|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Oct 18, 2011 13:38:40 GMT -5
I will say this. If Ron Paul does get elected and ends up not following through on any or all of his promises, I will never, I repeat, NEVER support another politician again. Ron Paul is pretty much my last hope for this country, I truly believe that he is sincere and really wants to turn this country around. But if he gets elected and ends up screwing us over, so help me god I WILL NOT support another politician again in my life.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Oct 18, 2011 16:07:41 GMT -5
He'd only take a salary in line with the average American, just under $40,000 a year. Why? The President has one of the hardest and most stressful jobs on earth, he deserves to be well paid.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 18, 2011 16:28:05 GMT -5
He'd only take a salary in line with the average American, just under $40,000 a year. Why? The President has one of the hardest and most stressful jobs on earth, he deserves to be well paid. I'm guessing he doesn't believe the President deserves the $400,000 a year they get. I think he thinks it's a waste of tax payer's money.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 18, 2011 17:35:58 GMT -5
Also, it'd be an incentive for him to help raise the wages of the citizens.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 19, 2011 0:24:11 GMT -5
I Hate ron Paul only because I have heard him speak. I KNOW he is a racist only because I've heard him speak. You're a ing idiot who never cites any sources. off already. Jesus... Again, you're an idiot who doesn't understand the Constitution whatsoever. LMFAO @ you thinking RON PAUL of ALL PEOPLE wants to "take peoples rights way." You're honestly the worst troll ever. You're not even slightly knowledgable on the subjects. I'm a white male, as is Slappy. Slappy is, however, a "minority" in his sexual preference. Ron Paul has made it clear that he personally doesn't support the gay lifestyle... But guess what - he's not going to take anyone's rights away. You see, Slappy is an intelligent person who actually looks at the facts, unlike yourself who has consistently shoved his head up his ass for something like a year now. He comes out with fairy tale plans on how to cut spending and create a budget surplus and you all think he is the second comming of christ. Anyone can create graphs, charts, budget plans and pretend like its accurate. I assure you not one single presidential hopefull wants to get the country further in debt, but because they dont make phony plans you all dont fall in love. What part of it is phony? Again, you're just making poop up. SHOCKING. Why don't you actually research things before you talk so incoherently about them? It's almost as if you're a masochist who enjoys being ripped apart at every turn. I do not make things up sir. I do not insult people, nor do I call people names simply because I do not like what they say. That is you. You support a candidate who has a budget plan (something made up) and you bash people and call them names when they say they do not like your candidate. There are videos of Ron Paul all over the internet, in which he speaks of taking away the 14th amendment because it was not meant to make everyone a citizen. I posted said video a while ago to which you bashed me. You want to speak of sources.....your only source seems to be Ronpaul.com or Ron Pauls "budget" plans. You remind me of a child who wants to play a game, and as you play you change the rules, and when questioned you pull out a rulebook (written by you as you go along) just so you can knock people. It is October 2011, you still have more than a year to carefully review the candidates and pick the one you like best. So how dare anyone say a person shouldnt be allowed to vote only because they either dont support Ron Paul, or they havnt made a clear decision on who they like best?!? I dont understand why you get all wound up when ever I state FACTS about Ron Paul. We just have polar opposite views on politics. Do I think you are in the wrong? Yes I do. Do I insult you? No I do not. I am an adult, when people have conflicting views I try to look at things from there point of view. Shame you just result to name calling. P.S. I knew you fellas are white.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 19, 2011 1:45:42 GMT -5
I do not make things up sir. I do not insult people, nor do I call people names simply because I do not like what they say. That is you. I don't "call you names because I don't like what you say." I call you names because you DON'T SAY ANYTHING!! EVER!! All you ever do is just make these flat, broad statements with no actual facts. You NEVER bring up anything that can actually be discussed because you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You support a candidate who has a budget plan (something made up) and you bash people and call them names when they say they do not like your candidate. No, only you. Plenty of people here don't support Ron Paul, but none of them make ridiculously absurd statements in every thread about the man. There are videos of Ron Paul all over the internet, in which he speaks of taking away the 14th amendment because it was not meant to make everyone a citizen. I posted said video a while ago to which you bashed me. Because the Amendment is way too vague and he wants to make it clearer, you claim he's "taking away peoples' rights," but the only thing he's suggesting is clarifying that people who are not from America are not American citizens. You call that "racism." It's not racism. You continually specify Hispanics, but this just as well applies to Canadians, Brits, French, Japanese, Indian, African, or Middle-Eastern people. It's completely NOT racist. Again, you spew crapout of your mouth without any real backing to it. You do this constantly and you wonder why everyone here laughs at you and belittles everything you say. You want to speak of sources.....your only source seems to be Ronpaul.com or Ron Pauls "budget" plans. You remind me of a child who wants to play a game, and as you play you change the rules, and when questioned you pull out a rulebook (written by you as you go along) just so you can knock people. What the are you talking about? 1) When you ask specific questions about Ron Paul, why would THE MAN'S OWN WEBSITE not be the best source, dumbass? 2) This has nothing to do with "changing the rules," as you have not ever presented a single topic of discussion with any actual facts behind what you're saying. 3) Any topic you come up with, I can find at least one source that is NOT from RonPaul.com. Oh look, you're making things up again. Do you know what you remind me of? The kid who would confidently raise his hand numerous times in every math class and have the wrong answer, forcing the teacher to repeat the formula over and over again. The other kids in class all rolled their eyes at how you just didn't pay attention, but the teacher just gently reminded you that you're doing it wrong. The problem is that I'm not your teacher and I'm not going to sit here and be nice about the fact that you consistently troll the crapout of threads with moronic bullcrapthat has no basis behind it. It is October 2011, you still have more than a year to carefully review the candidates and pick the one you like best. So how dare anyone say a person shouldnt be allowed to vote only because they either dont support Ron Paul, or they havnt made a clear decision on who they like best?!? When the did I say that? NEVER. I would never say that anyone should not be allowed to vote just because they disagree with me. That's what's great about this country. If I said anything of the like, it was OBVIOUSLY as a joke, but I would be shocked if I actually said anything like that ever. MORE MAKING THINGS UP, SURPRISE, SURPRISE... I dont understand why you get all wound up when ever I state FACTS about Ron Paul. We just have polar opposite views on politics. You haven't provided one single thing, ever, that includes facts. EVER. Period. Never. Why? Because again, you have no freakin' idea what you're talking about. Do I think you are in the wrong? Yes I do. Do I insult you? No I do not. I am an adult, when people have conflicting views I try to look at things from there point of view. YOU DON'T HAVE A POINT OF VIEW. Shame you just result to name calling. Shame on you for never having anything to add other than obnoxious bullcrapthat you found by Googling "bad things about Ron Paul." P.S. I knew you fellas are white. Yeah, and we're racist.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 19, 2011 8:29:24 GMT -5
Why is it bad if Paul has a budget plan? Why is it bad to have specifics and not just random ideas and talking points? Because that's done well in the past, right?
Today is 'Black This Out' trying to raise a lot of money for Paul. I'll be donating $20.12.
|
|
|
Post by extreme on Oct 19, 2011 8:51:18 GMT -5
I was surprised to hear Rush Limbaugh actually say Ron Paul's economic plan was a good idea. However he had be a dick and say that Ron Paul's plan is just a copy of his own idea.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 19, 2011 8:58:54 GMT -5
I was surprised to hear Rush Limbaugh actually say Ron Paul's economic plan was a good idea. However he had be a dick and say that Ron Paul's plan is just a copy of his own idea. Which is hysterical considering other GOP candidates' plans are copies of Paul's ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 19, 2011 10:11:22 GMT -5
My main issue with Ron Paul is that he does not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected much less garnering any real support. To me Ron Paul fans are the equivalent of Linux weenies screaming about how Linux is better than any OS out there. Umm, you only have like 2% market share for a reason you weenies.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 19, 2011 10:17:29 GMT -5
My main issue with Ron Paul is that he does not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected much less garnering any real support. To me Ron Paul fans are the equivalent of Linux weenies screaming about how Linux is better than any OS out there. Umm, you only have like 2% market share for a reason you weenies. Which is why he's polling anywhere between 9 and 15%. Much better than a lot of the candidates especially when the guy who is supposedly the front runner can't get past 25% and a new person emerges every few weeks to give that front runner a run for his money.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 19, 2011 10:52:01 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't his numbers now better than McCain's were at this point in 2008?
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 19, 2011 10:58:48 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't his numbers now better than McCain's were at this point in 2008? My numbers are better than McCain's were. Jimmy Carter polled at 1% before he gained momentum and won the nomination. Also, we are 11 hours into the day and $816,322.54 has been giving for Black This Out.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 19, 2011 11:10:07 GMT -5
My numbers are better than McCain's were. Jimmy Carter polled at 1% before he gained momentum and won the nomination. Also, we are 11 hours into the day and $816,322.54 has been giving for Black This Out. Shows how competent your campaign manager was.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 19, 2011 13:12:46 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't his numbers now better than McCain's were at this point in 2008? This is true. But I don't think that's really what Hulk is saying. He's saying that he doesn't believe that the "mainstream" Republican voters will come together to vote for someone as radical as Ron Paul. Let me say that I think this is a fair criticism. Whether or not it is true remains to be seen, but the odds of the Republicans coming together to vote for pretty much any of the other candidates (with the exception of Herman Cain and Gary Johnson; in my opinion) are much better... Because mainstream Republicans, like mainstream Democrats, claim that they want "change," but when real change is presented to them, they scoff at the ideas. THAT BEING SAID... I don't think there's any denying that Ron Paul winning the Republican nomination would completely change the general election. Because quite frankly, I think it's a bit absurd to believe that anyone OTHER THAN PAUL could actually beat Obama if they went head-to-head. Here are some reasons I believe that... 1. As fed up with Obama as people are, there is a large group of the population who simply wants to give him another chance. Whether it's because they think one term is too short for anyone or whether they blame Bush and his failed policies for Obama's misfortunes; they just want to give Obama another chance to prove himself. 2. The vast majority of people who vote don't know what the hell they're talking about and just vote for either a "R" or a "D." Being that this is true, there will be a significant amount of people who show up to the polls who currently are not supporting Dr. Paul, that would still vote for him over Obama simply because he's a Republican and he's "better than Obama." 3. Ron Paul supporters, even if it's only 10% of the population (which is a safe assumption), are not going to vote for any of the other Republican candidates. If Paul doesn't get the nomination, this 10% simply will not show up to vote. One coud argue that this is irrelevant to some extent, but the point is that Ron Paul's supporters are not mainstream Republican supporters, so just like we saw with McCain in '08, the total number of voters will be down and will favor Obama. 4. These Republican candidates are smashing one another in the debates and in the media. But notice how none of them attack Ron Paul. Certainly they might disagree, but there is a very important difference in how they disagree with him. NO ONE is attacking his credibility. EVERYONE agrees that he is the most true-to-his-guns person in the race... I believe this hurts the other candidates while helping Paul because there will be undecided voters who are swayed away by "another lying politician" being exposed during the debates, but still being put on the ballot by the Republican party. 5. Rasmussen polls already show that Paul has the best chance of any candidate to beat Obama in a head-to-head election. 6. As these other candidates (Santorum, Bachmann, Johnson, Huntsman, Gingrich) drop out due to the lack of funding they are receiving, today's massively successful moneybomb is proving one thing - Ron Paul isn't going anywhere... So as these debates get more focused on Perry, Romney, Cain and Paul; the American people are going to be more and more exposed to Dr. Paul's message. This, I believe, is the single most important thing... The media will eventually HAVE TO cover this guy.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 19, 2011 14:03:41 GMT -5
The thing is that while Paul may be sitting there at 10-15% that's about as far as he's going to go. He's not a guy who is going to steal support from anyone else. Let's say Cain drops out tomorrow. How many of those supporters are going to go to Paul? Almost none. They'll go to one of the other guys in the race. I'd be surprised if Paul got up to 20%, completely shocked if he hit 30% and would start screaming and ranting about conspiracies if he hit 40%. It's just not realistic. Personally I would rather people look at solutions that are realistic, than look at pie in the sky solutions that will never ever ever come to pass.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 19, 2011 14:23:34 GMT -5
1. As fed up with Obama as people are, there is a large group of the population who simply wants to give him another chance. Whether it's because they think one term is too short for anyone or whether they blame Bush and his failed policies for Obama's misfortunes; they just want to give Obama another chance to prove himself. I don't understand this. Blaming Bush for failed policies...that Obama has continued? Things like the wars, the Patriot Act, Guantanamo, etc. Not to mention the Obama Administration has been more harsh on whistleblowers than the Bush Administration (See Julian Assange).
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 19, 2011 14:39:44 GMT -5
The thing is that while Paul may be sitting there at 10-15% that's about as far as he's going to go. He's not a guy who is going to steal support from anyone else. Let's say Cain drops out tomorrow. How many of those supporters are going to go to Paul? Almost none. They'll go to one of the other guys in the race. I'd be surprised if Paul got up to 20%, completely shocked if he hit 30% and would start screaming and ranting about conspiracies if he hit 40%. It's just not realistic. Personally I would rather people look at solutions that are realistic, than look at pie in the sky solutions that will never ever ever come to pass. I think you're partially right on this, but I also believe that you're missing the point that the majority of people who would vote for Paul are not currently voting, or are even voting Democrat. Getting those people to the polls might be a chore, but it's possible... Obama did it. I don't understand this. Blaming Bush for failed policies...that Obama has continued? Things like the wars, the Patriot Act, Guantanamo, etc. Not to mention the Obama Administration has been more harsh on whistleblowers than the Bush Administration (See Julian Assange). You're preaching to the choir. But there were quite a few economic issues that Obama inherited from Bush and even Clinton and other prior Presidential administrations. People ARE willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt though.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 19, 2011 15:44:27 GMT -5
Over $1.2 million so far today.
|
|
chriskay18
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Jul 12, 2011 11:35:27 GMT -5
Posts: 450
|
Post by chriskay18 on Oct 19, 2011 16:00:05 GMT -5
I just don't like hacking in general. It can ruin people's lives. in the age of facebook, u are ruining your own lives. Mr. E. Nygma<-----Truestory.
|
|