As far as I can see, the rest of the candidates (republifags and democraps alike) are basically planning to move the checkers on the board around a little bit, and Mr. Paul wants to throw the fucking board over. I like the idea of change, so I'm attracted. How do you feel about this? Unrealistic liberfag, or are you interested too?
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 2:04 ID:I6+l5eG+
Mike Gravel dawg
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 3:30 ID:Zt0FgvVP
Yay Ron!!!
He's the only person who speaks of the new world order / eminant police state and he's the only who gets banned from debates, that should be all the evidence you need. Freedom of speech in full effect!
TAKE AMERICA BACK!
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 4:01 ID:hTU2h9//
oaky okay they pretty much support the same thing except mikes a little more extreme
we've got to make sure we syncronise our votes for one and only one candidate otherwise we won't get ether of them in.
24 and 24 are nothing if bush gets 25
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 5:07 ID:JygsXyZ7
Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance. He actually believes in something. While other candidates will take a few minutes to ponder the latest polling data, Ron Paul already has an answer. I won't say that he's right or wrong, simply that he is so convinced of his convictions that he does not require a moment to compose his answer. It's already there.
Ron Paul is consistent. Americans don't like that. We like people like GWBush, who run on the platform of limited foreign involvement then use any excuse possible to expand American hegemony across the globe. War and death and mass murder are popular themes for the GOP but Ron Paul does not agree. Because he does not think America's role is to patrol and police the whole world, he can't possibly win.
No one receiving a government stipend/benefit/welfare/etc. will ever vote Ron Paul because they will lose the life-line that keeps them alive. If a man or woman thinks blow-back doesn't exist, he or she won't vote for Ron Paul. If you don't believe in blow-back, please do this: on a windy day, step outside and piss into the wind. When the piss ends up on you then you will understand blow-back.
Ron Paul doesn't have a chance because people want "free" health-care, a more aggressive foreign policy and unlimited government benefits. No one will bother to ask whether freedom comes from the government or from something else.
I support Ron Paul with fanatical zeal, but I know he doesn't have a chance. Still, I'd rather be naive and lose so much than be cynical and lose nothing at all.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 6:14 ID:F0Hmbe8D
well man you've got to get out there and explain shit to people like the old days.
Even if it takes you fucking like an entire month to get one person to udnerstand you, suddenly you have two people. think of it like an RPG. Suddenly you have two people to spread the word. Two gets four in the month, eight in another month, who knows you might even manage to convince someone who can works faster then you, you've got to move guys, russia is not going to put up with this shit much longer and if a war does start, you will ether be nuked or drafted.
Don't take this for granted, it isn't over yet.
Just kidding, I'm going to vote for the Communist Party again.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-06 22:17 ID:XaN0U7yQ
>>5
I agree with you on most of your counts. I'm mostly just a libertarian-leaning right-winger, slightly anti-war, and very critical of the police state... I'm definitely going to be voting for Ron Paul in the republican primaries. Hope you all will too.
This is why I'm glad you freaks are on the fringes of society where you belong.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 4:14 ID:Cg5OAJkT
>>9
Why bother? The D and R candidates will, without a doubt, be Hillary Obama and Rudy McRomney. I don't even want to vote in the general election, let alone the primaries. When former coke-heads and war-hawk doves are nominated for the D ticket and liberal nut-jobs and adulterers are nominated for the R ticket, why the fuck bother?
The "leading candidates" view the Constitution less as a protection of individual rights and more a hindrance to the health of the state. Why should citizens be secure in their persons and papers when the dissolution Amendment IV would allow the State to protect us all so much better? Why should thieves be allowed to avoid incriminating themselves in a criminal trial? If we know they are thieves, they should be made to testify.
And if a man kills another man in some brutal fashion, he should be killed in the same way.
It is a matter of fact that when the Union declares war we can't be stopped. It is a matter of fact that when we enter into police actions that we are either fought to a stand-still or embarrassed by half a decade of retreat. But the Ds and Rs don't care, because a police action is not a war, even if it kills 60,000. It's not a war!
One side pretends that abortion is found in the Constitution. The other, that socialized medicine is buried within the Articles or Amendments. Amendment II prevents the police from dominating all urban and rural jurisdictions. Amendment III prevents a further escalation which would include National Guard units. Amendment IV prevents the State from gathering the information it needs, at least easily. Amendment V prevents the State from gathering the information it needs. Amendment VI prevents the State from launching an end-around and pinning the guilty-accused in a corner.
Amendment VII prevents the State from retrying the accused, even after new evidence has come forth. What a travesty! Amendment VIII prevents the State from holding excessive bail over known felons, no matter how guilty they are. Amendment IX prevents the State from from limiting Rights granted to the people -- the very rights which hinder the State.
And Amendment X does not exist.
No one who wants the US to survive will vote for Ron Paul. No one who would rather suffer a police state than a social injustice will ever vote for Ron Paul. Anyone who can't grasp the difference between States' rights and the rights of the Federal government will vote for Ron Paul. No one who puts social, economic or personal security before social, economic and personal liberty will ever vote for Ron Paul.
Just fucking vote for Rudy McRomney and accept the tyranny of the stupid.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 5:02 ID:oZJNE05D
Im supporting and voting for ron paul because he wants to stop government internet control and other stuff im too lazy to type
#12, we should bother because the Why Bother Party is really starting to outnumber the rest. Keep voting for the best candidate and stop thinking that you'd be better off voting for the winner (even though you don't -- I'm jus' sayin').
If Ventura could win in Minnesota without holding up bridges with his biceps and demonstrating superhuman characteristics, then it's possible to finally get a President who understands and obeys the US Constitution.
By not voting, "they" automatically win. Make them at least WORK FOR IT!
Name:
Blitzkrieg2007-08-07 8:33 ID:ExhDEdvU
Ron Paul doesn't want to regulate the internet, so vote for him! He also wants to bring back the constiution and get us out of Iraq. It is our DUTY as intranet warriorzz to spread this great mans message.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 9:52 ID:uWOBvw+w
why is he anti-war?
fucking gay hippie bullshit.
and he's the best the US got fucking pathetic
Personally I disagree with Mr. Paul about ending this war, we should finish it first, like any other conflict. The anti-war crowd has no understanding of reality, we're still in places like Germany and Japan btw, come to think of it, we have bases and territorial obligations that date back to the Spanish-American war...
I agree about 90% with Ron Paul, way more than any other candidate, and I do plan to vote for him no matter what.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 11:14 ID:uZyi4N7y
>>18
Finish it? this war will last as long as vietnam. And we are in this one form the beginning, not just jumping in halfway through.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 11:19 ID:35GnJQ5L
4chan has a new Politics forum on its new site. You guys have to migrate there so 4han can shut down this old site.
Too bad for #18's version of reality! The actual reality is that this "war" will only finish when the USgay slinks out of Baghdad like a beat-down dog. You can't conquer a people who refuse to be conquered. DUH.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 13:53 ID:bKbXwCfU
Spoilers: you have to be 18 or older to vote.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 14:16 ID:gM3xCEiu
Unfortunately, there's too much wrong in this country for it to be realistic to expect one man to fix anything just by getting elected.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-07 15:41 ID:CL7mnP+f
>>25
Because there is such thing as a perfect country and the US can't become one because not everyone is as intelligent and caring as you?
Name:
Oak2007-08-08 5:43 ID:rG0AmXrj
I do like Ron Paul's ideas and I think that is a great comparing it to a Checkers game, but I fear that he is out of the real race. He said he would stop running if he didn't get Republican nomination, and that fagot Rudy is most likely going to get it. Personally seeing how Ron Paul might be out I'll hope for Obama.
Rudy might have the Repub nom sewn up by his repeated screaming of "911! 911!! 911!!! 911!!!!". However, the Repubs like to run governors, since they are really the only type of politician who can win the White House. So, I'm holding out for the Dark Horse there. Rudy can scream "911!!11!111!1!one!!1!eleven" to keep the Party Faithful focused on what's important (i.e. killing towelheads who had the nerve to live over the oil we want), and then in the primaries the Dark Horse will appear and Rudy will dutifully endorse him to complete the scam.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-08 20:05 ID:HNdRh+Yb
>>28
Obama isn't a member of the Republican party.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-09 0:44 ID:WhLo+azb
"Personally seeing how Ron Paul might be out I'll hope for Obama."