Ron Paul a boss or what?
- Thread starter GTDProductions
- Start date
lol @ Mista Murda, you gettin way too deep into the microchip thing and its making you blind about all the other shit goin on or the shit Ron Paul does or stands for...
@CB - good lookin out with that explanation. I know it can be annoying when people keep askin you explain the same shit over and over but alot of us aint up on the politics like you and 2-0-Sixx so good lookin out...
@CB and 2-0-Sixx - Who would you vote for out of all the leading candidates and why? Who do you think would do best for U.S.A as the next president (could be a person who's not a leading candidate or a cadidate at all)?
@CB - good lookin out with that explanation. I know it can be annoying when people keep askin you explain the same shit over and over but alot of us aint up on the politics like you and 2-0-Sixx so good lookin out...
@CB and 2-0-Sixx - Who would you vote for out of all the leading candidates and why? Who do you think would do best for U.S.A as the next president (could be a person who's not a leading candidate or a cadidate at all)?
I don't really mind, but things are complicated. There are so many facets that i could seriously write a book about something someone thinks is a simple question. (though I am not the first person that should be writing one by any means)
That's where a lot of people with crazy ideas gain popularity with internet peoples - they are out trying to find a simple answer to complicated questions. Someone who gives them a simple answer to the question and forms it in a way they want to hear - boom that's the way shit is. That's how all these "conspiracy theories" propagate. People are searching for answers to extremely complex questions with answers that aren't always fun to hear. So rather than exploring all the angles; the answer that is most simplistic yet, most encompassing, is what they start to believe. i.e. NAU, illuminati, CFR, etc. as the end all be all answer.
Ron Paul feeds into that mentality.
An answer about why Ron Paul's economic policy is so fucked up touches on history, economics, politics, international systems, political theory, labor relations, sociology, etc. But it seems appealing for someone searching for a simple answer to a complex question - less taxes & less government means more money and "freedom" for you. Even though it really doesn't mean that, on the surface and to the person not willing to take the time and effort to find out why, it sounds like a good idea.
I don't like anyone that feels participating in the American electoral system on a national level can create significant progress/change.
Democrat, Republican, Green, Socialist, Libertarian or otherwise.
I've always said that. Which is why the Ron Paul jockey insinuating that I support Hillary or Obama, of all people, is border line comical, yet not unexpected from someone who rides Ron Paul so hard.
That's where a lot of people with crazy ideas gain popularity with internet peoples - they are out trying to find a simple answer to complicated questions. Someone who gives them a simple answer to the question and forms it in a way they want to hear - boom that's the way shit is. That's how all these "conspiracy theories" propagate. People are searching for answers to extremely complex questions with answers that aren't always fun to hear. So rather than exploring all the angles; the answer that is most simplistic yet, most encompassing, is what they start to believe. i.e. NAU, illuminati, CFR, etc. as the end all be all answer.
Ron Paul feeds into that mentality.
An answer about why Ron Paul's economic policy is so fucked up touches on history, economics, politics, international systems, political theory, labor relations, sociology, etc. But it seems appealing for someone searching for a simple answer to a complex question - less taxes & less government means more money and "freedom" for you. Even though it really doesn't mean that, on the surface and to the person not willing to take the time and effort to find out why, it sounds like a good idea.
I don't like anyone that feels participating in the American electoral system on a national level can create significant progress/change.
Democrat, Republican, Green, Socialist, Libertarian or otherwise.
I've always said that. Which is why the Ron Paul jockey insinuating that I support Hillary or Obama, of all people, is border line comical, yet not unexpected from someone who rides Ron Paul so hard.
No I don’t vote for president (at least not seriously, I’ve offered to sell my vote before) because I understand the futility of the act.
As far as making a difference or meaningful civil involvement – voting is the least possible anyone can do.
I don’t believe anyone can, within the current system, make any kind of meaningful change by running for nationally elected office. People who do run – are not people I ideologically agree with. Some believe by just being on the ballot they have influence, others believe by running they can sway other more electable politicians towards their ideas, others believe if they can just get inside the system it can be changed or reformed. I don’t believe any of that to be true.
Since some people don't understand the straw poll or its significance here is some info:
The poll takes place amongst attendees of a fundraising dinner benefiting the Iowa Republican Party(as i mentioned before Mitt Romney was paying people's tab just so they could participate in the event - so money was a non-factor). The vote takes place after each candidate is given a chance to make a short speech to the attendees.
Non-Republicans are allowed to vote in the Ames Straw Poll (this is important because if Ron Paul was a boss his supporters who are not registered members of the party were also able to vote for him). However, all voters must be 18 years of age, be legal residents of the state of Iowa, and purchase a ticket to the fundraising dinner.
As a straw poll, the Ames Straw Poll's results are non-binding and have no official effect on the presidential primaries. However, the straw poll is frequently seen as a first test of organizational strength in Iowa by the news media and party insiders. As such, it can become very beneficial for the winning candidate on the national level because it builds momentum for their campaign, enhances their aura of inevitability, and shows off a superior field operation.
Since its founding, the winner of the Ames Straw Poll has gone on to win the Republican presidential nomination two out of four times. Three out of four winners (including one of the winners of the 1995 tie), have gone on to win the Iowa Caucus.
The poll takes place amongst attendees of a fundraising dinner benefiting the Iowa Republican Party(as i mentioned before Mitt Romney was paying people's tab just so they could participate in the event - so money was a non-factor). The vote takes place after each candidate is given a chance to make a short speech to the attendees.
Non-Republicans are allowed to vote in the Ames Straw Poll (this is important because if Ron Paul was a boss his supporters who are not registered members of the party were also able to vote for him). However, all voters must be 18 years of age, be legal residents of the state of Iowa, and purchase a ticket to the fundraising dinner.
As a straw poll, the Ames Straw Poll's results are non-binding and have no official effect on the presidential primaries. However, the straw poll is frequently seen as a first test of organizational strength in Iowa by the news media and party insiders. As such, it can become very beneficial for the winning candidate on the national level because it builds momentum for their campaign, enhances their aura of inevitability, and shows off a superior field operation.
Since its founding, the winner of the Ames Straw Poll has gone on to win the Republican presidential nomination two out of four times. Three out of four winners (including one of the winners of the 1995 tie), have gone on to win the Iowa Caucus.
Too far out to call. But so far, yes. His only drawback is he's Mormon. If he was Evangelical he'd have it in the bag already. I think a lot of the more “liberal” policies that were enacted while he was governor and he gets saddled with can be attributed to him being gov. of the Kennedy/Kerry state.
The republicans have a lot of closer to the center (the American political center anyway) candidates trying to portray themselves as firm to the right and that makes the primary race closer than it could/should be. The republican base is split between their “moral values”, “religious values”, and traditionally conservative ideas on taxes, military, and the economy AND their desire to pick the most electable candidate that can over come the Bush hole they’re in. When it comes to the national election that won’t matter though and they’ll united behind who ever gets the nomination – especially if the choice is between a white male republican and a woman or ”colored” democrat.
That’s the contrast with the primary thus far. Generally speaking . . .
Republicans – looking for the most electable candidate even at the expense of some of their more traditional issues.
Vs.
Democrats – driven by their traditional issues and who ever panders to them the most, yet this comes at the expense of electability.
The republicans have a lot of closer to the center (the American political center anyway) candidates trying to portray themselves as firm to the right and that makes the primary race closer than it could/should be. The republican base is split between their “moral values”, “religious values”, and traditionally conservative ideas on taxes, military, and the economy AND their desire to pick the most electable candidate that can over come the Bush hole they’re in. When it comes to the national election that won’t matter though and they’ll united behind who ever gets the nomination – especially if the choice is between a white male republican and a woman or ”colored” democrat.
That’s the contrast with the primary thus far. Generally speaking . . .
Republicans – looking for the most electable candidate even at the expense of some of their more traditional issues.
Vs.
Democrats – driven by their traditional issues and who ever panders to them the most, yet this comes at the expense of electability.
ron paul is the only candidate not affiliated with the federal reserve banks, thats why his views are so different, he's the only one who isnt a puppet for the banks. he's also the only one trying to HELP us instead of fuck us and turn america into a system desighned for us to make money for the people on top.
