One Ron Paul Thread to Rule Them All, one thread to find him

[The Steel Magnolia]

One is a moderate working on the same failed economic policies of the Bush 43 administration.

The other is a Fascist radical working on the same failed economic policies of the Confederacy.

Watch the wacky hijinks ensue as two opposites do the unthinkable: Lose EVERY STATE to the Democrats!

It's a family friendly comedy for all ages!

I'd watch for a third party if I were you.
Americans elect and the libertarian party are both looking like they might be able to get into a debate.

True, but a third party would never get in the white house.

[Farnhamia]

I'd watch for a third party if I were you.
Americans elect and the libertarian party are both looking like they might be able to get into a debate.

True, but a third party would never get in the white house.

Both the Democrats and the Republicans would have to self-destruct in the same election year for that to happen.

[Ravineworld]

I'd watch for a third party if I were you.
Americans elect and the libertarian party are both looking like they might be able to get into a debate.

True, but a third party would never get in the white house.

IDK about that. Libertarians are growing quickly, and, americans elect are going on a massive offensive against the two parties.
Nobody thought Jesse Ventura would be the governor of minnesota when he ran. A bizarre ad campaign later, he was the governor. Americans elect definitely seems to be following that example. And the libertarians have been growing since bush, and if Ron Paul endorses Gary Johnson, well, we could definitely see a stranger election than normal.

[Ravineworld]

True, but a third party would never get in the white house.

Both the Democrats and the Republicans would have to self-destruct in the same election year for that to happen.

Well, Americans aren't very happy with the two parties. Almost 40% are independents. And many are starting to gravitate to the reform party, the libertarian party, the green party, and the constitution party (not really). If Gary Johnson can just get 5% support from americans, he can appear on TV with Obama and the republican nominee. That could potentially get him a decent campaign that could result in new interest in the libertarian party, and then we could see a libertarian in congress, and then we could, and this isn't a long shot, see a successful libertarian party campaign (if the parties more moderate wing manages to get a moderate libertarian on the ticket, which is difficult, because LPUSA is extremely radical, at least normally). I personally like R. Lee Wrights more than Gary Johnson, but 70% of libertarians don't agree with me, so I'll likely be watching for New Mexico to see if they like their old governor.

[Wikkiwallana]

Both the Democrats and the Republicans would have to self-destruct in the same election year for that to happen.

Well, Americans aren't very happy with the two parties. Almost 40% are independents. And many are starting to gravitate to the reform party, the libertarian party, the green party, and the constitution party (not really). If Gary Johnson can just get 5% support from americans, he can appear on TV with Obama and the republican nominee. That could potentially get him a decent campaign that could result in new interest in the libertarian party, and then we could see a libertarian in congress, and then we could, and this isn't a long shot, see a successful libertarian party campaign (if the parties more moderate wing manages to get a moderate libertarian on the ticket, which is difficult, because LPUSA is extremely radical, at least normally).

And then God help us all.

[Farnhamia]

Well, Americans aren't very happy with the two parties. Almost 40% are independents. And many are starting to gravitate to the reform party, the libertarian party, the green party, and the constitution party (not really). If Gary Johnson can just get 5% support from americans, he can appear on TV with Obama and the republican nominee. That could potentially get him a decent campaign that could result in new interest in the libertarian party, and then we could see a libertarian in congress, and then we could, and this isn't a long shot, see a successful libertarian party campaign (if the parties more moderate wing manages to get a moderate libertarian on the ticket, which is difficult, because LPUSA is extremely radical, at least normally).

And then God help us all.

Truly. And almost 40% of the American electorate are not independents, they're people who are annoyed at Democrats and Republicans and answer poll questions that way. They still vote in droves for one or the other. Nor do I think any substantial numbers are gravitating to "the reform party, the libertarian party, the green party, and the constitution party." Those parties and the LPUSA are niche parties, appealing to a fraction of the electorate, mainly because none of them ever runs a serious candidate, and they always go straight for the brass ring, the presidency. If they worked to build up from the state level, people might learn who they are and that they are not necessarily bat-shit insane (which is how a lot of them come off, whether they are or not).

[Revolutopia]

One is a moderate working on the same failed economic policies of the Bush 43 administration.

The other is a Fascist radical working on the same failed economic policies of the Confederacy.

Watch the wacky hijinks ensue as two opposites do the unthinkable: Lose EVERY STATE to the Democrats!

It's a family friendly comedy for all ages!

I'd watch for a third party if I were you.
Americans elect and the libertarian party are both looking like they might be able to get into a debate.

No body but teenagers and college students know what Americans elect is, and the Republicans and Democrats will keep the Libertarians off just like they did to Nader.

[Ravineworld]

And then God help us all.

Truly. And almost 40% of the American electorate are not independents, they're people who are annoyed at Democrats and Republicans and answer poll questions that way. They still vote in droves for one or the other. Nor do I think any substantial numbers are gravitating to "the reform party, the libertarian party, the green party, and the constitution party." Those parties and the LPUSA are niche parties, appealing to a fraction of the electorate, mainly because none of them ever runs a serious candidate, and they always go straight for the brass ring, the presidency. If they worked to build up from the state level, people might learn who they are and that they are not necessarily bat-shit insane (which is how a lot of them come off, whether they are or not).

Not really.
It's hard not to be annoyed with only two choices. People have learned to accept the two party system because whenever they start getting really pissed, a "hope" candidate comes along (Obama, Reagan). They are told that it is impossible for a third party candidate to win.
Although I agree with your technique to get third parties in office. Also, LPUSA should moderate itself a little, and give more room to liberal libertarians, ancaps (they helped found they party, yet they are being driven away), and more moderate voices (Gary Johnson is actually pretty moderate compared to the rest of the party, in other words, he doesn't support legalizing heroin and nuclear weapons, contrary to many in the party).

[Ravineworld]

I'd watch for a third party if I were you.
Americans elect and the libertarian party are both looking like they might be able to get into a debate.

No body but teenagers and college students know what Americans elect is, and the Republicans and Democrats will keep the Libertarians off just like they did to Nader.

Maybe.
If Americans Elect expands it's ad campaign and keep it away from sites like "reason", they could expand interest.
btw, did Ralphy poll above 5% when they kept him off?
According to the "news" groups, if any candidate polls above 5%, they include them in the debate.
Libertarians such as myself are hoping that Gary Johnson can pull it off.

[The Steel Magnolia]

No body but teenagers and college students know what Americans elect is, and the Republicans and Democrats will keep the Libertarians off just like they did to Nader.

Maybe.
If Americans Elect expands it's ad campaign and keep it away from sites like "reason", they could expand interest.
btw, did Ralphy poll above 5% when they kept him off?
According to the "news" groups, if any candidate polls above 5%, they include them in the debate.
Libertarians such as myself are hoping that Gary Johnson can pull it off.

True, but since Karger was barred from the Republican debates despite having more than the 2 or 3% required, I wouldn't be too confidant.

[Ravineworld]

Maybe.
If Americans Elect expands it's ad campaign and keep it away from sites like "reason", they could expand interest.
btw, did Ralphy poll above 5% when they kept him off?
According to the "news" groups, if any candidate polls above 5%, they include them in the debate.
Libertarians such as myself are hoping that Gary Johnson can pull it off.

True, but since Karger was barred from the Republican debates despite having more than the 2 or 3% required, I wouldn't be too confidant.

Fred was barred because the last thing they needed was an open homosexual sparring with WBC loving politician known as Michelle Bachman.
Now that I am thinking about it, that would be hilarious. Can you just imagine how that would end?
I don't know which would happen first, her yelling "god hates fags" or him telling her how much of a dick she is and talking about gay pride.
I think I am going to make a mock debate with Freddy, Michelle, and Jon Huntsman (just for the lols). Oh, man, that would be fucking hilarious.

[The Steel Magnolia]

True, but since Karger was barred from the Republican debates despite having more than the 2 or 3% required, I wouldn't be too confidant.

Fred was barred because the last thing they needed was an open homosexual sparring with WBC loving politician known as Michelle Bachman.
Now that I am thinking about it, that would be hilarious. Can you just imagine how that would end?
I don't know which would happen first, her yelling "god hates fags" or him telling her how much of a dick she is and talking about gay pride.
I think I am going to make a mock debate with Freddy, Michelle, and Jon Huntsman (just for the lols). Oh, man, that would be fucking hilarious.

And that is something I can agree with you on xD! See? It only took 50 odd pages!

[Dempublicents1]

Q: [to Paul] Sen. Santorum believes that the Supreme Court was wrong when it decided that a right to privacy was embedded in the Constitution. And following from that, he believes that states have the right to ban contraception, although he's not recommending that states do that.

SANTORUM: The Supreme Court created through a penumbra of rights a new right to privacy that was not in the Constitution.

PAUL: No, I think the 4th Amendment is very clear. It is explicit in our privacy. You can't go into anybody's house without a search warrant. This is why the Patriot Act is wrong, because you have a right of privacy by the 4th Amendment. As far as selling contraceptives, the Interstate Commerce Clause protects this; it was originally written not to impede trade between the states, but it was written to facilitate trade between the states. So if it's not illegal to import birth control pills from one state to the next, it would be legal to sell birth control pills in that state.

When did Paul change his mind on privacy?

"Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution." - Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html


Did he finally get around to reading some of the Constitution? Or is this just a "You have the right to privacy as long as I agree with what you're doing," schtick?

[Death Metal]

Nah, he's just saying what will get him votes. Business as usual for Ron Paul.

[Ravineworld]

Fred was barred because the last thing they needed was an open homosexual sparring with WBC loving politician known as Michelle Bachman.
Now that I am thinking about it, that would be hilarious. Can you just imagine how that would end?
I don't know which would happen first, her yelling "god hates fags" or him telling her how much of a dick she is and talking about gay pride.
I think I am going to make a mock debate with Freddy, Michelle, and Jon Huntsman (just for the lols). Oh, man, that would be fucking hilarious.

And that is something I can agree with you on xD! See? It only took 50 odd pages!

Yay! Turns out that even radical Rothbardians can agree with democratic socialists!

[Alien Space Bats]

PAUL: No, I think the 4th Amendment is very clear. It is explicit in our privacy. You can't go into anybody's house without a search warrant. This is why the Patriot Act is wrong, because you have a right of privacy by the 4th Amendment. As far as selling contraceptives, the Interstate Commerce Clause protects this; it was originally written not to impede trade between the states, but it was written to facilitate trade between the states. So if it's not illegal to import birth control pills from one state to the next, it would be legal to sell birth control pills in that state.

And this is the guy who thinks he understands the Constitution?!?

I don't even know... I... Uh...

There are more wrong interpretations of the Constitution in that passage than anyone could ever expect to hear or see in a single paragraph.

[Revolutopia]

Q: [to Paul] Sen. Santorum believes that the Supreme Court was wrong when it decided that a right to privacy was embedded in the Constitution. And following from that, he believes that states have the right to ban contraception, although he's not recommending that states do that.

SANTORUM: The Supreme Court created through a penumbra of rights a new right to privacy that was not in the Constitution.

PAUL: No, I think the 4th Amendment is very clear. It is explicit in our privacy. You can't go into anybody's house without a search warrant. This is why the Patriot Act is wrong, because you have a right of privacy by the 4th Amendment. As far as selling contraceptives, the Interstate Commerce Clause protects this; it was originally written not to impede trade between the states, but it was written to facilitate trade between the states. So if it's not illegal to import birth control pills from one state to the next, it would be legal to sell birth control pills in that state.

When did Paul change his mind on privacy?

"Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution." - Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html


Did he finally get around to reading some of the Constitution? Or is this just a "You have the right to privacy as long as I agree with what you're doing," schtick?

When he is actually on TV and knows if he lets slip that he doesn't believe in the right to privacy that he might lose his college base, who gladly throw out anything negative he said 10 years ago while preaching what he said 30 years ago.

[Grave_n_idle]

True, but a third party would never get in the white house.

IDK about that. Libertarians are growing quickly...

Doubtful. Bob Barr gained the support of half a million voters. The current number of registered libertarians is half that. The phenomenon you're talking about is the same phenomenon that allows someone like Ron Paul or Bob Barr to call themselves libertarian - people lying to themselves and others.

Some Republicans like to pretend they aren't Republicans. That doesn't mean that libertarians are actually increasing.

[Ravineworld]

IDK about that. Libertarians are growing quickly...

Doubtful. Bob Barr gained the support of half a million voters. The current number of registered libertarians is half that. The phenomenon you're talking about is the same phenomenon that allows someone like Ron Paul or Bob Barr to call themselves libertarian - people lying to themselves and others.

Some Republicans like to pretend they aren't Republicans. That doesn't mean that libertarians are actually increasing.

Actually, the libertarian party is the fastest growing party in the US.

[Grave_n_idle]

Doubtful. Bob Barr gained the support of half a million voters. The current number of registered libertarians is half that. The phenomenon you're talking about is the same phenomenon that allows someone like Ron Paul or Bob Barr to call themselves libertarian - people lying to themselves and others.

Some Republicans like to pretend they aren't Republicans. That doesn't mean that libertarians are actually increasing.

Actually, the libertarian party is the fastest growing party in the US.

When you've got two parties that form almost the entire spectrum, a tiny difference is all it takes to be 'the fastest growing' party. But I suspect you're aware of the conflation you've just attempted - suggesting that libertarians and 'the libertarian party' are (even remotely) connected.

A proportion of the Republican party get so embarrassed at identifying as Republicans that they start calling themselves something else... it's not a meaningful trend.

[Ravineworld]

Actually, the libertarian party is the fastest growing party in the US.

When you've got two parties that form almost the entire spectrum, a tiny difference is all it takes to be 'the fastest growing' party. But I suspect you're aware of the conflation you've just attempted - suggesting that libertarians and 'the libertarian party' are (even remotely) connected.

A proportion of the Republican party get so embarrassed at identifying as Republicans that they start calling themselves something else... it's not a meaningful trend.

You are wrong once again.
While I agree that the majority of the newbies in the LPUSA that are running for office are just republicans who are scared to admit that they want to be a part of another party, the majority of newbies in the LPUSA who are just regular people are just people who are sick and tired of high taxes on the poor and middle class, endless wars in the middle east, new versions of the patriot act being passed all the time, and a growing dissatisfaction with the two partys fighting each other more than fighting for the good of the nation. Left libertarians (libertarians who agree with the democrats on spending, taxes, and other fiscal issues, but disagree on gun rights, foreign policy, and other social issues) are another fast-growing group within the party

[Wikkiwallana]

When you've got two parties that form almost the entire spectrum, a tiny difference is all it takes to be 'the fastest growing' party. But I suspect you're aware of the conflation you've just attempted - suggesting that libertarians and 'the libertarian party' are (even remotely) connected.

A proportion of the Republican party get so embarrassed at identifying as Republicans that they start calling themselves something else... it's not a meaningful trend.

You are wrong once again.
While I agree that the majority of the newbies in the LPUSA that are running for office are just republicans who are scared to admit that they want to be a part of another party, the majority of newbies in the LPUSA who are just regular people are just people who are sick and tired of high taxes on the poor and middle class, endless wars in the middle east, new versions of the patriot act being passed all the time, and a growing dissatisfaction with the two partys fighting each other more than fighting for the good of the nation. Left libertarians (libertarians who agree with the democrats on spending, taxes, and other fiscal issues, but disagree on gun rights, foreign policy, and other social issues) are another fast-growing group within the party

High taxes on the poor and middle class? What country are you looking at?

[Ravineworld]

You are wrong once again.
While I agree that the majority of the newbies in the LPUSA that are running for office are just republicans who are scared to admit that they want to be a part of another party, the majority of newbies in the LPUSA who are just regular people are just people who are sick and tired of high taxes on the poor and middle class, endless wars in the middle east, new versions of the patriot act being passed all the time, and a growing dissatisfaction with the two partys fighting each other more than fighting for the good of the nation. Left libertarians (libertarians who agree with the democrats on spending, taxes, and other fiscal issues, but disagree on gun rights, foreign policy, and other social issues) are another fast-growing group within the party

High taxes on the poor and middle class? What country are you looking at?

Are you kidding me?
Here in the US, the 99% gets whacked with taxes on their labor, while the 1% pays barely anything.
Did you know that GE filed a 57,000 page tax return, and payed not a single dollar in corporate taxes.
Just goes to show how a system with taxes corrupts itself into a reverse-robinhood scenario.

[Wikkiwallana]

High taxes on the poor and middle class? What country are you looking at?

Are you kidding me?
Here in the US, the 99% gets whacked with taxes on their labor, while the 1% pays barely anything.
Did you know that GE filed a 57,000 page tax return, and payed not a single dollar in corporate taxes.
Just goes to show how a system with taxes corrupts itself into a reverse-robinhood scenario.

I didn't say a thing about the rich not being undertaxed. That does not mean the non-rich are overtaxed.

[Ravineworld]

Are you kidding me?
Here in the US, the 99% gets whacked with taxes on their labor, while the 1% pays barely anything.
Did you know that GE filed a 57,000 page tax return, and payed not a single dollar in corporate taxes.
Just goes to show how a system with taxes corrupts itself into a reverse-robinhood scenario.

I didn't say a thing about the rich not being undertaxed. That does not mean the non-rich are overtaxed.

OK. That's an opinion.
You know how much my father payed in taxes last year?
About 80 grand. He's not really rich or anything either. But it's ridiculous that he has to pay that much out of his hard earned money, while banksters get million dollar bonuses from the government after perpetrating fraud and never paying taxes.