You don't want to admit it, but...

[ChesusRice]

Is it D or R syndrome? I have not figured that part out yet...

Wouldnt matter what Party Ron Paul was in

He still wouldnt get the votes

 

[pen47Tex]

Wouldnt matter what Party Ron Paul was in

He still wouldnt get the votes

It wouldn't matter because D and R are essentially one in the same...
Both are financially irresponsible, war mongering, constitution shredding, corrupt entities. But, thanks for playing. Sweet dreams. Now go count yourself.
Baaahhh.

 

[UncleBuck]

It wouldn't matter because D and R are essentially one in the same...
Both are financially irresponsible, war mongering, constitution shredding, corrupt entities. But, thanks for playing. Sweet dreams. Now go count yourself.
Baaahhh.

we prefer to be "financially irresponsible" in different ways.

whereas modern time republicans prefer to run up the budget on the war machine, the modern time democrats prefer to run up the budget on a much lesser scale on things like infrastructure, education, health care for seniors and children (costly fuckers), and other safety net provisions.

and we have a very demonstrable track record for the governance of each party over the last 30+ years. republicans explode debt and deficits, democrats reduce or even neutralize said deficits.

i will be happy to talk about rawn pawl's "my lai" approach to economic governance if you so wish.

we also prefer to be war mongering in different ways.

whereas modern time republicans love boots on the ground, PTSD, phantom limbs, and more deaths due to suicide than combat fatalities, the modern time democrats prefer drones, small and targeted forces, and a minimality of other horrible effects of war on our soldiers.

and we also have a demonstrable track record of keeping the nation more secure with better foreign relations under democrats than under republicans over these last 30+ years.

i will be happy to talk about rawn pawl's "poop on israel" policy and others if you so wish.

we also all shred the constitution in our own ways.

whereas modern time republicans would love to shred the 14th amendment, the 16th amendment, and others...oh wait. that's rawn pawl as well. oh, shit. us democratsm only have expanded 2nd amendment rights under obama. damn us for that tomfoolery.

oh, and we also wish to extend 14th amendment rights to many more people, but ol' rawn does not approve of that. we all know this from his history of penning homo-bashing bills in the past.

 

[ChesusRice]

Oh Uncle Buck you need to "Wake Up"

 

[pen47Tex]

we prefer to be "financially irresponsible" in different ways.
Hi UB!! First let me point out to your buddy Cheesus, this is the way to hold a conversation. Spouting little jabs is childish. But UB I am glad to see you join this conversation. It's time for grown UPS to discuss it.
Nice to see you clarify "modern". We both know the history is a little ugly.
whereas modern time republicans prefer to run up the budget on the war machine, the modern time democrats prefer to run up the budget on a much lesser scale on things like infrastructure, education, health care for seniors and children (costly fuckers), and other safety net provisions.
Yeah, it's the other "safety net provisions" which with I have the most problems. You see I don't mind charity, but forced charity cannot be called charity. That's what Obamacare is Buck. (May I call you Buck?). The government takes my pay check, and forces me to give housing, food stamps, and now health care on the largest scale ever in the history of well fare to so many people who refuse to work. Of course I am not speaking about those who cannot work, bit those whose families have lived on the government tit for GENERATIONS. It males me angry, because not only is it unconstitutional, its not fair. I work hard for my money Buck. I raised three kids, and sacrificed so often to give them a good life. Why should I ne forced to pay for somebody else's kids too? When they don't even try to get a job, and be a real man and support their family, it puts the burden on me. The price of everything goes up, my check stays the same, and so there is less and less left over for a retirement savings, and Obama wants to take more? Bottom line is that from government hand outs to big business, foreign countries, and lazy do nothings, I'm Damn near broke after it is said and done. Nobody gives me anything I have not worked for, do why do they get a free ride?

and we have a very demonstrable track record for the governance of each party over the last 30+ years. republicans explode debt and deficits, democrats reduce or even neutralize said deficits.
Please show me Obama's deficit reduction... We are going deeper in the hole every second.
i will be happy to talk about rawn pawl's "my lai" approach to economic governance if you so wish.
That's petty Buck. Sorry but you are better than that sir. It is spelled Dr. Ron Paul.
we also prefer to be war mongering in different ways.
By killing American citizens with drone attacks? Even a 16 year old? Sad day in America when the POTUS can order the murder of American citizens, here or abroad.
whereas modern time republicans love boots on the ground, PTSD, phantom limbs, and more deaths due to suicide than combat fatalities, the modern time democrats prefer drones, small and targeted forces, and a minimality of other horrible effects of war on our soldiers.

and we also have a demonstrable track record of keeping the nation more secure with better foreign relations under democrats than under republicans over these last 30+ years.
That would be a matter of opinion, not fact. But, like I said in an earlier post, I see both parties as corrupt, and embarrassing.
i will be happy to talk about rawn pawl's "poop on israel" policy and others if you so wish.
Again? That bores me. Try using the correct spelling.
we also all shred the constitution in our own ways.
Yes you do... That's the main reason both parties disgust me.

whereas modern time republicans would love to shred the 14th amendment, the 16th amendment, and others...oh wait. that's rawn pawl as well. oh, shit. us democratsm only have expanded 2nd amendment rights under obama. damn us for that tomfoolery.
Yes, you shred my right to arms. But also my freedom from illegal search and seizure. Don't forget the"Patriot Act" which was voted for by the vast majority of Dems. Let's not forget Guantamino,(sp) let's not forget the NDDA.
oh, and we also wish to extend 14th amendment rights to many more people, but ol' rawn does not approve of that. we all know this from his history of penning homo-bashing bills in the past.

I do not agree with Dr. Paul's stand on abortion, or gay marriage. You and I agree here.
Let us be honest. I do not agree 100% with any party, but the Libertarians are the closest to me. Ready for a shock? I was a Democrat, born and raised. I am socially liberal, and fiscally conservative. For years I held my nose and voted D. After the party moved farther away from reality, I knew I couldnt do it anymore. I consider myself a Libertarian because they stand for liberty. BTW, did you know that both D and R congressmen and senators own more stock in private prisons than any one else? They will not relinquish their cash cow by legalizing marijuana with out a fight. We need third party clout in congress. Otherwise, look for more of our brothers and sisters to be locked up, to pad their corrupt pockets...
The floor is yours Buck.
Peace!!

 

[mccumcumber]

You know... I consider mysel pretty liberal, and yet I still voted for Johnson. Over Stein mind you, mostly because I disagree with her fiscal policies.

Ron Paul probably helped Gary Johnson more than he did himself, but I don't really mind that. Did you know that Larry king was a moderator for the independent parties' debate. Recognition is getting out there. Maybe in my life time it will be Democrat vs Libertarian. (Maybe Green).

You should just feel lucky that the mainstream media didn't rail the shit out of Paul. Look what happened to Nader. Nader actually cares about the country and the people in it. He is a smart, well educated man. Despite all of this, and more, the media still calls him crazy...

 

[pen47Tex]

You know... I consider mysel pretty liberal, and yet I still voted for Johnson. Over Stein mind you, mostly because I disagree with her fiscal policies.

Ron Paul probably helped Gary Johnson more than he did himself, but I don't really mind that. Did you know that Larry king was a moderator for the independent parties' debate. Recognition is getting out there. Maybe in my life time it will be Democrat vs Libertarian. (Maybe Green).

You should just feel lucky that the mainstream media didn't rail the shit out of Paul. Look what happened to Nader. Nader actually cares about the country and the people in it. He is a smart, well educated man. Despite all of this, and more, the media still calls him crazy...

I hear ya. The media is full of yellow journalists, propagating the two party only theme.

 

[sync0s]

Reason why Ron Paul would have been a better candidate than Romney for the GOP: He would have created a clear contrast in different ideologies and forced people to consider their personal views on the role of government. Would he have won? No, but that doesn't matter. Neoconservatives have sold out what it truly means to be conservative by increasing government for votes and the only way the GOP can heal its self is to kick that bible thumping social conservative/economic liberalism out of the party. Remember, Romney agrees with Obama.

 

[ChesusRice]

Reason why Ron Paul would have been a better candidate than Romney for the GOP: He would have created a clear contrast in different ideologies and forced people to consider their personal views on the role of government. Would he have won? No, but that doesn't matter. Neoconservatives have sold out what it truly means to be conservative by increasing government for votes and the only way the GOP can heal its self is to kick that bible thumping social conservative/economic liberalism out of the party. Remember, Romney agrees with Obama.

He would of got a lot of minority votes
with his view that he would of voted against the civil rights act

 

[sync0s]

He would of got a lot of minority votes
with his view that he would of voted against the civil rights act

You have to love panderers. Time to grow a spine.

 

[cannabineer]

You have to love panderers. Time to grow a spine.

The babies are cute, but the adults shit way too much half-digested bamboo. cn

 

[hotrodharley]

The GOP should be kicking themselves. They shouldn't have thrown the Ron Paul supporters under the bus.

View attachment 2403397

I don't like to be hateful, but the GOP got what they deserved.

Ron Paul does not need to be POTUS. Rather we don't need Paul as POTUS. However the GOP seems to have established a habit of not working with others to achieve an agreed upon simple common goal. Greed.

 

[sync0s]

Ron Paul does not need to be POTUS. Rather we don't need Paul as POTUS. However the GOP seems to have established a habit of not working with others to achieve an agreed upon simple common goal. Greed.

Your post achieved nothing but to indicate your stuck in the liberal fallacy that "greed" serves only the individual. Like you have never benefited from greed.

 

[Red1966]

Yet, turn out numbers say the "GOP" was down, Libertarian numbers were up, and many stayed home. It's all guess work in hindsight, but the GOP did disenfranchise the libertarian wing of the party, at a time they could hardly afford to do so.
But your premise is valid. As usual, well thought out and concise.
Cheers!

Romney got 3 million fewer votes than McCain got in 2008. Obama got 8 million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Obama has lost support among Democrats since he first ran. Romney wasn't as attractive as McCain was. Turnout is key.

 

[hotrodharley]

Your post achieved nothing but to indicate your stuck in the liberal fallacy that "greed" serves only the individual. Like you have never benefited from greed.

Who said greed and individuals? It's collective greed. Your post illustrates the liberal stance that conservatives really do not comprehend.

 

[RyanTheRhino]

Romney got 3 million fewer votes than McCain got in 2008. Obama got 8 million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Obama has lost support among Democrats since he first ran. Romney wasn't as attractive as McCain was. Turnout is key.

How did we have more people vote this election but both sides have less votes.

 

[Red1966]

Could be my source was wrong, or yours. Or there was a surprising number of third party votes. Since I don't even recall where I heard it, I can not defend my statement. Sue me.

 

[RyanTheRhino]

Well I haven't really looked for my self but this year had a much larger turnout.

Plus I don't think third parties took 11 million votes

 

[RyanTheRhino]

NOTICE* this is just the first thing i found cant find 2012. guess its not finalized yet

 

[Red1966]

That could be because, once again, Florida hasn't finished counting votes. I be interested in the final numbers. They surely will publish them somewhere. What the hell are VEP and VAP turnout rates?