Skip to comments.Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted on 05/14/2012 12:11:34 PM PDT by Kevin C
click here to read article
Romney has already disagreed with Obama more than McCain ever did.
Who is lying? Willard is for bigger government, is pro-choice, and has embraced Socialist ideologies like global warming.
Am I wrong? Prove it.
Give me some links and I’ll come up with links to counter each one.
Go vote for your liberal scumbag. Don’t think you hold any high ground doing it.
” - - - Best I can tell none of you get it. Ron Paul never been about Ron Paul. It has always been about taking back the Republican party from the corrupt establishment that gives us Romneys and McCains - - - “
The two main points of Ron Pauls Primary Campaign are as follows: 1.) FORCE THE GOP Elite TO HAVE AN OPEN CONVENTION; 2.) Allow the Delegates to vote for a dark horse who did not run in the Primary, such as Col. West of Florida.
If Pauls plan to cut 1 TRILLION dollars in year-to-year Federal spending, AND abolish 5 Federal Departments are the main reasons for Iowa Delegates to thaw out their opposition to Paul, then it might later be said that as Iowa goes, so goes the Nation.
BTW, T is for Texas, Tampa and those of us who are TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY!
Here are some more reasons to vote for Ron Paul in the remaining Primary elections:
1.) It will drive the Liberal Agenda Media (LAM) and their Rove-style political consultants NUTS!
2.) It will deny statistical support to Romney.
3.) It could result in an OPEN Convention in Tampa.
4.) It would irritate the snot out of the GOP-E.
5.) It will put the GOP-E on notice that we think that their RINO Party has done NOTHING since we sent 89 TEA Party men and women to the US Congress in 2010.
6.) An OPEN Convention is our ONLY chance of a successful DUMP ROMNEY campaign.
7.) A superb, true Dark Horse Republican Nominee needs an OPEN Convention to replace Romney.
BTW, did I mention the sheer joy of watching the GOP-Endorsers publicly eating crow?
What the Liberal Agenda Media has never figured out, is that the 2012 National Election will be the last National Election where Campaign topics other than the National Debt will be debated again.
IOW, when the grim reaper of financial reality forces Federal Politicians in both parties to pay the US Bond owners before payments to our Entitlement recipients, it will terminate discussion on the main topics that we chatter about so far in 2012.
This National election is all about the money, your grandchildrens descendants money.
Ron Paul is to old and to disliked as being different from what most voters picture a US President to look and sound like to win the Nomination.
HOWEVER, Ron Paul as an Anbody-but-Romney candidate in Tampa is our last, best chance to have an OPEN Convention in Tampa, and for that alone he deserves our Primary voter support.
Paul has soldiered on through this entire Primary Campaign. Let us help him establish a beachhead on the Shores of Tampa!
A Dump Romney action requires an OPEN Convention.
For those who object to Paul as a Nominee, then treat him as a tired old political soldier who will, with our help, win the Battle to achieve an OPEN Convention in Tampa.
THEN the delegates can win the War, and choose the best Nominee to solve our National Debt Problem.
Remember, this election is all about the money, your grandchildrens descendants money - - - - .
What is the best way that you can use your Primary vote to help the financial future of YOUR descendants?
Romney is running for President on a fiscally conservative, pro-life platform. Whatever he has done in different situations in the past, that is his stated platform now.
By contrast, Obama is running explicitly as a pro-abortion, big-government leftist.
Thus the two choices are not identical no matter how many times you or anyone else claims otherwise.
If you look up that phrase in the dictionary, there should be a picture of Newt there. He is not only A solid and consistent conservative leader, he was THE most important solid and consistent conservative leader the party has ever had outside of Reagan. If you're ignorant about Newt's record in Congress in the 1980s and 1990s then read up on it before you reply.
You say I lie because I state Romney admitted he’s progressive.....Here’s his video...scroll for second video.
In his own words:
” My Views are Progressive”
What is the number one rule in judging a politician? Look at what they actually do, not what they say on the campaign trail.
If you trust Willard, you are an idiot. Hands down...
Johnson and Goode are our only real options and the GOP is yesterday’s news.
Where on earth did you get a stupid interpretation like that? Are you not smart enough to actually read or something?
You're right, Jeff - it IS game over for America.
We're jinked either way, whether with Obama or Romney.
Let's face it - only an idiot or a fool believes that Romney isn't going to be essentially the same thing as Obama. Not only is Romney ideologically very similar to Obama, but I see no reason to believe that Romney isn't going to try to hang onto as much of the "czar" framework as he can; I see no reason to think that Romney isn't going to keep all of the liberty-destroying TSA/random searches/Patriot Act anti-constitutional framework in place. He can, and he will, because guess what - he has absolutely ZERO reason not to.
Conservatives didn't put him where he is, so he is not beholden to us in the least. All these people running around saying that we're "really gonna hold his feet to the fire" and that we're "gonna keep him honest" are just fooling themselves. They're not going to. Romney is going to simply laugh at and ignore them. He has no reason to listen to or care what conservatives think at all, and if you think he does, you're fooling yourself.
Oh boy oh boy oh boy! Romney's got a good platform! Like he's not going to ditch it about ten seconds after giving his victory speech (if he wins). Because, you know, no politician has ever, you know, lied or anything.
All you folks rolling over and reconciling yourselves to Romney are going to be sorely disappointed. You are in NO position to expect, or even hope for anything from him. He owes you NOTHING. And you will find out that you will GET nothing from him. And it's because we conservatives were absolute stupid idiots and refused to rally around a single candidate early on, and let Romney get momentum by winning with 25-30% in early contests.
Face it, Jeff - even if Romney win's, YOU and WE lose.
Time is going to tell. I believe you are wrong about Romney, though I am sure, like Bush, there will be a number of things he does that I do not agree with. Heck, there were things Regan did I did not agree with and he was our best President since Abraham Lincoln IMHO, maybe since Washington.
I believe though thet Romney, if elected, will be a far, far better outcome for this nation than Obama...and unfortunately, that is what we are left with.
If Rommney is elected, I expect eocnomically we wioll make a relative rapid recovery barring some world-wide crisis. I expect our military will be rebuilt and the R&D will fire back yup to keep us ahead.
I expect Obama-Care will be overturned and rendered moot...though it will take several years to root out all of it that is already going into place.
I expect we will have a storng foreign policy. And, I expect we will get far better SCOTUS JUstices than what Obama would choose.
But, as I said, time will tell. The very chance that any of that, let alone most of it, could happen is reason enough to vote against Obama with Romney.
Yeah, that seems to be Rogue Yam's hat, doesn't it? I suspect a lot of it has to do with the fact that he's too ignorant and unknowledgable of actual facts to do anything other than make faces at the people who aren't reconciling themselves to Romney. To a person like rogue yam, "principles" are horrid evil things that just mean you "think you're better than everybody else" and that keep you from lining up behind whatever piece of garbage the GOP has decided to nominate this time around.
It's sad, but the fact of the matter is, even in conservative circles, there will always be people like RY who value being a team player more than ideological consistency or commitment to first principles. Supporting the "R" is more important than supporting the Constitution, etc.
The funny thing is, he tries to hide behind the "Romney won it fair and square" argument - but Romney didn't. It can't be called a legitimate win when your opponents' signatures for ballot access are tossed out so they are disqualified, while yours are basically accepted sight unseen, as happened in Virginia. It can't be called a legitimate win when your opponent's campaign ads are kept off the air so they can be "fact-checked," while your much more scurrilous ads receive all the air time you can pay for, as happened in Florida. These, plus many other things, delegitimise Romney's "win." He only "won" because he and his campaign are lying, cheating, and stealing enough to win.
If that's what RY counts as "being a fighter," then no thanks. We've already got one of those in the White House. I choose something different.
Let's face it - anyone who thinks Romney will be significantly different from Obama is a fool. Plain and simple. We know that they both are pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, anti-gun, pro-progressive taxation, have both raised taxesand fees, both support government-run health care, both denigrate religious liberty, and have made the worst possible judicial picks they could have. These are not opinions, these are facts based off of their respective records - like it or not.
There's no reason to think Romney will govern any more constitutionally than Obama has. There really isn't. There are a lot of FReepers who are trying to convince themselves through wishful thinking that Romney is going to be the second coming of Ronald Reagan, but he won't be. There's no reason to think Romney won't hang onto the czars. there's no reason to think Romney won't keep TSA/VIPR/Patriot Act and the rest of the anti-constitutional regimen completely in place. There is no reason to think that Romney will not keep pretty much the entire substance of all the stuff that we hate about Obama in place.
Why should he change it? Conservatives didn't put him where he is. Money, dirty tricks, and a complicit GOP elite and "conservative" media did. He is not beholden to conservatives. He will not govern the way we want him to. His feet will not be held to the fire by conservatives. Conservatives will not "keep him honest." There's no reason in the world - nada, none, zilch - why he should give two toots of a horn what conservatives think about anything.
Oh, but he has a good platform! Like that's going to mean anything the day after he's elected. The platform will get the etch-a-sketch treatment. It only exists now so as to fool enough conservatives into voting for him to beat Obama. Once that happens, it's gone, never to be heard from again.
The whole "you have to vote for Romney or else you're voting for Obama!!!!" argument rests on a false premise, which is that there's any substantive difference between the two. There is not. Voting for one is essentially to vote for the other - the only differences to speak of are the "team colours" each is wearing. You can rah-rah for the Team D or you can rah-rah for Team R, but at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter which, since they're both going to do essentially the same things. Romney may be a little more subtle about it, but that won't change the substance of how he governs.
America's goose is cooked either way - and it's going to be because of people like Rogue Yam who would rather roll over and wimp out than try to fight for a real conservative who the GOP-E can't control.
Exactly on what evidence are you basing this wishful thinking?
Let's think this through, Jeff.
On the economy - we have already seen that Romney pretty much admits support for the fundamental premise of progressive taxation, which is wealth redistribution. He's already rumbled about the rich paying their fair share, just like a Democrat would. That right there suggests that he's not going to do much to help the economy. Face it, if our economy is to really and truly recover, drastic changes need to be made - tax fairness needs to be instituted, capital gains need to be majorly cut or even eliminated, and we need to start instituting at least some protective measures to bring back jobs. Romney the progressive taxation supporter and hard-core free trader will not push to see these done. So there's no real reason to assume that the economy is going to magically get better with him in office.
ObamaCare overturned? Are you kidding me? Overturned by the guy who is its spiritual godfather? Not going to happen on Romney's watch. While ObamaCare and RomneyCare are not entirely contiguous, the fact remains that much of MassCare led to ObamaCare. It was the model. Romney has repeatedly refused to back down on his belief that MassCare was essentially a good idea. The best Romney may do is tinker around the edges a bit, but it's simply wishful thinking to believe that Romney's going to go along with repealing ObamaCare. He has no credibility on the issue for a reason.
Court justices - nope. I understand the argument that Romney had to choose from the pool chosen by the Governour's Council in Massachusetts. But it doesn't take into account that even with this handicap, Romney STILL consistently choose the worst out of a bad lot. Further, his choices were those who were the most consistently radical supporters of legislating the gay agenda from the bench. There's no reason to think Romney's going to make good judicial choices at any level, sorry.
Foreign policy is more of a grey area since Romney has no actual record on that regard. However, given the fact that the rest of his proclivities are similar to Obama's, I don't see much reason to think his foreign policy will significantly differ, either. He may be less overt about some things, but I don't see how the substance can differ much. Remember - things are all interconnected. A person's foreign policy decisions stem from a worldview that also encompasses their views on everything else. If Romney's similar to Obama in other areas, there's a good chance he is on foreign policy choices as well.
It is quite difficult to talk to a Ron Paul supporter "around here" since early in this primary season just and all of his supporters, and there were many long time freepers that liked Ron Paul, were given the zot. It was a popular game here at FR to find and zot the paulbots. Not many survived the purge.
When you write that we should “ - - - fight for a real conservative who the GOP-E can’t control. “
Then who are they, IYHO?
That fight is called "the GOP Primary".
With respect to the White House, that fight is over.
Is that the picture where he is sitting on a couch next to Nancy Pelosi?
That was some time ago and it is one phrase taken out of context. Romney is running as a conservative now. He calls himself a conservative again and again. Thus he is not a “self-proclaimed progressive”.
Johnson and Goode are not options because neither will come anywhere close to winning even a single state. There is nothing real about that.
... and the GOP is yesterdays news.
Defeatism is un-American.
” - - - With respect to the White House, that fight is over. “
I can give you 15 TRILLION reasons why that fight HAS JUST BEGUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Defeatism is un-American.
Blah, blah, blah. One of two people will be leading our country for the next four years as we deal with the $15T deficit, Obama or Romney.
No number of exclamation points will change that fact.
I agree with this, of course.
I ask those on this thread who have so vociferously attacked Romney here, what is your goal? You say that you believe that America will be equally bad off under either Obama or Romney, but you only attack Romney. What are you trying to accomplish?
You do not come across as someone who is indifferent between Obama and Romney. Rather, you seem like you are trying to prevent Romney from getting elected.
I have thought it through and come to my conclusion. You have done likewise and come to a different conlcusion. I acccept that and understand your reasoning and intent. I have the same intent to keep the Republic from harm...or, further or worse harm in this case.
Virgil is not going to win. End of story. It will be either Obama or Romney...irrespective of what you or I or a few thousand people here on FR do.
As to his Judge nominations, I have talked with people who lived there during the Romney admin. As you have indicated, the Committee had the lion’s share of the power. He was constrained. But after that, it still had to clear a overwhelmingly liberal legislature...and so of course, the end product was as liberal as it could be in that environment. Romney was hobbled and, IMHO, tried to make the best of a losing situation from his very moderate standpoint.
Do not get me wrong. I do not like his record, but I also recognize where he was and what constraints were upon him as Governor of that state and that a lot that is being attributed to him personally was not really him, but the overall liberal nature of the state, its legislature and its laws that hobbled anything good he may have wanted to do.
Now, he is free of all of that, indicates that he has changed in very specific areas, and has put together a platform on the issues for the last 5-6 years that he is running on which is, on its face, not that terribly bad.
My point is simple. That is a whole lot better than what we have from Obama and the only real two choices we have in terms of who the actual next President will be are these two.
One a very moderate Republican from Mass who says he has now seen the light and is running on a platform reflecting that, and the other a Kenyan Marxist who is intent on detroying the Republic and is alreayd well on his way in his 1st term to doing so.
For me, though it is certainly not the choice I wanted, the choice between the two is still very clear.
That’s what I intend to do and why and I believe if we put in place the conservative (spelled Tea Party) congress we simply must have in any case, that Romney will govern accordingly.
Will he be “really good?” Probably not. But I believe on the economy, on the military, in foreign affairs, and with ObamaCare and other social issues he will be a vast improvement over Obama.
God’s speed. Time will soon tell how this will play out and I pray God’s guidance on the people of this nation, all those who love America and cherish our way of life and liberty, that they may be guided to help us turn away from the precipice we are teetering over.
This isn't my opinion... This is proven history.
” - - - for the next four years as we deal with the $15T deficit - - - “
We finally agree. WE will deal with the 15T NATIONAL DEBT (not the 1.3T ANNUAL deficit), and not Obama or Obamalite..
Where we disagree is that neither Obama or Obamalite will decrease Federal Spending to be less than the previous year’s Federal income.
BTW, the addition of thrice repeated four letter words to your statement does not change the fact that the “ fight has just begun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! “
You are a quitter. The fact that there may be other quitters changes nothing.
1) You are a quitter.
2) Quitting is un-American.
It comes down to a trust issue - I do not trust Romney, and do not believe he is really making the changes he claims to be making. I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that, but fear that I am not. I simply cannot and will not vote for him.
So essentially, any facts that are inconvenient to you, you will simply ignore.
The story of the Romney supporter’s life.
No - voting for anti-American socialists like Obama and Romney is un-American.
If the choice really is determined - if it is only Romney or Obama, with no hope of conservatives finding their backbones and rallying around someone else - then yes, America is well and truly jinked. Nothing will change that fact.
Well then, it’s time to dump the GOP, since it’s obviously corrupted to the point of no return.
Until then, I’m voting Virgil Goode and Constitution Party, regardless of how much of a “wasted” vote it is.
My goal is to somehow against hope get conservatives to see the light, dump Romney, and choose an actual conservative alternative.
” - - - I ask those on this thread who have so vociferously attacked Romney here, what is your goal? You say that you believe that America will be equally bad off under either Obama or Romney, but you only attack Romney. What are you trying to accomplish? “
THANK YOU for asking THE question so clearly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My goal is to defeat the insanity of Keyensian Economics in “both” of our very sorry political parties THIS YEAR!
This can be accomplished by choosing a stellar Dark Horse Nominee, such as R-Rep. West of Florida, to slaughter Obama in a November Landslide.
The key is to FORCE the GOP-E to allow for an OPEN Convention in Tampa. Without an OPEN Convention the SOS of INSANE Federal Spending will keep America on the same crowded track with Greece, and Kalifornia.
There are over 15, 000, 000, 000, 000 reasons why spending more money this year than was taken in during the previous year is an INSANE path to financial destruction.
Neither Obama or Romney have presented a plan to spend our Federal dollars in a non-insane manner.
For example, the GOP Elite have stood in line to endorse Romney, endorse “The Ryan Budget,” and compromise-away every opportunity to reduce Federal Spending.
I included the Ryan Budget, because Rep. Paul Ryan himself says that his “Budget” will balance in 30 YEARS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, I added those exclamation points for your benefit, because both you and I know that Ryan’s budget will NEVER balance, and thus never be a fact. The exclamation points are just for volume emphasis.
Your own personal moral short comings are not my fault.
IF you believe that “ - - - Quitting is un-American, “ THEN will you join with us to DUMP Romney and campaign for an OPEN Convention in Tampa?
Here here. Time to "go Galt" politically. Romney does not deserve our support any more than Obama does. So why support either of them?
The problem with "stellar Dark Horse" candidates is that they often are exposed as being far less than stellar once they are out in the spotlight. That was true about Herman Cain this cycle, and about Fred Thompson last cycle. It is a rare, rare person who can be an effective conservative candidate. Really the last good one we had was Reagan and he spent decades honing his craft, and he achieved the Presidency in a media environment that was in some important ways far less punishing to conservatives than what we have now.
Rep. West is almost completely untested and inexperienced on the national stage. To nominate him when he has built no national following would be the ultimate Hail Mary pass. Conservatives are supposed to be conservative. Nominating the guy who is best known, most proven, and most well connected is the conservative approach.
By your actions here you are supporting Obama. Fact.
Your actions here are indistinguishable from those of someone who wants Obama to win. There is nothing moral about that.
Sorry,I meant in our local neighborhood.
If that's how you wish to interpret, well, I can't stop you. I just hope Romney doesn't disappoint you too much.
That is reality.
That’s delusional, I saw no such thing, but instead Palin’s supporters attempting to destroy Romney. Palin had a strategy, destroy Romney without actually runnning against him. She thought she could take her war to Fox News, but it failed, caused Romney is too smart. I am one of the few who have been an adversary for Palin, while Palin has many of her people attacking Romney constantly. So what you say just isn’t true, instead, it seems like a Saul Alinsky strategy. You can’t get away with that. Palin sent her bots over from conservative4Palin. No such thing was done by Romney. There has been no war by Romney against Palin, unless you consider one lone voice to be a war. But it’s only because someone is telling you the truth. Romney has been very gracious towards Palin, despite her attempts to constantly undermine him and trying to deny him the nomination by calling for his nomination to be overturned at the convention. That is a war, and it failed. Please don’t accuse Romney of the vile actions of Palin. It’s wrong and completely untruthful.
There is no comparision between McCain and Romney. McCain was the true Washington insider, he actually was part of the Estalishment. Romney, as a one term Governor and life long Businessman, is actually outside of the Establishment, despite all the smear Romney Propoganda to the contrary. McCain wasn’t skilled as a Presidential Canididate. He actually didn’t win the nomination by fighting hard for, he made backroom deals with the Establishment and was getting help from Huckabee. But that’s ok, cause I think Romney was just learning the ropes. I don’t really think it was his real goal to actually win that time. He just needed to learn the ropes, so that he could kick ass, without the backroom deals. That’s why Romney is tough, he won by learning to fight. He didn’t do like McCain. He fought for it, he is as tough as he is smart. Why do you think the Palin supporters hate him so bad. Because Romney is that tough. Palin talks tough, but all she has is buzz words. She is the daughter of a teacher, she acts just like it. Cause the educational field is full of people who just do lots of B.S, wiouthout really knowing what they are talking about, it’s called Buzz words. And she uses them so well, cause she’s the daughter of a teacher. It’s a very socialist thing and way to talk. And Palin does it well. But Romney actually understands what he is talking about. That’s why he’s tough. Unlike Palin, who is a fraud. McCain and Romney are nothing alike at all, two completely different animals.
By the way, Romney has never said one bad word about Palin, but Palin has many of her supporters trying to harm Romney politically. Romney has shown a great deal of restraint, he has noticed I am sure. Palin has attempted to undermine Romney on Fox News. Romney has demonstrated tremendous restraint in not falling for her plot. So it is Palin who does what you accuse Romney of. Only a good man could have such self-restraint in the face of such temptation. It is the reason why Romney is the man that he is.