[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I agree with Santorum. He set Perry straight on the 10th amendment at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver:
'First, before a book signing event, Santorum told reporters he had a “difference of opinion” with Perry on gay marriage and said it was wrong and divisive to create a patchwork of marriage laws in the 50 states. Then, during a question-and-answer session with activists, Santorum unloaded on the governor.
“States do not have the right to destroy the American family. It is our business,” he said. “It is not fine with me that New York has destroyed marriage. It is not fine with me that New York is setting a template that will cause great division in this country.”[/quote]
Santorum has VP written all over his face. He’s got some very serious energy, he’s constantly on the attack (so the Presidential nominee can take the high road), he can play conservative to keep the part faithful happy while the top of the ticket moves to the middle. And he could deliver PA a very important toss up state for the GOP.
I would just encourage him to improve his presentation by smiling more. I also like Christie for VP. He could play the same attack roll, he’s a lovable character, and he could deliver New Jersey.
[quote]tedro wrote:
Personally, my ideal campaign would revolve around nothing more than an online debate like this one. Lay it all out and let the candidates quote and debate each other in print.
[/quote]
So your solution would be to make it so that people who are too illiterate to have an educated vote in the first place to have to read what the candidates have to say?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I agree with Santorum. He set Perry straight on the 10th amendment at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver:
'First, before a book signing event, Santorum told reporters he had a “difference of opinion” with Perry on gay marriage and said it was wrong and divisive to create a patchwork of marriage laws in the 50 states. Then, during a question-and-answer session with activists, Santorum unloaded on the governor.
“States do not have the right to destroy the American family. It is our business,” he said. “It is not fine with me that New York has destroyed marriage. It is not fine with me that New York is setting a template that will cause great division in this country.”[/quote]
Santorum has VP written all over his face. He’s got some very serious energy, he’s constantly on the attack (so the Presidential nominee can take the high road), he can play conservative to keep the part faithful happy while the top of the ticket moves to the middle. And he could deliver PA a very important toss up state for the GOP.
I would just encourage him to improve his presentation by smiling more. I also like Christie for VP. He could play the same attack roll, he’s a lovable character, and he could deliver New Jersey. [/quote]
I’d never heard of Chris Christie. Just looked him up. I assume you’re suggesting a Romney/Santorum or Romney/Christie ticket is likely?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
[/quote]
Actually Ron Paul schooled that neocon sociopath and put him in his place. So many mindless drones around here.[/quote]
Really…the only thing that Ron Paul put in their place was his dentures. I know, I know he’s great free drugs, no wars, we all just mind our own business and the bad guys won’t even know we’re here bla bla bla…[/quote]
Only in your own deluded mind pal.[/quote]
I have a deluded mind because I think Paul is insignificant? When in fact he’s proven himself in prior elections to be insignificant. If there is anyone, or I should say a group of people who are truly delusional it would be the Ron Paul supporters. They will be forced from their stupor when he gets destroyed in the first real primary (as they were in 08’). That was a bitter pill to swallow if I recall correctly. Do you think it will taste any better this time around?
Really cloakster he’s not winning the Presidency - You guys have to stop playing dress up.[/quote]
So NOTHING happened in the past 4 years that could possibly have made Paul a significant figure? There was no housing bust, no stock market crash, no increase in commodity price, no out of control FED etc. etc.
Paul was proved right on numerous accounts. The facts line up much better with him and his record than they do with any of the other contenders. He tied for 1st place in Ames, is polling in the top 3 nationally and yet you claim that he is completely insignificant? Maybe you might want to diversify your reading to include something besides just the T-Nation forums.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Republicans are playing chess, FINALLY. [/quote]
No, they really aren’t playing chess at all.
If it were a game it would be more like a giant pinata party with the rep candidates (except for Ron Paul, of course) running around like dizzy and blindfolded little children wanting their candy.
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
I love how allllllllllllll the Paul supporters are bagging on her now. Seriously, I’ve never met ONE ron paul supporter that I could get along with- not even outside of politics. They’re just such pieces of shit and incredibly delusional. The bulk of his supporters are all conspiracy theorists and absolutely won’t listen to any other points of view- which ironically they despise others for supposedly doing the same thing. “Oh Ron Paul is different. He won’t play the game.” Ok, well he’s still a politician and different doesn’t always mean better or even GOOD. You could vote a dog into the office and that’d be different, but I don’t see a lot of support for Lassie in 2012.[/quote]
I don’t think you are in a position to know “the bulk of his supporters” so please continue to speak out of your ass.
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent. This is because it takes an IQ bigger than one’s shoe size to understand Paul’s positions as being constitutional. Plus he does not speak in vacuous and annoying rhetoric like the other losers (who are all the same candidate as far as we are concerned) and requires the ability to think outside of the sanctioned, establishment canon.
Why is no one talking about how Ron Paul is tied for first place with the noncontender Michelle Bachmann and placed distant from even former MN Gov. Pawlenty?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I agree with Santorum. He set Perry straight on the 10th amendment at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver:
'First, before a book signing event, Santorum told reporters he had a “difference of opinion” with Perry on gay marriage and said it was wrong and divisive to create a patchwork of marriage laws in the 50 states. Then, during a question-and-answer session with activists, Santorum unloaded on the governor.
“States do not have the right to destroy the American family. It is our business,” he said. “It is not fine with me that New York has destroyed marriage. It is not fine with me that New York is setting a template that will cause great division in this country.”[/quote]
Santorum has VP written all over his face. He’s got some very serious energy, he’s constantly on the attack (so the Presidential nominee can take the high road), he can play conservative to keep the part faithful happy while the top of the ticket moves to the middle. And he could deliver PA a very important toss up state for the GOP.
I would just encourage him to improve his presentation by smiling more. I also like Christie for VP. He could play the same attack roll, he’s a lovable character, and he could deliver New Jersey. [/quote]
I’d never heard of Chris Christie. Just looked him up. I assume you’re suggesting a Romney/Santorum or Romney/Christie ticket is likely?[/quote]
Maybe Perry Christie - That would be a great balance as Perry carry’s Texas and Christie NJ. I think Santorum goes better with Romney as he (Romney) is less conservative than Perry who would not need Santorum to bring in the conservatives. So, Romney/Santorum Perry/Christie or better yet Perry/Romney.
Given the perfect campaign any of those match ups could win.
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent.[/quote]
And you don’t know that so don’t accuse the other poster of talking out of his ass.
No, but when he speaks the sound of his voice is very annoying. Not to mention his unelectable mannerisms. He comes off as an old crank. And there’s a reason for that - He’s an old crank!
Oh one more thing, he’s never going to become the President of the United States, not now, not ever. So let’s stop wasting time by talking about him.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Why is no one talking about how Ron Paul is tied for first place with the noncontender Michelle Bachmann and placed distant from even former MN Gov. Pawlenty?
This was a blowout for the Paul campaign.
He’s catching on, I tell you.[/quote]
He’s NOT going to catch on I tell you. And I will back that up with any sort of (Internet)wager that you’d like to make.
(Here’s where Paul supporters usually get uncomfortale- They like talking the talk and playing make believe but they won’t put up…unfortunately they don’t have the good grace to shut up either.
[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
So NOTHING happened in the past 4 years that could possibly have made Paul a significant figure? There was no housing bust, no stock market crash, no increase in commodity price, no out of control FED etc. etc.
Paul was proved right on numerous accounts. The facts line up much better with him and his record than they do with any of the other contenders. He tied for 1st place in Ames, is polling in the top 3 nationally and yet you claim that he is completely insignificant? Maybe you might want to diversify your reading to include something besides just the T-Nation forums.[/quote]
Oh Gaius…you have so much to learn, yet you think you already know so much (the irony). Ron Paul is never going to become President for reasons that you are just unable to grasp at your tender age. But don’t feel badly about it there are others older than you who don’t get it either. Yes, you are correct on one thing all of those things changed in four years. But there is one thing that didn’t change and that is candidate Ron Paul. People are not going to vote for a 76 year old Congressman (who gives off a persona of shear craziness)for President. The media age demands a candidate (like Obama) who can pull people to them through shear charisma. Romney has a good deal of it, Perry perhaps even a little more. Paul however is the anti charisma candidate. I’ve explained this numerous times on this board so I won’t go into details for you. But rest assured public speaking, physical appearance, youth appeal and much more is important to getting elected to the highest office in the land. Have you never taken a media and politics course? Have you never read books on how people get elected to office? Have you never…oh wait…you’re only 20…forget it.
As for my own reading junior, rest assured that I’ve forgotten more about politics and history than you have learned in your short lifetime. I don’t think you can match anyone on this board relative to education, reading or outright experience, certainly not me, so stop pretending that you can.
Do yourself a favor, either go away, or learn to ask more questions. You are in no position to TELL most on this forum anything regarding politics, history or world affairs.
Your Friend (who else would tell you the truth but a friend?),
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Why is no one talking about how Ron Paul is tied for first place with the noncontender Michelle Bachmann and placed distant from even former MN Gov. Pawlenty?
This was a blowout for the Paul campaign.
He’s catching on, I tell you.[/quote]
He’s NOT going to catch on I tell you. And I will back that up with any sort of (Internet)wager that you’d like to make.
(Here’s where Paul supporters usually get uncomfortale- They like talking the talk and playing make believe but they won’t put up…unfortunately they don’t have the good grace to shut up either.
[/quote]
LOL!
Dude, seriously. He placed a very low 5th place four years ago in this very same straw poll that he tied Bachmann for this year. If that is not “catching on” I don’t know what is.
Wake up!
Plus it is really telling that the media darlings can’t even catch a third place finish above T-bore. REALLY?!
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Why is no one talking about how Ron Paul is tied for first place with the noncontender Michelle Bachmann and placed distant from even former MN Gov. Pawlenty?
This was a blowout for the Paul campaign.
He’s catching on, I tell you.[/quote]
He’s NOT going to catch on I tell you. And I will back that up with any sort of (Internet)wager that you’d like to make.
(Here’s where Paul supporters usually get uncomfortale- They like talking the talk and playing make believe but they won’t put up…unfortunately they don’t have the good grace to shut up either.
[/quote]
The fact that his money bombs made more in a day than other candidates made in their entire run and that he has more active volunteers and support groups than probably all of them combined makes of course a very strong point for your argument.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Why is no one talking about how Ron Paul is tied for first place with the noncontender Michelle Bachmann and placed distant from even former MN Gov. Pawlenty?
This was a blowout for the Paul campaign.
He’s catching on, I tell you.[/quote]
He’s NOT going to catch on I tell you. And I will back that up with any sort of (Internet)wager that you’d like to make.
(Here’s where Paul supporters usually get uncomfortale- They like talking the talk and playing make believe but they won’t put up…unfortunately they don’t have the good grace to shut up either.
[/quote]
LOL!
Dude, seriously. He placed a very low 5th place four years ago in this very same straw poll that he tied Bachmann for this year. If that is not “catching on” I don’t know what is.
Wake up!
Plus it is really telling that the media darlings can’t even catch a third place finish above T-bore. REALLY?![/quote]
The average Paul supporter is pretty intelligent.[/quote]
And you don’t know that so don’t accuse the other poster of talking out of his ass.
[/quote]
I can’t prove it but I can logically deduce it.
They are at least intelligent enough to know how to irritate people that think “he doesn’t have a chance”.[/quote]
Well tell me now how did you “deduce” this? Because everyone who agrees with Paul is intelligent? Gee, I hope you don’t say something like that.
Also, just in case you meant me - I hope you don’t think that I would actually give the power to irritate me over to some faceless nameless screen name on the Internet. No…you don’t think that you’re too smart. I am well aware of the type of people that support Ron Paul, the majority are young and naive. And Paul’s black and white solutions appeal greatly to them. None of that bothers me. But it is enormously entertaining to poke a stick at you guys. And the really good part is that the end is in sight. Either you will be right and Ron Paul will catch fire and become the next (chuckle) President of the United States, or I’m right and he will fade like a beach combers tan in the month of October.
But let me know what sort of bet you’d like to make on your boy…err sorry senior citizen.