Republican Primary Megathread (poll now updated)

[Wikkiwallana]

they won't find out, precious few people actually learn much of whats going on during the elections.

I have no clue where you were told those things, but they blatantly oppose his actual views, to the point where it more amuses then annoys me. the economy will actually be FIXED, the actual issue economically speaking though is, he is willingly to sacrifice all these things the government spends money on like social security. The economy WILL be fixed if hes in, but it depends if you think its too high of a price or not.

That link did not really provide any solid proof, and those views conflict with Libertarian ideals, which Ron Paul is a closet libertarian

No solid proof? You didn't read it or look under the spoilers, did you? Well, here:

as to many of my points: http://www.ontheissues.org/ron_paul.htm

Re opposition to separation of Church and State: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.1547:; http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 61302.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul85.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... Itemid=69;

Re opposition to Fourteenth Amendment & racist legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.J.RES.46:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.3863:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.5842:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d098:h.r.4982:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul346.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... &Itemid=69

Re gutting the Bill of Rights: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.00300:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.04379:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.05739:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.3893:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul270.html;

Re lying hypocrit who voted for law he said was unconstitutional: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 60403.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul98.html

Re opposition to civil rights, including Civil Rights Act of 1964: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul385.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... Itemid=69;

Re discrimination against homosexuals and same-sex couples: http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr072204.htm; http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 72204.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html

Re racist publications: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/ang ... 2a7da84ca;
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/ron ... ewsletter;
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/w ... newsletter

Re supports federal laws against abortion: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.02597:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.1094:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.00776:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d097:h.r.392:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul84.html

I love you, Farn.

[Farnhamia]

No solid proof? You didn't read it or look under the spoilers, did you? Well, here:

as to many of my points: http://www.ontheissues.org/ron_paul.htm

Re opposition to separation of Church and State: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.1547:; http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 61302.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul85.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... Itemid=69;

Re opposition to Fourteenth Amendment & racist legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.J.RES.46:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.3863:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.5842:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d098:h.r.4982:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul346.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... &Itemid=69

Re gutting the Bill of Rights: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.00300:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.04379:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.05739:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.3893:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul270.html;

Re lying hypocrit who voted for law he said was unconstitutional: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 60403.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul98.html

Re opposition to civil rights, including Civil Rights Act of 1964: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul385.html; http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option= ... Itemid=69;

Re discrimination against homosexuals and same-sex couples: http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr072204.htm; http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 72204.htm; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html

Re racist publications: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/ang ... 2a7da84ca;
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/ron ... ewsletter;
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/w ... newsletter

Re supports federal laws against abortion: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.02597:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.1094:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... .r.00776:; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d097:h.r.392:; http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul84.html

I love you, Farn.

Shucks. I can't take credit for anything other than copying and lambasting, though, the all the work was done by TCT.

[Lackadaisical2]

I said it 8 months ago, and I'll say it again. Romney will get the nomination. If they took bets from American citizens (that is, if online gambling was legal in the US), I'd have $500 down on him on Paddy Power at 7:1 odds, and I'd be cleaning up nicely when this whole thing's over. Motherfuckers.

Online gambling is legal, maybe. I heard something about a new interpretation of some law or another... Uh, whatever.

[Severania]

Lol how is Paul winning? I am an American Conservative and I honestly think he is a babbling old man. He is smart, but doesnt make sense.

Most of Paul's supporters are the young and politically ignorant.

They couldn't possibly realise how badly the country would suffer under his leadership.

No point in having a poll because of this very reason.

Thank you!

[Maloys Empire of GORE]

Apologies, he intends to do that I mean.


They even talk about Obamas plans in the media,

Who does? What do they say? Be more specific.

he plays other countries sensitive political situations in a way where they will see it more beneficial to help him.

For example?

He has militarily intervened without congress approval already. Just wasn't a massive invasion or anything like Iraq or Afghanistan

No, he followed through on a treaty obligation, Congresses opinion on the issue literally didn't matter because we were legally obliged to do what he did.

ignoring that in the past we have expressed that we would not be bound by any treaty even if we would agree to it(break deals if they suck) and that intervention on our part was not necessary, it was still an act of war, which requires congress to get involved. It wasn't a trade, it wasn't a negotiation.

Iran is a good example, look at the current political climate. Their waving around the nuclear war card, in hopes of getting Iran to preemptive strike, rallying Muslims behind them, which would force America to get involved.

Now, what Obama is doing, is he is trying to strong-arm them. He knows they aren't stupid enough to actually use a nuke, and they have no other way to really hit at us. So, were threatening them to help expand oil control and hopefully get them to disarm the bombs, although they are dead set against that.

Recently, Iran told America to stay out, now either they must apologize and let them back in, or Obama is going to need to do a show of strength, to help keep people supporting him.(the result of trying to piss off a president during the election year lol)

Now hopefully you have also noticed that the major powers in the world are trying to appear to be united in their policies, US, UK, Canada, France, etc etc. Their actually a large reason Iran has been sweating, as the only ones who are not really part of this big circle of power is China and Russia, Russia is too weak at the moment to do anything, and China benefits from us in the first place.

Do you need more? Or links? or whatever?

[Maloys Empire of GORE]

I love you, Farn.

Shucks. I can't take credit for anything other than copying and lambasting, though, the all the work was done by TCT.

Thank you! I'm gonna read these then probably just edit this post with comments.

[Tahar Joblis]

I said it 8 months ago, and I'll say it again. Romney will get the nomination. If they took bets from American citizens (that is, if online gambling was legal in the US), I'd have $500 down on him on Paddy Power at 7:1 odds, and I'd be cleaning up nicely when this whole thing's over. Motherfuckers.

Go to Intrade. Place your bet. You can, quite legally.

It's online poker and other such games that are illegal or borderline. Prediction markets haven't had any trouble.

[Farnhamia]

Shucks. I can't take credit for anything other than copying and lambasting, though, the all the work was done by TCT.

Thank you! I'm gonna read these then probably just edit this post with comments.

A number of them are invalid links, it seems. Go to the original post, which TCT may have edited with new ones.

[Wikkiwallana]

Who does? What do they say? Be more specific.

For example?

No, he followed through on a treaty obligation, Congresses opinion on the issue literally didn't matter because we were legally obliged to do what he did.

ignoring that in the past we have expressed that we would not be bound by any treaty even if we would agree to it(break deals if they suck)

No we haven't. Read Article 6 of the Constitution sometime.

and that intervention on our part was not necessary,

It was, however, requested.

it was still an act of war, which requires congress to get involved. It wasn't a trade, it wasn't a negotiation.

Which is why we were called on through a defense treaty.

Iran is a good example, look at the current political climate. Their waving around the nuclear war card, in hopes of getting Iran to preemptive strike, rallying Muslims behind them, which would force America to get involved.

Could you say that again, but coherently this time?

Now, what Obama is doing, is he is trying to strong-arm them. He knows they aren't stupid enough to actually use a nuke, and they have no other way to really hit at us. So, were threatening them to help expand oil control and hopefully get them to disarm the bombs, although they are dead set against that.

Disarm the bombs? They don't even have any yet.

Recently, Iran told America to stay out, now either they must apologize and let them back in, or Obama is going to need to do a show of strength, to help keep people supporting him.(the result of trying to piss off a president during the election year lol)

What the hell does any of this have to do with what happened in Libya?

Now hopefully you have also noticed that the major powers in the world are trying to appear to be united in their policies, US, UK, Canada, France, etc etc. Their actually a large reason Iran has been sweating, as the only ones who are not really part of this big circle of power is China and Russia, Russia is too weak at the moment to do anything, and China benefits from us in the first place.

Do you need more? Or links? or whatever?

I need an explanation of what this has to do with anything we have been discussing in any way whatsoever.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Huntsman would be nice.

[Farnhamia]

Huntsman would be nice.

Except he's chosen to be a Republican. Put Huntsman in the White House and he brings all the crazy back to power.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Huntsman would be nice.

Except he's chosen to be a Republican. Put Huntsman in the White House and he brings all the crazy back to power.

Which was pretty similar to my argument for why Paul shouldn't be president as well.

Good thing you can't vote then.

Honestly, I'd go with the evil I know over the evil I don't. Though Paul has policies I do support, and the man does not change his views (you have to give him credit for that), he could potentially be even worse than Obama, and the fact of the matter is that the man's a Republican. A Republican president would inspire greater support for the GOP if he does his job right.

If this resulted in the GOP as a whole becoming more sane and Paul-like, that would be welcome. But Paul is barely a Republican. The average Republican voter is someone I would profoundly disagree with, and I don't want the GOP as it is now controlling both Houses of Congress. A more Paul-like GOP would be acceptable, but the party as a whole likely wouldn't change if Paul was president.

Replace Paul with Huntsman.

[Napkiraly]

I would rather see Huntsman as the nominee, but Romney is going to get it. To be fair to Romney he isnt that bad compared to the others apart from Huntsman. Either way I hope Obama wins again.

Ron Paul is no, just....no.

[Maloys Empire of GORE]

I love you, Farn.

Shucks. I can't take credit for anything other than copying and lambasting, though, the all the work was done by TCT.

Alright half of those links did not work

The others were all really showed his support for individuals.

Courts may not favor people based on race or religion

Abortion is not murder until time of conception

Newsletters that he did not write and that are from decades ago.

Supporting court trial saying that you may not favor people marriage wise based upon sexuality/sexual orientation.

where is this evil politician who you are convinced is the only one evil liar involved, when I did not see anything to suggest that.

Ron Paul disagrees with gay marriage, abortion, and other religions/atheism, BUT he respects freedom and individual choice.

[Maloys Empire of GORE]

ignoring that in the past we have expressed that we would not be bound by any treaty even if we would agree to it(break deals if they suck)

No we haven't. Read Article 6 of the Constitution sometime.

and that intervention on our part was not necessary,

It was, however, requested.

it was still an act of war, which requires congress to get involved. It wasn't a trade, it wasn't a negotiation.

Which is why we were called on through a defense treaty.

Iran is a good example, look at the current political climate. Their waving around the nuclear war card, in hopes of getting Iran to preemptive strike, rallying Muslims behind them, which would force America to get involved.

Could you say that again, but coherently this time?

Now, what Obama is doing, is he is trying to strong-arm them. He knows they aren't stupid enough to actually use a nuke, and they have no other way to really hit at us. So, were threatening them to help expand oil control and hopefully get them to disarm the bombs, although they are dead set against that.

Disarm the bombs? They don't even have any yet.

Recently, Iran told America to stay out, now either they must apologize and let them back in, or Obama is going to need to do a show of strength, to help keep people supporting him.(the result of trying to piss off a president during the election year lol)

What the hell does any of this have to do with what happened in Libya?

Now hopefully you have also noticed that the major powers in the world are trying to appear to be united in their policies, US, UK, Canada, France, etc etc. Their actually a large reason Iran has been sweating, as the only ones who are not really part of this big circle of power is China and Russia, Russia is too weak at the moment to do anything, and China benefits from us in the first place.

Do you need more? Or links? or whatever?

I need an explanation of what this has to do with anything we have been discussing in any way whatsoever.

The thing with Iran was an example our conversation is not solely based on Libya, unless you want it to be. I gave you an explanation of our current plan and the political climate we are in, and how we have used that to our advantage. I simplified Iran's plan as much as I could, but I guess I will have to try harder.

Iran = Muslim

Israel = Not

Iran = hates Israel

Israel = Nervous about Iran

Iran = trying to goad Israel into attacking them

Muslims = get enraged Israel attacks, and rallies against them

America = friends with Israel, so, we will get involved, and we love to kill things too so thats a bonus

Now you seem to be interested in that Libya thing, so, I will give you something on that.

We did not have any obligations to Libya, we supported the rebels who we had no clue about what they supported or who, and helped piss off even more people.

(On our country not supporting being bound by treaties with other countries)Read George Washington's end of term speech

Andrew Jacksons foreign policy

Our stance on other countries and isolationism before and after world war 1

EDIT: Missed one part. Defense Act Statement. Defense is only done in war. Heres an alternate example. Police. Police do not get involved until something actually happens. Its not just done, because they can.

We don't just go and defend others, just because.

[Daistallia 2104]

Mitt Romney won.

Maybe. Seems there have been some concerns about counting errors...
http://www.kcci.com/news/30144582/detai ... z1idUftgoh

[Wikkiwallana]

No we haven't. Read Article 6 of the Constitution sometime.


It was, however, requested.


Which is why we were called on through a defense treaty.


Could you say that again, but coherently this time?


Disarm the bombs? They don't even have any yet.


What the hell does any of this have to do with what happened in Libya?


I need an explanation of what this has to do with anything we have been discussing in any way whatsoever.

The thing with Iran was an example our conversation is not solely based on Libya, unless you want it to be. I gave you an explanation of our current plan and the political climate we are in, and how we have used that to our advantage.

Yeah, used to our advantage my ass. The Libyan rebels went to the UN and France to beg for help months before Obama said or did anything about it. The two are not comparable.

I simplified Iran's plan as much as I could, but I guess I will have to try harder.

Iran = Muslim

Irrelevant.

Israel = Not

Also irrelevant.

Iran = hates Israel

Israel = Nervous about Iran

Not news.

Iran = trying to goad Israel into attacking them

Source?

Muslims = get enraged Israel attacks, and rallies against them

America = friends with Israel, so, we will get involved, and we love to kill things too so thats a bonus

Now you seem to be interested in that Libya thing,

Interested? Eh, not really, I just like staying on topic instead of jumping all over the place. You made incorrect accusations regarding Obama's actions on Libya, I attempted to correct them, and instead of addressing my points you started talking about Iran, fuck if I know why.

so, I will give you something on that.

Oh goody…

We did not have any obligations to Libya,

We did have obligations to the UN and NATO however, and they were the ones who asked us directly.

we supported the rebels who we had no clue about what they supported or who,

They supported the Libyan people having freedom from a brutal dictator.

and helped piss off even more people.

Mostly the only people I've seen pissed off by this are the American right wing, and mostly because Obama did it, even though the likely would have done the same.

EDIT: Missed one part. Defense Act Statement.

What is that?

Defense is only done in war.

There was already a war going on when we got there. We defended one side.

Heres an alternate example. Police. Police do not get involved until something actually happens. Its not just done, because they can.

There was already a civil war in progress, we just helped the people who opposed Gaddafi.

We don't just go and defend others, just because.

Never heard of a mutual defense treaty?

[Hamelburg]

I'd love to see Santorum get the nom, but Romney will likely get it...

[Aeronos]

Mitt Romney will get it, sadly. Should he beat Obama, the US can expect to evolve from nation-building to empire-building, and its poor experience 60% tax rises in order to fund millionaire tax rises.

Should Obama instead win, odds are he'd drop the bipartisanship due to the term limits being up front, and expand the size and scope of his economic recovery package. This will either have the effect of bubbling the US out of financial turmoil for another decade, or plunging it head-first into a deficit-driven depression trap.

[Kazomal]

I said it 8 months ago, and I'll say it again. Romney will get the nomination. If they took bets from American citizens (that is, if online gambling was legal in the US), I'd have $500 down on him on Paddy Power at 7:1 odds, and I'd be cleaning up nicely when this whole thing's over. Motherfuckers.

Online gambling is legal, maybe. I heard something about a new interpretation of some law or another... Uh, whatever.

Within a state, excluding on professional sports. Basically, allows state lottery sales online, and maybe some online poker, et al, sites.

Basically, the old interpretation was that when you go on the internet, the info, signal, whatever, goes out of state and back, and thus is subject to federal online gambling bans. The more recent statement by the Justice Department indicates that they now interpret intra-state online gambling to be beyond their authority.

I said it 8 months ago, and I'll say it again. Romney will get the nomination. If they took bets from American citizens (that is, if online gambling was legal in the US), I'd have $500 down on him on Paddy Power at 7:1 odds, and I'd be cleaning up nicely when this whole thing's over. Motherfuckers.

Go to Intrade. Place your bet. You can, quite legally.

It's online poker and other such games that are illegal or borderline. Prediction markets haven't had any trouble.

You're peaches. I imagine the odds aren't as good anymore, but regardless.

[SpudEmpire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0vG1CM95Js

How is this joker considered a serious candidate? Can't even keep his cool against a bunch of college students.

[New Conglomerate]

Way to be an asshole, again, Mitt.

By the time this nomination process is over, the guy's going to have a flat-tax plan. Just you wait.

[Napkiraly]

Iran = Muslim

Israel = Not

Iran = hates Israel

Israel = Nervous about Iran

Iran = trying to goad Israel into attacking them

Muslims = get enraged Israel attacks, and rallies against them.

Except that a lot of Middle Eastern countries hate Iran just as much they hate Israel and in some cases even more (see Saudi Arabia). These countries are not going to go support Iran in any war against Israel, they know exactly how much that will piss off the Americans. Not only that, but they also realise that if they did go to war against Israel they will get fucked over royally, especially if the US jumps in. They will also not risk they're oil revenue and relationship with US over a potential Iranian-Israeli conflict, they have too much to loose considering how most of their revenue is generated through oil exports. Also consider the fact that they are still worried about the political ramifications of the Arab Spring, with many recognizing the new found threats to their regimes and how easily these threats can be 'exploited' if you will. So add that and America's tendency to replace governments that piss them off and you'll see that not many Middle Eastern nations will support Iran in any war against Israel, if any at all, save maybe Syria and they're not in any position to wage a war against Israel at the moment. Honestly the only countries I can think of that even like Iran is Oman, Qatar, and Syria (though relations have gotten a bit chilly due to the uprising, ironically enough) and elements in Bahrain, Lebanon, and Iraq.

[Roania]

I would like to say, "WOOO! Mitt Romney! Yeah!" That is all.

[AiliailiA]

A poll about the Iowa primary isn't relevant any more. How about making it the New Hampshire primary instead?