Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Ron Paul 3rd Party Candidacy; Hurt Or Help Obama?  
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40066 posts, RR: 74
Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1672 times:

Seeing that Ron Paul was crushed in just about every single Republican primary and caucus just goes to show that he does not share the views of most Republicans.
However he still enjoys a huge following and polls well against President Obama.
I see parallels of the Ron Paul supporters with the Obama supporters in 2008. Both have a loyal following and are popular with the younger voters.
Mitt Romney will attract traditional Republican voters as well as those that simply want to defeat Obama. I can see Ron Paul attracting a handful of former Obama supporters as well as those who equally dislike Obama and Romney.
I think that can hurt Obama more than help. Any thoughts?


Bring back the Concorde
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 39
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

Hmmm. . he pulls voters from different backgrounds, I have no idea which side would suffer more.

He does attract certain voters who are usually associated with liberals and who have grown displeased with some policies mainstream democrats like or accept. Civil liberties and the wars are probably the two biggest groups.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40066 posts, RR: 74
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 1):
He does attract certain voters who are usually associated with liberals and who have grown displeased with some policies mainstream democrats like or accept. Civil liberties and the wars are probably the two biggest groups.

True.
In the 15 years I lived in San Francisco (liberal Democratic bastion), he was the only Republican to have an active campaign set up there. Dole, Graham, McCain, Dubya, Romney nor any Republican actively tried to seek support from liberals accept Ron Paul.
Ron Paul had a tent in Golden Gate Park at the 40th Anniversary of the Summer Of Love festival. He was attracting a lot of supporters. I think Ron Paul would take away from Obama more than Romney.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineKingairTA From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 458 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1634 times:

Ron Paul already said he wont run as a third party. Its GOP or nothing.

User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8765 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1633 times:

From what I've seen, he seems to care very little about the moronic "liberal vs. conservative" partisanship that has so poisoned politics. For that reason alone, I'd be happy for him to have some influence... although he is of course still a politician, so he can't escape political realities.   


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1590 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 1):
He does attract certain voters who are usually associated with liberals and who have grown displeased with some policies mainstream democrats like or accept. Civil liberties and the wars are probably the two biggest groups.

Very true. The issue is that to get a third-party candidacy, he would have to get a LOT of money moving and I'm not sure he has it. And in this game, he's going to need billionaires on his side (that's what it's come down to since "People United"). Does he have them?

He polls well among younger voters, particularly White ones.

On balance, I think his candidacy would hurt Romney more than Obama, but not dramatically so.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1571 times:

The national poll numbers mean nothing.

What matters is who supports him in a handful of key large electoral vote states.

Florida?

Ohio?

Arizona?

Pennslyvania?

Illinois?

Michigan?

Those are the states where a few thousand, couple ten thousand, votes in two of those states for Ron Paul could change the outcome of the election.

I think the election comes down to a handful of midwest states this year - Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois - 65 electorial votes among regions where economic conditions are not the best.


User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13198 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1549 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 8):
The national poll numbers mean nothing.

What matters is who supports him in a handful of key large electoral vote states.

Florida? Ohio? Arizona? Pennsylvania? Illinois? Michigan?

Those are the states where a few thousand, couple ten thousand, votes in two of those states for Ron Paul could change the outcome of the election.

I think the election comes down to a handful of Midwest states this year - Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois - 65 electoral votes among regions where economic conditions are not the best.

That is the danger. In 2000 in Florida, Ralph Nadar's 3rd party votes, mainly pulling extreme progressive/liberal votes from Gore, may have been enough to cause Gore to lose in that state, it's electoral votes and thus the election (although Gore had more overall national votes).


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40066 posts, RR: 74
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1482 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 7):
may have been enough to cause Gore to lose in that state,

Of the 84,000+ people that voted for Nader in Florida, 2/3rds said they would have voted for Gore had Nader not been on the ballot. That is certainly higher than the 537 vote margin the Supreme Court awarded to Dubya.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlinePu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 771 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1456 times:

Ron Paul as a 3rd party candidate hurts Romney.

Republicans are more ideological. Low taxes good. Government bad. The depth of your belief in these ideas determines whether you like Romney or Paul more - but in no case would you vote for Obama if the top item on your decision making rubric is the basic passion for limited government.

(btw Democrats are less ideological voters, and if anyone is profoundly ideological it is Ron Paul)

So Paul as a candidate subtracts twice as much from the Republicans as from the Democrats, like Ross Perot did in 1992, which gave Bill Clinton the presidency with 42% of the vote.

Also remember even a very small 3rd party candidate can decide the whole election in terms of how many wasted votes they capture, likewise anger among Paul supporters could rebound against the Republicans in several ways...

Pu


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1444 times:

Quoting Pu (Reply 9):
(btw Democrats are less ideological voters, and if anyone is profoundly ideological it is Ron Paul)

I respect him. I may not agree with him, but he's logical and consistent. He's very systematic and objective, like the trained physician that he is. I would very much enjoy sitting down to lunch with him and having a debate. It would be a very intellectual experience and I don't think it would be the least bit contentious, but very challenging. He is a Conservative.

I think that's part of what makes him so attractive to people. He does not flip-flop. He's brutally honest. He is not like most politicians. There is nothing slick about him. He is brilliantly smart, honest, and follows his principles. I would not vote for Ron Paul, but I would be OK with having a President Paul.

He is an idealogue, but an honest one. That's rare.


User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7558 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1356 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 7):
That is the danger. In 2000 in Florida, Ralph Nadar's 3rd party votes, mainly pulling extreme progressive/liberal votes from Gore, may have been enough to cause Gore to lose in that state, it's electoral votes and thus the election (although Gore had more overall national votes).

Nader's presence in the 2000 race likely did equal or more damage to Gore in both New Hampshire & Gore's home state of Tennessee; the latter being a psychological loss as well as a tactical loss. Had Gore picked up either NH or TN; what went down in FL wouldn't have made it the deciding state.

Quoting Pu (Reply 9):
Ron Paul as a 3rd party candidate hurts Romney.

   He did run under a 3rd party label (Libertarian) back in 1988 but only got 0.47% of the popular vote; but that was when Paul was still largely an unknown.

I think he (Paul) knows that if he did run 3rd party this year; it would only help President Obama.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8477 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1325 times:

I believe his supporters who would normally vote moderate to left will vote for Obama.

The major question is if his supporters who tend to be on the right will even bother to vote at all. Maybe if the RNC gives Paul a speaking slot (but not in prime time) in exchange for supporting Willard there might be a chance for shifting preferences in the Paul Group.

My bet is moving to Paul starting to look at helping his son run for President in the future. That means being supportive of this year's candidates. The days of stepping on toes need to be over if he wants to support Rand in the future.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1263 times:

I am trying to find the political ideology chart that plotted out a sample of Obama supporters, a sample of Paul supporters, and samples of the other GOP candidate supporters.

I can't find it, which is a pity because it would be instructive to this discussion. Does anyone know what I'm talking about?


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1242 times:

In what strange world do you live in that supposes Obama supporters would gravitate to Mr. Paul?

Paul is for small government
Paul is for a non-interventionist government
Paul is anti-abortion
Paul opposes the PPACA and government run health care
Paul supports a balanced budget
Paul does not appear to believe in an income tax
Paul is pro-Second Amendment

These positions are diametrically opposed by the Obama administration and, by extension, their supporters. To be sure, some of these positions can be held by Obama supporters, but enough to vote for Mr. Paul and in sufficient numbers to tilt the election in favor of Mr. Romney? No chance.

Without a doubt, a third-party run by Mr. Paul would be Mr. Obama's wet dream for this election.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
He is an idealogue, but an honest one. That's rare.

That he is...and ideologues can be dangerous.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
I am trying to find the political ideology chart that plotted out a sample of Obama supporters, a sample of Paul supporters, and samples of the other GOP candidate supporters.

I can't find it, which is a pity because it would be instructive to this discussion. Does anyone know what I'm talking about?

You're right, I can't seem to find it either. A lot of stuff from 2008 popping up, but very little informative stuff about 2012. Maybe some of our college students, well versed in Internet research can turn it (or one) up.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40066 posts, RR: 74
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1238 times:

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 11):
Nader's presence in the 2000 race likely did equal or more damage to Gore in both New Hampshire & Gore's home state of Tennessee;

Dubya won 51% in Tennessee in 2000.
Nader was not a factor in Tennessee. Nader was only a factor in Florida and New Hampshire.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 14):
In what strange world do you live in that supposes Obama supporters would gravitate to Mr. Paul?

Before you shoot off the mouth with insults and jerking your knee around, perhaps you should read what the thread starter wrote and the questions they ask.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlinePu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 771 posts, RR: 13
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1227 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):

I am trying to find the political ideology chart that

I'm not sure if we are allowed to reproduce it here in full? but I think this Venn diagram is instructive.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/venn-ron-paul

.
...which implies pro-life, anti-immigration, anti-tax, pro-Privitisation Ron Paul supporters would gravitate towards Romney while anti-war, anti-Patriot Act, anti-NAFTA Ron Paul supporters would lean towards Obama.

Pu


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8955 posts, RR: 24
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1218 times:

Quoting Pu (Reply 16):
...which implies pro-life, anti-immigration, anti-tax, pro-Privitisation Ron Paul supporters would gravitate towards Romney while anti-war, anti-Patriot Act, anti-NAFTA Ron Paul supporters would lean towards Obama.

Except that it is full of very loaded terminology. "anti-immigration"? "anti-tax"? "Pro-War"? Utter horsecrap.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineakiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 651 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1211 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 14):
In what strange world do you live in that supposes Obama supporters would gravitate to Mr. Paul?

Speaking as an early 20 something, there is a portion of the younger population that would traditionally gravitate towards Obama that has fallen in love with Ron Paul for his protection of the internet and hands off approach to social issues.



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently offlineSSTeve From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 733 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1172 times:

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 18):
Speaking as an early 20 something, there is a portion of the younger population that would traditionally gravitate towards Obama that has fallen in love with Ron Paul for his protection of the internet and hands off approach to social issues.

Yeah, he's appealing to those who like to think they're deep thinkers. The libertarianism is attractive when you take a quick look. The bluntness is nice. And really, what great difference would a libertarian president be? It's not like he's going to change the constitution. Could end the drug war and chill out about a lot of other things. But when you look deeper into the policies that would have the most effect-- economic policies, radical government curtailment-- he's a bit of a whack.


User currently offlineakiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 651 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1161 times:

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 19):

Yeah, he's appealing to those who like to think they're deep thinkers. The libertarianism is attractive when you take a quick look. The bluntness is nice. And really, what great difference would a libertarian president be? It's not like he's going to change the constitution. Could end the drug war and chill out about a lot of other things. But when you look deeper into the policies that would have the most effect-- economic policies, radical government curtailment-- he's a bit of a whack.

Not saying I agree with them, just noting that they exist. I think that they completely over-estimate the power of the president to change fundamental laws and strategy of the country. I view most Ron Paul supporters as more or less cultist.



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently offlineSSTeve From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 733 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1153 times:

Oh, I didn't think you were arguing for him. I just happened to get linked to a long appearance of his on Bloomberg with Paul Krugman... yikes. He's a bit of a crank when you ask him to get down to specifics.

User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1134 times:

The problem is that most state primaries don't let independents vote or people to vote in a Republican primary unless they are a registered Republican. I am an independent that usually votes libertarian, so I couldn't vote for Ron Paul in Florida. If every state had an open primary, we would have probably done great in a lot of states.

Ron Paul had a lot more to offer than that used car salesman Romney, stuffy old Gingrich or Bible Thumping Santorum


User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1128 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 14):
Paul is for small government
Paul is for a non-interventionist government
Paul is anti-abortion
Paul opposes the PPACA and government run health care
Paul supports a balanced budget
Paul does not appear to believe in an income tax
Paul is pro-Second Amendment

IMHO, Paul would hurt Romney among middle-aged voters, and hurt Obama among moderate to conservative college-educated 20 somethings. Paul has very little appeal in the black and hispanic community, as well as with evangelicals because of his close identification with author Ayn Rand (who was very much an anti-religion zealot and a believer that the ultimate power was in individual choice, not in a faith in a higher power or following any religious doctrine). The ironic thing is that Rand was pro-choice (as she viewed abortion as an extension of individual choice) - while Ron Paul is pro-life. Strange divergence there......

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 18):
Speaking as an early 20 something, there is a portion of the younger population that would traditionally gravitate towards Obama that has fallen in love with Ron Paul for his protection of the internet and hands off approach to social issues.

Again, Paul appeals to younger, Tea-Party-ish Conservatives based on his Ayn Rand-based appeal on the correctness of personal liberty (and the rights of personal greed) since these voters see themselves as slaves to the failing social safety net. But these young voters would be wise to remember that Dr, Paul's idol Ayn Rand received healthcare through Medicare and Social Security payments in the final years of her life, as she was dying from cigarette-smoking related lung cancer.



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1101 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 15):
Before you shoot off the mouth with insults and jerking your knee around, perhaps you should read what the thread starter wrote and the questions they ask.

Where do you see an insult?

I read the opener and still don't see where anyone who supports Obama would go for Paul. All those bits I listed are from Mr. Paul's website and they are contrary to all of Mr. Obama's positions. The only people who would vote Paul instead of Obama are the touchy-feely folks who aren't paying attention. Oh, wait....I retract everything.   



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 25, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1111 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 23):
Paul has very little appeal in the black and hispanic community,

I know a lot of Cubans that think that he is great.


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8955 posts, RR: 24
Reply 26, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1109 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
I read the opener and still don't see where anyone who supports Obama would go for Paul. All those bits I listed are from Mr. Paul's website and they are contrary to all of Mr. Obama's positions. The only people who would vote Paul instead of Obama are the touchy-feely folks who aren't paying attention.

I said the same thing earlier in a more, ahem... direct manner, which got deleted. But that is what I don't get. I understand that there is an emotional attraction to both Obama and Paul. Both are non-standard candidates that upset the status quo. They are both 'rebels', which has attracted youth since time immemorial. But from there they are completely different. Obama's and Paul's positions on things could not be more opposite, except a little on the foreign policy side.

I'm seeing an awful lot of people, personally and on TV, who say that they voted for Obama and are now disappointed. Really??? Everything that Obama has done, tried to do, is attempting to do, and the way that he is campaigning, and the effect that his administration has had on the body politic of this country, was completely foreseeable back in 2007 and 2008. Anyone who voted for him and is disappointed is either A) a hard core commie who is disappointed that Obama did not lead some sort of 1917-style revolution (maybe 10% of the people are in that category), or B) simply was not paying attention 4 years ago, and voted out of emotion rather than reason.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6924 posts, RR: 34
Reply 27, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1099 times:

Quoting Pu (Reply 9):
Ron Paul as a 3rd party candidate hurts Romney

Absolutely correct.

I think he's staying in, wisely, however, to force the dialogue. The Republican primary bloodbath was actually a good thing--it put that milquetoast Romney on notice that the true conservatives aren't going to put up with RINO bulls**t. moreover, the real fights are for Senate seats and to retain House majority.

Many Republicans I know will vote for Romney but hold their nose doing it; just as many of us have done for a long time. I think I'm sticking with Gary Johnson the libertarian candidate again this time around. We'll see....

But Dr. Paul is forcing the debate to one of FISCAL PRUDENCE. He can take the fire that would otherwise be going toward Romney while pushing the narrative into one of Obama's crushing fiscal irresponsibility. And his cajones may help Romney find his.

Finally, I think Dr Paul still wants to audit the Fed---he could get some traction if Romney wins on this and be able to increase his influence. In most matters of liberty, I think that's a good thing.


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8955 posts, RR: 24
Reply 28, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1093 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 27):
I think I'm sticking with Gary Johnson the libertarian candidate again this time around.

So basically you are voting for Obama.

The primary is over. That's your choice - Romney or Obama. Tick tock tick tock...



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6731 posts, RR: 24
Reply 29, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1093 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
A) a hard core commie who is disappointed that Obama did not lead some sort of 1917-style revolution (maybe 10% of the people are in that category), or B) simply was not paying attention 4 years ago, and voted out of emotion rather than reason.

Or C) desperate for anything that wasn't going to just continue the previous 8 years as McCain would have disastrously done.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
Everything that Obama has done, tried to do, is attempting to do, and the way that he is campaigning, and the effect that his administration has had on the body politic of this country, was completely foreseeable back in 2007 and 2008.

The same could have been said for Bush. His cluelessness on both domestic and foreign policy issues was well known before he ran for President....not surprisingly by time he left office the U.S. was substantially weaker in both areas.


User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6924 posts, RR: 34
Reply 30, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1071 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 28):
So basically you are voting for Obama.

The primary is over. That's your choice - Romney or Obama. Tick tock tick tock...

Well, I reject the lesser of two evils approach fundamentally. And I haev the luxury of living in a state that will overwhelmingly vote for one over the other anyhow, so it's somewhat moot.

I'm sick and tired of the Ruling Class overall (comprised of Repubs and Democrats).


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8955 posts, RR: 24
Reply 31, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1054 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 29):
Or C) desperate for anything that wasn't going to just continue the previous 8 years as McCain would have disastrously done.

I consider that an emotional response.

Quoting slider (Reply 30):
Well, I reject the lesser of two evils approach fundamentally.
Quoting slider (Reply 30):
I'm sick and tired of the Ruling Class overall (comprised of Repubs and Democrats).

Trust me, I know how you feel. Many Americans will end up having to hold their noses while voting for Romney, and I'm sure a lot of Democrats will be voting for Obama the same way. Personally I would love to be able to vote in a Constitutionalist or Libertarian. But it ain't gonna happen. So I'd rather not waste my vote.

The time to change the direction of challenging party is during the primaries. We did put up a challenge, and Paul said a lot of things that needed to be said. He also said a lot of things I wish he hadn't, but anyway. But now the primary is over, and knowing that ours is a 2-party system, you have to choose between the two major parties. Those who wish to vote for one of the dozen or so fringe candidates, I understand your feelings, but it's a wasted vote.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 32, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1042 times:

I like Ron Paul, I don't agree with all his views, but then again, who ever agrees with every view of a candidate? The thing that gets me most is over and over I hear people say they like Paul, and would vote for him if they thought he could win, THEN VOTE FOR HIM!!!!!!!!!
I wish he would run as a third party, but what will happen, is exactly what I just stated.
Stay Safe!


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 33, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1039 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 23):
IMHO, Paul would hurt Romney among middle-aged voters, and hurt Obama among moderate to conservative college-educated 20 somethings. Paul has very little appeal in the black and hispanic community, as well as with evangelicals because of his close identification with author Ayn Rand (who was very much an anti-religion zealot and a believer that the ultimate power was in individual choice, not in a faith in a higher power or following any religious doctrine). The ironic thing is that Rand was pro-choice (as she viewed abortion as an extension of individual choice) - while Ron Paul is pro-life. Strange divergence there......

It's interesting, actually. The only place where Paul's ideology strikes me as inconsistent is the anti-abortion stance. I suppose that if you believe that it's murder, then it is part of the job of a government to enforce anti-homicide laws. That said, homicide is actually a STATES issue. I don't believe that Federal law addresses garden-variety homicide. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
They are both 'rebels', which has attracted youth since time immemorial.

Jigga whut? An almost octagenarian white male doctor and a man with a coupla Ivy-League degrees are "rebels?" That's an interesting dictionary you're using.


User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6924 posts, RR: 34
Reply 34, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1030 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 33):
Jigga whut? An almost octagenarian white male doctor and a man with a coupla Ivy-League degrees are "rebels?"

Yeah, Ron Paul is kidn of a rebel, very iconoclastic. In much the same way Goldwater drew a lot of the youth vote, Dr. Paul has that same appeal.

Now I wish he were more charismatic and carried it better, as that's been his achilles' heel, but if you read his books, he's totally rational, lays out a path of liberty and is, compared to the status quo of politics as usual, very rebellious I suppose in that context.


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 35, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1017 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 30):
Well, I reject the lesser of two evils approach fundamentally. And I haev the luxury of living in a state that will overwhelmingly vote for one over the other anyhow, so it's somewhat moot.


I understand your thinking and sympathize, but look at my rationale.

I believe that Romney will win the general election. Barring some Obama Administration super-collapse, Romney will win with a slim electoral victory. That's just the way the numbers are going to fall.

My thinking is that Romney will need major popular vote numbers in order to claim, that all elusive and illusory, mandate that the media keeps harping on. You know: the political capital or clout. Romney will have to put up big numbers on the popular side.

And, what about your local (state legislature and /or US Representative) elections? You going to go 3rd party there also?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 33):
The only place where Paul's ideology strikes me as inconsistent is the anti-abortion stance.


I don't know...it's very consistent with his faith. And, as we've seen in other threads, faith plays a role in shaping our politics, whether we like it or not.

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 32):
The thing that gets me most is over and over I hear people say they like Paul, and would vote for him if they thought he could win, THEN VOTE FOR HIM!!!!!!!!!


I agree, vote for the candidate you want. But, the time to vet candidates is during the primary, not the general.

A third party run by Dr. Paul will hurt Romney. Will it cost him the election? I don't know. Need to look at the polling data in the states that will be close. But, every vote he takes from Romney, lessens a Romney victory 'impact'.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 36, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):
I believe that Romney will win the general election. Barring some Obama Administration super-collapse, Romney will win with a slim electoral victory. That's just the way the numbers are going to fall.

I doubt it. I think his religion is going to bite him in the butt.


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 37, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1007 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 36):
I doubt it. I think his religion is going to bite him in the butt.


If anyone's religion is going to bite him in the butt, it's Obama's. Or more to the point, it will be the media trotting out every Tom, Dick & Bubba that thinks Obama is a closet Muslim and painting the whole GOP as fringe lunatics, by extension.

It would be funny, if it wasn't so important.

Romney's religion affects him only if he lets the narrative get steered away from the real issues in this election, 'ala Santorum.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 39
Reply 38, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1001 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
And in this game, he's going to need billionaires on his side (that's what it's come down to since "People United"). Does he have them?

Only Peter Thiel that I know of. But he's got a lot of supporters that have poured in a lot of money, including wealthy ones like one guy that spent more than $100,000 on an USA Today ad back in 2007/8.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
On balance, I think his candidacy would hurt Romney more than Obama, but not dramatically so.

I tend to think so too. I do wonder, however, if he drops the GOP and runs third party independent if more people outside the GOP would not join his campaign.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 39, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 997 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 37):
If anyone's religion is going to bite him in the butt, it's Obama's. Or more to the point, it will be the media trotting out every Tom, Dick & Bubba that thinks Obama is a closet Muslim and painting the whole GOP as fringe lunatics, by extension.

That helps Obama, rather than hurting him.

"You gonna vote for the guy from the party of conspiracy theorist white-supremacist wackjobs?" Painting the GOP as a party of fringe lunatics (and the current GOP is pretty much just that) is going to hurt the GOP. ESPECIALLY when people wearing elephant pins and waving flags illustrate the point.


User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6924 posts, RR: 34
Reply 40, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 992 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):
And, what about your local (state legislature and /or US Representative) elections? You going to go 3rd party there also?

All depends. For me, I have few competitive races there. The primary for TX Senate is interesting, but rest of the races are not terribly competitive. For most elections, I evaluate case by case, race by race, and make a decision. More often than not, I'll yield to the more conservative or libertarian candidate.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 39):
That helps Obama, rather than hurting him.

"You gonna vote for the guy from the party of conspiracy theorist white-supremacist wackjobs?" Painting the GOP as a party of fringe lunatics (and the current GOP is pretty much just that) is going to hurt the GOP. ESPECIALLY when people wearing elephant pins and waving flags illustrate the point.

I concur...

Romney needs to get out a hammer and just pound away on the economy. let the surrogates elsewhere bring up ancillary issues, but Romney ought to be wise to play the issues, hammer away at it non stop and he *should* win handily if Americans are sentient beings.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 41, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 985 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 23):
as well as with evangelicals

Which shows just how ridiculous it is for Christians to ally themselves with the Republican party. Ugh. Ron Paul is a Southern Baptist evangelical! The only evangelical in the race!

It's because so many so-called Christians love war and worship the military. They don't like Paul for his anti-war/pro-peace beliefs.

Quoting slider (Reply 30):
Well, I reject the lesser of two evils approach fundamentally.

Me too. I voted for him in Alabama's Republican primary in 2008 and 2012 and if he's not on the ballot in November my vote will be to not give the corrupt system any legitimacy.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20337 posts, RR: 59
Reply 42, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 980 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 40):
Romney needs to get out a hammer and just pound away on the economy. let the surrogates elsewhere bring up ancillary issues, but Romney ought to be wise to play the issues, hammer away at it non stop and he *should* win handily if Americans are sentient beings.

Unless, of course, the economy continues to improve. Or unless he keeps portrying himself as an out-of-touch rich fat cat with more cars than most of us have underwear.


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 43, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 975 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 39):
That helps Obama, rather than hurting him.

Sorry, I should have used a name as the subject instead of the pronoun (I know better than that, I've been working with my 9 year old on just that subject). It should read:

"If anyone's religion is going to bite Romney in the butt, it's Obama's."



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8955 posts, RR: 24
Reply 44, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 979 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 33):
It's interesting, actually. The only place where Paul's ideology strikes me as inconsistent is the anti-abortion stance. I suppose that if you believe that it's murder, then it is part of the job of a government to enforce anti-homicide laws. That said, homicide is actually a STATES issue. I don't believe that Federal law addresses garden-variety homicide. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I agree entirely. While I am pro-choice, I do believe that Roe v Wade was bad law, and should be rescinded. The subject should go to the states, UNLESS there is sufficient support to propose a Constitutional Amendment giving the Federal government power over that issue. Yes, it would be a bit of a mess, but you can't ignore the Constitution because it's inconvenient.

Quoting slider (Reply 40):
he *should* win handily if Americans are sentient beings.

Ahh, I think I see the problem with that assumption...

This campaign is going to get ugly. REALLY ugly. Obama is pulling no punches already, and we are still 6 months away. He has tried to claim that Romney would not have ordered the raid that killed Bin Ladin (an ad that even Arianna Huffington called "dispicable"). Now he is attacking Romney for having once had a bank account overseas. Then there was the dog-on-a-roof business. All besides the point - all meant to distract from the issues, but unfortunately such tactics work on enough people to be able to swing an election. In the coming 6 months, I fully expect the Obama campaign to accuse Romney of everything short of having sex with his mother. I hope and pray that Romney can keep himself at a higher level of discourse, and that enough Americans get disgusted at the nastiness and vote accordingly.

But it's going to be a long, dirty 6 months. As Charles Krauthammer recently said, over the next few months we are going to feel like taking a shower after every newscast.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 45
Reply 45, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 969 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):
I believe that Romney will win the general election. Barring some Obama Administration super-collapse, Romney will win with a slim electoral victory. That's just the way the numbers are going to fall.

I have absolutely no idea what makes you say that. Obama is polling just fine in all the swing states right now. Realclearpolitics is your friend.

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5655 posts, RR: 15
Reply 46, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 970 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 44):
over the next few months we are going to feel like taking a shower after every newscast.


And after ever commercial break. Thank God for DVR.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 44):
I agree entirely. While I am pro-choice, I do believe that Roe v Wade was bad law, and should be rescinded. The subject should go to the states, UNLESS there is sufficient support to propose a Constitutional Amendment giving the Federal government power over that issue. Yes, it would be a bit of a mess, but you can't ignore the Constitution because it's inconvenient.


Which is, I'm think what Dr. Paul's position is on the matter. A quote from his site:

"* Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through legislation modeled after his “We the People Act.”

Look, I'm not a Dr. Paul supporter, but, like others, I do feel his stance has been consistent on this issue and others. Maybe I've missed something in his speeches (I've only caught the sound-bites and bits and pieces), or maybe I'm missing something entirely, but his stance on abortion is consistent with his faith and his stance on a smaller federal government.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 47, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 951 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 25):
I know a lot of Cubans that think that he is great.

Ron Paul is against the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba because he's all for supporting free international trade, which of course would win him support of some (but certainly not all) Cubans.



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 48, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 36):
I doubt it. I think his religion is going to bite him in the butt.

Not for the Right Wing voters - they would rather have a Mormon than a "Muslim". I don't think someone that normally votes Republican will let Romney being a Mormon to stop them from voting for him in November.

Quoting slider (Reply 30):
Well, I reject the lesser of two evils approach fundamentally

Jesse Ventura said it best "If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are still votiing for evil"

If I wind up with just Obama and Romney on my ballot in November and a bunch of nobodies that will get no air time (Ron Paul kept off the ballot as a 3rd party) I will not vote this year. I am already pissed off that my district in Florida keeps off 3rd party candidates for Senate, Congress etc.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Renegotiate Nafta Or Else, Obama/Clinton Agree posted Wed Feb 27 2008 16:47:57 by Arrow
So How Long Till Ron Paul Gives Up? posted Wed Jan 23 2008 04:57:15 by CaptOveur
Ron Paul Exposed As Racist And Homophobe posted Thu Jan 10 2008 15:26:42 by Max999
Opinions On Ron Paul posted Thu Jan 3 2008 14:20:49 by DL777LAX
Ron Paul Gaining Traction...fundraising Record posted Tue Nov 6 2007 10:42:40 by Slider
Ron Paul 2008 posted Fri Oct 12 2007 23:03:52 by GREATANSETT
Ron Paul; A Republican I Can Vote For posted Tue Mar 13 2007 15:48:16 by Superfly
Is Anyone Here Voting For A 3rd Party? posted Sun Oct 24 2004 06:58:49 by Usatoeze
Iraqi Officials Ask 3rd Party To Mediate Surrender posted Fri Mar 21 2003 20:57:21 by JetService
Ron Paul Sounds Good To Me For GOP In 2004 posted Wed Mar 12 2003 07:59:45 by MD-90
Renegotiate Nafta Or Else, Obama/Clinton Agree posted Wed Feb 27 2008 16:47:57 by Arrow
So How Long Till Ron Paul Gives Up? posted Wed Jan 23 2008 04:57:15 by CaptOveur
Ron Paul Exposed As Racist And Homophobe posted Thu Jan 10 2008 15:26:42 by Max999
Opinions On Ron Paul posted Thu Jan 3 2008 14:20:49 by DL777LAX
Ron Paul Gaining Traction...fundraising Record posted Tue Nov 6 2007 10:42:40 by Slider
Ron Paul 2008 posted Fri Oct 12 2007 23:03:52 by GREATANSETT
Ron Paul; A Republican I Can Vote For posted Tue Mar 13 2007 15:48:16 by Superfly
Is Anyone Here Voting For A 3rd Party? posted Sun Oct 24 2004 06:58:49 by Usatoeze
Iraqi Officials Ask 3rd Party To Mediate Surrender posted Fri Mar 21 2003 20:57:21 by JetService