ron paul gaining momentum

[inconvertible]

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/straw-poll/

[Pistons_In_7]

Not a chance in hell..

[AFBlue]

He is VERY popular here in Ga, so he might have a good showing in southern states on Super Tuesday....

But I agree with PI7, not a realistic chance.

[2centsworth]

his economic policies are way above average IMO. It's the rest of him that makes him unelectable.

[DarkReign]

I am noticing a trend with Paul....its amazing I know, but try and hold on to your sanity...

He does well in all things "internet", whether it be a poll or fundraiser, he dominates on the WWW.

Its the whole "real world success" thing that seems to elude the campaign.

[Extra Stout]

I am noticing a trend with Paul....its amazing I know, but try and hold on to your sanity...

He does well in all things "internet", whether it be a poll or fundraiser, he dominates on the WWW.

Its the whole "real world success" thing that seems to elude the campaign.
I think that is where the term "Paulbot" comes from. Much like a malware bot, the Paul supporter combs the internet looking for references to Paul.

[DarkReign]

^ good point.

[thispego]

No it's that he's being stifled in the real world by the powers that be who don't want him to become popular.

[inconvertible]

^better point

[Extra Stout]

No it's that he's being stifled in the real world by the powers that be who don't want him to become popular.
"powers that be" = "the 90-95% of the population that are neither hardcore libertarians nor the fringe weirdos that Paul also seems to attract."

[thispego]

"powers that be" = "the 90-95% of the population that are neither hardcore libertarians nor the fringe weirdos that Paul also seems to attract."
no, "powers that be" = .00001% of the US population

[monosylab1k]

I am noticing a trend with Paul....its amazing I know, but try and hold on to your sanity...

He does well in all things "internet", whether it be a poll or fundraiser, he dominates on the WWW.

Its the whole "real world success" thing that seems to elude the campaign.
just like Snakes on a Plane.

[inconvertible]

"powers that be" = "the 90-95% of the population that are neither hardcore libertarians nor the fringe weirdos that Paul also seems to attract."


you are just fooled by the media, like 90-95% that have their head up their ass and blinders on.

[Ryvin1]

you are just fooled by the media, like 90-95% that have their head up their ass and blinders on.


Jesus Christ could be on the ballot but would be polling low and get no air time if he didn't back the war or back big government, the media would say he is a fringe candidate and doesn't stand a chance, so won't even mention his name unless he gets blamed for any racist comment in the bible, even though he didn't write it. Don't even mention the part of the bible that advocates slavery and beating your slaves.

[whottt]

He's like Chris Benoit...

On the internet Chris Benoit was the greatest thing to ever hit Pro Wrestling...

Off the internet...the Rock and Hulk Hogan still ruled.


Paul's popularity on the internet is probably closer to his true overall popularity than Benoit's was...due to the the internet getting more and more popular and influential...

But I'm still going to say that Paul remains an internet darling with little or no chance of getting the nomination.


For me the main kicker is his stance on Iraq...which is irresponsible IMO.


Other than that I don't have many questions about his character or ethics...seems to be a decent guy, although I'll still say that being a decent guy doesn't equate to being a great Presidential candidate.

[JoeChalupa]

Ron will never have enough momentum.

[Galileo]

PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEOS:

http://www.freeatlast2008.com/

[boutons_]

Paul will never be accepted by the Repug/corp establishment (just like Edwards), and he's too radical and just too weird for moderate voters. He's gotta be radical and weird for his activists, but that precludes him from the moderates.

[Wild Cobra]

, and he's too radical and just too weird for moderate voters.
What?

Explain please.

Can you tell me a single radical idea he has?

I'll bet it's not so radical if you take a moment to understand it!

He's not accepted because he is not part of the elite class... He has real constitutional values.

[boutons_]

Abolish IRS, for starters.

Overturning the entire, hyper-complex tax code, 1000s of pages, with its 1000s special/vested interests and loopholes and the entire accountancy/tax prep/tax lawyer industries, is fucking radical, so radical it's weird to even consider it as feasible.

Here's what happens to conservative radicals IN PRACTICE:

"They have forgotten that Reagan -- facing spiraling deficits, sinking poll ratings and a hostile Congress -- reluctantly signed legislation raising payroll, income and gasoline taxes, some of them among the largest in our history. He promised to limit government and eliminate the Departments of Education and Energy. Instead, when faced with congressional and popular opposition, he relented and even grew government by adding a secretary of veteran affairs to the Cabinet."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/the_use_and_abuse_of_reagan.html

[Wild Cobra]

Abolish IRS, for starters.

Overturning the entire tax code, with its 1000s special/vested interests and loopholes and the entire accountancy/tax prep/tax lawyer industries, is fucking radical, so radical it's weird to even consider it as feasible.
How is simplifying something radical?

I am a staunch supporter of "The Fair Tax." It eliminates taxes as we know them, and makes them all a consumption based tax. Basis necessities need not be taxed.

Buy food, toilet paper, etc. no tax. Hence, it should be about 22% cheaper.

Buy TV's DVD players, cars, etc. you get taxed. Taxes are paid on items not necessary for basic living. Taxes are relatively equal. Taxes are fair this way between income classes and class envy would be reduced. Exports don't get taxed, imports get taxed, helping to balance the trade deficit.

This is not a radical idea. No other country has such a complicated tax structure as ours. Other first world nations use a consumption style tax.

Why won't it change? Politicians will never take those chains and collars off the tax payers necks. We are their property. To eliminate their power to control us trough taxes would reduce their power so dramatically.

What's radical about reducing the governments power.

You want radical... I have a few radical ideas. Ron Paul cannot compete with me!

[Wild Cobra]

Here's what happens to conservative radicals IN PRACTICE:

"They have forgotten that Reagan --


To bad the article only cherrypicks their highlights.

I forget how much the SS/Medicare went up by, but at the time it was the right thing to do. I would advocate increasing it more, because it is a tax that everyone pays, rather than you libs trying to just soak the rich.

Gasoline taxes are not 18.4 cents per gallon federal. It's not a percentage tax, so from time to time needed to be increased to keep road projects running as inflation increases. President Reagan inherited terrible inflation, therefore the increases on the gas tax were historic.

I wish he did eliminate the Department of Education. It's not his choice alone. Congress must play a part too.

The biggest things I agree with to criticize him about are his granting amnesty to illegal workers, and his poor choice for the Supreme Court. However, maybe they were the best he could get past the democrat controlled senate?

[DarkReign]

You want radical... I have a few radical ideas. Ron Paul cannot compete with me!

http://ghscommunications.com/pope.jpg

[boutons_]

'Congress must play a part too."

... is why an extreme radical like RP won't get elected. The establishment won't permit it, even if he had enough $$$ and talent to run a national campaign.

[pussyface]

Paul will never be accepted by the Repug/corp establishment (just like Edwards), and he's too radical and just too weird for moderate voters. He's gotta be radical and weird for his activists, but that precludes him from the moderates.

you are not intelligent enough to see that john edwards is no ron paul.

paul is unique in that he is uncompromising in saying what he actually believes (MSM pundits call this "not trying to actually win.") edwards is calculated and hides his true beliefs to play the electability game (this is most clearly illustrated with his 'stance' on gay marriage: 'i am personally opposed to fags getting married, but my wife disagrees,' an obvious political calculation designed to placate the southern dummy vote while letting the hipsters in San Francisco know what he really thinks. i would charge that edwards believes in marriage rights for gays, but lacks the backbone to stand up for them)

aside from edwards being an economic dunce and, as a classic Onion headline put it, "Promising to end all bad things by 2009," the two are very different in other substantive ways.

neither will win their parties nomination, unfortunately, but one will still be a respectable and uncompromised figure moving forward (when a person compromes principal in the name of utilitarian good and fails on both accounts, as edwards has, its pretty shameful)

[DarkReign]

^ longest title-under-name in history.

[boutons_]

Fox loves RP:

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/4906/nvqo0.jpg

[BradLohaus]

^Honest mistake, I'm sure.

[inconvertible]

no they are doing this shit on purposes.....it seems its not only fox, but msnbc doesn't want to acknowledge him either?????

what gives?

[inconvertible]

can't you people see its the establishment(every other candidate) and Ron Paul....FIGHT THE POWER.....By voting for paul you are fucking up the system and voting for someone who is 100% legit........lets have some fun and donate to..............

www.ronpaul2008.com



romney made $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ with his dads connections....and now it time to pay the piper.....so they have enlisted him to be DUBYA part 2.......don't let huge corperations succeed.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Far be it for me to defend Fox News (and I'm not), but if somebody's vote is swung by not realizing Paul finished third (or second), I don't know that I would trust them to punch a ballot without hurting themselves.

[Nbadan]

PLAISTOW, N.H. -- Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network "is scared" of him.

"They are scared of me and don't want my message to get out, but it will," Paul said in an interview at a diner here. "They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative."

Paul's staff said they are beginning to plan a rally that will take place at the same time the 90-minute debate will air on television. It will be taped at Saint Anselm College in Goffstown.

"They will not win this skirmish," he promised.

The Fox debate occurs less than 24 hours after two back to back Republican and Democratic debates on the same campus sponsored by ABC News, WMUR-TV and the social networking website Facebook.

Boston (http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/primarysource/2007/12/paul_fox_news_i.html)

[word]

Momentum to do what ? Nothing ? Which is exactly what he's done during his time in Congress. Nothing.

He votes no on appropriations bills yeah, but not till he crams in all the pork he can knowing it will pass anyway. Now there is a man of conviction.

[Ryvin1]

Momentum to do what ? Nothing ? Which is exactly what he's done during his time in Congress. Nothing.

He votes no on appropriations bills yeah, but not till he crams in all the pork he can knowing it will pass anyway. Now there is a man of conviction.

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

[pussyface]

Momentum to do what ? Nothing ? Which is exactly what he's done during his time in Congress. Nothing.

He votes no on appropriations bills yeah, but not till he crams in all the pork he can knowing it will pass anyway. Now there is a man of conviction.

the funny thing is that this guy is probably backing clinton/obama/romney

[boutons_]

I read today where Paul votes against spending bills he knows will pass, while anyway adding in pork for his district.

[word]

Ron Paul was also the first person in Congress to propose term limits in 1974. Since then he's run 14 campaigns for Congress and two for President over the last 34 years.

So, clearly what he means is term limits are for 'someone else'. He can't even self impose them on himself. This is just one of many reasons no one takes this crackhead seriously.

[Wild Cobra]

I read today where Paul votes against spending bills he knows will pass, while anyway adding in pork for his district.
I think that's a bit of spin. I head this too, but there is a difference betwen valid brojects brought to ones own state vs. what we really define as pork. Notice how no specific examples were mentioned... Leads me to believe they were valid requests for his state.

[Wild Cobra]

Boutons...

Just for you... a definition:

radical, adjective.

1. Pertaining to the root or origin; original; fundamental; as, a radical error.

2. Implanted by nature; native; constitutional; as, the radical moisture of a body.

3. Primitive; original; underived; uncompounded; as, a radical word.

4. In botany, proceeding immediately from the root; as, a radical leaf or peduncle.

5. In mathematics, pertaining to a radix or root.

6. Unsparing; extreme; without reservation; thorough; severe.

radical, noun.

1. In philology, a primitive word; a radix; a root; a simple, underived, uncompounded word.

2. A primitive letter; a letter that belongs to the radix

3. In politics, one who advocates a radical reform, or extreme measures in reformation.

4. In chemistry, an essential or constituent part of a compound which remains after one or more elements have been removed.

5. In anatomy, a minute vessel that originates in the tissue.

6. In algebra, a term to which the radical sign is prefixed; also, a surd.

Now I'll grant you that Paul's proposed tax change can technically be considered radical after such definitions are considered. Only because within the political specific definition, "radical reform" is the same as "extreme reform" meaning a large change rather than being extreme.

Funny how something so simple as the Fair Tax can by definition be considered extreme. That's politics for you I guess.

[boutons_]

"a large change rather than being extreme.'

Abolishing the entire tax code in favor of only a retail tax is extremely, radically large.

It'll NEVER happen because RP is dead in the water now, never mind when the Repug swift-boaters and slimers start tearing him apart.

[Wild Cobra]

It'll NEVER happen because RP is dead in the water now, never mind when the Repug swift-boaters and slimers start tearing him apart.
Except the Fair Tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_tax) isn't his idea. It has several backers in congress. It is HR 25 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR25:) sponsored by Rep Linder, John (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d110&querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Rep+Linder++John))+00 693))), originally on 7/14/1999. It's most current form is dated 1/4/2007, and has 68 cosposores:

Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 1/31/2007
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 10/23/2007
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Baker, Richard H. [LA-6] - 2/8/2007
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 2/8/2007
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 4/17/2007
Rep Bilirakis, Gus M. [FL-9] - 3/9/2007
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 7/17/2007
Rep Bonner, Jo [AL-1] - 1/11/2007
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 5/9/2007
Rep Boren, Dan [OK-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 1/4/2007
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 1/11/2007
Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 9/24/2007
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 1/4/2007
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 2/5/2007
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 1/4/2007
Rep Crenshaw, Ander [FL-4] - 1/4/2007
Rep Cubin, Barbara [WY] - 1/19/2007
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 1/4/2007
Rep Davis, David [TN-1] - 1/23/2007
Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 1/4/2007
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-9] - 1/4/2007
Rep Drake, Thelma D. [VA-2] - 1/5/2007
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 2/8/2007
Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 9/17/2007
Rep Feeney, Tom [FL-24] - 1/4/2007
Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] - 1/31/2007
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 2/5/2007
Rep Gilchrest, Wayne T. [MD-1] - 6/11/2007
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 1/5/2007
Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. [VA-5] - 1/4/2007
Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 1/4/2007
Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 2/6/2007
Rep Hastert, J. Dennis [IL-14] - 1/10/2007
Rep Hensarling, Jeb [TX-5] - 1/22/2007
Rep Hoekstra, Peter [MI-2] - 2/28/2007
Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] - 2/8/2007
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] - 5/7/2007
Rep Keller, Ric [FL-8] - 2/5/2007
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 1/11/2007
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 1/31/2007
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 10/9/2007
Rep Lewis, Jerry [CA-41] - 2/6/2007
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 9/10/2007
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 1/4/2007
Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 1/9/2007
Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 2/8/2007
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 1/4/2007
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 1/18/2007
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 1/4/2007
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 1/4/2007
Rep Norwood, Charles W. [GA-10] - 1/4/2007
Rep Pearce, Stevan [NM-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 1/30/2007
Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 2/15/2007
Rep Tiahrt, Todd [KS-4] - 2/12/2007
Rep Walberg, Timothy [MI-7] - 1/11/2007
Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 6/18/2007
Rep Weldon, Dave [FL-15] - 2/5/2007
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 1/4/2007
Rep Whitfield, Ed [KY-1] - 1/30/2007
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 1/5/2007

He says he'll vote yes on the Fair tax, but it is troubling that he didn't take the time to cosponsor it. Maybe I shouldn't care, there are enough cosigners for any reputable congress majority to take action on it. To bad it will never get past the likes og Nancy Pelosy.

[inconvertible]

"a large change rather than being extreme.'

Abolishing the entire tax code in favor of only a retail tax is extremely, radically large.

It'll NEVER happen because RP is dead in the water now, never mind when the Repug swift-boaters and slimers start tearing him apart.


There is no income tax in the EU. only a sales tax that charges everyone(even welfare people)a tax on everything they buy. thus the rich pay more than the poor.....like it should be.

[Extra Stout]

There is no income tax in the EU. only a sales tax that charges everyone(even welfare people)a tax on everything they buy. thus the rich pay more than the poor.....like it should be.
No income tax in the EU? I would get annoyed with such a ridiculous falsehood, except that you are so obviously insane that you can't really be held accountable for it.

[boutons_]

"There is no income tax in the EU"

lie

"a tax on everything they buy"

groceries, clothes, and sometimes books and newspapers aren't taxed.

"the rich pay more than the poor"

lie. the biggest problem with consumption tax is that is is always regressive, never "flat", no progressive, so there must be an parallel attempt to reduce the regessivity.

[xrayzebra]

"There is no income tax in the EU"

lie

"a tax on everything they buy"

groceries, clothes, and sometimes books and newspapers aren't taxed.

"the rich pay more than the poor"

lie. the biggest problem with consumption tax is that is is always regressive, never "flat", no progressive, so there must be an parallel attempt to reduce the regessivity.


Not a consumption tax. Tax is called Value Added Tax
(VAT). Much different than a consumption tax or
sales tax. Get your stuff straight, just once in a while.

[Pistons_In_7]

Enough of this Ron Paul propaganda, he isn't gaining shit. All he is doing is wasting 10's of millions of dollars that could go to serve a much better purpose. He doesnt stand a chance hin hell and you all know it.

[Pistons_In_7]

By the way there is a VAT on clothing, i just went shopping in the UK and stores had signs that read "Vat Included In Price"

[Extra Stout]

Enough of this Ron Paul propaganda, he isn't gaining shit. All he is doing is wasting 10's of millions of dollars that could go to serve a much better purpose. He doesnt stand a chance hin hell and you all know it.
I'm not positive how campaign finance laws work... but could Paul's funds go to help other libertarian-minded candidates run for local offices around the country?

There could be a real fight among Paul supporters between the libertarians who want to use the money to run to become state legislators or county judges, and the crackpots who want to blow it all on tinfoil and newsletters.

[dallaskd]

the map has changed drastically since you posted it.

[Mavtek]

that poll is reset every week.

[ClingingMars]

RP isn't the only one who supports the FairTax.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=5

-Mars