Quote :

"It was an internet poll. Ron Paul supporters are infinitely more motivated and active than others. They should have learned their lesson from the '08 campaign, and realized that any poll on the internet will be won by Paul. Setting it up in the first place only shows that they haven't learned anything. Paul's real poll numbers are surprisingly high this year, compared to '08. He's regularly in the range of 7-12%, and that's better than he was near the end of the campaigns last time. It's better than I thought he'd be doing. I'm very pleased with that. But he will not win. None of that changes how much I'll campaign for him. When I'm making calls or knocking on doors, I won't tell people I think he has no shot. I simply try to persuade folks that he is the right guy for the job, and he deserves their vote. Yes, Paul is ignored and persecuted. Some of his idiosyncrasies give his opposition plenty of ammunition. And heaven knows that plenty of his most ardent supporters are just plain....special. I make calls and knock on doors so that, a couple years or decades down the line, we might have a real impact and have real numbers behind us. But I'm not deluded enough to believe that this is the year. I roll my eyes and feel a little embarrassed whenever my fellow supporters try to deny that. I'm hoping to make sure that he is not a flash in the pan (in the public's mind, anyway), and that he's not one of a kind."

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 4:59 PM. Reason : ]

8/16/2011 4:58:40 PM

Quote :

"Is he only putting them on Youtube?"

http://www.ronpaul.com/

no, he's putting them on his website too

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2011 4:59:06 PM

i'm just saying, if he wants to win, he's got to buy air time as well. Hell, if he even wants to get his message out, he's got to buy air time. The GOP primary isn't won by courting 20-something, internet-savvy people.

8/16/2011 5:12:13 PM

I have no idea where the ads are being played, or where you live, but I don't think NC is a huge priority at the moment. Are any other candidates already airing ads around here?

8/16/2011 5:20:24 PM

begs the question-

why exactly does the media/establishment/whatever hate him?

can we have a simple list plz.?can we better define who these evil forces keeping the un-corruptible paul down really are?

8/16/2011 5:27:06 PM

They hate him because the GOP base will never support someone who actually has reasonable views on controversial issues. Paul once suggested that 9/11 was the direct result of US foreign policy in the middle east (correct). On that day, any chance of him ever becoming the GOP nominee went out the window.

8/16/2011 5:35:42 PM

1) he's ideologically consistent, so they can't make a fuss about that
2) corporations, in general, hate him because he won't give them favors, and said corporations are the ones buying ads on the media stations

8/16/2011 5:36:54 PM

Quote :

"i'm just saying, if he wants to win, he's got to buy air time as well. Hell, if he even wants to get his message out, he's got to buy air time. The GOP primary isn't won by courting 20-something, internet-savvy people."

The ad will be played on major stations in Iowa and New Hampshire.

8/16/2011 5:43:58 PM

3) He wants to get rid of the Fed (said so in the debate on national tv) and the fed runs shit. Biggest true conspiracy ever. The fed makes money and gives it to banks. Basically the fed magically takes money out of all of your pockets and gives it to banks so that banks can lend it back to you and charge you for it. Nobody wants to piss off the banks.

4)corporations also want the military to continue to subsidize their global machine

5) Everyone loves israel and he looks at teh Iran situation without bias instead of pro israeli bias. Which makes the people who love Israel blindly think he somehow hates Israel.

8/16/2011 6:04:50 PM

I'm really tired of hearing Paul can't win.

Obama "couldn't win" either.

He can win there are ways it can be done. Hell, he polls barely behind Obama head to head.

The key is we need to convert more people.

The economy is getting worse by the day and he is the only candidate willing to address the economy, jobs, spending, etc. All of the rest of the candidates are against saving the country and economy and we need to make sure everyone understands that before they cast their vote.

We need a surge and we need a surge now. Paul has a shot to poll top two in NH and with two second place finishes and online support gaining the message can be heard.

We cant afford to take a chance on Romney, Obama, etc they are all the same people. 2012 has got to be the year. It might already be too late to save the country, but thats not a good reason to not try.

So get your fucking bumper sticker, spam your facebook status, whatever the fuck it takes. People need to realize this isn't a game and they cant afford to fuck around like they have the last three Presidential elections.

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 6:29 PM. Reason : Paul2012]

8/16/2011 6:28:20 PM

Quote :

"I make calls and knock on doors so that, a couple years or decades down the line, we might have a real impact and have real numbers behind us. But I'm not deluded enough to believe that this is the year."

When you say a "a couple years or decades down the line" are you still talking about Ron Paul? The dude is 75.

8/16/2011 6:34:57 PM

Quote :

"Basically the fed magically takes money out of all of your pockets and gives it to banks so that banks can lend it back to you and charge you for it. Nobody wants to piss off the banks."

"Monetary Policy" lolololol

Quote :

"Everyone loves israel and he looks at teh Iran situation without bias instead of pro israeli bias. Which makes the people who love Israel blindly think he somehow hates Israel."

It is hilarious that the U.S. government has been fucking with Iran for over a half a century, and somehow, they're always in the wrong.

Quote :

"I make calls and knock on doors so that, a couple years or decades down the line, we might have a real impact and have real numbers behind us. But I'm not deluded enough to believe that this is the year. I roll my eyes and feel a little embarrassed whenever my fellow supporters try to deny that."

You don't know that. Either way, we can barely afford to have Obama stay in office, but we definitely can't afford to have another Republican get elected, because then we're pretty much locked into our current course for another 8 years.

2008 was a very important election, and unfortunately, there just wasn't enough momentum. I think there's quite a bit more this time around. The country is already largely in the shitter, but we might be able to salvage what's left if we reverse course...it's gotta be sooner rather than later, though.

8/16/2011 6:47:28 PM

I'm doin a Rassmussen phone poll right now. It asked if I would vote for Obama or a generic Republican to which I responded "not sure." The follow up question was "What if it was Ron Paul verses Obama"? It didn't ask about any other candidates. So, either it was a hell of a guess / damn good intel, or it's an interesting poll question.

8/16/2011 6:52:36 PM

Quote :

"When you say a "a couple years or decades down the line" are you still talking about Ron Paul? The dude is 75."

One would figure that as a volunteer for Paul, I would get credit for being aware of that. Maybe not.

Yes, I know he is old. This is why I mentioned in the same line of thought that I hope he is not seen as a flash in the pan or as one of a kind, meaning that there would be more like him (who aren't 75).

Nobody has to try to convince me of how important 2008 was or how important 2012 will be. I get it, and I'm on board, and that's why I'm active. The highest realistic goal we can hope for, however is to affect the framing of some issues, get awareness out of alternative, legitimate positions, and make more of the population sympathetic to it. And put up a respectable enough number that some of the laughing at us will ring hollow to enough people.

Pulling 15-20% in just a few primary states would be AMAZING progress from 4 years ago that, honestly, I would have bet against. I'd still probably bet against it, but getting that much is possible. And, in 4 years, going from < 1% awareness, let alone support, to today's numbers is unbelievable.

But the odds for him winning the nomination still hover somewhere just below 0%.

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 7:58 PM. Reason : a]

8/16/2011 7:57:16 PM

This election is no fucking joke.

We've got one of Obama's top economic advisors saying we need to start another war to save the economy. It's pure lunacy of course, but I wouldnt put it past those guys, they'll do anything they can to save their power.

Where the hell are all the liberals coming out in support of Ron Paul?? If you really cared about all those things you said you did like ending the war, you'd be ready to throw Obama out of office with both hands.

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 8:49 PM. Reason : a]

8/16/2011 8:49:33 PM

yes, ron paul is old, and will almost certainly not become president. but once people subscribe to his views, they seem to rarely change their minds. if his following continues to grow, he could be laying the ground for future libertarian candidates, whether it be on a local, statewide, or national level.

8/16/2011 9:14:37 PM

It has never been about Ron Paul the man. It just so happens he's been the guy with the message and a track record of a true statesman to back it up. He has certainly not been "groomed" for the Presidency and he's somewhat lacking in charisma. The movement that he and others have started will persist, and he has always emphasized that the real importance is not this election or that election, but to have a revolution of ideas, which I think is well under way.

Quote :

"Where the hell are all the liberals coming out in support of Ron Paul?? If you really cared about all those things you said you did like ending the war, you'd be ready to throw Obama out of office with both hands."

I think quite a few TWW "liberals" are coming out and saying they would vote for Ron Paul if it actually came down to it.

[Edited on August 16, 2011 at 10:38 PM. Reason : ]

8/16/2011 10:37:50 PM

Ron Paul & the Top Tier
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-15-2011/indecision-2012---corn-polled-edition---ron-paul---the-top-tier

Jon Stewart's credibility: +1

8/17/2011 12:02:39 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji_G0MqAqq8

Kind of crazy watching this you would think it was a recent video or post 2008 then you look at the date 2007 and realize paul is a genius and talked about the entire crisis that was about to happen and how the bailouts would be unconstitutional.

I would vote for him on this alone.

8/17/2011 10:09:50 PM

you think that's creepy. go back and read his speeches about Iraq before we invaded. he hit the nail on the head on that one, too, right down to calling out the "informant" on the WMDs as being a politically-motivated tool

8/17/2011 10:52:32 PM

^^ David Einhorn for VP!

8/18/2011 10:15:40 AM

8/18/2011 2:27:17 PM

under Ron Paul for for drugs and marriage it should say "States Decide"

8/18/2011 2:30:16 PM

It's true that he believes in federalism, and he is a federal politician so that is relevant, but his personal position is that drugs/relationships should not be regulated even on the state level.

8/18/2011 2:45:26 PM

It was smart of you to only include the things people are most likely to agree with on your chart.

I mean, I guess it would be a pretty long chart if you had to deal with all of the stuff he'd repeal.

Civil Rights Act of 1964: Obama- "what, are you crazy?" Paul- "if Alabama wants to keep blacks in a permanent underclass, that's up to them. Free association. See? Got the word "free" right there."

[Edited on August 22, 2011 at 1:53 PM. Reason : x]

8/22/2011 1:47:02 PM

Yeah Ron Paul fans have this silly habit of thinking they can snare Liberals by listing the 5 or so issues on which Paul isn't a typical libertarian kook. Either they're deluding themselves into ignoring all the other deplorable stances or they agree and are just making a feeble attempt to trick liberals.

8/22/2011 1:58:32 PM

Does someone know where I can find online the passage from Ron Paul's book where he talks about his hatred for statistics?

8/22/2011 2:01:04 PM

Quote :

"Yeah Ron Paul fans have this silly habit of thinking they can snare Liberals by listing the 5 or so issues on which Paul isn't a typical libertarian kook. Either they're deluding themselves into ignoring all the other deplorable stances or they agree and are just making a feeble attempt to trick liberals."

Ah, yes. Us crazy libertarians trying to find common ground rather than warring against the other side like obedient Americans. Grow the fuck up, already.

8/22/2011 2:22:44 PM

I think the real snare is to label Ron Paul as a "libertarian kook" instead of actually considering what he says. Just because the television says it doesn't mean it's true. I hope Ron Paul has good luck, he plays a dangerous game questioning the Federal Reserve.

8/22/2011 2:53:05 PM

Quote :

"Ah, yes. Us crazy libertarians trying to find common ground rather than warring against the other side like obedient Americans. Grow the fuck up, already."

It's not really a common ground/unity ticket when you think that any economic policy short of whatever Murray Rothbard came up with in his insane fucking gourd is the equivalent of putting a gun to someone's head.

Yes, GROW UP, says the teen anarchist. Seriously, anyone who is as absolutist as you are, going to the extent of characterizing anything to your left as SOCIALISM or evil or whatever (even when they agree with Milton Friedman in some cases!), should grow thicker skin.

8/22/2011 3:31:19 PM

Quote :

"Just because the television says it doesn't mean it's true. I hope Ron Paul has good luck, he plays a dangerous game questioning the Federal Reserve."

The television doesn't say anything about him, I came to the conclusion that he's a kook entirely from reading his own words.

Of course this is more typical Paulista tripe, whining about the media and assume that anybody who doesn't like him just doesn't know him enough. Just like with cherry picking of his positions you do to try and snare liberals: either you're stupid and behind the curve or you really delight in insulting our intelligence.

[Edited on August 22, 2011 at 4:06 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2011 4:04:08 PM

Well, he doesn't seem like a libertarian kook to me. But maybe that's because I'm such a uneducated bottom feeder. Sorry to insult your intelligence.

8/22/2011 4:13:50 PM

Ok, let's just assume that Ron Paul really is this messianic figure that can single handedly save us all from ruin. Someone explain to me how he'll have any more luck than Obama in implementing his policies in our Congress full of simpletons who only care about their own political careers? Consider that Obama had 53% of the popular vote, won the electoral collage in a landslide, and had Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. Still, the bills he was able to sign were a far cry from the plans he had originally laid out. If Paul wins, it won't be by those margins, and it's basically impossible that he'll have anywhere near that level of support in Congress. Paul is also considered a fringe lunatic among most of Washington, whereas Obama was basically a rock star in his party. Yeah, Paul isn't black, but he is old as dirt and looks like Mr. Magoo. What makes any of you Paul supporters think that this man who probably has to piss 6 times an hour and take midday naps will be capable of getting anything done at all? I mean, my god, based on the deterioration of Obama's physical appearance after just 2 years in that hell, we won't be able to tell Paul from the crypt keeper after his first few months in office.

8/22/2011 4:16:24 PM

Quote :

"It's not really a common ground/unity ticket when you think that any economic policy short of whatever Murray Rothbard came up with in his insane fucking gourd is the equivalent of putting a gun to someone's head."

Ron Paul is quite a bit more moderate than me, at least in the sense that he believes we should have some government. His stated goal is never been to abolish everything, just to stick to the Constitution. That means having a weak central government, hard money, that Congress must declare war, etc.

Quote :

"Yes, GROW UP, says the teen anarchist. Seriously, anyone who is as absolutist as you are, going to the extent of characterizing anything to your left as SOCIALISM or evil or whatever (even when they agree with Milton Friedman in some cases!), should grow thicker skin."

You believe that other people are your property. I don't believe that other people are my property. That's the difference between us.

In any case, both of you can continue sucking the dick of an imperialist, corporatist President, while ignoring the only candidate with a chance in hell that would end the drug war and end our overseas operations that are bankrupting us. I'm the absolutist, though.

Quote :

"The whole gun image is really brilliant rhetoric on your part. Everything's always "at gunpoint". People pay taxes "at gunpoint". You are providing people welfare "at gunpoint". I mean, I guess in order to avoid that stuff, you'd have to opt out of the social contract. "

What happens when you don't pay your taxes? What happens if I have a moral objection to the fact that my money is used to murder people?

8/22/2011 4:25:17 PM

Quote :

"I'm the absolutist, though."

Well...




uhh, yeah.

8/22/2011 4:35:17 PM

Quote :

"What happens when you don't pay your taxes? What happens if I have a moral objection to the fact that my money is used to murder people?"

What happens if you have a moral objection to any law? What happens if you break any law and attempt to evade each graduated attempt to enforce?

Or is it only coercion by violence when it's the laws and activities you, destroyer, disagree with personally?

8/22/2011 5:24:27 PM

Quote :

"What happens if you have a moral objection to any law? What happens if you break any law and attempt to evade each graduated attempt to enforce?"

You get arrested, and if you attempt to avoid arrest, you're either overpowered or killed. Every law is a gun, but some laws are easier to comply with than others.

Quote :

"Or is it only coercion by violence when it's the laws and activities you, destroyer, disagree with personally?"

It's coercion by violence or the threat of violence regardless, but violent can be just if it is used against someone that was the initiator of force.

Of course, I've played this game before, so I already know what's coming: "But what's keeping capital owners from using coercion?" Right now, the government, and it's doing a poor job at it. This is hardly the only solution that exists, but it is the only solution that is allowed.

[Edited on August 22, 2011 at 5:50 PM. Reason : ]

8/22/2011 5:45:41 PM

Look the arguing isn't helping anyone.

Stop arguing with people that don't care to save the country, we need to spread the message in positive ways to people that do care.

Ron Paul is polling only 2% behind Obama as of this week!!

The message is out there we just need to get independents to vote in the republican primary. Together we can all defeat Obama but divided we can not end the regime.

[Edited on August 22, 2011 at 7:29 PM. Reason : a]

8/22/2011 7:28:38 PM

Quote :

"Someone explain to me how he'll have any more luck than Obama in implementing his policies in our Congress full of simpletons who only care about their own political careers?"

My thinking is that the president has the easiest direct effect on foreign policy so I am rooting for his foreign policy because thats a direct way to help the country big time.

The things I am worried about like civil rights are much harder for the president to change on his own aside from assigning judges which won't matter unless half of the current judges die. Everything else needs congress.

8/22/2011 7:40:48 PM

My thinking is the only thing getting liberals/moderates to vote for Ron Paul is going to do is get Perry/Bachmann elected.

[Edited on August 23, 2011 at 9:44 AM. Reason : .]

8/23/2011 9:44:30 AM

If Ron Paul was running under a third party, then you'd have a point.

This is a bit different, though. The GOP establishment is running scared because they think the party may be overtaken by the libertarian-wing. Is it not obvious, though, that the libertarian-wing of the GOP is growing? 10 years ago neo-conservatives in the GOP were a dime a dozen. Now, there's much more of a split internally.

Not everyone likes Ron Paul or libertarianism, but pretty much everyone hates the Republican party. Support Ron Paul in the primaries, even if you won't vote for him in the general election, as it will help move the GOP in the right direction.

8/23/2011 12:18:08 PM

Quote :

"it will help move the GOP in the right direction"

I don't really think it's the "right direction", it's too easily hijacked, we literally just saw it happen. The only thing the tea-partiers kept from the libertarian populist fervor was the hard-headedness.

8/23/2011 5:58:01 PM

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;” "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;”

8/25/2011 8:35:06 PM

Quote :

"it's too easily hijacked, we literally just saw it happen. The only thing the tea-partiers kept from the libertarian populist fervor was the hard-headedness. "

Yeah, it was amazing and shameful how quickly the Tea Party thing turned from an uprising of the libertarian wing and fiscal conservatives (who might not be exactly civil libertarians, but who aren't very concerned about social issues) into keeping a few elements of the latter, but generally being establishment GOP, except for extreme, uncompromising to a fault, and even dumber and more actively shunning of thought, reason, and all forms of knowledge and science.

8/25/2011 9:03:42 PM

Militant Christianism + pork rinds and funnel cakes = the Tea Party.

8/25/2011 10:40:12 PM

well, there's legitimately a huge element of fiscal conservatism at the core, but now that the movement has become mainstream GOP and hijacked by the funnel cake-eating, church thrice per week, academia-loathing rank and file, the fiscal conservatism can't be pursued to the end of sound policy and certainly not by sound politics.

8/25/2011 11:00:32 PM

^ and this is why I like Ron Paul. I've been reading The Revolution by RP and no where does he mention anything about legislating Christian Morals. I do disagree with him on his personal opinion regarding abortion and the definition of life, but at least he is a strict constitutionalists and realizes this is a states issue. I do think a lot of what RP preaches is extremist, but as other posters have already acknowledged, how much change can he really make with the Congress we have now? I do think that his views on non-interventionism and foreign aid should be implemented immediately to cut our budget, but even this will be tough.

8/29/2011 2:09:16 PM

Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

How is it even possible for a medical doctor to deny evolution?! They watch microbes adapt to antibiotics every day.

8/29/2011 2:44:32 PM

^ i know a guy that only believes in short term natural selection but doesn't believe different species can come from that..

8/29/2011 2:50:55 PM

Quote :

"How is it even possible for a medical doctor to deny evolution?"

Because it's useful to pander to the 44% of Americans who also deny evolution. He probably doesn't actually deny it. But maybe, because the "micro-evolution" bullshit gambit is the only way to somewhat reconcile the biological facts with Intelligent Design, except of course that pesky fossil record and observed speciation: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

[Edited on August 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM. Reason : .]

8/29/2011 3:10:30 PM