Ron Pauls Revolution

[CycloWizard]

The left should care because in important ways, the Paul ideology is worse than even other Republicans, and another threat to society to 'nip in the bud'.

The Paul ideology is really in theory a rejection of democracy - valuing nothing but weatlh, the 'freedom' and 'liberty' claims propaganda to sell it; and in practice, it's a reversal of the taking of power by 'the people' and restoring the rule of the wealthy, a return to plutocracy, all their promises of protections for the 99% lies.

What a nonsense. This idiocy is bandied about by both sides. "If candidate x disagrees with my views, then he's anti-democracy!" Democracy is what its voters say it is - that's the entire point. You simply want voters to vote such that government wipes your ass for you. Anyone who votes to the contrary is then un-American in your eyes. Your willingness to use such ridiculous hyperbole in lieu of any real argument tells me a lot about what democracy means to you. Hint: it has nothing to do with the reality of a democracy or a republic.

 

[nextJin]

It was easy to take over the tea party for a few reasons namely they were no where near as organized as they are now with the Liberty movement. Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" came about afterwards along with the major support from disenfranchised Democrats and Republicans getting on board with the movement. It would be impossible to take over the Liberty movement at this point, the MSM played a huge role as well especially Fox News as the tea party movement was a perfect counter to "Hope and Change" though McCain still got crushed. It was easily noticeable when prior to early '08 Hannity, Levin, and others purposefully challenged those individuals on everything yet almost overnight they hop on board.

I personally do not see this as a small and irrelevant fringe when they are actually taking over state level parties as I mentioned in the OP. On the lower levels it is even more pronounced.

I agree with the undermining democracy but that is exactly how the system is setup. The problem here is that with the GOP unlike the Democrats they only change the rules every 4 years. It's fair in the sense that neo-conservatives could do the same thing if they really cared. Unfortunately most are uninformed and probably will not be informed until a few months from now when this hits the MSM.

My point here and most will probably agree is that the GOP is begining to become heavily fragmented. The Democrats have their platform and are generally par the course with their platform agenda. The majority of the Liberty movement are much closer to the Republican party of old so the goal was to work within the 2 party system and take the fight to the GOP as opposed to trying a new third party. It makes sense especially when the overwhelming majority of the neo-conservative base are older Americans while the Liberty movement are a much younger generation. Democrats do not have this problem as they are have a fairly even spread.

I do not want to go too much into detail on a Paul policy response since this was not meant to address that argument, however. I do not see how Paul caters to the power elite when he would have seen them fail and a good majority of OWS are favorable of Paul much more so than anyone else in the party. Paul has spoken at some OWS events, Romney or Gingrich would have gotten killed likely.

 

[Siddhartha]

The general concenus here on these forums is very much nothing but hatred towards Paul, both from the neo-conservatives and the left. However something that I feel is being purposefully ignored or simply shrugged off are several points worth discussing.

1) libertarian-republicans have taken over possibly hundreds of small county/district level GOP parties.
2) libertarian-republicans have taken over several state level GOP parties
3) Paul has possibly several hundred shadow delegates who will decline to vote during the first round in Tampa.
4) Paul has won or will win a plurality of delegates in 5 states to be on the ballot
5) Paul has continously proved that he will net more delegates than what he is thought to have. For all of the states that have a delegation of delegates already selected and ready for Tampa, Paul has way more than being reported. This trend will likely continue.
6) The GOP is breaking its own rule by collaborating with Gov Romney during a Primary giving him funds and assistance. This is rule 11.
7) The RNC has sent an open letter to the Nevada state GOP telling them that if Paul takes over the delegate process they might as well not even come to Tampa. The state GOP rejected it. Link

Like it or not, this uprising within the GOP is happening and it likely will not stop at the RNC in Tampa. Really, it has nothing to do with Paul. The vast majority of the folks involved with these events are highly knowledgeable and very well informed on how government actually works. These are not stupid kids smoking pot or college kids wanting to rebel. These are the original tea partiers from 2007-early 2008 who abandoned the teaparty after Palin and MSM took it over.

Paul has said and will continue to say that winning the Presidency would be a by product of this movement. I personally think it would be a miracle if he somehow won the nomination in Tampa, however I am not deaf or blind to what is happening. The GOP is going through a transformational process. It happens with every political party every so often and this is really no different.

You can keep saying whatever you want about Paul, this is not a nonissue. Everyone is taking notice now and the MSM is going to be playing catch up trying to explain why and how this is happening. If you believe Paul only has 60-80 delegates you need to read up on who has what. If you do not believe Paul supporters are literally taking over segments of the GOP you need to read up on who did what.

My question to the neo-conservatives here, how are you going to deal with the huge amount of paleo-conservatives overwhelming the party and throwing you out? It's an honest question.

The left shouldn't really care because either way it's a stark contrast to their political beliefs which does not change.

This is not about Paul getting the nomination, it's more about how the paleo-conservatives/libertarian republicans are effectively trying to take over the party from the ground up. As I said I seriously doubt he gets the nomination. It is just extremely interesting how this is playing out within the party.

Going by how the GOP ran the country when they last had the White House, I doubt they will really be small government fiscal conservatives when they have to be responsible for running the country. They would cut spending for education, healthcare, and any other program that benefits the working and middle classes and the poor. They will increase military spending and any other programs that benefit the rich and their states and districts.

OP, start

 

[LegendKiller]

The young and dumb demographic is for him, mainly the ones without families or careers (those that are are ones that haven't grown up or hate their lives). Those of us who realize how silly the whole "anarchy" movement is, realize that you don't need to do a 180 in order to change the system, we didn't get here by doing that and we don't get out of here by doing that.

Anarchy sounds great, everybody do what they want! Until you realize that it's nothing more than Somalia writ large. Ron Paul's type of republic is more like Mexico as somebody said.

Plutocracy sounds even better, which is what RP's "revolution" would result in.

 

[Anarchist420]

Plutocracy sounds even better, which is what RP's "revolution" would result in.

We don't have plutocracy with massive government?

The reason, for example, Northern Virginia is so rich is because a good number of them live off the government. The banks are rich because they live off the government. Microsoft and Apple are so big because of the government.

You're forgetting that the wealthy supported heavy government involvement in the economy and that the non-wealthy supported the free market until the Progressive Ear... the latter changed because of all of the government lies and secrecy and because they thought the government could help them. They turned out to be wrong.

Until you realize that it's nothing more than Somalia writ large. Ron Paul's type of republic is more like Mexico as somebody said.

Quite a fallacy.
Somalia is not a stateless society. The American state and the U.N. are there and many Somalians are trying to establish a government.

 

[nextJin]

The young and dumb demographic is for him, mainly the ones without families or careers (those that are are ones that haven't grown up or hate their lives). Those of us who realize how silly the whole "anarchy" movement is, realize that you don't need to do a 180 in order to change the system, we didn't get here by doing that and we don't get out of here by doing that.

Anarchy sounds great, everybody do what they want! Until you realize that it's nothing more than Somalia writ large. Ron Paul's type of republic is more like Mexico as somebody said.

Plutocracy sounds even better, which is what RP's "revolution" would result in.

This individual is severly uninformed of Pauls support base. Said individual also does not know the difference between a Contitutional Republic form of government and apparently no government at all. There is no 180 involved unless the 180 is going back to what is basically the Barry Goldwater era of the Republican Party.

Going by how the GOP ran the country when they last had the White House, I doubt they will really be small government fiscal conservatives when they have to be responsible for running the country. They would cut spending for education, healthcare, and any other program that benefits the working and middle classes and the poor. They will increase military spending and any other programs that benefit the rich and their states and districts.

OP, start

Something tells me you have not read Pauls proposed budget, but yes you are correct that on the federal level most of those would be cut along with military spending. A paleo conservative Republican majority in government would not increase military spending. They have a long way to go, and the overall transition might not happen but it is an interesting discussion.

 

[LegendKiller]

This individual is severly uninformed of Pauls support base. Said individual also does not know the difference between a Contitutional Republic form of government and apparently no government at all. There is no 180 involved unless the 180 is going back to what is basically the Barry Goldwater era of the Republican Party.



Something tells me you have not read Pauls proposed budget, but yes you are correct that on the federal level most of those would be cut along with military spending. A paleo conservative Republican majority in government would not increase military spending. They have a long way to go, and the overall transition might not happen but it is an interesting discussion.

I know quite a few RP supporters, almost every one of them are without children, those that aren't can't even figure out their lives. "Said individual" doesn't even understand himself, let alone the Constitution. There is a huge 180 involved as RP's ideals aren't even grounded in modern economics, politics, or society. Austrian economics and libertarianism is a utopian ideal that can't even exist in the real world. It's grounded upon supposition and hypothesis formed in a vacuum (let's all just get along) rather than reality.

Look at the loser above. The guy sucks off his parents all of the way through, and likely past, college. He can't even support himself yet we're supposed to believe his grandiose ideas? He isn't some big thinker, he's just some kid who really has no idea how to make it through life. Likely he was given everything in life, coddled and soothed the whole way through his middle to upper-middle class life. Now that he has free time to think, and suck off his parents, he can say how shitty the world is, without even being involved in the world. He probably didn't even have a decent job, if one at all, in college. He went to a 3rd tier hack school, probably to stay close to his parents, because he isn't half as bright as he thinks he is, and only a quarter as bright as he needs to be.

This is why RP's supporters are largely younger, they are the spoiled brats of the hippie+ generation who have been coddled their whole lives and told they were special. This is why they are dismissed by everybody uniformly.

Ron Paul has gone on record to state that we would be just fine with 2 nuclear missile submarines defending us. His statements are as intemperate as Jefferson's and his philosophy just as misguided and hypocritical.

If your "revolution" is supporting a racist, homophobic, anti-rights austrian buffoon, go right ahead. Just remember that you are still only less than 20% of the voting population.

 

[nextJin]

I know quite a few RP supporters, almost every one of them are without children, those that aren't can't even figure out their lives. "Said individual" doesn't even understand himself, let alone the Constitution. There is a huge 180 involved as RP's ideals aren't even grounded in modern economics, politics, or society. Austrian economics and libertarianism is a utopian ideal that can't even exist in the real world. It's grounded upon supposition and hypothesis formed in a vacuum (let's all just get along) rather than reality.

Look at the loser above. The guy sucks off his parents all of the way through, and likely past, college. He can't even support himself yet we're supposed to believe his grandiose ideas? He isn't some big thinker, he's just some kid who really has no idea how to make it through life. Likely he was given everything in life, coddled and soothed the whole way through his middle to upper-middle class life. Now that he has free time to think, and suck off his parents, he can say how shitty the world is, without even being involved in the world. He probably didn't even have a decent job, if one at all, in college. He went to a 3rd tier hack school, probably to stay close to his parents, because he isn't half as bright as he thinks he is, and only a quarter as bright as he needs to be.

This is why RP's supporters are largely younger, they are the spoiled brats of the hippie+ generation who have been coddled their whole lives and told they were special. This is why they are dismissed by everybody uniformly.

Ron Paul has gone on record to state that we would be just fine with 2 nuclear missile submarines defending us. His statements are as intemperate as Jefferson's and his philosophy just as misguided and hypocritical.

If your "revolution" is supporting a racist, homophobic, anti-rights austrian buffoon, go right ahead. Just remember that you are still only less than 20% of the voting population.

In 2008 he only had 5% or less, then it was 10% and now apparently its 20% (realistically it's around 18% nationally more if you include Democrats and Independents). In your hatred of conservatives you're missing the overall point in that it is not getting smaller, it’s not stagnant. It's apparently convenient to keep mentioning Paul has ceilings of support when that ceiling continuously keeps being raised. Unlike Romney who does indeed have a ceiling of support of 30% or less.

It really has always boiled down to the simple statement he is known for which is "If you want the government to take care of you from cradle to grave and tell you how to live don't vote for me".

I agree with your rant on Anarchist, not even going to try and explain it, and I'll ignore your last statement. If you believe that about Paul you obviously have no idea what you’re talking about. At least not about the man, his policies however much like everyone else’s can be debated forever.

In your sphere you may know a handful of supporters but nationally it's anything but your interpretation. Simply watching any one of the thousands of Paul videos online or the hundreds of rally based videos will show a large demographic of supporters however white they may be.

Ultimately, if his support was irrelevant you would never see the party takeovers or the delegate allocations going the way they are going.

 

[Abraxas]

The most curious of all aspects about the Paulbot breed is their constant complaints about government regulation and the conspiracies again him, in particular from the media. On the one hand they want the free market; the government out of business, the government out of markets, etc. Then, on the reverse they will complain unceasingly about how the media is out to get Ron Paul and how if he just got fair coverage he would be winning this primary, retaking the government, and freedom and prosperity would spread across America like crabgrass.

The thing of it is, the media, as an actor in the freeish market, has simply rejected the Ron Paul product. The ideals of free marketism hold that all actors will and should act in their rational self interests, including the media. That in mind, why is nobody giving any attention to this Earth shattering revolutionary in the press? Two answers come to mind. The first is the policies Ron Paul do not support the interests of the media and so it is in their rational self interests to deny him coverage. As staunch supporters of the free market, the Paulbots should be overjoyed to see their principles in action, to see the market place of free ideas and pursuing ones own prosperity with no regard for public good and absence of regard for fair play. After all, the press' job is to make money, just like any other business. Just because the free market has voted down Ron Paul like a smallpox burrito doesn't mean Ron Paul's ideas are bad, right? No, just that it is not in the interests of the market to fly them and so there should be absolutely no expectation they should.

I did say there was another option, but it barely merits mention. That being the possibility that Ron Paul simply is not that interesting, his followers are not that numerous, and his impact is not that profound; or, in other words, the press isn't covering him because aside from a few devotees, nobody cares about Ron Paul.

Now that we have our two options on the table, it is clear that by Ron Paul's own standard of the market should work he is receiving exactly as much attention as he deserves.

Or, maybe, just maybe, there should be a little decorum in our electoral process. Some standards of fair play that ensures candidates like Ron Paul are given attention by the press, given the opportunity to speak to the nation, given a platform to promote their ideas. Maybe they should pass a law...

 

[nextJin]

^^ I agree, as I mentioned earlier in another thread. On one hand they are undermining the will of the general concensus, on the other they took the rules of the GOP and starting using it against the established majority. I also noted that if the media had indeed covered Paul fairly and he received 5% of the popular vote then none of this would be happening.

I must note that the Maine and Nevada state conventions are being held today and in Maine they elected a Paul supporter to the chairmanship and treasury. The same will likely happen in Nevada in a few hours and both state conventions are swamped with Paul supporters. The results are that the overwhelming majority of State conventions that have been completed with delegates allocated to the RNC in Tampa will be sending Paul delegates who could possibly even go unbounded after a rule change from the state.

Again, every state that is done conducting party business has been severly impacted by the Liberty movement by either establishing new heads of the party, more delegates than proportioned by the popular vote or both.

And,

I did say there was another option, but it barely merits mention. That being the possibility that Ron Paul simply is not that interesting, his followers are not that numerous, and his impact is not that profound; or, in other words, the press isn't covering him because aside from a few devotees, nobody cares about Ron Paul.

Is a fairly ignorant statement given the information present in the thread and in local state news.

 

[Anarchist420]

The most curious of all aspects about the Paulbot breed is their constant complaints about government regulation and the conspiracies again him, in particular from the media. On the one hand they want the free market; the government out of business, the government out of markets, etc. Then, on the reverse they will complain unceasingly about how the media is out to get Ron Paul and how if he just got fair coverage he would be winning this primary, retaking the government, and freedom and prosperity would spread across America like crabgrass.

The CIA and the FCC regulate the MSM privatizing their profits and socializing their losses. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC are the propaganda arms of the government. There is a reason they're afraid of Dr. Paul... it's because if he were President the truth would be found out and the MSM's ratings would sink so low that they'd go out of business.

 

[fskimospy]

The CIA and the FCC regulate the MSM privatizing their profits and socializing their losses. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC are the propaganda arms of the government. There is a reason they're afraid of Dr. Paul... it's because if he were President the truth would be found out and the MSM's ratings would sink so low that they'd go out of business.

LOL.

 

[Abraxas]

The CIA and the FCC regulate the MSM privatizing their profits and socializing their losses. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC are the propaganda arms of the government. There is a reason they're afraid of Dr. Paul... it's because if he were President the truth would be found out and the MSM's ratings would sink so low that they'd go out of business.

I'll give credit where credit is due, I certainly did not anticipate this response. I was wholly unaware the conspiracy out to get Ron Paul needed to be expanded even further. So, tell me, if the CIA is afraid of Ron Paul, how is he still alive? Wouldn't it be much easier, cheaper, and more efficient to contain the Ron Paul juggernaut through more direct means than trying to control every media outlet covering the US elections on the planet?

^ I agree, as I mentioned earlier in another thread. On one hand they are undermining the will of the general concensus, on the other they took the rules of the GOP and starting using it against the established majority. I also noted that if the media had indeed covered Paul fairly and he received 5% of the popular vote then none of this would be happening.

I'm sorry, could you clarify what you agree with? That there should be a law to ensure fair coverage by the media for an election?

 

[Zebo]

God damn some of you people need some history classes. Alot this overbearing govt was hard fought for for a reason. And this was while we still had homesteading where you could get a free section of land (means of production) from the govt. paul polices today would be a complete and unmitigated disaster for 90% of Americans. No schools to make you smart to actually get a job. No jobs w/o juice since open discrimination would be legal. Children working to feed their families. and so on. It's all been done before you know.

 

[Steeplerot]

Ron Paul would trade government tyranny for private tyranny. Least I can vote on Govt.

Which is why right wing libertarians sound so politically childish, the: "everything not private is always bad/less efficient" reeks to hell of corporate thinktank propaganda.

Amazing that our consumerist culture has created such low critical thinking drones that accept blatant corporate advertising and PR as core economic theory.

Personally I think all right wing libertarians should be strung up by the toes and actually made to read a Ayn Rand novel for being so naive. That shit is torture.

The anti government thing about libertarians and cons is to me just sour grapes as they are still butthurt from losing the civil war/civil rights. (notice their "enemy" (fellow Americans) they still perceive with disdain as 1960s counterculture stereotypes) When you get down to it and talk to them. Ron Paul is one of these types of old dudes who reenact some lost past beef no one really cares about but the most extremist righties anymore. Ron Paul will always be marginalized by his own nuttiness. No conspiracy needed. (not directed at you Z -just musing on RP)

 

[Zebo]

It's just the opposite Steep. I worked for a DOD contractor through the 90s as Reagan's privatization was in full swing. Old dudes who where NOAA or DOD employees where now Lockheed employees and got same salary but contractor billed 3x as much as govt paid for same services before. Hell just look at private merenary contracting in war zones - guys can't wait to get done with enlistments to make 10x as much - then the bill rate on top of that. Privatization is all lies and raping publc. that goes for HC debate as well these days. Teamwork is always the best answer not privatization.

 

[Craig234]

It's just the opposite Steep. I worked for a DOD contractor through the 90s as Reagan's privatization was in full swing. Old dudes who where NOAA or DOD employees where now Lockheed employees and got same salary but contractor billed 3x as much as govt paid for same services before. Hell just look at private merenary contracting in war zones - guys can't wait to get done with enlistments to make 10x as much - then the bill rate on top of that. Privatization is all lies and raping publc. that goes for HC debate as well these days. Teamwork is always the best answer not privatization.

You attack the contractors tripling prices for their own profits and corrupting our democracy to make it happen? You're a commie-loving hater of the military who wants to see the US overthrown and all the people executed or forced to convert to radical Islam. That sounds like a parody that's ridiculous, but unfortunately it's all too close.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Ron Paul's delegate strategy has turned some heads. As seen here

Now that Paul’s success is impossible to ignore, the media are writing a new narrative. Headlines like “Ron Paul’s stealth state convention takeover” and “Ron Paul People Playing Mischief with Delegates” indicate that instead of ignoring Paul’s victories, they now seek to imply that there is something sneaky or unfair about them. Some even suggest that his delegate success in states where he did not win the popular vote may even (gasp!) “undermine democracy.”

Undermining democracy would be a good thing. If there is anything we have too much of in 21st century America; it’s democracy. The United States flourished as a free and prosperous society largely because it was founded as a republic. The reason for the bicameral legislature, the separation of powers, and the other so-called “checks and balances” was to protect us from democracy, which James Madison called “the most vile form of government.”

However this is Fox's take here

Even so, some Republican strategists say such tactics are hurting the party and its efforts to unify for the general election.

“The bottom line is any attempt to gather more delegates (for Paul) is not likely to yield success,” said Taylor Griffin, a GOP strategist at the Washington, D.C.-based Hamilton Place Strategies. “The only person it’s going to help is Barack Obama.”

This weekend, the Paul campaign appears to be eyeing 25 delegates up for grabs at the GOP convention in Nevada, where Romney won the state caucus with roughly 50 percent of the vote in February.

The notion that the Paul campaign might try to tinker with the Nevada delegate count has prompted the Republican National Committee’s top lawyer to send a letter to the Nevada state party.

 

[nextJin]

I find it funny how people keep associating libertarians with anarchy or anti-government. There is a strong difference between limited constitutional government and no government at all. A serious case can be made about several departments in the Federal government or the size and scope of our gigantic military machine.

Back on topic, Nevada and Maine will most likely release the results from yesterdays delegate nominations this morning. From the conventions it appears to again show that Paul will walk away with a majority of the delegates from both. The Paul people were unable to get the chair in Nevada however they did get the chair and treasury in Maine.

EDIT: Actually in Nevada the Paul supporters elected two new RNC members both of whom are Pro-Paul, they will not take over until after the National Convention however.

In both Nevada and Maine the Romney campaign did a few specific things to counter the surge of Paul supporters;

- The Romney campaign bussed over 400 people to the convention (Nevada, I do not have Maine's numbers), none of whom were official delegates. They were given fake delegate badges (which were noticable). They were voice voting on the floor and these fake delegates were trying to override the Paul delegates.

- This was caught on tape, and broadcasted over ustream. After word got out they took a lunch break removing all people from the floor. Upon re-entry everyone had their badges checked.

- There were several people in Paul clothing, passing out fake slates with Romney delegates with a few Paul delegates (whose names were spelled wrong). This too was caught and those people were removed from the floor.

I must make an observation here and say that only the first two could possibly be associated with the Romney campaign. Anyone who supports Romney could have been trying to confuse the Paul people at the convention with fake slates.

 

[nextJin]

I'm sorry, could you clarify what you agree with? That there should be a law to ensure fair coverage by the media for an election?

I agree with the free market news having a right to ignore any story they see fit, but as I mentioned I believe that is the main reason for this movement trying to do what they are doing. No law should ever be passed to effect the news, and in my opinion the best way to address the vast majorty of issues is to change the lobbying laws however unlikely that might be.

 

[fskimospy]

Quite a fallacy.
Somalia is not a stateless society. The American state and the U.N. are there and many Somalians are trying to establish a government.

The American state and the UN are most certainly not there. Somalia currently has nothing even remotely approaching a state. What it currently has is the Transitional Federal Government that controls Mogadishu and little else. That government is propped up by AMISOM, which is an African Union military force that gets some UN funding. It is not UN. People trying to make a government and people succeeding in making a government are two very, very different things.

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiKh9Ko3mw4

 

[fskimospy]

In 2008 he only had 5% or less, then it was 10% and now apparently its 20% (realistically it's around 18% nationally more if you include Democrats and Independents). In your hatred of conservatives you're missing the overall point in that it is not getting smaller, it’s not stagnant. It's apparently convenient to keep mentioning Paul has ceilings of support when that ceiling continuously keeps being raised. Unlike Romney who does indeed have a ceiling of support of 30% or less.

Self delusion. Before the polls basically stopped mattering, check the RCP numbers here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep.../republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

Romney doesn't have a ceiling of ~30%, he was already over 50% in April. In these polls Ron Paul was losing to Newt Gingrich. Think about how sad that is... Newt... Gingrich. This is the best Ron Paul's support has been able to get, and not a single candidate has wasted any time attacking his record because he is no threat. His support from all but the die hard crazies would evaporate in weeks if the rest of America knew about his racist past, his clown college economics understanding, and his crackpot governance views.

 

[nextJin]

Self delusion. Before the polls basically stopped mattering, check the RCP numbers here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep.../republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

Romney doesn't have a ceiling of ~30%, he was already over 50% in April. In these polls Ron Paul was losing to Newt Gingrich. Think about how sad that is... Newt... Gingrich. This is the best Ron Paul's support has been able to get, and not a single candidate has wasted any time attacking his record because he is no threat. His support from all but the die hard crazies would evaporate in weeks if the rest of America knew about his racist past, his clown college economics understanding, and his crackpot governance views.

He has a ceiling when running against any other status conservative. It was not until Santorum dropped out that most conservatives swollowed their pride and said Romney is at least better than Obama. Which is ammusing since not five years ago he could have passed off as a white Obama.

Not a single candidate could attack his record because there is not much there that they could attack, the only thing anyone even mentioned were the newsletters which has already been covered and wrote off.

Your last statement and generally your overall comment is of no relevance given that he has only increased in support especially in this election. The fact that the RNC are sending threating letters to these states is just another show of force by the RNC because they are taking notice to the viable threat Paul has to them. If he was of no consequence no one would care.

EDIT: This guys obviously hates them there black people, should probably string him up.

 

[Anarchist420]

Self delusion. Before the polls basically stopped mattering, check the RCP numbers here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-1452.html Romney doesn't have a ceiling of ~30%, he was already over 50% in April. In these polls Ron Paul was losing to Newt Gingrich. Think about how sad that is... Newt... Gingrich. This is the best Ron Paul's support has been able to get, and not a single candidate has wasted any time attacking his record because he is no threat. His support from all but the die hard crazies would evaporate in weeks if the rest of America knew about his racist past, his clown college economics understanding, and his crackpot governance views.

Racist past my ass. He was the only doctor in town who would deliver a mixed race baby. If anyone's racist, it's Newt World Order for thinking the CSA flag is racist (NWO lobbied the GA legislature to take it down, and they did so under his pressure) and for supporting reverse discrimination.
I can't believe no one ever threw the racist card at Giuliani. He and NewtWO are the ones who should have the race card thrown at them.

Dr. Paul is a lot more respectful to females than all the others are too, despite frequently being accused as discriminatory towards them.

As for his alleged lack of support, perhaps RCP is biased or controlled by the government. They could be run by CNN or funded by Soros for all we know.

I don't see how he could have so many supporters at his speeches and be taking over the GOP if he wasn't popular. His support is a lot higher than 5% and very few people are excited about Romney.

The American state and the UN are most certainly not there.

I've read otherwise (with all due respect).🙂