Would YOU vote for RON PAUL

if he does. then he is the anti christ.. :devil:

 

None of the Republicans are worth voting for. Ron Paul is right on some things, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. The other Republicans are clocks that are working but are perpetually wrong. T-Paw seemed like he may have been ok at least in terms of Republican politics.

lmao. If the internet represented real life Ron Paul would win the presidential election with 114% of the popular vote, and a gazillion electoral votes.

 

Yes, I would definitely prefer Obama to be reelected. He's not great, but every one of the candidates fielded by the republicans make him look like Black Jesus for sure.

 

IF he dosn't have plans or cares anout preserving the enviorment then my answer would be no for that reason... I care about our eniviorment alot and I know alot of you out there do, and I just dont want anything to happen to what we love...So would I vote for him HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Peace & Love

 

I don't know if I'd vote for him or not, but I can say there is no way, on God's green earth, that I would vote for Obama. I'd vote for Jerry Springer first.

Capt. Morgan

 

No I think he's affiliated with the klan

 

lol

 

haha- - Can you believe that guy was the mayor of Cincinnati at one time

 

Yeah, Cincinnati sucks.

 

That's for sure-and that's saying a lot, you know? He's real popular with the common person-it's the establishment that doesn't like him. That's why he's not that likely to get elected.

 

Maybe Newsweek, February 16, 2009, was correct "We Are All Socialists Now"?

 

More like "We're All Austrians Now"-as in Austrian economics.

 

I wrote him in for the last election and donated $500 dollars to his campaign. This time I still support him and have donated to date about $200 dollars. Dr. Paul will get my vote even if I have to write him in again. I will never again make the mistake of voting for a candidate that lacks integrity and a track record (yes, I check thomas.gov and such to see how they vote on legislation).

 

If only that were true. With the National debt today at $15,253,378,004,924.27 Obama is asking Congress to raise the ceiling again, by $1.2 trillion. The National debt when Obama took office was $10,626,877,048,913.08, an increase of $4,626,500,956,011.19 or put another way, our DEBT has been growing by $4,236,722,487.19 per day, which is above and beyond the revenues collected.

Until 5 things are accomplished little positive change will be possible.
1. Eliminate the National debt
2. Eliminate the Federal reserve
3. Make our money sound
4. Repeal the 16th amendment
5. Repeal the 17th amendment
None of the above can be accomplished overnight, but until we begin a path towards accomplishing them things will only grow worse for the governed.
Ron Paul would be a start, while electing an establishment Republican or Democrat only results in where and how quickly our Nation decays. While Central planning is effective in producing results most quickly, the equality of 'governed individuals' it results in is that of equal poverty. The success or failure of each of us as individuals should be primarily a result of our own decisions and actions in life, not governments.

Would/will I vote for Ron Paul? Absolutely.

 

by the time you finished that post the debt went up- 426,544,988.45

 

Bob

This is just evasion, he is a right wing libertarian and many here have given their criticisms of that ideology - can you please stop trying to worm out of addressing these criticisms and actually do so.

*

And Ron is just a right wing libertarian, one moment you are saying they’re all different and the next you are saying most are just the same – which is it?

 

Bob

Here is something I wrote back in 08 long before the tea party started up – Neo-cons fall, who’ll rise on the right?

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=333692&f=36

The thing many people don’t understand is that the Republican Party is just an alliance of right wing factions. Too gain leadership someone has to try and appease or appeal to the differing factions depending on which are dominant or not. (Of course this is the same with the Democratic Party). It is a problem that stems from having a two party state.

So in the RP you have old style small c conservatives, the Christian right, state-rightists, neo-cons, right wing libertarians, constitutionalists, nationalists etc (most are neo-liberals but not all). Alliances and ideas merge and part with the ebb and flow of the political tides.

The neo-cons are not out but they were badly damaged by their failures in the Bush Admin, and so you got the tea party movement with its more RWL stance.

I’m a left winger, and as mentioned in the US you basically have two right wing parties one centre right and one further to the right. I couldn’t honestly give either my support, but like many Americans if I were forced to do so I’d have to hold my nose and vote for the lesser evil.

 

Bob

I’m hoping this was not genuine comment and just some fatuous outburst - otherwise it shows a woeful lack of knowledge about the US’s foreign policy and world politics.

I’d also say that it was untrue, I think criticism has come from many quarters including many from the US, the problem is that there are a lot of cheerleaders for US style right wing libertarianism but they only seem to have pom-poms rather than rational or reasonable arguments.

 

Jack

Depends what this means in practice. I’ve given the example of education in the past – Critics of the US educational system have pointed out that many of its problems stem from too much localism. As Susan Jacoby* points out “children in the poorest areas of the country would have the worst school facilities and teachers with the worst training”. Bringing about a situation were the children of the already advantaged are yet more advantaged by receiving better education.
Also wealth can often gain advantage from disunity, playing one state off against another. One state cuts income and corporation tax to the bone and businesses in another demand it be done in there state or they will move. This already happens on a global scale and why I think we need global institutions to curb it.

 

Bob

Thing is do these supporters know what his ideas are and can they actually address the criticisms levelled at right wing libertarianism?

Being popular does not actually equate to being therefore right or having sensible or even rational ideas.

I mean Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin and Mao were popular.