like gay people are evil, abortion is evil, stem cell research is evil, letting people smoke pot is evil, etc.

It just gets so annoying to hear a candidate talk about rational economics one minute and think "yeah this guy is really smart", then the next minute facepalm as he rants about how gay people will destroy traditional American society or some other BS like that.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

Yeah that's my opinion. I want to agree with the Republican party, but then their mainstream candidates come out with irrational ideologies like gay people are evil, abortion is evil, stem cell research is evil, letting people smoke pot is evil, etc.

It just gets so annoying to hear a candidate talk about rational economics one minute and think "yeah this guy is really smart", then the next minute facepalm as he rants about how gay people will destroy traditional American society or some other BS like that.

I agree 100%. But, I think that this is in the nature of the current political process--campaigns are targeting as many people as possible, and since that often includes the more marginal of the populace, then they must resort to that same senselessness that turns them off to common sense crowd.

It's because of that necessity to pander for votes that I could never succeed as a politician.

[Chizalia]

Yeah, well, see you in Paulville and all, but we are talking about a dude who blamed famine in Somalia on....socialism. You know, the kind of socialism that is also known as anarchy (because that is actually how Somalia is governed). Always makes me chuckle. Something wrong out there in the world? Must be socialism!

Anyway, RP seems to be an honest dude and I haven't detected him being in anyone's pocket, but he's still a typical right-wing nut when it comes to stuff like policies and an understanding of world affairs. He's just a little less nutty than some of the others. (I used to be a godawful right-wing nut and all around ignorant ♥♥♥♥♥, so I know aaaall about how that works).

Check out the Constitution fetishism on his website. The opposition to family planning. The support for cutting corporate taxes. This nonsense right here: "America is the greatest nation in human history".

I got some news for you guys - America is certainly not now, and probably never was, the greatest nation on earth. Like P Diddy said, I done been around the world. Well, I've been to Europe, anyway, and I've lived in England for 6 years. America? It is downright primitive compared to this country. Soz, but it's true. I have no interest in going back to a country which lets its citizens die for lack of healthcare, still believes the trickle-down economic myth (how is that working for most of you?) and has poor transportation infrastructure and patchy workers' rights legislation. I get so much more for my taxes here - to name a few, fantastic socialized (omg) healthcare, public transportation and the knowledge that my fellow citizens do not starve or sleep on the streets when they are in need.

I think it's both hilarious and sad that the right thinks everything will be OK if we can just disentangle His Holiness the Holy Free Market from the clutches of government. What you will end up with is a feudal society, and who do you all think'll be Lord of the Manor then? You? Don't count on it. You'll be plowing a furrow for Monsanto/McDonalds/Koch Industries. Enjoy!

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by Chizalia

Yeah, well, see you in Paulville and all, but we are talking about a dude who blamed famine in Somalia on....socialism. You know, the kind of socialism that is also known as anarchy (because that is actually how Somalia is governed). Always makes me chuckle. Something wrong out there in the world? Must be socialism!

Anyway, RP seems to be an honest dude and I haven't detected him being in anyone's pocket, but he's still a typical right-wing nut when it comes to stuff like policies and an understanding of world affairs. He's just a little less nutty than some of the others. (I used to be a godawful right-wing nut and all around ignorant ♥♥♥♥♥, so I know aaaall about how that works).

Check out the Constitution fetishism on his website. The opposition to family planning. The support for cutting corporate taxes. This nonsense right here: "America is the greatest nation in human history".

I got some news for you guys - America is certainly not now, and probably never was, the greatest nation on earth. Like P Diddy said, I done been around the world. Well, I've been to Europe, anyway, and I've lived in England for 6 years. America? It is downright primitive compared to this country. Soz, but it's true. I have no interest in going back to a country which lets its citizens die for lack of healthcare, still believes the trickle-down economic myth (how is that working for most of you?) and has poor transportation infrastructure and patchy workers' rights legislation. I get so much more for my taxes here - to name a few, fantastic socialized (omg) healthcare, public transportation and the knowledge that my fellow citizens do not starve or sleep on the streets when they are in need.

I think it's both hilarious and sad that the right thinks everything will be OK if we can just disentangle His Holiness the Holy Free Market from the clutches of government. What you will end up with is a feudal society, and who do you all think'll be Lord of the Manor then? You? Don't count on it. You'll be plowing a furrow for Monsanto/McDonalds/Koch Industries. Enjoy!

To be sure, and as I've said before, I appreciate and often encourage dissent, and indeed you make some valid points here, particularly about healthcare, which, in the United States, is simply a disgrace, and subject that just gets my hackles up to no end.

For some time, I looked at the English healthcare system, and thought (and to some extent, still think) that such a system might work in the United States. I would still prefer it over what we have now, and WAY over the Obama proposal, which, frankly, I flatly refuse to be a part of. However, I don't know if a system that works for the 51 million people of England would work so well for a country with now over 300 million people--and with such diverse backgrounds and opinions, as is the nature of the U.S.

From the tone of your post, I get the impression that it is your opinion that the United Kingdom is hands down the best country in the world, and I shall make no attempt to dissuade you of such an opinion. Indeed, anyone's rhetorical claim that their country is the best the world has ever seen is simply that--a rhetorical claim. Moreover, I suppose that if you're correct that England truly IS the best country that the world has ever seen, we in the United States should all pack everything we possess, and trolly across the pond to the Splendid Island forthwith, however, I would think 300 million + people would be a bit of a tight squeeze.

Since the United States is my home from birth, I, for one, am more likely to remain here in the hopes of bettering my own country, than to flock to another that I might think better. To that end, and within the political processes of that society, the legal and prescribed way to do it is to vote, and that means voting for the person I consider most qualified to hold the office for which he/she is campaigning.

Well, in the case of the 2012 Presidential election, and all things considered, the only one I see that fits that bill is Dr. Paul. Call him a right-wing nut, if you will, but, in my observation, he's much more likely to simply address the real issues that face this country than anyone else. Hence, he'll get my vote.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Chizalia

Yeah, well, see you in Paulville and all, but we are talking about a dude who blamed famine in Somalia on....socialism. You know, the kind of socialism that is also known as anarchy (because that is actually how Somalia is governed). Always makes me chuckle. Something wrong out there in the world? Must be socialism!

Anyway, RP seems to be an honest dude and I haven't detected him being in anyone's pocket, but he's still a typical right-wing nut when it comes to stuff like policies and an understanding of world affairs. He's just a little less nutty than some of the others. (I used to be a godawful right-wing nut and all around ignorant ♥♥♥♥♥, so I know aaaall about how that works).

Check out the Constitution fetishism on his website. The opposition to family planning. The support for cutting corporate taxes. This nonsense right here: "America is the greatest nation in human history".

I got some news for you guys - America is certainly not now, and probably never was, the greatest nation on earth. Like P Diddy said, I done been around the world. Well, I've been to Europe, anyway, and I've lived in England for 6 years. America? It is downright primitive compared to this country. Soz, but it's true. I have no interest in going back to a country which lets its citizens die for lack of healthcare, still believes the trickle-down economic myth (how is that working for most of you?) and has poor transportation infrastructure and patchy workers' rights legislation. I get so much more for my taxes here - to name a few, fantastic socialized (omg) healthcare, public transportation and the knowledge that my fellow citizens do not starve or sleep on the streets when they are in need.

I think it's both hilarious and sad that the right thinks everything will be OK if we can just disentangle His Holiness the Holy Free Market from the clutches of government. What you will end up with is a feudal society, and who do you all think'll be Lord of the Manor then? You? Don't count on it. You'll be plowing a furrow for Monsanto/McDonalds/Koch Industries. Enjoy!

Check your stats. NO one dies from lack of healthcare. EVERYONE who needs it, gets it. We have hospitals all across the country, that HAS TO admit anyone who comes in. We also have medicaid and medicare and the VA. They can't just let you die, so I think you need to get your anti American facts straight before implying anything about us. Thing is, just how much healthcare do people deserve? Do we give everyone every single possible health care to keep them alive for as long as possible? Give everyone a heart transplant, and give every fat person liposuction and gastric bypass? How about a lung transplant for every smoker? You see where I'm getting at? There is only so much you can do. EVERY country lets it's citizens die. Period. I'd love for you to show me a country that doesn't. Go look at UK. They are bankrupting their health care and are starting to ration health care. Longer and longer wait times. Less doctors to do the work, and less hospitals due to less money. You keep loving up health care for all, but you don't know how the real world works. When they run out of other peoples money, then what?

Also, while you are at it, check out how many private hospitals are in the UK, because people would rather pay money for health care, then deal with the crappy UK free health care system.

Oh, and we get public transportation here too. Difference is, America is so big, that it's not as good here, because it CAN'T be. Everything in the UK is so compact and close, that public transport works. Go to New York, and you can get anywhere on public transport. So, try again with your argument.

As far as people starving. Well, give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.
I doubt that your government feeds every single person that needs food. We have food kitchens and donations and a huge portion of the population receives food stamps and welfare. So, GTFO out of here with your UK is so much better then the US, unless you have some actually valid evidence for your assumptions.

Everyone born in a true socialist country, that moved to America, wants nothing to do with it. It does not work. You eventually run out of other peoples money. Once 50% realize that they don't need to work to get money, and the other 50% realize that their work is going to the first 50%, then there is nothing left for anyone. I'd love to hear your reasoning for socialism. Because from what I've seen, you don't know how USA works, how the UK works, or how socialism works. Or capitalism for that matter/

[Mariana Trench]

I don't agree with all of his positions by a long shot (he's anti choice as far as reproductive rights go) but I don't imagine that would actually have a lot of impact on the policy. I'd like to see him win out of immense curiosity, the fact that it would prove a candidate could win without the ridiculous media run around, and this:

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

I would like to see him win the nomination just to see the giant political ****storm that would entail immediately afterwards.

Just imagine all of the members of the media having to give coverage to his campaign after purposefully ignoring him for so long. They would even have to invite him onto all the channels to speak simply because he would be the Republican candidate and all the news stations are expected to cover the Presidential election in full detail.

Re: the never ending capitalism vs socialism argument: all markets that work, are mixed markets, unless you want to count black markets, period.

[Andrew Brunelle]

But Ron Paul won't win, and being president doesn't give one as much power as most people think. Even if he does get elected, many of the ideas he talks about will never be implemented because they are too out there for mainstream America and the corporate-suckling Congress and Senate. Anything Ron Paul wants to do in regard to shaking up the status quo will be quashed and ridiculed, even if it is better for our nation and the world as a whole.

I like Ron Paul, but he'll most likely never get elected, and he'd be better off using his influence leading movements like the Occupy Wall Street or Take Down the Fed...

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

But Ron Paul won't win, and being president doesn't give one as much power as most people think. Even if he does get elected, many of the ideas he talks about will never be implemented because they are too out there for mainstream America and the corporate-suckling Congress and Senate. Anything Ron Paul wants to do in regard to shaking up the status quo will be quashed and ridiculed, even if it is better for our nation and the world as a whole.

I like Ron Paul, but he'll most likely never get elected, and he'd be better off using his influence leading movements like the Occupy Wall Street or Take Down the Fed...

I highly doubt Ron Paul would want to step anywhere near the flea party.

[Gabo]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

But Ron Paul won't win, and being president doesn't give one as much power as most people think. Even if he does get elected, many of the ideas he talks about will never be implemented because they are too out there for mainstream America and the corporate-suckling Congress and Senate. Anything Ron Paul wants to do in regard to shaking up the status quo will be quashed and ridiculed, even if it is better for our nation and the world as a whole.

I like Ron Paul, but he'll most likely never get elected, and he'd be better off using his influence leading movements like the Occupy Wall Street or Take Down the Fed...

I love how anytime someone says Ron Paul won't get elected, they state it as if the mere exclamation will make it true. Where is the basis for this argument? By any metric used to measure the race for the Republican nomination, Paul is doing well. He consistently polls well. He fundraises like a madman. His supporters dedicate time to volunteer in the grassroots. So where's the argument?

You're right that the status quo is trying to quash and ridicule him, but it's pretty difficult when they can't poke holes in his arguments or expose bad things about him because they can't find any! Rather, they ignore him, pretending to themselves that he'll go away like a bad dream. Well, that may have worked in 2008, but it's not working today. The old media only continues to prove their irrelevancy and bias as they ignore him and his support continues to grow.

[Lil Chris]

This is funny John Stewart Shows How Ron Paul Is Feared AND IGNORED - YouTube

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

But Ron Paul won't win, and being president doesn't give one as much power as most people think. Even if he does get elected, many of the ideas he talks about will never be implemented because they are too out there for mainstream America and the corporate-suckling Congress and Senate. Anything Ron Paul wants to do in regard to shaking up the status quo will be quashed and ridiculed, even if it is better for our nation and the world as a whole.

I like Ron Paul, but he'll most likely never get elected, and he'd be better off using his influence leading movements like the Occupy Wall Street or Take Down the Fed...

So in other words, give up all hope and stop trying to change anything for the better?

Even if Ron Paul doesn't win, someone else would be wise to "take his place" and run on similar values in future elections, given the proven support for such values that currently exists.

[garentee]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

So in other words, give up all hope and stop trying to change anything for the better?

Even if Ron Paul doesn't win, someone else would be wise to "take his place" and run on similar values in future elections, given the proven support for such values that currently exists.

It does not matter who is in office.. Ron paul DOES have great ideas, if he is elected it will not change overnight or in 4 or even 8 years. The problems we face are systemic in nature and it requires many years of change to get to where Ron Paul wants to take them. Right now the system we have is the culmination of fifty years of picking away at what FDR put into place, and it took that long because change in this system takes quite a long while. If you want to vote for Ron Paul, by all means do so..heck I may vote for him as well, but I think it is far more important to change things in your locality first.

[Brutha]

You know, the kind of socialism that is also known as anarchy

If you look at the way burning man is organised you could call it socialism or anarchy. Both terms accurately describe it.

Anything Ron Paul wants to do in regard to shaking up the status quo will be quashed and ridiculed, even if it is better for our nation and the world as a whole.

The medium is the message.
Getting Ron Paul president will automatically shakle up the status quo without him doing anything.

But it's just not true. The president doesn't need congress or the senate to withdraw US oversee troops. The president doesn't need them to give nonviolent drug addicts that are incarnated pardons.
The president doesn't need anything to declassify a huge number of documents that will have a political effect.

[scorpio1980]

Everyone keeps saying the president doesn't make that big of a difference or that we need to change our policies on the local level first. Don't forget like Brutha says the president has the ability to do a lot on his own, and has a tremendous amount of influence. Also, doesn't it make sense to change things on a local level we should have a president that supports your local rights. Someone who believes the federal government should get out of education, raiding your raw milk, marijuana policy, gay rights, abortion, etc and leave those policies to the states to individually choose. This will create competition between states. These are all reasons to support Ron Paul.

We the people support Ron Paul:We The People: Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Election - YouTube