Is Ron Paul the Right's best chance at a win in '12?

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Lord Acton, Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887

.......and with Globalism, we have absolutely no chance to opt out. Mankind is simply not evolved enough to come together in such a way. Things are messy enough already with greed and corruption. How anyone can think that this would magically disappear when united globally is beyond me.

Best to keep national sovereignty. If someone else has a better system, it will be copied if it is in a nation's self-interest. Our Founders saw this and that is why they vested more power in the States than in the Nation. Globalism is a one-way street with no way out. It is a dictatorship at its root.

 

As far as I know, Ron Paul supports free trade, so I'm not sure why you would support him if that's what you think of as the big "globalist" manifestation.

You're also barking up the wrong tree with me on the "people shouldn't be punished for having more." I think that's how conservatives like to frame the issue of using government to protect the human rights of the poor. I'm all for taxing the rich more, not as punishment, but as a practical way of giving choice to the poor.
The logic does go outside the country. I think global poverty is a problem. I think the West's current level of consumption is unsustainable. I think global inequality will lead to more instability, war, and violence.

The only "globalization" I have issue with is the kind in which MNCs exploit the desperation of the world's poorest and have every interest in keeping them from rising (thus leading to overall cost reduction for them, and sustainability of that situation through bribing a corrupt government). That is essentially us exploiting the poor of other nations to lower our costs. This is what I think of as elitist globalization, and for all the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing we do about it, we're not the primary victims.

Protectionism is opting out...
from both the benefits and the costs.
Ultimately it will make us a poorer nation faster than free trade will... and that brings it up again: why do anti-free-traders support Ron Paul?

 

What about Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck ?
Both have global appeal and as much a chance as a Paul/Hunstman ticket.

Or the Golden Gophers winning the Rose bowl.

Get over it..your guys dont have any appeal past a small base.

you can have a thousand straw votes..100's of debates..
And still they would lose..
Must be those stupid voters.

 

You hit the nail on the head, stupid voters are exactly the reason Paul isn't likely to land the Republican ticket. Stupid might be too harsh a term, easily distracted is closer to the truth.

 

I support Ron Paul because he is anti-FED, and anti-using our military, sons and daughters, to massive amounts of our nations wealth, to be muscle for said globalists, who find it funny to tax those who are being hurt the worst by globalism to attack rogue nations and bring their citizens also under control. What a grand old scheme. You have to start somewhere. Even if a nationalist got in control, the FED would still destroy America. Even with the FED removed, free trade will still destroy America. My choice is between someone who supports free trade but is anti-FED, or a bunch of people who believe in business as usual. If there was someone who was pro-protectionism when it comes to trade with developing nations, AND was anti-FED, I assure you, I would support that person and call Ron Paul a better version of treason.

 

Please. If Ron Paul didn't stand a chance, there wouldn't be so many people, venues and mediums going out of their way to remind us that he didn't stand a chance. Obviously, the status quo is worried.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

 

Agreed.

I also find it interesting that so many people ridicule Ron Paul's foreign policy yet the people that are directly affected by it, our troops, support Ron Paul more than any other GOP candidate combined and more than Obama. I mean who cares if the people with the clearest view on the situation side with Ron Paul.

 

Sorry Ron you have no chance...this is his last gasp...his ideas are 40 yrs old....some are good most are unworkable and unacceptable to most americans

 

Is Ron Paul the Right's best chance at a win in '12?


Right there is what is wrong with American politics.

People seem to be more concerned with their party winning then improving the country.

You find a candidate that shares your ideas with how to run a country first - whether they can win or not should be TOTALLY and COMPLETELY irrelevant.

 

Exactly.

And there are a TON of threads just on this site about Ron Paul.

 

Who is huntsman?

 

I feel like Ron Paul is more of an anarchist because he barely wants any government at all. He thinks his taxes are high even though they are one of the lowest in the country and in the developed world.

 

Anarchist =! Less Government

Who truly cares about the rest of the World when it comes to Economic and Social Policies? Most of the World is under a harsh Government system Socially and Economically... with a usual group of Tyrants ruling over the masses. Since the rest of the World has such a common ideology of whipping their people into submission should America follow suit because the rest of the World is doing it too?

 

I know..this is brilliant..
Lets have Ron Paul on survivor island for a season..
Have 10 people from Romney' camp..
10 more from Camp Perry..
10 from The Cain tribe..
10 from the Newt tribe.

and so on..
The Paul Tribe would have the least members since he has no support in congress right now...so let's give him 5 more.. equaling 6.

Paul would be the leader Right off the bat..since he the most popular...and hey that means EVERYTHING ( since he has the most threads )

Does anybody really think that Paul would last a week?
His style would drive everyone nuts..his pork for himself and nobody else..
Paulism doesn't work in congress..wont work at the state level... and certainly not at the federal or survivor island level.

 

And MnBillyBoy's hate fixation of Ron Paul continues...

 

No..the delusion of Ron Paul supporters continues..
attack anyone who disagrees.
Use that constitution next time.

 

I love how your argument supplied no substance at all and no backing.Do you mind trying to formulate one next time? Thank you!

 

Still failing to have any substance other than clearly retarded remarks... please try to formulate an actual argument as to why his Policies are bad other than acting like an 8yr old discussing the best Cartoon Show.

 

This. So much this.

There are several aspects of the US political system that need completely torn down and rebuilt from scratch. Our party system is one of them. Partisan politics has become a cancer in this country.

The whole idea of "parties" needs to be tossed out. Citizens need to vote for a candidate based on their views and policies, that's it. There are so many people who don't even know much about the candidates but vote based on nothing more than their party affiliation. I have relatives like this, even to the point of fanaticism - it disgusts me.

Personally, I'd even like to see it taken one step further. The public would not even know who the candidates are until after the election. Each candidate would be assigned an arbitrary number, such as candidate #1, #2, etc. No personal information is released on any candidate whatsoever - not gender, race, age, location, anything. This way, the public must base their decisions solely on the only thing that actually matters - the views and policies of the candidates - which would be disseminated through the media.

To correct the OP, I feel that Ron Paul is the best chance for the United States. Everyone else just seems to be either more of the same BS, or an all around whack-job.

 

How am I attacking you?

You have posted post after post after post after post with almost nothing but vile for Ron Paul - have you not?

If you want to be taken seriously then I suggest you show a more balanced approach to your rhetoric rather then just spewing forth bile directed at one person.


I, myself, have criticized Ron Paul on several things.

Why?

Because the man is not perfect.

Just as he cannot be as awful as you make him out to be.

But I try and keep an open mind...you obviously do not (imo).

 

I agree with your whole post, but I wanted to especially address the parts I highlighted.

- I TOTALLY agree with the first one.

- And the second one is VERY interesting idea that I that I do not recall ever having heard of before. I think you are on to something there.

 

It is a good idea if the "media" is not entertainment based, and for sale to the highest bidder, just like the said politicians. Have c-span be the arbitrator or something.

 

Unfortunately - I do not think people would embrace it anytime soon for the reasons you mention.

But I still think it is a good idea...maybe just a little before it's time (unfortunately).

But most good ideas are (imo).

 

I agree.

10 char.

 

That's a good point. It may have a couple little issues, but I'm sure they can be worked out.