If you had to choose between Barack Obama and Ron Paul, who would you vote for? Its interesting because I see a lot of hardcore Democrats really being tempted by Ron Pauls anti-imperialist and pro-civil liberties stance while many Republicans may be repulsed by his stance on these issues.
And there are also Conservatives who love his ideas concerning economics, and role of government, while many Liberals find these same ideas horrifying. I think it's safe to say that RP has the broadest range of support amongst all 2012 candidates.
I would vote for just about ANYONE over Obama. The only problem is....the debates. I would have a pained look on my face the entire time, don't think Paul would hold up. Now with Newt? Or even Romney, I would have a pained look on my face for the arrogant lying piece of (*)(*)(*)(*) that is Obama. He would not fair very well up against those two.
Either is likely to be shot if elected, the one by racists, the other by Big Business, so how far does it really matter?
Repub here, voting for RP, first time I've been excited and on board with a repub nominee in, well,Â…forever. If he doesnt get the R nominee Im going Libertarian since thats where the real conservatives seem to be these days.
Is there any other republican nominee that you would consider? Just wondering what your thoughts on the rest of them are, and will you be voting for obama is Paul doen't win the primary?
Ron Paul is my #1 choice for president......... .........Barack Obama is my #310,576,453 choice for president. . . . .
Yes, because there's been a credible threat on Obama's life the last four years he's been office. I'm starting to think you get off on making a complete idiot of yourself. Back to the topic at hand, I'd vote for Paul over Obama any day of the week. If he doesn't get the nomination, which looks like he won't, I'll vote for who ever is running on the libertarian ticket. I'll be (*)(*)(*)(*)ed if I vote for any of the GOP, since they're just as bad as Obama.
I will be writing Paul in if he doesn't get the nom. I simply can't vote for any of the others. Here's my thoughts as to why: Romney: Same as Obama on virtually everything. Supports NDAA, anti-gun, Romneycare, supports the FED, no change on foreign policy and no major spending cuts to start. Same status quo. Newt: He's a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A dedicated Globalist, and has no respect for our Constitution. He wants to strengthen the Patriot Act and greatly increase .gov's power to eavesdrop on Americans. Then there's the fact that he supports and individual mandate on healthcare, no change in foreign policy, supports the FED, no major spending cuts, etc. Santorum: Rick literally scares me. I truly believe he would invade Iran day one and day two set out to setup his version of a theocracy.
Alas, we all wish the stinking process were irrelevant to US. Clear off and no-one will be bothered about your nutty doings.
You're the only one soiling your knickers over what happens in our domestic politics. Spewing your opinions, as if they actually matter. You must suck at your own life so bad, back on your (*)(*)(*)(*)ty little island, that you have nothing better too do than hang on our coattails. Pretty pathetic actually.
What a charming toad! If you kiss it it might turn into a gas chamber! It gives me to wonder, as so often, what is the point of the American right wing, poor vampiric buggers.
Well, it seems you have come to grips with your irrelevance. Since you seem to really have nothing to offer to refute my point, but looking at the majority of your post, you really offer notning anyway. At least you're consistent.
This. I also think the Republican party deserves a major beat down (Obama win) for the next 4 years if they fail to put the right person in and instead let them be told who the nominee will be.
Sides/parties/stances are flipped; Obama looks more like a republican and Paul more like a democrat (contradiction) Because that is exactly how they bring democratic voters (majority of the masses before 'Obama's' change (the change the elite wanted to see) to the other side (note: this 'other side' only exist in the mind of the masses) The republican (and the newly created group, the 'Tea Party' (not as how the Boston TP of 1773 occured, this time caused by the establishment) stay on their side. This is how the system has shift a majority of the masses to one side (to have more votes on the 'winning' presidential candidate, a 'republican/TP'), because a ruling elite wants more power then ever (this political shift and change over the past decade shows that they are seeking more power, rulers always do, they always have a goal, always empire, ruling over the masses) Voting on Obama or Paul will end up in the same sitution nevertheless finally, voting for Obama only means that their goal will only stay away for another four years (four years of more change, even more of the masses in motion and tired and angry, exactly what the establishment/elite want to see, to gain power from a deliberately caused chaotic/confused situation), and voting for Paul means they can bring a majority if the masses behind him (without waiting four years) when the situation starts to better/clear up (same strategy was used in Germany between 1929 en 1940, same political/emotional/psychological game with the German masses/people, this time a hundred times more reinforced y all the propaganda via the(ir) mass media) You can better not give your power to an elite and the people who work for them, 'politicians' (do only exist because you were born in a system caused/masterminded by them, not by the people, all thinking/ideology/terminology comes from them)
