Are we done with the Ron Paul fantasy?

[Evan]

:donkey

[DarkReign]

I would think so. Its definately over for him.

[Holt's Cat]

Yeah, it's a fantasy these days that conservative Republicans would actually think about reducing the scale and scope of the federal government.

[Evan]

I have no problem with him at all...just tired of the forum (all forums) spam for the past year.

[BonnerDynasty]

Fiscal Conservatism is a pipe dream now.

[101A]

Fiscal Conservatism is a pipe dream now.When was it reality?

I mean, I liked Reagan as much as the next guy...but did he ever force a balanced budget, MAKE the Dems get spending in order. No, he didn't.

[inconvertible]

No, Not By A Longshot.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

When was it reality?

I mean, I liked Reagan as much as the next guy...but did he ever force a balanced budget, MAKE the Dems get spending in order. No, he didn't.

uh....you republicans need to make up your fucking minds, was regan the winner of the cold war because he spent dirty commies into submission with his massive military budgets, or was he some hostage to the crazy democratic spending machine?

crazy idiots

[101A]

uh....you republicans need to make up your fucking minds, was regan the winner of the cold war because he spent dirty commies into submission with his massive military budgets, or was he some hostage to the crazy democratic spending machine?

crazy idiotsIt was simply a statement.

I don't believe there has ever been a true, fiscal conservative in the White House. You sure read a lot into it. The wasn't hostage at all to the Dems, but they, in fact, controlled Congress and the budget. Just as I would say Bush didn't make the Republican Congress control spending. NEITHER has been conservative/each willing, if not desiring, to run up debt.

The Clinton presidency, as a matter of record, has the best deficit control of all recent administrations. The Republican Congress, with an opposition president, might be the BEST formula for fiscal control. Of course, it might have simply been an abberation of the Cold War ending - along with the .Com expansion, before the War on Terror and the .Com bust. Time will tell.

Reagan, IMO, did have a part in the hastening the fall of the Soviet Union; but more that that was the Soviet Unions utterly failed centrally controlled economy.

It boggles my mind that many people in other parts of the world, and not just a few in this country want to inch closer to that model.

Crazy idiots.

[Extra Stout]

No, Not By A Longshot.
Yeah, why should he quit? He's the frontrunner!

[LaMarcus Bryant]

I bet the starter of this thread follows the logic
"Why vote for him, he has no chance!"

[braeden0613]

I bet the starter of this thread follows the logic
"Why vote for him, he has no chance!"
yeah that logic gave us John Mccain

[Mavtek]

March 4th, he's on the ballot, he's got my vote if only it is a protest vote. Why would I vote for anyone else? I don't care if he's got no chance I'd like to make sure everyone knows there are people out there like me who believe in what Ron Paul does.

[Phil Hellmuth]

He is getting my write in vote in november.

i refuse to be a conformist.

[boutons_]

RP sounds very realistic here, basically doing nothing now but subsidizing the campaign industry and wasting his donations:


February 9, 2008, 1:13 am

Paul Concedes Race, Sort Of

By Ariel Alexovich

In a message to supporters sent just before 11 p.m. Friday night, Representative Ron Paul, a long-shot G.O.P. candidate from Texas, basically conceded that he’s not going to win the party’s nomination.

That said, he’s scaling back his campaign — but not entirely.

He said:

With Romney gone, the chances of a brokered convention are nearly zero. But that does not affect my determination to fight on, in every caucus and primary remaining, and at the convention for our ideas, with just as many delegates as I can get. But with so many primaries and caucuses now over, we do not now need so big a national campaign staff, and so I am making it leaner and tighter.

Mr. Paul clearly stated that he will not run as a third-party candidate. Right now, his priorities are serving the residents in his Texas congressional district and winning re-election.

If I were to lose the primary for my congressional seat, all our opponents would react with glee, and pretend it was a rejection of our ideas.

From what we can make of the letter, Mr. Paul is staying in the race on a peripheral level, just so he can keep participating in policy discussions (and maybe use up all that money he’s amassed?).

“In the presidential race and the congressional race, I need your support, as always,” Mr. Paul wrote. “And I have plans to continue fighting for our ideas in politics and education that I will share with you when I can, for I will need you at my side. In the meantime, onward and upward! The neocons, the warmongers, the socialists, the advocates of inflation will be hearing much from you and me.”


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/paul-concedes-race-sort-of/

=============

... but they won't be doing anything about what they hear from RP.

If you don't have the votes, you're dead, like RP.
If have enough votes, you can do anything.

[PEP]

I hope Ralph Nader runs.

[Holt's Cat]

Republican Caucus Results: With 60% of the precincts reporting - Ron Paul 45%, Mike Huckabee 20%, John Mccain 17%, Mitt Romney 9%, Uncommitted 9% link (http://www.khq.com/Global/story.asp?S=7847796)

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f317/acroso/rprising.jpg

[Extra Stout]

link (http://www.khq.com/Global/story.asp?S=7847796)

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f317/acroso/rprising.jpg
So if the city of Spokane ever becomes an independent country -- Ron Paul could become their new President.

[pussyface]

So if the city of Spokane ever becomes an independent country -- Ron Paul could become their new President.

i want to move to spokane now.