Abdel, aren\'t you Canadian?

(27) Rick Santorum is the only viable opposition to Mitt Romney, and I am going to vote for the Oblunderer before I vote for Bush 2.0.

recently, I have become more open to the idea of RP...but realistically, the guy has a 0% chance of winning right?

although i don't agree with him on foreign issues, i.e.: i agree with a presence in the middle east, i do think he's onto something when he says to cut off aid to the majority of nations and leave places like Korea..he shouldve declared himself a third party candidate a long time ago though, right?

i just don't understand what you think you're going to get out of posting this shit non-stop. it's obvious he has no chance of being on the ticket whether or not you continue to post this stuff. i am big ron paul fan but your non stop propaganda is just getting annoying

tldr

I generally support RP, but I also realize that he has zero chance of winning.

Also, I'm sure there are people who aren't going to vote for RP that don't agree with #1 (the only one I read)/

Is your goal to just turn this into Canada vs USA again? I really don't get what your motive is for these posts. You don't believe that you're converting a massive amount of people to support RP do you?

You mean the same kind of presence in the middle east that Osama Bin Laden cited as his main motive in the 9/11 attack?

The original post makes no sense. How are non-Paul voters saying "I am opposed to bailouts. Therefore, I will vote for a candidate who supported TARP."? I am not a Paul voter, and I say that I did not oppose the bailouts and will vote for a candidate that supported TARP. Basically, you lay down 26 incredibly specific criteria that maybe 5% of the population believes in, and then assumed that everyone thought the same way and still doesn't support RP.

Mm.

The Saudis and Kuwaitis want or wanted us there. No way to predict that OBL would go and do awful things again because of it.

So because the Saudis asked we had no choice but to go?

ron paul would be too disruptive to US institutions. that being said, parts of his platform are excellent and the better showing he has the more they will get incorporated into mainstream views.

That's the point...

But the Saudis — whose king is a religious arbiter of sorts — invited us. Absent the hindsight we have, it's totally reasonable for the US to have gone in.

That's true.

The man is not electable because he's not likeable. Likeability is what will re-elect Obama and what will prevent Mitt Romney from even having a chance. Belive me, if Mitt had an ounce of Reagan's charm and charisma, November would have been a wrap in August.

People, whether they're in the US or Ghana, are fkin retards when it comes to understanding the importance of their vote. I've said it and have heard others say the same here - revoke voting rights for the intellectually challenged.

I think the end game for Ron Paul, at this point, is just to keep beating the drums with his message and set the stage for Rand Paul in the next 10-20 years. The old guy knows he'll never get the nod in his lifetime.

you're astounded because you haven't accepted the fact that your fate is tied to that of millions of morons that have the same rights as you do when it comes to dictating how society works.

benevolent dictator = win

1) everyone (almost) in the US has the right to vote

2) most of these votes come from people with extremely limited intellect, i.e. they are easily hoodwinked into voting for representatives that obviously don't represent their interests

3) those of us that do have a brain are fucked because we are in the vast minority, and don't have enough votes to get the right guy in office.

4) benevolent dictator solves this problem.

what I was getting at is that, once you accept the above as reality, you would no longer be astounded by the fact that completely useless politicians continue to get voted into office.

This. The problem is that as more and more of the stupid people go on welfare/entitlement programs, and guys like Obama can basically get anything they want implemented (higher tax rates, etc). It becomes harder and harder to get rich. So the people who have the drive and ability to become rich do not do so, as they get frustrated or discouraged from how hard it's become, and their apathy leads them to go onto the entitlements as well, thereby effectively destroying the middle class and opportunity/hope for advancement. It's ironic that one of Obama's main campaign slogans was Hope when most of his policies would eliminate it.

You forgot one. "Ron Paul is a senile old racist bastard who thinks we should dissolve the federal government so the States can regulate themselves (back of the bus, you), and he wants to put us back on the gold standard." I don't get how anyone can listen to him speak for ten minutes and be inspired. He's clinically insane.

What you don't seem to acknowledge is that 'the guys at the top' (the so called millionaire and billionaires and the vampire squids of the world) aren't the ones who are going to get slammed the hardest on the taxes/new legislation. The middle class has (20+ years) and will always be the ones that are getting squeezed. Hence why social mobility is at an all time low. If you tax someone making 250k+ at a higher rate, it doesn't 'make room for the next guy', and it doesn't carry over. If anything, that small business owner/company/individual getting taxed at a higher rate will simply lay off as many people as necessary or stop spending to cut costs so that their bottom line doesn't take a hit. The chances of another person seeing more than 10% of the additional tax revenue used in anything other than an entitlement is very low, as the majority of tax dollars that could be used positively get squandered over bureaucratic nonsense. And 'getting the resources to realize their potential' or lighting a fire under them definitely wouldn't be an entitlement, which is exactly that, something they are entitled to. Most people I know who think they are entitled to things don't put forth a lot of effort. Sidenote: Social mobility is at an all time low..... guess what party has been in control the last 4 years. (6 really, counting the bush years with a divided gov).

No, not "this." ANT you are the man, and I get what you're saying, but I don't think you get why many of RP's supporters (including me) support him. I'm angry at the federal government for being the driving force behind a credit boom/bust that made and continues to make it much harder than it should be for recent grads - and all Americans, for that matter - to find jobs. The government is not and should not be responsible for creating jobs, and the world doesn't owe you shit, and you're not entitled to any handouts...but the government should be responsible for creating a free-market environment that allows the private sector to create jobs. Government needs to stay almost completely out of the economy because they always fuck everything up.

I remember taking Econ classes in college in 2007-2008. Someone emailed me a youtube video of Ron Paul...I laughed at Ron and thought he was a looney old nut job, a total bat shit crazy idiot...End the Fed? What the FUCK??? We HAVE to have the fed to ease the business cycle!!!

I was never very politically active until I began to get angry about the economy and at Obama/Congress for exacerbating the recession with regulations. This election cycle, I rediscovered Ron Paul and looked closely at his issues, read End The Fed, thought closely about what had happened in the economy over the past few years...and everything started to click. I will always be grateful to Ron Paul for showing me the light, for bringing free markets to my attention. Now I see why Ron Paul supporters are so passionate...

RON PAUL IS THE ONLY ONE MAKING ANY FUCKING SENSE AND PROPOSING REAL FUCKING SOLUTIONS.