Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Ron Paul in 2012


CitizenX

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 661
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i wonder what the support for ron paul is in the gay community.

If you are insinuating that Paul is against gays, he is not.

He wants the government to get out of the marriage business, he thinks that you shouldn't have to get a marriage license from the government. He wants marriage to go back to the church, the church clearly defines marriage as being between a man and a women.

He doesn't care if gays are together or if they want to create their own type of union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are insinuating that Paul is against gays, he is not.

i wasn't. i was responding to bc2004 and his disapproval of ron paul's looks.

i do understand ron paul's view. he says leave these decisions up to the states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you are telling us what "gays" look like...please keep it up.

is that what i'm telling you or is that how your brain is filtering it?

what do you think of rick perry and his looks? he's handsome in a josh brolin/sean hannity kind of way. *whistle*

What matters is that I get to choose a candidate...and you don't.

what matters to me is that i will continue to comment on the circus also called american politics while you bitch and whine about how i shouldn't because it's not canadian politics... on a canadian political forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is that what i'm telling you or is that how your brain is filtering it?

You voluntarily made such an association...another member called you on it.

what do you think of rick perry and his looks? he's handsome in a josh brolin/sean hannity kind of way. *whistle*

He's OK, but I want to have Mitt Romney's baby!

what matters to me is that i will continue to comment on the circus also called american politics while you bitch and whine about how i shouldn't because it's not canadian politics... on a canadian political forum.

That's fine by me...in the end...your opinion means nothing on the matter. It's fun to remind you of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You voluntarily made such an association...another member called you on it.

you're wrong. he made a different point than you did.

he said:

If you are insinuating that Paul is against gays, he is not.

He's OK, but I want to have Mitt Romney's baby!

you're much cuter when you show your sense of humour.

That's fine by me...in the end...your opinion means nothing on the matter. It's fun to remind you of that.

because your opinion does? it's fun to remind you of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're wrong. he made a different point than you did.

he said:

If you are insinuating that Paul is against gays, he is not.

Yea...I wonder why he posted that?

because your opinion does? it's fun to remind you of that.

No...because I get to vote in the election...and contribute to campaigns...and you don't. But it's OK to watch....doesn't cost you nuthin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea...I wonder why he posted that?

ah. he made a different point than you did. you insinuated that i think ron paul is gay because you said he looks frail and he asked whether i thought ron paul is against gays.

different.

No...because I get to vote in the election...and contribute to campaigns...and you don't. But it's OK to watch....doesn't cost you nuthin'.

your vote will count less towards the elections than if i were to contribute money. money will dictate who you will vote for.

money wins elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ah. he made a different point than you did. you insinuated that i think ron paul is gay because you said he looks frail and he asked whether i thought ron paul is against gays.

different.

You introduced the idea...and now we know why.

your vote will count less towards the elections than if i were to contribute money. money will dictate who you will vote for.

money wins elections.

You cannot legally contribute money directly to a candidate. And you certainly can't vote in the election. But you can yap about it all you want. Money should win elections...it's just like voting!

Despite a recent Supreme Court decision that eases restraints on the use of corporate money in U.S. elections, it is still illegal for a foreign national to make a contribution to a candidate in a federal, state or local election. And the term "foreign national" includes foreign corporations. A "foreign national" is a foreign government, political party, corporation, association or partnership, or a person with foreign citizenship who does not have a green card (permission from the U.S. government to reside here permanently).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot legally contribute money directly to a candidate. And you certainly can't vote in the election. But you can yap about it all you want. Money should win elections...it's just like voting!

money should win elections? nice!

Despite a recent Supreme Court decision that eases restraints on the use of corporate money in U.S. elections, it is still illegal for a foreign national to make a contribution to a candidate in a federal, state or local election. And the term "foreign national" includes foreign corporations. A "foreign national" is a foreign government, political party, corporation, association or partnership, or a person with foreign citizenship who does not have a green card (permission from the U.S. government to reside here permanently).

everyone, including you, know that i, as a foreign national, can find ways to contribute money to candidates running for presidency in the U.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

He is basically as perfect as your gonna get in a politician. His ideas are sold including a non intervention foreign policy, the only candidate which has a plan to cut real money, a trillion dollars in his first year, the other candidates are proposing spending their way out, which is rediculous the debt is already at 15 trillion. The only candidate that follows the U.S. constitution( i think thats important afterall it is the supreme law of the land) His record in the congress is amazing, never voted for a tax increase in his career, never voted for a unbalanced budget, and never voted for a pay raise for himself. Most of these problems that are occuring he has predicted, so we need to take him seriously. The establishment doesn't like him because those people are the ones who are going to be losing out in terms of benefits, which is why the media so bias against him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

He is basically as perfect as your gonna get in a politician. His ideas are sold including a non intervention foreign policy, the only candidate which has a plan to cut real money, a trillion dollars in his first year, the other candidates are proposing spending their way out, which is rediculous the debt is already at 15 trillion. The only candidate that follows the U.S. constitution( i think thats important afterall it is the supreme law of the land) His record in the congress is amazing, never voted for a tax increase in his career, never voted for a unbalanced budget, and never voted for a pay raise for himself. Most of these problems that are occuring he has predicted, so we need to take him seriously. The establishment doesn't like him because those people are the ones who are going to be losing out in terms of benefits, which is why the media so bias against him.

Conjecture aside, none of what you tout will help Mr Paul win the GOP nomination………

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conjecture aside, none of what you tout will help Mr Paul win the GOP nomination………

I have come to expect this from people who haven't done their homework. All of this is on his record in congress, its not hard to view it. Whatever i stated is fact backed up by his votes in congress, and his statements in interviews. One can have a different opinion on foreign policy i guess, but his record there is amazing as well, voting against unconstitutional and unnecessary wars which have turned into a mess. Before commenting you might want to do some research, i might take you more serious next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Derek is doubting the factual parts of what you wrote, so the homework comment doesn't apply.

He's saying that it doesn't matter: Paul won't be elected.

Personally, I think his vision (if it could even pass congress) would be a disaster for many many people, and could destabilize the country as a whole... but I'm Canadian so my opinion should be viewed as that of an interested observer. (This last point will hopefully vaccinate me against an attack of the BC_2004s.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have come to expect this from people who haven't done their homework....

It matters not...Rep. Paul will not be nominated by his own party to be president. So he will be left to run as an independent or accept a VP spot on the ticket if he is very lucky. Ron Paul has run for US president several times only to lose, regardless of his record in Congress. Ross Perot did far better than Ron Paul as an idependent (Reform Party) candidate in 1992, while espousing mostly the same ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It matters not...Rep. Paul will not be nominated by his own party to be president. So he will be left to run as an independent or accept a VP spot on the ticket if he is very lucky. Ron Paul has run for US president several times only to lose, regardless of his record in Congress. Ross Perot did far better than Ron Paul as an idependent (Reform Party) candidate in 1992, while espousing mostly the same ideology.

You may be right on him not being the nominee, but i rather find it annoying when people think your making this stuff up. Look at his record its all there, his record is almost as perfect as you can get in terms of following the constitution and standing up for freedom. The other candidates just cant touch him there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update on the Dr.:

A (Bloomberg) poll released yesterday has Paul in second place in Iowa, one percentage point behind Cain.

A (Bloomberg) poll released today has Paul in second place in New Hampshire.

And a new (PPP) poll has Paul ahead of Obama among independents, 48% to 39%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update on the Dr.:

A (Bloomberg) poll released yesterday has Paul in second place in Iowa, one percentage point behind Cain.

A (Bloomberg) poll released today has Paul in second place in New Hampshire.

And a new (PPP) poll has Paul ahead of Obama among independents, 48% to 39%.

Yep, they ignored him at first .. then gave him some air time .. and now sidelined and ignored again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...