Larry Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 That would be very interesting if in the first three contests we had three different winners. Santorum (Iowa) New Hampshire (Romney) and South Carolina (Gingrich)... does that mean that Florida goes for Paul? After all, in Miami, Paul would look like a youngster. I could see him having a long shot at Virginia. Only two people on the ballot. The Romney people will think they've got the state locked up, and won't be enthusiastic. The Ron Paul people will be a minority, but they're always enthusiastic. It could happen. (And the Giants could beat the Patriots, too.) ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 09:25 AM ---------- 9. has a real solution to our disasterous economy; Only if your definition of "a real solution to our disasterous economy" is "let's try to convince people that our economy has been disastrous for the last 100 years, so we can dynamite every man-made object in the country that was made in the last 100 years, and assume that a Utopia will eventually emerge from the rubble." ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 09:26 AM ---------- If I were watching American Idol, I would understand Newt 'Winning' last night.This is a debate to be President of the USA though. I have no use for this degenerate. Anyone who would take him truthfully......wow. Unfortunately, you were watching American Idol. The acts get up on stage, they perform on command, and then the audience votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Its unwatchable.. I can't watch comments made by people that have 30 years of service. All i want is the vote record. If you voted for something you were against... too bad. Then i believe if you lie directly to the American people you should be censured, and then fired... there are plenty of people that can replace you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 "Did you know that if you guess Ron Paul's real name, he has to teach you how to spin hay into gold?" ~ Stephen Colbert, on Morning Joe recapping the SC debate I was about to post that too. Classic line. I lost it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 And this summarizes what is wrong with America.. Newt 'Rocked the house'. Ya, a guy who has 0 morals 'rocked it' and can clearly be our president. He can continue our senseless wars and degrading country. Awesome.The one guy who: 1. Is talking about the real issues; 2. Has an impeccable political record. 3. Is the only Veteran on the stage; 4. Has the most military support of all of the canidates combined; 5. Has an impeccable private life; 6. is one of only two canidates eligible on the Virginia balllot; 7. Finished 2nd in New Hampshire; 8. has polled with Romney as the only canidates to challenge Obama in an election; 9. has a real solution to our disasterous economy; 10. is principled in what made this country great and is a true American in every sense of the word. Yea, Ron Paul is just 'an oversized suit hanging on a rack'. Awesome. What were you expecting? He played to that crowd. That's what the crowd wanted and he gave it to them. That simple. I agree that Newt isn't a good guy. Hell, if he's cheated on his 1st two wives, he'll probably cheat on this one. If he's President, he'll probably end up being President for the much sexier Brazil on the side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 What were you expecting? He played to that crowd. That's what the crowd wanted and he gave it to them. That simple.I agree that Newt isn't a good guy. Hell, if he's cheated on his 1st two wives, he'll probably cheat on this one. If he's President, he'll probably end up being President for the much sexier Brazil on the side. LOL!! I had to force coffee back from the brink of coming out of my nose! Thaks for that comic relief (something I sorely need these days) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I could see him having a long shot at Virginia. Only two people on the ballot. The Romney people will think they've got the state locked up, and won't be enthusiastic. The Ron Paul people will be a minority, but they're always enthusiastic. It could happen. (And the Giants could beat the Patriots, too.) ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 09:25 AM ---------- There are only two presidential canidates from the Republicans. Paul and Romney. They are the only two who will be in play for Virginia. How could the republican party run anyone else on Super Tuesday if they are not on that ballot? How exactly could you explain not being able to get 10k signatures? Only if your definition of "a real solution to our disasterous economy" is "let's try to convince people that our economy has been disastrous for the last 100 years, so we can dynamite every man-made object in the country that was made in the last 100 years, and assume that a Utopia will eventually emerge from the rubble."---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 09:26 AM ----------[ Unfortunately, he is the only one with a real plan. None of the others are doing anything other than rhetoric. Without a complete philosophocal shift in our economy, we are headed to implosion. There is no other way aside from a complete overhaul. There have been good times in our economy, no doubt. But the fact is a fiat currency is destined to fail around 100 years. It has in every civilization that has utilized it. Until people understand that, they will continue to cling to the deeply flawed system. Unfortunately, you were watching American Idol. The acts get up on stage, they perform on command, and then the audience votes. Well, 'Acts' would be a great way to describe what Santorum, Romney and the Grinch are doing based on their political careers and voting records. Paul is just doing what he has been doing for the past 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Unfortunately, he is the only one with a real plan. Fortunately, your claim isn't true. He is the only candidate with a plan that involves large quantities of dynamite. But "doesn't specify dynamite" does not equal "no plan". Without a complete philosophocal shift in our economy, we are headed to implosion. And the Paulbots have been saying that for years, and have absolutely no support for it. But the fact is a fiat currency is destined to fail around 100 years. But the fact is that you have absolutely nothing to base that claim on, other than "well, it's been working, spectacularly, for 100 years, but I'm certain that it can't possible work for 105! Some day my completely unsupported theory will be right!" It has in every civilization that has utilized it. Why, I bet any minute, now, you'll be able to support that claim. Well, 'Acts' would be a great way to describe what Santorum, Romney and the Grinch are doing based on their political careers and voting records. Paul is just doing what he has been doing for the past 30 years. Playing to every loony who thinks that the End of the World is Nigh, and losing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 First off I must say that this debate was the best one yet. I thought it was historic and really really entertaining.... Here is my critique. I thought Santorum who I personally don't care for, won the debate. He was on the offensive the most and landed good body shots on both Mitt and Newt. I thought Newt really did well too. I thought he took the accusasions by John King the CNN moderator about the "open marrage", and basically stuffed them down kings throat and was very strong throughout the rest of the debate. I thought Mitt turned in his normal steady performance with two caviots. I thought Mitt's strategy of looking passed his on stage opponents and focusing on Obama might help him in the general, but it hindered his performance in this debate with both Rick and Newt obviously upping their game and attacking him. Two caviots in Mitt's performance... (1) Mitt said he was always a pro life candidate and governed Mass as a pro life candidate... Really? That's not a true statement and I think it weak to mask his change of position rather than explain his change of heart. I think the Dems are likely going to use that quote against him in the general as there are plenty of television footage of him declairing himself a strong pro choice candidate... The second issue was when Mitt said he didn't inherit money from his parents?,. Again, blatant falsehood. Mitt was the son of a multi millianare; who inherited many millions of dollars. He's already on record on these issues. He's already confirmed these positions. I thought he lost disipline and tried to get a little too nuanced and it lead to some uncomfortable ackward momments for Mitt. Ron Paul isn't in the race. He's on stage to lend publicity to his philosophy with no hope of winning. I thought Ron Paul is a side show, who continues to draw the distinction between himself and his other presidential peers. As such his statements continued to serve his overall goals, but detracted from the real debate going on between the other contenders who actually are running for the GOP nomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 How was it "historic"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 How was it "historic"? Newt won. Newt is a historian. Winners write the history books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 [*]Ron Paul isn't in the race. He's on stage to lend publicity to his philosophy with no hope of winning. I thought Ron Paul is a side show, who continues to draw the distinction between himself and his other presidential peers. As such his statements continued to serve his overall goals, but detracted from the real debate going on between the other contenders who actually are running for the GOP nomination. Yet he has garnered around 20% of the early race votes, has more than doubled his support than last go around, has more confirmed delegates than anyone but Romney, is on the ballot (or will be) in all states (unlike both Santorum and Grinch) and is actually running for the presidency despite many folks somehow trying to pretend he isnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 How was it "historic"? How was Ronald Reagan's "Shining City on a Hill" speech historic?. It was historic because it connected with people, it resonated. I thought Rick Santorum, who couldn't resonate with a tuning fork achieved that in this debate. I also thought Gingrich did really really well too. I thought it was a really important meaningful even historic debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 How was it "historic"? It was historic. At the beginning of the debate, Newt made the best "change the subject and go on the attack" speech since Richard Nixon's "Checkers" speech. It was dishonest, manipulative and brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Yet he has garnered around 20% of the early race votes, has more than doubled his support than last go around, has more confirmed delegates than anyone but Romney, is on the ballot (or will be) in all states (unlike both Santorum and Grinch) and is actually running for the presidency despite many folks somehow trying to pretend he isnt. Paul is using the Presidential Nomination to garner free publicity for his ideals. He has less of a chance of winning a national office than Steven Colbert. He is there solely to garner support for his ideals and detracts from the overall decision facing the GOP at this time. As such when he spoke in the debate last night it served to detract from what was occuring between the other three candidates.... Ron Paul won't be coming in second in SC, he might not even come in third. Currently I think he's tied for Santorum at 15% in SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 It was historic. At the beginning of the debate, Newt made the best "change the subject and go on the attack" speech since Richard Nixon's "Checkers" speech. It was dishonest, manipulative and brilliant. I prefer John Lithgiw reading Newt's press release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 It was historic. At the beginning of the debate, Newt made the best "change the subject and go on the attack" speech since Richard Nixon's "Checkers" speech. It was dishonest, manipulative and brilliant. Exactly that checkers speech was also historic and ranks with the 100 greatest poliitcal speeches this country has ever seen. It rescued Richard Nixon's political career. And I think Newt might have resqued his career in those openning minutes too. I don't think Newt's speech was dishonest. I think the CNN host John King did over reach, by openning the debate with that question. I think it was an ambush, it could be baseless, and on the eve of the SC primary it was discusting. CNN over reached with an eye towards ratings, and Newt slammed their face in the car door for it. I think he almost came out looking better for Kings question. I think Newt's real shinning moment however was when Santorum accused him of having grandious ideas and Newt counter punch answer was again impressive. Newt has a spark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I prefer John Lithgiw reading Newt's press release. William Shatner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Paul is using the Presidential Nomination to garner free publicity for his ideals. He has less of a chance of winning a national office than Steven Colbert. He is there solely to garner support for his ideals and detracts from the overall decision facing the GOP at this time.As such when he spoke in the debate last night it served to detract from what was occuring between the other three candidates.... Ron Paul won't be coming in second in SC, he might not even come in third. Currently I think he's tied for Santorum at 15% in SC. so let me get this straight, because he isnt likely to win, then he's not "really running"? (I agree he likely wont do super well in SC or FL, that isnt the campaign strategy which is centric around delegates) The strategy may not work, but it's a solid one none the less. You have no basis for claiming he isnt really running Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Paul is using the Presidential Nomination to garner free publicity for his ideals. He has less of a chance of winning a national office than Steven Colbert. He is there solely to garner support for his ideals and detracts from the overall decision facing the GOP at this time.As such when he spoke in the debate last night it served to detract from what was occuring between the other three candidates.... Ron Paul won't be coming in second in SC, he might not even come in third. Currently I think he's tied for Santorum at 15% in SC. I think you are being manipulated by the orchestrated marginalization conducted by the lamestream media. They constanty do everything in their power to make him look foolish and they fail miserably. Obviously there are a lot of people in this country who believe everything they see on tv, and you are one of those people. Forget the fact that he has more delegates, as Snyder mentioned, than anyone else other than Romney. Just forget that. Forget that he has more donations to his campaign from the military than all of the other canidates and obama COMBINED. Just forget the fact that they tried to skip Paul's opinion on abortion when he is a medical doctor who has delivered more than 2000 babies. Forget the fact that he is on the Virginia ballot and the 'Historian' isn't.... CLEARLY he is a kook. The constitution is kooky. Peace is kooky. Strong national defense is kooky. Fixing our economy is kooky. Stopping SOPA/PIPA is kooky. Repealing the NDAA is kooky. Being principled is kooky. Being a Veteran is kooky. Being a real american is kooky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 The constitution is kooky. Peace is kooky. Strong national defense is kooky. Fixing our economy is kooky. Stopping SOPA/PIPA is kooky. Repealing the NDAA is kooky. Being principled is kooky. Being a Veteran is kooky. Being a real american is kooky. I was OK with this until the part I highlighted. Why exactly is Ron Paul "a real American?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 so let me get this straight, because he isnt likely to win, then he's not "really running"? (I agree he likely wont do super well in SC or FL, that isnt the campaign strategy which is centric around delegates) The strategy may not work, but it's a solid one none the less.You have no basis for claiming he isnt really running Ron Paul isn't really running for President, because he knows he has no shot at winning. He has said as much. Yet he will still be in the race up until the convention. The GOP will allow it because they don't want to upset him or his supporters... Paul is in this race because it supports his overall goal of getting publicity for his ideals. I mean think about it. How many candidates have left the race now after they've decided they didn't have a shot to compete? Yet Paul who opennly admits he can't compete stays in the race. It's because he has another agenda, he's using the Presidential Debates/Campagne to feed another agenda. ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 03:38 PM ---------- I think you are being manipulated by the orchestrated marginalization conducted by the lamestream media. They constanty do everything in their power to make him look foolish and they fail miserably. Obviously there are a lot of people in this country who believe everything they see on tv, and you are one of those people.Forget the fact that he has more delegates, as Snyder mentioned, than anyone else other than Romney. Just forget that. Forget that he has more donations to his campaign from the military than all of the other canidates and obama COMBINED. Just forget the fact that they tried to skip Paul's opinion on abortion when he is a medical doctor who has delivered more than 2000 babies. Forget the fact that he is on the Virginia ballot and the 'Historian' isn't.... CLEARLY he is a kook. The constitution is kooky. Peace is kooky. Strong national defense is kooky. Fixing our economy is kooky. Stopping SOPA/PIPA is kooky. Repealing the NDAA is kooky. Being principled is kooky. Being a Veteran is kooky. Being a real american is kooky. I didn't say Paul was a kook. I said he has no chance at winning, he knows he has no chance at winning, and he's going to continue his campagne up until the convention because it serves his purpose. That purpose not being getting the GOP nomination, but having a platform for his ideas. And yes he has a small motivated group of followers... who also know he has no shot at winning, and don't care. Paul has made the decision that co-opting the GOP presidential race in order to have a platform for his ideals is reasonable. I don't agree with him, but that is part of the process. Ronald Reagan was not entirely unlike Paul in this regard.... Although Reagan did pull out of his three unsucessful races before the convention. I think Reagan used the earlier races to garner support in order to ultimately win. Again though Paul doesn't think he will ever ultimately win. Which makes his participation even harder to justify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I was OK with this until the part I highlighted.Why exactly is Ron Paul "a real American?" He is a family man who is truthful and principled. He believes in what built this country and stands up for what made this country great. He served in the military and continues to serve his country fighting for the rights of all americans every day. In contrast to Romney who is a flip flopping, can't relate to normal people, lying, globalist who created the foundation to Obamacare. Gingrich who is a draft dodging (i know, he had a wife and kid), bought and paid for, flip flopping, lieing,voted for Obamacare, voted for global carbon taxes,morally bankrupt piece of trash. And Santorum who never served yet, like the others, wants to send everybody elses kids to die by fighting illegal wars, continues to expand the debt ceiling every chance he gets going against conservative principles, and has taken LARGE amounts of 'lobbyist' money during his career. ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 04:58 PM ---------- Ron Paul isn't really running for President, because he knows he has no shot at winning. He has said as much. Yet he will still be in the race up until the convention. The GOP will allow it because they don't want to upset him or his supporters...Paul is in this race because it supports his overall goal of getting publicity for his ideals. I mean think about it. How many candidates have left the race now after they've decided they didn't have a shot to compete? Yet Paul who opennly admits he can't compete stays in the race. It's because he has another agenda, he's using the Presidential Debates/Campagne to feed another agenda. ---------- Post added January-20th-2012 at 03:38 PM ---------- I have not heard him say he has no chance? Where are you getting this from? He has said that if he doesn't get the nomination, the side effect is that the seed of liberty is planted. He is in a great position to win, especially when 2 of the 4 canidates can't particpate in all of the states (Virginia) and don't have the funds necessarily to see it through. Paul somehow, being the poorest of the canidates with 'little' support, has no issues with money and has the resources to take it to super tuesday already. How anyone could think he has no chance when he polls with Romney as the only ones who can beat Obama is beyond me. Obviously his 'little' group of supporters are bigger than anyone in the media will admit. I didn't say Paul was a kook. I said he has no chance at winning, he knows he has no chance at winning, and he's going to continue his campagne up until the convention because it serves his purpose. That purpose not being getting the GOP nomination, but having a platform for his ideas.And yes he has a small motivated group of followers... who also know he has no shot at winning, and don't care. Paul has made the decision that co-opting the GOP presidential race in order to have a platform for his ideals is reasonable. I don't agree with him, but that is part of the process. Ronald Reagan was not entirely unlike Paul in this regard.... Although Reagan did pull out of his three unsucessful races before the convention. I think Reagan used the earlier races to garner support in order to ultimately win. Again though Paul doesn't think he will ever ultimately win. Which makes his participation even harder to justify. Ok, you didn't call him a kook but insinuate it by saying he has no chance. Paul was polling at around 8-10 percent nationally last election, he is well over 20 percent now. This is a serious bid and as these canidates drop from contention, the lamestream media will have to give him more time and the contrast between him and Romney will be even greater. This will also result in a swell of support for Paul. I think this is going to be a lot more interesting that you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I think you are being manipulated by the orchestrated marginalization conducted by the lamestream media. Oh for the love of god. Can we please stop this "conspiracy against Ron Paul" crap already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I think you are being manipulated by the orchestrated marginalization conducted by the lamestream media. They constanty do everything in their power to make him look foolish and they fail miserably. Obviously there are a lot of people in this country who believe everything they see on tv, and you are one of those people.Forget the fact that he has more delegates, as Snyder mentioned, than anyone else other than Romney. Just forget that. Forget that he has more donations to his campaign from the military than all of the other canidates and obama COMBINED. Just forget the fact that they tried to skip Paul's opinion on abortion when he is a medical doctor who has delivered more than 2000 babies. Forget the fact that he is on the Virginia ballot and the 'Historian' isn't.... CLEARLY he is a kook. The constitution is kooky. Peace is kooky. Strong national defense is kooky. Fixing our economy is kooky. Stopping SOPA/PIPA is kooky. Repealing the NDAA is kooky. Being principled is kooky. Being a Veteran is kooky. Being a real american is kooky. I don't think those things are kooky. But I know some of his followers are. :evilg: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Oh for the love of god. Can we please stop this "conspiracy against Ron Paul" crap already? You seriously are asking our friend Ken this particular question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.