Why CAN'T Ron Paul be President? by Wulfenstar

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Read my post

Edit: I don't care what you believe. You can believe what you want, so long as you don't FORCE it on anyone else.

Believe me, when I say I would fight and die for that right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:12 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"No, the people did not choose. They were given a choice between to glasses of dirty water, and they chose the one that appeared LESS dirty.
But BOTH are.
There are more than 2 choices, dammit.
You are still angry that I called you a "stupid Pollock"."

Not angry.

It's why I put in that 99% NOT Ron Paul figure.

Obama or Clinton ? McCain or Romney ? Obama or McCain ? Dark charcoal grey or pinstrip dark charcoal grey ?

At any point in that decision tree you can say that the choices are marginally different from each other. You could argue that people were swayed by circumstances, by media, by secondary or tertiary factors.

But a 99% NO Ron Paul vote repeatedly over the whole process is pretty conlusive. It's a lesson that you need to pay attention to. That 99% NO is telling you something important - something you need to acknowledge. You need to figure out what that is. And once you figure it out, go to work on it.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:15 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
And as God is my witness, I will make the ignorant public see that.

With THAT attitude????

Good luck on that!

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:18 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"With THAT attitude????

Good luck on that!"

Yeah, I know.

But I look at a mountain as waiting to be climbed. Not as as an insurmountable object.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:27 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Which is why I'm trying to give you some advice.

BTW.. you seem totally unaware of the inherent contradiction of trying to "force" Libertarianism on everyone. Please note that your Lib buddies are strangely silent....

---------------------------------
I'd hate to be leading a parade and find that there's no one behind me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:27 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

bump

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:29 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"I'd hate to be leading a parade and find that there's no one behind me."

Not I.

I would rather lead a parade of ONE, and be RIGHT...than follow a magical ANYBODY, and be wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:31 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

All I'm saying is... even your Lib buddies aren't following you into this minefield....

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:31 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Not I.

I would rather lead a parade of ONE, and be RIGHT...than follow a magical ANYBODY, and be wrong.

Everyone in a parade thinks they're right. Who's to say.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:29 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Everyone in a parade thinks they're right. Who's to say."

Damn right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:32 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Yanno Wulf, with your "I know what's right for them and I'm gonna make them see it, the ignorant slobs" and "Everyone should be made to join the military" philosophy, I don't think you're a Libertarian.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:36 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

When you know you will die, when you accept it, when it no longer terrifys you, then you are free.

And, as a free man, what you do from that point forward, defines who you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:37 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Sig,

"Everyone should be made to join the military" philosophy...

I've backed off that philosophy.

I believed that the military could teach the people the will to continue, and give them the teeth to fight for the future.

But to FORCE people into that is wrong.

I've stated that and let it be the end of it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:52 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

My whole point...is that Ron Paul CAN be President.

If I, someone who admittedly is fraked beyond all reason, can see him as being a leader of actual HOPE...than so can all the sheeple.

"When I was a young boy,
My father took me into the city
To see a marching band.
He said,
"Son, when you grow up,
Would you be the saviour of the broken,
The beaten and the damned?"
He said
"Will you defeat them,
You demons, and all the non believers,
The plans that they have made?
Because one day I'll leave you,
A phantom to lead you in the summer,
To join the black parade."

"Do or die, you'll never make me
Because the world, will never take my heart
Go and try, you'll never break me
We want it all, (we'll carry on) we wanna play this part
Do or die, (we'll carry on) you'll never make me
Because the world, (we'll carry on) will never take my heart
Go and try, (we'll carry) you'll never break me
We want it all, (we'll carry on) we wanna play this part"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:01 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"My whole point...is that Ron Paul CAN be President."

Then you'll have to figure out how to change people's minds.

".. then so can all the sheeple."

Not a great start to winning heart and minds.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:06 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
When you know you will die, when you accept it, when it no longer terrifys you, then you are free. And, as a free man, what you do from that point forward, defines who you are.

I agree.

Maybe you weren't here several years ago when I was making that same point. It's three ayem and there's nothing to respond to... no bosses, no TV commercials, no nothing... and if you STILL can't think like a free person because you can't even face your own fears....

But I don't think I'm going to "make" people see that. I hope they do. For the sake of future, I surely do. But if COULD "make" them see that, then I'm not going to call myself a liberator. I'll be a tyrant.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:10 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I realize that my earlier post may have missed its mark on some folks around here.

The new generation must never forget those that came before.

So here.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:21 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

".. then so can all the sheeple."

Not a great start to winning heart and minds."

Rue, you are right.

The first step, the VERY FIRST STEP, is to change the people from sheeple...into wolves.

Give people their teeth back, and then we can start the charge to fight back for our freedoms.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:35 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

But Wulf... (interesting name)... most people don't WANT to be wolves. And they don't HAVE to be. The greatest change comes about when everybody takes one step in the same direction. Just one. Not when a vanishing minority run a marathon. So, you're right, in a way: The first thing you have to do is convince peeps of the viability of your cause. Because if you're gonna ask them to slit their wrists... ain't gonna happen!

BTW- Successful movements have room for both the heroes AND less heroic. The outre AND the more conventional. Now, YOU may be constitutionally-suited to tackle the world with a knife between your teeth, but that's not most peeps. So if you're going to build a successful movement, (That's what you're trying to do, right?) you have to have some ALTERNATE activities besides storming the Bastille.

-----------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:58 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Also Wulf,

If you're going to look on yourself as SO superior and everyone else as SO inferior (something that comes out in all your posts, and which other people have pointed out) - you're not going to get very far. People notice. And it won't endear you OR your message to them.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:10 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"My whole point...is that Ron Paul CAN be President."

Then you'll have to figure out how to change people's minds.

".. then so can all the sheeple."

Not a great start to winning heart and minds.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

I can almost hear Wulfie giving his first speech in support of Ron Paul:

"Ahem... Is this thing on? Good. Okay, LISTEN TO ME, YOU BUNCH OF IGNORANT SLOBS! ALL YOU SHEEPLE, YOU'RE ALL IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK OR HOW TO THINK, AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU BOTH! VOTE RON PAUL! DON'T ASK WHY, JUST TRUST ME WHEN I SAY HE'S THE ONE! BELIEVE IT! DON'T BE SHEEPLE! FOLLOW ME!"

I'm guessing that speech will go over pretty well. Who knows, in a couple days you may even be able to walk again...

Mike

I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me.

- Anthem, by Leonard Cohen

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:13 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Rather than think of virtually everyone you share the planet with as being subhuman, it might be nice to put aside your overlarge ego and try to address the nature of the situation.

Why don't you go back to calling Auraptor, et al, dogs.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:11 PM

DREAMTROVE

Actually, I think he probably should be, not just because he's the best candidate. I think he had the most support, and probably, cheating aside, got the most votes, especially when you consider that only he, Dennis and Mike Gravel were running for the job, aside from the 3rd party candidates. Everyone else said "If elected I will" they were running for dictator.

Honestly, I think McCain was probably ineligible to run. Panama is not the US, no matter how you slice it. If we accept it, Obama was born in the US, but only just. He might have been born in Jakarta, he wasn't born in Kenya, but he wasn't really running for president so much.

But of course, democracy is a total illusion. I called Obama/Clinton in 2004, or I guess I posted it here in 2005, because of the media opinion. I know what really drives the election, it's why it was an easy pick. the problem was Obama wouldn't take hillary as a vp, even though she came in 2nd, because he probably thought she would kill him and take his place, which she probably would.

Give Barry a while. I said everyone gets 18 months unless they attack american citizens. Then you can abandon them. But Obama hasn't bombed America, so he gets 18 months, then we can evaluate his job performance. I did as much for Bush, who now I would say, at least people in his govt *did* attack America, so I probably shouldn't have, but follow this logic.

The incoming president, pork bailouts aside, writes the next years budget, and usually policies, taxes, etc. It takes 2 years for the new head of state's policies to be fully in place, or at least 18 months. I think 18 months in, you can judge how things are going. Before that, I think people are just being partisan.

All that said, I think Ron Paul is still the voice of reason in the US govt. His speech on the bailout, the fraudulent nature of the debt and the irrationality of American empire was awesome.

We're going to lose, but lets lose for who we really are, and on that subject, can we get rid of these fakers, pork pigs, and jackasses on the right, the war-nuts, and anti-conservationists, everything that is just corporate greed with a thin cloak.

Oh, and could someone do me a personal favor and take Jabba the Limbaugh and transport him to limbo? I don't want to hear another peep from that shmuck about anything, and I don't want him to stand for conservatives, and I actually don't want him in the news any more than Paris Hilton, they deserve the same amount of respect: zero.

One more thing, Steele. I guess this is par for the course, he's like the GOP's Howard Dean. At least Steele hasn't called our president "Osama bin Laden" yet. That puts him one up on Dean. (I actually worked for Dean, he was an ass then, too.) Steele I don't know, but before the GOP actually wants to win an election, they might want to hire someone with some backbone. Just a thought. Personally, I don't care. He can stay if someone gets rid of Limbaugh. Oh, and if you have an extra shot, take out Coulter, too. If you're lucky, you can get Ann and Bill Maher in one shot :)

Non-terrorist disclaimer, not suggesting shooting anyone, just put them on -ignore /always

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:14 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

BigBM

"Why don't you go back to calling Auraptor, et al, dogs."

I reserve that for Rap. It's very specific to him. I don't call ALL people with whom I disagree sheeple, or dogs. Unlike of course Wulf, who prefers to think of himself as the uber Wulf to the sheeple with which he's surrounded, and whom he feels he has the right to demean.

***************************************************************

And please, PLEASE, for the love of god, learn to read ! M-kay ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:20 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"I can almost hear Wulfie giving his first speech in support of Ron Paul:

"Ahem... Is this thing on? Good. Okay, LISTEN TO ME, YOU BUNCH OF IGNORANT SLOBS! ALL YOU SHEEPLE, YOU'RE ALL IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK OR HOW TO THINK, AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU BOTH! VOTE RON PAUL! DON'T ASK WHY, JUST TRUST ME WHEN I SAY HE'S THE ONE! BELIEVE IT! DON'T BE SHEEPLE! FOLLOW ME!"

Ok, this was kind of funny...

BUT, I don't think people are all ignorant, slovenly, idiots who should just do what I say.

JUST that you need to wake up and realize that its WAAAAY past time to put politics aside and actually do the right thing for the country as a whole.

And FOR ME, that is getting back in line with the Constitution....and being for the one guy who has ALWAYS been FOR the Constitution.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:32 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"Why don't you go back to calling Auraptor, et al, dogs."

I reserve that for Rap. It's very specific to him. I don't call ALL people with whom I disagree sheeple, or dogs. Unlike of course Wulf, who prefers to think of himself as the uber Wulf to the sheeple with which he's surrounded, and whom he feels he has the right to demean.

But it's not demeaning when your buddy Signy says it, right?

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
BTW- Let me be clear: I think most peeps ARE sheeple. I think "we" have an inherent tendency to "follow the leader", to cooperate well beyond the point of self-interest.

Might want to bone up on your own reading skills Rue.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:38 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

This was your post directed to ME - remember ?

"Rue
Why don't you go back to calling Auraptor, et al, dogs."

I haven't called anyone else a dog. Nor have I called any group sheeple. Also, I was answering a post directed to ME and answering for ME. And now you want me to answer to your post to ME for --- SignyM ?

***************************************************************

Is someone ELSE typing your posts for you ? B/c clearly, you are not reading your own posts with any comprehension.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:45 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

S'wenyways Wulf

You got a lot of 'splainin' to do about this:

"If I, someone who admittedly is fraked beyond all reason, can see him as being a leader of actual HOPE...than so can all the sheeple."

Presumably, all those 99% of sheeple who voted NO on Ron Paul.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:16 PM

While I think it's true that a majority of voters would not be in favor of Ron Paul's ideology - even if they were presented with a clear choice - I do think he'd garner a lot more support (my gut feel is in the thirty percent range) if his message was allowed through. But the really important thing is who doesn't want Ron Paul to be heard, and that's the leadership of both parties.

More than probably any other national politician, his message threatens the charade that keeps the vested powers vested. He speaks truth when it's not popular, when it's not convenient, and when his fellow party members don't want us to hear it. And that's probably the biggest reason he'll never get his due.

The two major parties worked hard over the last century to build up the wall that keeps out all substantial opposition. They will remain in power until that wall is breached. And that's not going to happen with a grassroots voter movement unless its accompanied by major structural upheaval.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:23 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
This was your post directed to ME - remember ?

"Rue
Why don't you go back to calling Auraptor, et al, dogs."

I haven't called anyone else a dog. Nor have I called any group sheeple. Also, I was answering a post directed to ME and answering for ME. And now you want me to answer to your post to ME for --- SignyM ?

***************************************************************

Is someone ELSE typing your posts for you ? B/c clearly, you are not reading your own posts with any comprehension.

Slick.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:38 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Yes, I think most people tend to follow the leader. I use the term "sheeple" as a term that Wulf would recognize, seeing as he uses it rather often.

What I'm trying to point out is that people are not wolves, or tigers, or eagles, or bears, or any other large carnivore. We're a SOCIAL species. Relatively defenseless in our naked state, with infants who remain helpless for years and years. We got where we got by cooperation. Or sociality is both our curse and our strength.

Deal with it.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
What I'm trying to point out is...

Yes, you've pointed that out most effectively, and most repeatedly. And what you don't seem to understand is that we're not complaining about the point you're making. Yes, humans are social creatures, cooperation is necessary, and community is necessary and desirable. But that's not the same thing as a corrupt political structure dominated by corporate interests who'd rather keep consumers blindly turning the wheels of the war machine. Ron Paul isn't shut out of the process because he threatens civil, social cooperation. He's shut out because he promotes it.

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Deal with it.

Or defeat it. Ron Paul may not get elected. But those of us ready for real change won't shut up just because what he's saying makes the old guard uncomfortable.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:05 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
They will remain in power until that wall is breached.

Pffth, we don't NEED to breach it, just grow strong enough, tall enough, in and of ourselves to simply step on over it, and just keep walkin.

"Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit"
- Philip Pullman; The Subtle Knife

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But a 99% NO Ron Paul vote repeatedly over the whole process is pretty conlusive. It's a lesson that you need to pay attention to. That 99% NO is telling you something important - something you need to acknowledge.

No it's not. It's asinine to say when 9 out of 10 people you ask don't even know who the man is. It's hard to be voting against somebody you don't even know exists.

They had two candidates (3 if you include Hillary) that were beat down into our subconscious, and aside from a few republicans vying for the position, there was little real choice in the matter.

You can't honestly say that you agree with McCain on more things than you do with Ron Paul, could you?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:22 AM

Quote:

They had two candidates (3 if you include Hillary) that were beat down into our subconscious, and aside from a few republicans vying for the position, there was little real choice in the matter.

You're blaming the media for his failure, when in fact you really should be blaming him and his organization (or lack thereof) for not getting his message out and for not running a good grass-roots campaign. If he'd been an effective campaigner and had people behind him who were worth a damn, his message surely would have gotten out to more than 1% of the "sheeple".

Mike

I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me.

- Anthem, by Leonard Cohen

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:26 AM

ahem.... 10% of the sheeple.

You'll see. When Obama fails just like Bush did.

There's no room for other voices now. The people just aren't inconvenienced enough to be meaningfully pissed off yet.

Paul's no savior. I believe he is special, but there are plenty of others like him. It won't be a two party race much longer.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
ahem.... 10% of the sheeple.

You'll see. When Obama fails just like Bush did.

There's no room for other voices now. The people just aren't inconvenienced enough to be meaningfully pissed off yet.

Paul's no savior. I believe he is special, but there are plenty of others like him. It won't be a two party race much longer.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

Okay, ten percent. That's a huge difference, but not really. Wiki pegs his popularity at around 7% AMONG REPUBLICAN VOTERS, so he didn't really have more than single-digit support even in his own party.

And in terms of electoral votes, Ron Paul really didn't do that well either. He spent some $28 million on his campaign, and got ZERO electoral votes. To borrow a line from Dennis Miller, I wasn't even running, and I tied him.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a good message or some valid points. What I *AM* saying is that he and his staff did a really shitty job of putting it out there and getting noticed. If 90% of the American public didn't have any idea who he is, is that THEIR fault, or his?

On your other point ("You'll see, when Obama fails just like Bush did.") I also disagree. I think Obama will fail in ways completely different from Bush, possibly ways completely new to America! But who knows? He might just pull it off. Don't hold your breath. :)

As for your overall point, that there are others like Ron Paul and it won't be a two-party race much longer, I'd like to believe you. I *HOPE* you're right, and I'm hoping to bring more third-party candidates into power soon, but I'm starting at the local, county, and state level. Before you can build a new house, you need a solid foundation; we'll build that foundation, THEN we'll work on winning national elections. These things take time.

Mike

I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me.

- Anthem, by Leonard Cohen

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:44 AM

KELKHIL

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Doesnt mean he won't be in the future.

Remember who you are dealing with on this site.

BrownCoats = Diehards.

Yeah but think about it... we couldn't even keep a TV show going. All that needs is a few million viewers on any given week. Being Prez... taht take a few million in Each state. Not gonna happen.

Zombie Killing, Ninja in Training Kelkhil
The Shirtless Forsaken

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:55 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
and got ZERO electoral votes.

And he won't, ever, unless we get underneath it and start ripping the guts out of it at the state level.

Ummm, you DID see my post further up in this thread on March 4th about why that can NOT happen in our current system, right ?

When you play a rigged game at the card sharpers table with his deck - expecting to do anything but lose is asinine.

You got to palm some cards yourself to even stand a chance.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 5:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Okay, ten percent. That's a huge difference, but not really. Wiki pegs his popularity at around 7% AMONG REPUBLICAN VOTERS, so he didn't really have more than single-digit support even in his own party.

I was just saying that, at best, 10% of the American public was even aware of who the man is. He had support among Democratic voters as well. Of the people who I knew that knew who he was and liked his message, I can say they both were pretty happy to see support coming from the other side.

Quote:
didn't do that well either. He spent some $28 million on his campaign, and got ZERO electoral votes. To borrow a line from Dennis Miller, I wasn't even running, and I tied him.

With Miller's quote, and I say this being a fan of Miller myself, you prove the point I'm trying to make. If the little converage anyone ever sees of the man is that it's futile for him to win and he's the champion of the "lunatic fringe", how much money would you suspect needs to be thrown at that problem to make it go away?

Ron Paul ran on a rigidly responsible fiscal policy, and he wasn't going to ask Barack Obama to bail him out when he spent ten times his net worth in campaign expences al la Hillary.

I'm sure Dr Paul cringed at spending even 28 million dollars, but until true campaign finance reform comes this was big proof that we're still just entrenched mindlessly in the 2 party race. He couldn't even sneak his way in by pretending to be a Republican.

The sad thing about him "pretending" to be Republican, is that he's the one who most closely follows and believes in their ideals of small government and free market, he's the one laughed at like an old clown wearing depends.

Quote:
I'm not saying he doesn't have a good message or some valid points. What I *AM* saying is that he and his staff did a really shitty job of putting it out there and getting noticed. If 90% of the American public didn't have any idea who he is, is that THEIR fault, or his?

I'm not sitting here being judgemental of the proles. Things are just to easy enough collectively, even in these tough times, for us to start looking for true alternatives and change. It's nobody's fault. We're just proving the fact that there are natural leaders and natural followers. We're just doing what we're told to do, with a little bit of "choice" thrown in to blind us from the fact that until we stand together and demand it that there really is no choice.

Quote:
On your other point ("You'll see, when Obama fails just like Bush did.") I also disagree. I think Obama will fail in ways completely different from Bush, possibly ways completely new to America! But who knows? He might just pull it off. Don't hold your breath. :)

I didn't mean "LIKE" Bush did... I just mean that he will fail, and is already failing. Borrowing a way out of a problem is what got us here. We are all cheering him on as he sells our grandchildren into slavery. Bush didn't start that fire either. He just gave it a hell of a workout. Obama's now giving it the "Sammy Sosa" treatment.

Quote:
As for your overall point, that there are others like Ron Paul and it won't be a two-party race much longer, I'd like to believe you. I *HOPE* you're right, and I'm hoping to bring more third-party candidates into power soon, but I'm starting at the local, county, and state level. Before you can build a new house, you need a solid foundation; we'll build that foundation, THEN we'll work on winning national elections. These things take time.

The ground up is the way to do it. The top is way too heavy and corrupt and the foundation is weak and pliable. I do believe that a government can truly function to serve the people, but it will forget what it was designed to do when the people fall asleep.

Here's hoping the adrenaline shot that the people need isn't as severe as previous shots needed to be to get the desired effect.

But we know better than that, don't we......

Good luck Mike,
~6

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 5:17 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I based my 99% NO vote for Ron Paul on a calculation: his fractional repubican support x fraction of declared repubican voters x fraction who vote. And I came up with a number less than 1% who supported Ron Paul (and gave him the benefit of the doubt by boosting it 50% to 1%). Now, this is a back-of-the-envelope calculation, and you can argue whether it's less than 1% or up to 7% - but either way it a VERY SMALL NUMBER. In truth, it's a DECISIVELY small number.

Was it bad campaigning or a message out of tune with what the vast majority want ? Think of ALL the alternatives who, unlike Ron Paul, are well known who also didn't get many votes - Ralph Nader, anyone ?

So, what can be learned from low numbers of out-of-mainstream candidates ? It's that people right now are not looking for 'different'. They're looking for 'better'.

Maybe in a few years things will be so bad people will want to chuck all the old faces and old ideas. But then, and I have to be the one to bring bad news, that will also mean Ron Paul - a member of which well-established party, again ?

Aside from those factors, Ron Paul has a lot of baggage - the racism posted on HIS website under HIS name, and his stand on abortion, for starters.

I believe we have a two party system b/c our 'winner take all' government structure leaves no room for the opposition, or for coalitions. If you want to establish an alternate party, it needs to be done in a big way to make any headway against either party. Chipping around the edges to marginally improve Ron Paul's popularity isn't going to do it. B/c, in the end, he will still be a marginal player at the edges.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:58 AM

Wow... can you plug any more sound bites from 40 years ago Rue?

Idiot.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Wow... can you plug any more sound bites from 40 years ago Rue?

Idiot.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

Not sure I follow you on this, Jack.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 8:47 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Not sure I follow you on this, Jack.

Me neither.

Seems like Rue's point was pretty on-point and laid out and you came up with....

HUH?????

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:05 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Anyway, I'm 100% behind about 30% of what Ron Paul says. The other 70% I'm 90% against, which pretty much means I'm not only "not for" RP I'm actually against him.

There are other politicians and non-mainstream candidates that I like a whole lot better than RP, including Ralph Nader and Russ Feingold. So if I'm gonna daydream I may as well come up with something way more agreeable.

Sarge... my point about peeps being cooperative is that we seem to cooperate waaaaay beyond immediate self-interest. Look at all the enduring societies that practiced human sacrifice, or engaged in endless wars. You won't get peeps to agree with you by rippping off their blinders and having them suddenly raise their hands up to the sky, praising freedom. Change is scary. Peeps need to see it will make a material improvement in their lives.

BTW- I find it interesting that I hear more from Ron Paul on that "liberal" show "Real Time" (Bill Maher) than I do thru any of the Republican "conservative" shows. Why he doesn't have the stones to break with the Repubs is beyond me 'cause the only thing they do for him is to bury him. Maybe if he ran as an independent he'd get more coverage.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I find it interesting that I hear more from Ron Paul on that "liberal" show "Real Time" (Bill Maher) than I do thru any of the Republican "conservative" shows. Why he doesn't have the stones to break with the Repubs is beyond me 'cause the only thing they do for him is to bury him. Maybe if he ran as an independent he'd get more coverage.

You mean like that other guy that ran independent? The one that no one at all heard about?

This issue was a pretty common discussion topic amongst those of us who supported Ron Paul's message. But, futile as his attempts to gain the Republican nomination might have been, it got more coverage than a third party, or independent run, ever would have. The defining moments of his campaign happened in the Republican primary debates, where he essentially gave the middle finger to the party establishment in their own backyard. That would have never been possible if he'd run as an independent.

The truth of the matter is the two parties have the process sewn up tight. Voters and, more importantly, media know this and they won't give more than token coverage to anyone outside of that process because, by definition, they aren't "viable".

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:45 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"The truth of the matter is the two parties have the process sewn up tight. Voters and, more importantly, media know this and they won't give more than token coverage to anyone outside of that process because, by definition, they aren't "viable"."

Then Ralph Nader should never have been interviewed.

Then H. Ross Perot did something literally impossible.

So, if you can figure out how they did it anyway, you have a template.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Then Ralph Nader should never have been interviewed.

Then H. Ross Perot did something literally impossible.

So, if you can figure out how they did it anyway, you have a template.

Did what exactly? Proved my point?

Perot was actually the impetus for many of the changes that lock out third parties today. Up until Perot's run, presidential debates were traditionally run by the League of Women voters. After Perot gave them a good scare, the two major parties agreed it was in their mutual interest to avoid anything that would give third parties a shot in the future. The changes they implemented, in part, prompted the LoWV to drop support for the debates stating:

"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public"

Since then, the leaders of the two parties control the debates, eliminating, for all practical purposes, any chance of a third party candidate participating in the debates.

If our national media had the "balls" or the integrity of the League of Women Voters, they'd refuse to cover the debates and insist on an open, fair process. But they don't. And they won't.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:11 AM