• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The One and Only Official CEP Ron Paul Thread

yummy22 said:
Diebold voting machines will be used at the Ames Straw Poll. :\
Click to expand...



That's reassuring!

No matter what the outcome, the response will be "It was RIGGED!!"

Either the Ron Paul fanatics rigged the machines, or "THEY" rigged it against Ron Paul.

I mean... all his supporters are geeky internet freaks - how hard would it be for the media to push one of them hacking the machines?
 
I went to a speech of his last night. At the end his campaign manager said something about electronic voting while rolling eyes.

He does seem to have a great deal of support in Iowa. His meetings are consistently packed. Whether or not this will translate into votes remains to be seen.
 
Paul's strong grass-roots support of Paul reminds of the Howard Dean campaign in 04, how far might he have gone, had he not shouted "HYYAAAAAAA!"
 
Ron Paul Quietly Converting GOP Believers

John Fout
The Street.com
Thursday, August 9, 2007

Why haven't conservatives leaders embraced their own ideals and come out to support Ron Paul in public?

I pondered this issue in an article in June. I saw Paul as the one second-tier candidate who might have a chance of a breakout from the pack. It turns out I might have got it right. He has remained the most popular GOP candidate on the Internet. This genuine outpouring of support is rivaled only by that for Barack Obama.

Paul remains low in the polls, but his fund-raising suggests he has moved into a separate tier not shared by other small candidates. His campaign has $2.4 million on hand -- more than that of Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.). I spoke with Jesse Benton, Paul's communications director, and he says funding continues to be positive for this quarter.

The other second-tier GOP candidates need to do well in the Iowa Ames Straw Poll to stay in the race. Paul does not. His money and popularity over the Internet have separated him from the others.

Paul's campaign recently scheduled several last-minute events in South Carolina with a few days notice. They drew 450 people at one and over 1,000 at another. Front-runner Rudy Giuliani would love to draw those kinds of crowds.

So Paul has gotten support. Sometimes, his supporters don't always agree. A recent New York Times Magazine piece excerpted the following from a supporter's letter to Paul headquarters:
We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country. And in a Ron Paul Meetup many people will consider each other "wackos" for their beliefs whether that is simply because they're liberal, conspiracy theorists, neo-Nazis, evangelical Christian, etc. ... We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next "Star Trek" convention or whatever.

The New York Times piece, nevertheless, demonstrates that Paul's support is genuine.

Then, the National Review Online jumped into the Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) debate last week. It seems that NRO feels conflicted about supporting Paul for president, as do many conservatives.

First, John Derbyshire wrote glowingly about all of the conservative credentials of Paul. Derbyshire's final conclusion, however, was that he could not embrace his own dreams and ideals:
Ain't gonna happen. It was, after all, a conservative who said that politics is the art of the possible. Ron Paul is not possible. His candidacy belongs to the realm of dreams, not practical politics. But, oh, what sweet dreams!

Then Todd Seavey came to Paul's defense a day later. He sees Paul as the perfect fusion candidate to bring together the fiscal and social conservatives:
Presto! The much-lamented divide between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives, which has seemed to be widening lately, is eliminated. As has oft been said, Republicans tend to fare best when they pursue the program (pioneered by National Review and praised last year by Ryan Sager in his book Elephant in the Room) called "fusionism," yoking together social conservatism and the libertarian desire to shrink government.

Paul's positions are also genuine. He has a very consistent voting record, so much so that it occasionally puts him in hot water in his own district. But his ability to stay on message will get him support from an important corner of the Republican Party -- the evangelicals.

The evangelicals in the GOP have experienced fatigue over the last few years. They have heard quite a few promises from Washington but have had precious few real victories to celebrate. How long can they put up with the pandering from the top tier candidates like Giuliani (pro-choice), Mitt Romney (a flip-flopper), and Fred Thompson (a lobbyist).

Paul has always been pro-life. He was also an original supporter of Ronald Reagan in 1976 against Gerald Ford. But you won't hear him discussing his views on religion in public. He's a firm believer in the Constitution and the separation between church and state.

So what is stopping conservatives from coming out and supporting Ron Paul in public? I return to Derbyshire's piece:
If Washington, D.C. were the drowsy southern town that Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge rode into, Ron Paul would have a chance. Washington's not like that nowadays, though. It is a vast megalopolis, every nook and cranny stuffed with lobbyists, lawyers, and a hundred thousand species of tax-eater.

Derbyshire basically admits to all of the foibles that have damaged the Republicans over the last seven years -- the lobbyists and scandals. Conservatives have gone from a party of ideals to a party of money, power brokering and winning at all costs.

Unfortunately for the GOP, it has caught up with them. They lost soundly in 2006 and may well repeat it in 2008. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) didn't help their cause last week with another ethics scandal. He's also the senator responsible for an earmark for the "bridge to nowhere."

So why not take a chance on Ron Paul? Even if you can't win, at least conservatives would feel good that they did the right thing by cleaning house. Besides, the last time a conservative got drubbed in a presidential election was Barry Goldwater in 1964. His loss did lead conservatives to their greatest win -- Ronald Reagan.

http://www.thestreet.com/pf/markets/marketfeatures/10372302.html
 
Ron Paul Presidential Odds

Gambling 9/11
Thursday, August 9, 2007

In a nutshell, popularity for 2008 Presidential candidate Ron Paul is massive. In fact, articles on Dr. Paul featured at Gambling911.com now rank among the most read. Nearly 10,000 unique views were registered for Ron Paul-related articles on a single day, August 8. Gambling911.com pieces are frequently picked up by dozens of websites across the Net that focus on Ron Paul's campaign. With this type of popularity, it should come as no surprise that Sportsbook.com would reduce Ron Paul's odds from 200 to 1 to 8 to 1 in just a three month period. Six months ago, Dr. Paul was not on Sportsbook.com's Presidential Odds menu.

Following a Republican debate on August 5, Ron Paul enjoyed some of his most extensive mainstream press exposure yet. An ABC news poll had Paul winning that debate.

While it can be argued that most of Ron Paul's buzz is being generated over the Net and that those living outside the Web may not know much about him, it can also be said that these same people not familiar with Paul probably know little of the bigger name candidates either. It's just too early in the race.

http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-Presidential-Odds-080907.html
 
While it can be argued that most of Ron Paul's buzz is being generated over the Net and that those living outside the Web may not know much about him, it can also be said that these same people not familiar with Paul probably know little of the bigger name candidates either. It's just too early in the race
Click to expand...

I personally knew many not-wired people who were in fact all-about Howard Dean in early 2004. People talk, and those polls are not at all reliable imo.
 
The Alabama and New Hampshire Straw Poll Results

Alabama Straw Poll Results

Ron Paul - 216 (81% )
Tom Tancredo - 0 (0% )
Sam Brownback - 2 (.75% )
John McCain - 2 (.75% )
Mike Huckabee - 6 (2% )
Rudy Giuliani - 7 (3% )
Fred Thompson - 9 (3% )
Duncan Hunter - 10 (4% )
Mitt Romney - 14 (5% )



New Hampshire Straw Poll Results

Ron Paul - 208 (73% )
Mitt Romney - 26
Mike Huckabee - 20
Tom Tancredo - 8
John McCain - 7
Cox - 5
Duncan Hunter - 5
Fred Thompson - 3
Rudy Giuliani - 3
Sam Brownback - 1


Ron Paul Also Wins Big in New Hampshire

Ron Paul won big earlier today in Alabama. He also won big in New Hampshire this afternoon.

Dr. Paul received 208 votes (73% ) for a landslide victory against Mitt Romney today at the Strafford County, New Hampshire straw poll. Romney received 26 votes. Mike Huckabee came in third with 20 votes.

Tancredo (8 votes), McCain (7 votes), Cox (5 votes), Hunter (5 votes), Thompson (5 votes), Giuliani (3 votes) and Brownback (1 vote) finished the field.

As noted earlier, Ron Paul received 216 votes for a commanding first-place finish in a straw poll today sponsored by the West Alabama Republican Assembly. Mitt Romney came in second with 14 votes.

The poll was open to Alabama residents.

http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/08/ron-paul-also-w.html
Click to expand...


WTF? No Diebold machines I guess... ;)


ronpaulrace_dees.jpg
 
Last edited:
High Risk Credit

by Ron Paul

August 20, 2007

As markets went on a rollercoaster ride last week, our economy is coming close to a day of reckoning for loose credit policies being followed by the Federal Reserve Bank. Simply, foreign banks we have been relying on to buy our debt are waking up to the reality of much higher default rates than predicted, and many mortgage backed securities have been reduced to “junk” ratings. Wall Street fears the possibility of tightening credit and the tightening of America’s belts. Why, they say, “if Americans spend only what they can afford, think of the ripple effects throughout the economy!” This is the cry, as the call comes for the fed to cut rates and bail out companies in trouble.

More inflation is, however, never the answer to inflation.

The truth is that business involves risk, and businesses that miscalculate risk should be liquidated, so their assets can be reallocated to businesses that correctly judge risk and make profits. Instead, the Fed has injected $64 billion into the jittery markets, effectively amounting to a bailout that keeps these malinvestments afloat, but eventually they will become the undoing of our economy.

In addition to the negative reactions in financial markets, many Americans have taken on too much personal debt owing to exotic mortgage products and artificially low interest rates. Unfortunately, these families are now in the position of losing their homes in unprecedented numbers as the teaser rates expire and the real bills are coming due.

The real answers are, and always have been, found in the principles of the free market. Let the market set the interest rates. If we had been functioning under a true and transparent free market system, we would not be in the mess we are in today. Government, like the American household, needs to live within its means to get back on stable fiscal ground.

We’ve been headed in the wrong direction since 1971. This week marks the 36th anniversary of Nixon’s decision to close the gold window, which convinced me to seek public office to call attention to the runaway money train that would come in the aftermath of that decision. The temptation to print and spend money with impunity, like the temptation to max out lines of credit, is too strong to for government to resist. While Nixon brokered exclusivity deals with OPEC to prop up demand for the tidal wave of green pieces of paper the Fed pumped into the markets, the world is tiring of marching to the beat of our drum in order to secure their energy needs. The house of cards Nixon built is now on the verge of collapsing on our heads, and on our children’s heads.

As the dollar weakens, it becomes ever clearer that we need a return to sound, commodity-based money for a secure future, money based on real value, not empty promises and secretive backroom machinations is the way to get out of the current calamity without causing even bigger problems.

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst082007.htm
 
m885 said:
Ron Paul's internet supporters never fail to crash and skew a poll.
Click to expand...

m885, what about Dennis Kucinich's supporters? They're "crashing and skewing" all the Democratic polls now.

Paul and Kucinich aren't the establishment candidates, so if they're winning online polls, straw polls (Paul won the NH straw poll the other day), etc. that must mean the polls are invalid right?
 
^^ Well, Kucinich doesn't have the same kind of support Paul does. Clinton and Obama are dominating on the Democratic side, while the Giuliani and Romney campaigns have all but stalled out in winning over the public.
 
it's early days...no doubt that a lead this early will be impossible to maintain..things will get shaken up.....even just a month is an incredbily long time in politics.
 
mulberryman did you miss my point? The point is that the traditional media is censoring and ignoring all their online polls about the candidates and continue to report Obama & Clinton and Giuliani & Romney as the top tier candidates. m885 is a corporate apologist and he's downplaying the significance of Internet support, acting as if Internet savvy, politically motivated citizens are nutjobs and the majority of American voters who haven't read a book since high school, don't know any of the candidate's positions, and don't even know the facts about the Iraq war are the ones whose opinions really matter.

When asked to decide which candidate they support by answering questions about their stances on each issue, instead of based on name recognition I'm fairly sure the majority of Americans would find out that they should support Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, or Dennis Kucinich. The fact that most voters have been misinformed by the traditional media for propaganda purposes is what leads to Obama & Hillary having any credibility.

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/...rity-of-americans-agree-with-dennis-kucinich/
 
^^ I agree, but unfortunatle the majortiy of Americans either don't use the internet, or use it only for games and porn. Many people that I have talked to in the real world only know Hillary, because Bill was president, and don't even know who Guiliani or Obama are, much less Kucinich or Ron Paul.
 
I like the caption at the end of paqrt 3 of that video:

As host, Morton Downy Jr spend much time lecturing about the evils of drug use... while chain-smoking cigarettes

He died of lung cancer on March 12, 2001.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top