Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: Ron Paul
knoxman Joined Thu 06/07/07 Posts: 3655	Sun 01/20/08 06:36 AM
Well who the hell else is there to vote for? Not anyone else that is running is worth it to me. I would rather use my vote for Ron Paul yes! A vote for Ron Raul is throwing your vote away. He will not get enough votes to win. PERIOD If you're not going to vote for a viable cadidate then why even waste your time? You may not like the other candidates but one of them will win. So when the Conventions are over and it is a two horse race, you need to choose the lesser of the two evils, and vote for that person. Not Ron Paul. Mrtxstar: I usually enjoy reading your posts, whether I agree with you or not. As a fellow Cowboys fan, I must respectfully say that your attitude on this issue is what the problem with our voting process is today. In 2000, I voted for Harry Browne (Libertarian). When I announced my decision to my co-workers, they all said that I was wating my vote. I'm wondering, since when is it wasted vote when you're voting for the candidate you think is best. The attitude of saying "Screw it, there's only about 2 from each party that has a chance, I'll vote for one of them" gives the corporate media limitless power to push the most "corporate-friendly" candidates down our collective throats. COME ON, PEOPLE! VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE YOU THINK IS BEST, NOT JUST THE LIMITED CHOICES THE CORPORATE MEDIA TELLS YOU TO! Just an aside--I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul for local dog catcher! Not all indy candidates are good choices (see Ventura, Jesse).

adj4u Joined Sun 04/08/07 Posts: 21254	Sun 01/20/08 06:39 AM
if every one that felt this way I have never exercised my right to vote...simply because it has always been a matter of choosing between the lesser of 2 evils. would write in ron paul then it would be a paul presidency anyone that refuses to vote because of the lesser of two evils is saying --- i'm cool with things the way they are --- if you do not like anyone in the race go write in someone anyone send the message if you do not like a govt for the corp by the corp if you don't vote you do not deserve a (so called) free country cause freedoms are erroding away 'cause of the lesser of two evils theory but hey what do i know

adj4u Joined Sun 04/08/07 Posts: 21254	Sun 01/20/08 06:42 AM
Well who the hell else is there to vote for? Not anyone else that is running is worth it to me. I would rather use my vote for Ron Paul yes! A vote for Ron Raul is throwing your vote away. He will not get enough votes to win. PERIOD If you're not going to vote for a viable cadidate then why even waste your time? You may not like the other candidates but one of them will win. So when the Conventions are over and it is a two horse race, you need to choose the lesser of the two evils, and vote for that person. Not Ron Paul. Mrtxstar: I usually enjoy reading your posts, whether I agree with you or not. As a fellow Cowboys fan, I must respectfully say that your attitude on this issue is what the problem with our voting process is today. In 2000, I voted for Harry Browne (Libertarian). When I announced my decision to my co-workers, they all said that I was wating my vote. I'm wondering, since when is it wasted vote when you're voting for the candidate you think is best. The attitude of saying "Screw it, there's only about 2 from each party that has a chance, I'll vote for one of them" gives the corporate media limitless power to push the most "corporate-friendly" candidates down our collective throats. COME ON, PEOPLE! VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE YOU THINK IS BEST, NOT JUST THE LIMITED CHOICES THE CORPORATE MEDIA TELLS YOU TO! Just an aside--I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul for local dog catcher! Not all indy candidates are good choices (see Ventura, Jesse). this is why there should be a manditory 51% to win and if there are 3 or more runners and none get 51% then there should be a run off between the top two but hey what do i know

CBD Joined Tue 08/28/07 Posts: 1026	Sun 01/20/08 07:12 AM
ron paul He's not electable, but if you want to throw your vote away go a head. As an independent he would be the Ross Perot of 2008.

CBD Joined Tue 08/28/07 Posts: 1026	Sun 01/20/08 07:17 AM
your the problem in this country, politics of fear, dont waste your vote. that is complete garbage, it is called ethos i am glad you were brainwashed from an early age. people dont even realize that they have been played for a 2 party system that keeps the peace. use common sense go for Ron Paul, Libertarion views are the ones that are consistent, economically no government, socially no government

mnhiker Joined Wed 02/14/07 Posts: 3771	Sun 01/20/08 04:52 PM
What I get sick of is how candidates who aren't the current frontrunners get marginalized. Look what happened to Dennis Kucinich. MSNBC effectively shut him out of their debate between Hillary and Obama. I'm going to vote for someone who will stand up to the corporatists, not someone who will just be status quo and do whatever they say. The greedy corporations are ruining this country.

Starsailor2851 Joined Mon 07/02/07 Posts: 1430	Sun 01/20/08 04:56 PM
What I get sick of is how candidates who aren't the current frontrunners get marginalized. Look what happened to Dennis Kucinich. MSNBC effectively shut him out of their debate between Hillary and Obama. I'm going to vote for someone who will stand up to the corporatists, not someone who will just be status quo and do whatever they say. The greedy corporations are ruining this country. Dennis Kuchinach got 5 votes in Nevada, 21,708 in Michigan, and 3,919 in New Hampshire. lol, I think I could get more votes than that.

mnhiker Joined Wed 02/14/07 Posts: 3771	Sun 01/20/08 05:01 PM
That's not the point. The point is that every candidate has the right to debate and air his views. If you think otherwise then you don't value the democratic process and want the corporations and press to control the process. That's not freedom.

Starsailor2851 Joined Mon 07/02/07 Posts: 1430	Sun 01/20/08 05:08 PM
That's not the point. The point is that every candidate has the right to debate and air his views. If you think otherwise then you don't value the democratic process and want the corporations and press to control the process. That's not freedom. Why give airtime to someone who has absolutely no chance in the election, as shown by polls in which give them dismal numbers, and take away from the time from the candidates who are the most popular among the voters? All it does it detract from debating issues and allows the nutjob candidate to wave their arms in the air as they grunt and rant and rave. In today's age the internet has more pull than any live debate anyways. The only reason Ron Paul is surviving with a dismal support base IS SIMPLY because of the internet.

mnhiker Joined Wed 02/14/07 Posts: 3771	Sun 01/20/08 05:09 PM
Just for the record, I am leaning more towards Edwards than Kucinich, but I believe that all candidates in the race have a right to air their platforms. Otherwise, how can voters make informed decisions?

mnhiker Joined Wed 02/14/07 Posts: 3771	Sun 01/20/08 05:11 PM
Well it's obvious you like the status quo and are comfortable voting for the person your handlers want you to vote for. Just be a good little brainwashed clone, go into the voting booth and vote for the one they want you to vote for.

Starsailor2851 Joined Mon 07/02/07 Posts: 1430	Sun 01/20/08 05:19 PM
Just for the record, I am leaning more towards Edwards than Kucinich, but I believe that all candidates in the race have a right to air their platforms. Otherwise, how can voters make informed decisions? The overwhelming majority of voters never make informed decisions, haven't for a VERY long time either. They vote on looks (Presidential appearance or handsomeness), the party, and other really stupid things, never for issues. I'm a Democrat, may shock you, and have voted for more Democrats than Republicans (in local and state), but most do not vote like that. I vote on the person's issues and record. Most, however, do not.

tsw123 Joined Wed 10/10/07 Posts: 380	Sun 01/20/08 05:34 PM
Just for the record, I am leaning more towards Edwards than Kucinich, but I believe that all candidates in the race have a right to air their platforms. Otherwise, how can voters make informed decisions? The overwhelming majority of voters never make informed decisions, haven't for a VERY long time either. They vote on looks (Presidential appearance or handsomeness), the party, and other really stupid things, never for issues. I'm a Democrat, may shock you, and have voted for more Democrats than Republicans (in local and state), but most do not vote like that. I vote on the person's issues and record. Most, however, do not. I agree. I think that relatively few voters make truly informed decisions. They vote on a parties ideals, straight ticket.

mnhiker Joined Wed 02/14/07 Posts: 3771	Sun 01/20/08 06:36 PM
Starsailor, I vote for the person who I think most reflects my values and who I think will be the best person for the job. It doesn't shock me that you're a Democrat, surprises me a little. But I agree with you that people vote based on stupid things. To me, it's not a beauty pageant.

Wonderbread Joined Wed 12/13/06 Posts: 5587	Wed 04/16/08 11:14 PM
lolololololololololololol

gardenforge Joined Tue 01/16/07 Posts: 1322	Thu 04/17/08 01:38 AM
Ron Paul does not have a chance in hell of being elected. Voting for him makes about as much sense as rearranging the furniture on the Titanic. McCain is a conservative liberal, Hillary is a liberal conservative and Obama is just plain scary.

Disaronno Joined Sun 11/04/07 Posts: 679	Thu 04/17/08 04:56 AM
Well who the hell else is there to vote for? Not anyone else that is running is worth it to me. I would rather use my vote for Ron Paul yes! A vote for Ron Raul is throwing your vote away. He will not get enough votes to win. PERIOD If you're not going to vote for a viable cadidate then why even waste your time? You may not like the other candidates but one of them will win. So when the Conventions are over and it is a two horse race, you need to choose the lesser of the two evils, and vote for that person. Not Ron Paul. Because they are excersizing their American obligation. And while I do not support Paul personally - I would welcome a couple "Ron Paul" types to band together, start getting enough votes to seriously challenge our two party system. Sure, he may not have enough today - but look back in history on things like the Anti-Masonic party and they had a definite 'sway factor' Besides....kitten could choose quite a bit worse. LaRouche comes to mind....

hellkitten54 Joined Sun 01/06/08 Posts: 11707	Thu 04/17/08 05:42 AM
Holy cow. My very first post on JSH came back. I still feel the same way about Dr. Paul.

Wonderbread Joined Wed 12/13/06 Posts: 5587	Thu 04/17/08 10:07 AM
Holy cow. My very first post on JSH came back. I still feel the same way about Dr. Paul. I got bored last night. lol.

hellkitten54 Joined Sun 01/06/08 Posts: 11707	Thu 04/17/08 10:36 AM
Holy cow. My very first post on JSH came back. I still feel the same way about Dr. Paul. I got bored last night. lol. I noticed. I got an ivitation to become a part of the libertarian party today in the mail.