Posted on 12/23/2007 7:36:15 PM PST by melt
Got it, thanks.
When is knocking down lies and smears about Paul "shilling" for him? Don't you guys ever get tired of carrying the liberal media and establishment GOP's water?
Man you make yourself look like a fool defending this nut.
Who's the fool? The man has said hundreds of times that he is not running as a 3rd party or independent candidate. He has learned from his experience in 1988. He even told his wife of 50 years that he won't do it. When are you guys going to stop beating this dead horse?
He cries for term limits and has spent 18 years in Congress.
He supports term limits overall but realizes it's a dead issue. The voters who re-elected him time and time again haven't had a problem with it. Tancredo also did the same thing. Do you live in his district? Didn't think so.
He whines for less spending and then inserts multi-millions in earmarks while refusing to vote for a bill he knows will pass.
Earmarks are money that is already allocated in the budget. That money is ALREADY SPENT. You are thinking of pork. Earmarks are completely different than pork. And what he's doing is not hypocritical, because he at least recognizes the system stinks overall and people should be given the chance of getting their money back.
Paul is the biggest hypocrite DC has ever seen.
Pure nonsense. Stop parroting the MSM/GOP establishment spin and think for yourself. Read his record. He has been consistent since he went into Congress in 1976.
In fairness, there are plenty of pure anti-war single issue voters in the Paul camp. But the GOP would be making a mistake if they discount their libertarian GOP voters.
Paul won’t “win” in the traditional sense ie being sworn in as President. But he will be the best thing that has happened to the GOP in years by exposing young voters to the idea of limited government for the first time.
Dude whatever. Tell Shrek I said hi!
The traitor MSM is doing everything they can to dilute the Repub vote, Just like they did with the debates they hosted..They made sure they were about Dem issues, and avoided any debate abnout the successes in Iraq, and the GWOT.
I disagree. If he runs Third party, he will suck more of Hillary's voters away from her than repub voters from our side. It will help our side. If he just stays out, I'm betting that the libertarian-leaning independents will split fairly even, or stay home.
Are you kidding. Right now, these people are all anti-war leftists, Code Pinkers, white supremacists, etc according to the GOP bootlickers. But I guarantee you when the GOP nominee loses because these people stayed home or wrote in Paul's name, these same FReepers will be screaming as to why didn't they go out and vote for their statist candidate, WAAA!
I knew Ross Perot. Ross Perot was a friend of mine. Ron Paul, you are no Ross Perot.
Which is why I can confidently say, “Run, Paul, run!” (Siphon off all those wackjob votes from Hillary).
If this is true, then why is nearly everyone on this thread having conniption fits?? Shouldn't they be happy that Paul will suck away votes from Hillary then?
Let's all get into a circle and sing Kumbaya now...
LOL... Yes, because what is "good" for this country is the wonderful road we've been on, of a growing government, growing debt, corruption, loss of our liberties, open borders, loss of sovereignty.... thanks to the wonderful Democrats and Republicans who have done such a great job! How could anyone not love the 2 major parties? Shame on anyone for not wanting the status quo!
Absolutely.
I dont know about that brother FReeper.... I remember my cousin saying that about Perot back in the 1st Clinton campaign. I cant predict the future, but I sure think it would work against us. It is a dangerous situation I think.
Here is the transcript, I think this title shows a bit of MSM bias, as this was probably the least important part of the interview IMO.
Full transcript of Ron Paul on Meet the Press:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22342301/
MR. RUSSERT: If, if you do not win the Republican nomination for president, will you run as an independent in 2008?
REP. PAUL: I have no intention to do that.
MR. RUSSERT: Absolute promise.
REP. PAUL: I have no intention of doing that.
MR. RUSSERT: Well, but no intention’s a wiggle word.
REP. PAUL: Well, OK, I deserve one wiggle now and then, Tim. I mean, what the devil...
MR. RUSSERT: So no—so no Shermanesque statement.
REP. PAUL: You know, I...
MR. RUSSERT: “I will not sun as an independent.”
REP. PAUL: Well, I can be pretty darned sure that I have no intention, no plans of doing it, and that’s about 99.9 percent. I don’t like people who are such absolutists, “I will never do this, or I will win, I’m going to come in first.” I don’t like those absolutists terms in politics.
MR. RUSSERT: But the door’s open a little bit.
REP. PAUL: Not very much. It really isn’t. I, I don’t—Tim, we just raised $10 million in two days. We haven’t even had a race, we have February 5th coming up. We have a campaign to run. Why—do you ask all the other—how many other candidates have you asked, “Are you going to run as a third party candidate if you don’t win?” Have you asked John McCain that?
MR. RUSSERT: Well, if someone has a history of running as a third party candidate, sure. You ran in ‘88 as a Libertarian.
REP. PAUL: Yeah, well, I know...
MR. RUSSERT: It’s a logical question.
Perot was the opposite of Paul. Perot was a pro- military hero who had great appeal for patriotic Republicans, not in any way comparable to paul, except “third party”. That’s exactly why I say that Paul will be Hillary’s “Perot”, if he runs.
Ron Paul...
I’m not supporting Ron Paul, but I have to laugh at the current FR “conventional wisdom.” On thread after thread, various GOP candidates are attacked vehemently, with the only exception being Fred Thompson. He’s only attacked a little bit.
The only conclusion one can draw from this is that many of the posters will not support the GOP nominee if it is Romney, McCain, Giuliani, etc., leading one to the logical conclusion that they will vote third party.
Yet, they also participate in these pile-on-Ron-Paul threads, attacking Paul for leaving the door open a tiny bit for running third party.
So, if the nominee isn’t Fred Thompson, will most FReepers just stay home?
“What type of man then wavers on a promise to his wife of that magnitude?”
Rudy Giuliani?
I reckon. There’s these two fellers on a bridge.....
You do make an interesting point, and this is an interesting conversation. One reason I would not think that this is the case is the way Democrats do not split from the party easily. Most Democrats are Democrats because that what they are. Its almost like rooting for your favorite NFL team, they are the loyal ones. My grandparents were Democrats. If you discussed issues with them, they would agree with every single point of view a conservative has, but always voted Democrat (I know that is not the majority of them though). Most Democrats need only one issue to be a Democrat. Many are Democrat based on one or two issues. It maight be AFL-CIO Unions, Abortion, Gay Rights, the Media "Common Man's Party" etc. Republicans are the ones that demand 100% agreement with their candidate or they threaten to run off to a third party. I see that all the time on FR. I see them say "If ______ wins the RNC Nomination, I am voting 3rd party". Never mind it would result in putting in someone they would disagree 100% into office. I just see republicans more willing to leave the party if they are not 100% happy with their party candidate. About an hour ago I saw a FReeper say if his man doesn't win the nomination, he would write in Buchanan on election day. Its insanity.
Well if Paul goes 3rd party, I hope your right and I hope Im wrong, I just dont have that confidence you do on that issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.