GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Here here! Hoping he can pull out the win. It would mean a lot for this country regarding our current spending philosophy. Learn from Rome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Further cementing Romney as the inevitable candidate. I think this is the likely outcome as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 lol, after the last Fox News debate and Paul's appearance on Jay Leno, Fox News went into full neo-con anti-Paul mode. They spent most of the weekend trying to scare their viewers away from Paul, pretty much saying that Iran will destroy the world if Paul becomes president. It's laughable and sad at the same time. The establishment wants to Jedi mind trick people into thinking he isn't electable. Don't fall for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 lol, after the last Fox News debate and Paul's appearance on Jay Leno, Fox News went into full neo-con anti-Paul mode. They spent most of the weekend trying to scare their viewers away from Paul, pretty much saying that Iran will destroy the world if Paul becomes president. It's laughable and sad at the same time. The establishment wants to Jedi mind trick people into thinking he isn't electable. Don't fall for it. Despicable. Time to start up the anti-Fox News drum. Start calling in, commenting, writing, the whole 9. It's such a shame they can claim to be news when they are nothing but opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 If Paul wins Iowa, we will see the Republican Establishment bare their long knives. It will be ugly, and I will feel sorry for Ron as they stick him whenever and wherever they can, Fox News especially. He's such a decent man and he's playing in an ugly game, which is why I've really grown to admire his courage and character. It'll be worth it just to poke the establishment in the eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 19, 2011 Author Share Posted December 19, 2011 Further cementing Romney as the inevitable candidate. That wouldnt surprise me, though these days who knows what twists this race will take? I can say that I never had any hope of even one Primary/Caucus win this go around back last year and I'm very pleasantly surprised he has been elevated to front runner status or at least near the top in some states already. exciting stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 That wouldnt surprise me, though these days who knows what twists this race will take? I can say that I never had any hope of even one Primary/Caucus win this go around back last year and I'm very pleasantly surprised he has been elevated to front runner status or at least near the top in some states already.exciting stuff The best part will be having Fox News unable to cover their own primary. That alone should have everyone out voting for Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 19, 2011 Author Share Posted December 19, 2011 The best part will be having Fox News unable to cover their own primary. That alone should have everyone out voting for Paul. That would be fun to watch them squirm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 This is so awesome. Romney is a zombie. I knew Gingrich would crash and burn. And the rest are clowns. The best part is, Paul's support is only going to sky-rocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 I would vote Obama over Paul and I can't stand Obama. I like a few of his idea, but a majority of them are just HORRIBLE ideas. I watched him in one of the debates and frankly he scared the hell out of me. I thought Bauchman seemed much more sane that Paul, he was the only candidate that turned me off. Honestly with this merry-go-round of a field I think that people know what they have with Romney, he has stayed pretty steady and constant. They know they have a reliable car. They are just test driving the others to see if they are better cars and any problems. Romney will be the Republican candidate for this election. The only real question is who is going to be his VP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 19, 2011 Author Share Posted December 19, 2011 I would vote Obama over Paul and I can't stand Obama. I like a few of his idea, but a majority of them are just HORRIBLE ideas. I watched him in one of the debates and frankly he scared the hell out of me. I thought Bauchman seemed much more sane that Paul, he was the only candidate that turned me off. Honestly with this merry-go-round of a field I think that people know what they have with Romney, he has stayed pretty steady and constant. They know they have a reliable car. They are just test driving the others to see if they are better cars and any problems. Romney will be the Republican candidate for this election. The only real question is who is going to be his VP. How very ahem..."conservative thinking" of you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Its Iowa. His foreign policy stances as well as social positions will not let him get that far especially in the South. ---------- Post added December-19th-2011 at 02:57 PM ---------- The best part will be having Fox News unable to cover their own primary. That alone should have everyone out voting for Paul. Paul may win Iowa, and with liberals allowed to vote there, probably N.H. too But then Florida and South Carolina, etc will go so what as well as most of the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 I would vote Obama over Paul and I can't stand Obama. I like a few of his idea, but a majority of them are just HORRIBLE ideas. I watched him in one of the debates and frankly he scared the hell out of me. I thought Bauchman seemed much more sane that Paul, he was the only candidate that turned me off. Foreign Policy no doubt. Scared of those 3rd world countries taking over I see. Honestly with this merry-go-round of a field I think that people know what they have with Romney, he has stayed pretty steady and constant. They know they have a reliable car. They are just test driving the others to see if they are better cars and any problems. Romney will be the Republican candidate for this election. The only real question is who is going to be his VP. Okay, now I see where you are coming from. Nothing more need be said. Romney would be steady and constant like a reliable car if he was running for constant change, that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpyaks3 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Some crosstabs fun "Do you think that Barack Obama was born in the United States, or not" He was.....47% He was not....31% Not sure.....22% If that doesn't say something about the current state of the GOP primary voter I don't know what does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 There are so many things about Ron Paul that I like. Him on Leno Jay- How much foreign aide do you want to cut? Ron- All of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpyaks3 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 There are so many things about Ron Paul that I like. Him on Leno Jay- How much foreign aide do you want to cut? Ron- All of it. Yeah massive foreign aid that accounts for all of one percent of the budget. It would be awesome to give up all the soft power that foreign aid brings the United States so that we can shave one percent of the US Budget. That is the problem with Ron Paul a lot of his stuff sounds plausible until you actually look at what the results of his policies would be. Now I agree with him on some things (ending the wars (drug and foreign wars)) but a lot of his plans would be absolutely disastrous if they were ever implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Yeah massive foreign aid that accounts for all of one percent of the budget. It would be awesome to give up all the soft power that foreign aid brings the United States so that we can shave one percent of the US Budget. Soft power? That money never reaches the people, all it does is empower those that keep the country in need of foreign aid. Time to rethink things me think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Yeah massive foreign aid that accounts for all of one percent of the budget. It would be awesome to give up all the soft power that foreign aid brings the United States so that we can shave one percent of the US Budget.That is the problem with Ron Paul a lot of his stuff sounds plausible until you actually look at what the results of his policies would be. Now I agree with him on some things (ending the wars (drug and foreign wars)) but a lot of his plans would be absolutely disastrous if they were ever implemented. I know. You cant have a President that enacts disastrous and economy crippling programs. Oops. Pauls objection to foreign aide is deeper and more complex than a budgetary view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockfan7224 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 :gus: :gus: That's all I have to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpyaks3 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Soft power? That money never reaches the people, all it does is empower those that keep the country in need of foreign aid. Time to rethink things me think. If you don't think the aid we give foreign governments doesn't influence their policies then I really don't know what to tell you. From a realpolitik standpoint it doesn't need to reach the people to be effective at changing another countries actions. Now I agree that many times US foreign aid doesn't benefit the people of that country but for the vast majority of our history our foreign policy has ****ed over the people of other countries. I have major problems with the way we use aid but that doesn't mean its not a useful tool for United States interest at a very low relative cost. Look how effective the IMF has been at restructuring countries economies in a way that benefits their investors interests, now I will argue that the IMF ****s over those countries, but that doesn't change the fact that they have the ability to change policy through economic incentives. Now if you want to argue from the standpoint of an average citizen in the world I think you can argue against United States foreign aid or the IMF but from the American governments viewpoint both are very useful for influencing policy. When you hear Paul say he would cut all of our foreign aid it sounds nice but in the long run it is a terrible idea, just like his cut Department of Energy, well yeah sounds alright until you realize that the Department of Energy is responsible for the nuclear arsenal of the country and a hell of a lot of other important things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Why would we want to influence policy of another country? Hasn't that gotten us where we are today? That's where you and I have fundamental differences. That can't be a real question. There are certainly some good reasons to try to influence policies of other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 If you don't think the aid we give foreign governments doesn't influence their policies then I really don't know what to tell you.From a realpolitik standpoint it doesn't need to reach the people to be effective at changing another countries actions. Now I agree that many times US foreign aid doesn't benefit the people of that country but for the vast majority of our history our foreign policy has ****ed over the people of other countries. I have major problems with the way we use aid but that doesn't mean its not a useful tool for United States interest at a very low relative cost. Look how effective the IMF has been at restructuring countries economies in a way that benefits their investors interests, now I will argue that the IMF ****s over those countries, but that doesn't change the fact that they have the ability to change policy through economic incentives. Now if you want to argue from the standpoint of an average citizen in the world I think you can argue against United States foreign aid or the IMF but from the American governments viewpoint both are very useful for influencing policy. When you hear Paul say he would cut all of our foreign aid it sounds nice but in the long run it is a terrible idea, just like his cut Department of Energy, well yeah sounds alright until you realize that the Department of Energy is responsible for the nuclear arsenal of the country and a hell of a lot of other important things. Why would we want to influence policy of another country? Hasn't that gotten us where we are today? That's where you and I have fundamental differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpyaks3 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 I know. You cant have a President that enacts disastrous and economy crippling programs.Oops. Pauls objection to foreign aide is deeper and more complex than a budgetary view. I understand Paul is an isolationist, I am just pointing out that his policies have far larger consequences then on their surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpyaks3 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Why would we want to influence policy of another country? Hasn't that gotten us where we are today? That's where you and I have fundamental differences. Trust me I am very anti-imperialist and believe our foreign policy is a disaster, but if you think that there is any way we don't stop ****ing around in other countries through economic as well as military action even if Ron Paul some how got elected President then you are ignoring our nations history. We have always been involved in other countries, we have always sought to expand our influences, and we do a lot of terrible things around the world in order to accomplish that but there are also some good reasons to influence another country. If we can help stabilize Mexico or work to limit Saudi Arabia's influence in the Middle East we can make the world a better place as well as help ourselves out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.