Ron Paul?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by iSax1234, Dec 10, 2011.

  1. iSax1234 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia
    #1
    Why do people issue quite circular statements, such as "he's unelectable?" If everyone said that statement then, would that in truth not make him unelectable. If people like his views of the economy, and the federal government's role in society as based on the Constitution, then why are more people not all in? Many a crowd from the GOP seems to hate on his foreign policy, but it seems he just respects national sovereignty and the constitutional power of the people to declare war through congress. Sure one may not like his libertarian views on marijuana or prostitution, ect, but he looks at the Constitution and finds no Federal power to make these thing illegal and therefore gives the states the right to choose for themselves.

    Besides, Gingrich is a rich progressive lobbyist who has taken 37 million dollars from healthcare companies and a 1.5 million dollars from Freddie and Fannie. He aligns himself with Teddy Roosevelt and is a true Grand Ole Progressive. Romney seems to be a good leader, but has flip flopped way too many times to be taken seriously not to mention things government is the solution to all of our problems. Then there is..um who is that guy...oh yeah Perry (couldn't remember the third guy).

    Ron Paul stands for liberty and a Federal Government that identifies with the constitution. He also stands for peace, and America keeping their guns to themselves.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #2
    However misdirected, Ron Paul has scruples, and that scares the **** out of Republicans.
     
  3. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #3
    Because his social and foreign policy views are totally misaligned with the conservative constituency he is actively courting.

    While his economic views are totally out of line with a liberal constituency.
     
  4. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #4
    Gingrich is a progressive?

    I guess you mean that in a different way than I think of it.
     
  5. tmagman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Location:
    Calgary AB
    #5
    Ron Paul also has stated in the past he would dispose of the presidency. Not going to lie but a person who is running for an office he wants to destroy is 'unelectable'
     
  6. iSax1234 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia
    #6
    Have any links or sources to the fact Ron Paul wants to eliminate the Office of the President?
     
  7. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #7
    What, and destroy a nice sound-bite?? :mad:
     
  8. tmagman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Location:
    Calgary AB
    #8
    it was several years ago unfortunately. I was searching for the source but cannot find it anymore. There's other branches of government he wants to remove too that are very well documented as well (the Fed for instance), that while in their current form are terrible, they do have a purpose but simply need a new mandate and leadership.

    As a person I don't mind Paul, I think he brings a lot to the conservative table and forces people to talk about things and possibilities, but I just don't see him as a viable leader.
     
  9. iSax1234 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia
    #9
    Again you haven't posted why you don't see him as a leader, and I suppose you're not required to give a logical argument on why you don't see him that way.

    Oh that corporation that has no checks and balances, and prints money when ever it wants and loans it to whoever it wants without anyone knowing? Not to mention the banks are bankers. So the Federal Reserve loans the banks money for barely any cost and then the banks make money off the Federal Reserve's money, that they decided to print more of lower the value of everyone else money. The Federal Reserve needs to go.

    "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties that standing armies" - Thomas Jefferson

    "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” -Henry Ford

    Either way, Ron Paul holds no constitutional authority to just repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, but rather does hold the power to audit the Federal Reserve and expose the truth of what they're doing.
     
  10. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #10
    I don't think you asked why people don't see him as a leader you asked why he's un-electable.

    The reason I don't see him as a leader is because I think many of his ideas are foolishly naive. Founded more in his idealistic views of how he thinks the world should work rather than how it actually operates.

    The federal reserve may require adjustments it also has many valuable societal functions which make it a very valuable institution. A blanket statement like "the federal reserve needs to go" which isn't supported by a slue of enormously convincing data comes across as silly and rash.

    Not the sort of thing I wan't to hear from my leaders...

    "All men are created equal" -Thomas Jefferson

    Of course he owned slaves...

    The weight of prudence we attribute to our founding fathers is frankly ridiculous. So using the original wording of the constitution as an inflexible basis for all future regulation strikes me as naive and foolish.

    Not a quality I wan't in my leaders

    I can probably agree with you here, I think the economic systems employed by modern economies are deeply flawed (and this includes banking systems).

    This means that serious reform is required not outright elimination.

    Who knows that might be a good thing and I probably wouldn't be opposed to massive reforms to US banking practices.

    That being said, this is hardly the only issue to consider and as general rule I'm enormously opposed to Ron Paul's overriding societal philosophy.

    Of course I also think he's also the best of the conservative candidates, I don't agree with many of his viewpoints, but he's the only one of the lot who isn't a wheedling snake willing to say anything to garner support.
     
  11. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #11
    *cough* Huntsman *cough*
     
  12. MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
  13. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #13
    Ron Paul's positions on certain issues attract people who, like Paul himself, are blinded by ideology and cannot see that his policies are dangerously naive in placing theory and ideology above practicality.

    Paul is considered unelectable because any mainstream candidate from either side would make short work of him by actually spelling out his platforms and what they would mean for the American people. He has found success in attracting supporters who seem to exist in the vacuum of the internet, their support ever bolstered by the echo chamber, ever mystified when they find that nobody else has seen the light.
     
  14. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #14
    Gravitas, charisma, call it what you will. The ability to walk, talk, look, and act presidential. Neither Paul nor Gingrich possess this quality in any appreciable measure.
     
  15. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #15
    Agreed. By that yardstick, only Huntsman (IMO) meets it.
     
  16. iSax1234 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia
    #16
    Look presidential? Have you ever looked at a picture of William Taft? How presidential does this guy look, he got in office. Its interesting that we're participating in a social experiment now that seems to be failing in Europe and in the US. Big government, big bureaucracy , tons of regulations and then many are quick to say free markets, and free people are ludicrous ideas.

    Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government. - James Madison



    This is hilarious. Founding fathers they only revolted against the largest empire in the world and set up the most free country in the world. Have you ever read the Constitution, federalist papers, or maybe heard the oath that the elected officials and armed force members swear their life by when they take that position? Or perhaps you haven't read history, or you're to blind to see it repeating itself. The constitution protects your liberties and protects you from the government, but you're willing to give a loose interpretation so that you can get some type of benefits from the government? Do you think that the states unified to provide a larger welfare state or to protect the fundamental liberties of it's people?

    Seems like we've had quite a few financial collapses since 1913. So why do you want to keep doing the same ole thing?

    Where government abides by the constitution? Where individuals are responsible and accountable to themselves. That charity isn't forced with a gun upon the American people, but done out of the kindness of their hearts through Churches and non profits? Where states have the right to pass their own laws? Where we don't inflate our currency and steal money from the people so they can pay for their own healthcare, food, housing, retirement, and education? You seriously would rather participate in the redistribution of wealth that set up a system that holds it's businesses and banks accountable and keeps the private sector private? What sort of government do you want? A republic or some type of tyrannical regime.

    "The happiness of society is the end of government." - John Adams

    Either way I respect your ideas on government, and why you don't like Ron Paul. I do disagree with him on some standards, but no one is perfect. Either way I think he is the best candidate to the loose the chains of big government and set the people free to be innovative, peaceful, and prosperous. Even if you think big government somehow has the authority to take one person's property and give it to another, you won't be able to do this without money, and Ron Paul is the cornerstone of monetary and financial reform.
     
  17. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #17

    Yeah, he looked svelte in the televised debates. :D
     
  18. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #18
    I'd say that Romney meets it as well; actually I've been saying for quite a while now that Romney will most likely be the nominee. Gingrich is a really smart guy but he's got far too much baggage and whatnot. Paul is the libertarian version of space cadet Denis Kucinich.

    Taft was before television. Besides, being Kringlarian-fat didn't stop Chris Christie from being considered for a while there.
     
  19. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #19
    There wasn't an obesity epidemic in the US when Taft was elected. Obesity and its many causes and effects is probably the greatest danger this country faces. If someone as obese as Christie is ever elected President, I'll guarantee you that the end is near.
     
  20. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #20
    I don't think he's the lest bit presidential. His inability to pick a ****ing position on virtually every issue disqualifies him in my book.
     
  21. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    The problem in Europe is that the politicians haven't been competent enough to isolate the Greek problem just to Greece - Greece is night and day worse than the rest of the Eurozone.
     
  22. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #22
    I'd probably vote for Ron Paul over any other candidate. It's just a sad reality on how messed up the picks are this time around.

    Although I do 100% agree, the fed has to go. It's too closely linked to all of the banks that are "too big to fail". They need to go, too. As does the prime minister of Italy, who's also linked to the big banks.

    /angsty rant :D
     
  23. Daveoc64 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    #23
    Given that (as others have pointed out), the vast majority of people in the United States would not accept the level of "small government" that he advocates, it seems pointless to me to try to argue that an "old" document should carry more weight than public opinion.

    Freedom of the people to choose what they (collectively) really want seems more important to me.
     
  24. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #24
    The only thing that I agree with Paul is to scale back our military presence around the world. We shouldn't have a blind alliance with Israel. I wouldn't go so far as to be totally isolationist, but enough of getting involved in wars that have no concern to us. We're not the world police.
     
  25. puma1552 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #25
    This is dead-on, and it really bothers me thinking that some of these people could actually be chosen to represent our country on the world stage.

    Gingrich: Ambles/waddles out on stage at the GOP debates, then sits there, chin down, seeming pessimistic and crass about everything.

    Paul: Comes across as the odd, squirrely guy in the neighborhood that nobody really knows or wants to know.

    Perry: A bit of a bully, constantly interrupts people and takes cheap shots.

    Santorum: Looks like he just came in from recess. Whatever it is, he just doesn't have it.

    Bachmann: Dear god she is scary to look at, she looks brainwashed. A true travesty of a candidate.

    Huntsman: Seems ok, would like to know more about him.

    Romney: Typical stale old white guy. Probably the most normal.

    Cain: Guy REALLY needed speech lessons to talk properly if he were ever serious. Listening to that guy talk made my ears bleed.

    Truth be told, qualifications aside, someone running for president does have to be *very* charismatic, classy, and proper. Obama is this to a "T".
     

Share This Page