The Ron Paul Thread

[Malice]

Thaddeus Russell Plugs AntiWar.com - YouTube

Thaddeus Russell Plugs AntiWar.com - YouTube
Video: click to display

*sniff* I've been so mean to leftists all these years. Let's join hands, you'll be exterminated after our common goals are achieved!

[-SpectraL]

Here's a whole bunch of facts which are already a matter of public record...

Youtu.be

Youtu.be
Video: click to display

!

[mizled]

Does he still have a Gynecology practice?

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Cory

Newt Gingrich has a much, much, much greater chance of winning the GOP nomination then Ron Paul ever had. If Gingrich had won Florida things very well may have turned out differently. Which, by the way, was a dead heat going into it after South Carolina.

Newt had no money, he couldn't have run a national campaign and he knew it from the beginning. He was on a book tour. Besides Romney, Paul has had the greatest support, dollar wise. Neither Newt or Santorum had the funds to continue past the beginning of the voting. They knew it, and I suspect were just red herrings used to create something to talk about besides Paul. Crazy, maybe. Plausible, very.

Ron Paul: There's "No Way" I'm Ready to Endorse Romney - YouTube

Ron Paul: There's "No Way" I'm Ready to Endorse Romney - YouTube
Video: click to display

Mitt Romney doesn't have Ron Paul's support. Publicly, at least.

[Psych]

Ron Paul Can Still Win the Nomination if GOP Delegates Are Free to Vote their Conscience - YouTube

Ron Paul Can Still Win the Nomination if GOP Delegates Are Free to Vote their Conscience - YouTube
Video: click to display

[Tachosomoza]

Ron Paul is not going to be the GOP nominee.

[Malice]

And you're never going to be White.

[ZappaFan]

Originally Posted by Malice

And you're never going to be White.

Dont tell him that.
Dream big Tacho, dream big.

[Tachosomoza]

Damn, and I just bought a giant tub of bleaching cream too.

I guess I can always skin one...

[The Big LeBronowski]

>mfw ron paul will NEVER BECOME PRESIDENT

[Psych]

Originally Posted by The Big LeBronowski

>mfw ron paul will NEVER BECOME PRESIDENT

Maybe not, but people said the same thing about a president who would take orders from the pope, and even a nigger president. So old crazy man doesn't sound so strange now does it?

[The Big LeBronowski]

arn pwol join the revolutsin

[Psych]

ill be ur private captain derp, sir!

[Tachosomoza]

Originally Posted by Psych

Maybe not, but people said the same thing about a president who would take orders from the pope, and even a nigger president. So old crazy man doesn't sound so strange now does it?

So, you're admitting Ron Paul is crazy? And the fact that Kennedy was catholic (they dont take orders from the pope, btw) and Obama is black doesn't have anything to do with their ability to be president. They won their party's nomination and the general election, that's what matters. Ron Paul didn't win shit and won't win shit, so no White House for geriatric cult leader.

[Tachosomoza]

Also, we already had a crazy old guy for president from 1981-1989.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

So, you're admitting Ron Paul is crazy?

That's the common perception of him among the uneducated, yes.

And the fact that Kennedy was catholic (they dont take orders from the pope, btw) and Obama is black doesn't have anything to do with their ability to be president.

That's not what people said before it happened. Newspapers wrote criticisms of Kennedy that he would not be fit to be president because he took orders from the pope. Of course that's not true, but you see how stupid people can believe the nonsense newspapers will write.

They won their party's nomination and the general election, that's what matters. Ron Paul didn't win shit and won't win shit, so no White House for geriatric cult leader.

Hasn't won shit. Yet.

[Tachosomoza]

Won't win shit. Ever.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

Hasn't won shit. Yet.

Well he's clearly not going to win anything this time. So unless you're suggesting Ron Paul is going to run at ~80 years old in 2016, I'm pretty sure his time about to fucking run out.

He's clearly setting the stage for his son; who has already done the politically shrewd move of endorsing Romney. Because Rand has plenty of time, Ron doesn't.

[Malice]

Came across a great critique of Scott Sumner's (NGDP targeting guy) critique of the Austrian explanation of the great depression:

http://mises.org/daily/5826

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Rust

Well he's clearly not going to win anything this time. So unless you're suggesting Ron Paul is going to run at ~80 years old in 2016, I'm pretty sure his time about to fucking run out.

He's clearly setting the stage for his son; who has already done the politically shrewd move of endorsing Romney. Because Rand has plenty of time, Ron doesn't.

I bet Ron lives to be a hundred. He's a healthy teetotaller. So yea, he'll probably run in 2016.

Romney hasn't clinched the republican nomination yet either, don't let the mainstream news fool you.

Paul possibilities persist.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

Also, we already had a crazy old guy for president from 1981-1989.

Yea supposedly one of the great presidents of late. And guess who Reagan endorsed? Ron Paul.

Originally Posted by Ronald Reagan

Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.

'nuff said.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Psych

Yea supposedly one of the great presidents of late. And guess who Reagan endorsed? Ron Paul.

Ronald Reagan never endorsed Ron Paul for President of the United States. You are being disingenuous to advance your point. In today's GOP Reagan would be a "RINO" anyways.

Originally Posted by Psych

Paul possibilities persist.

You spelled "delusions" wrong.

[-SpectraL]

Won't matter when he runs. If they're losing, they'll rig the vote. If rigging the vote doesn't work they'll rewrite the rules. If rewriting the rules doesn't work, they'll use threats and intimidation. If threats and intimidation doesn't work, they'll push the mainstream media for propaganda. If propaganda doesn't work, they'll go back to rigging the vote. It's an endless circle of criminal conspiracy that will never end until man himself is brought to justice.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

I bet Ron lives to be a hundred. He's a healthy teetotaller. So yea, he'll probably run in 2016.

Then he'll have about the same chance as he does now: Zero. Nobody in the U.S. is going to elect a 80 year old man for POTUS (or 84 if Romney wins and he has to run in 2020), no matter how spry he looks. It was in a huge issue when McCain was only ~71 in 2008.

Paul possibilities persist.

[mizled]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

So, you're admitting Ron Paul is crazy? And the fact that Kennedy was catholic (they dont take orders from the pope, btw) and Obama is black doesn't have anything to do with their ability to be president. They won their party's nomination and the general election, that's what matters. Ron Paul didn't win shit and won't win shit, so no White House for geriatric cult leader.

C'mon, be more open minded.
We need an old crazy ass fundamentalist anti semite in the White House.

As a janitor.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Rust

Then he'll have about the same chance as he does now: Zero. Nobody in the U.S. is going to elect a 80 year old man for POTUS (or 84 if Romney wins and he has to run in 2020), no matter how spry he looks. It was in a huge issue when McCain was only ~71 in 2008.

Once again, that's the kinda of thing people said about Reagan when he was 70. Guess what? He won. Is cognitive dissonance starting to eat at you yet?

[Tachosomoza]

Originally Posted by Psych

Yea supposedly one of the great presidents of late. And guess who Reagan endorsed? Ron Paul.

Yeah, if you consider policies that feed the rich and smash the poor "great"...Reagan and his supply side economics is one of the causes of the current day situation. He didn't even run shit, he played the senile old man during Iran Contra and believed in astrology. Shortly after leaving office, he wrote a letter detailing how he had Alzheimer's, even though everybody knew there was something wrong with him when he was in office, and he never fully recovered from being shot. When he died, he didnt even remember being president. Reagan was a tool, a puppet.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

Yeah, if you consider policies that feed the rich and smash the poor "great"...Reagan and his supply side economics is one of the causes of the current day situation.

Yea, I don't think Reagan was great. He was a paid actor. Literally.

Word was if he didn't get the president job he was going to get Hariison Ford's role in Air Force One.

[Tachosomoza]

Originally Posted by Psych

Yea supposedly one of the great presidents of late. And guess who Reagan endorsed? Ron Paul.




'nuff said.

Originally Posted by Psych

Yea, I don't think Reagan was great. He was a paid actor. Literally.

Word was if he didn't get the president job he was going to get Hariison Ford's role in Air Force One.

Psych, you're not the sharpest tool in the box are you?

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

Once again, that's the kinda of thing people said about Reagan when he was 70. Guess what? He won. Is cognitive dissonance starting to eat at you yet?

He was 69. Ron Paul will be 80. There is no cognitive dissonance, you just made my freaking point for me: It was an issue for Reagan, who was 69, why in the world wouldn't be an even bigger issue for Ron Paul who would be 80 at best? Reagan surpassed the problem because he had support. Ron Paul does not; at least not anywhere comparable.

So he would not only more than a decade older, but he'd have a fraction of the support.

[Tachosomoza]

With supporters like Psych, a Canadian who changes positions at the drop of a hat, and Malice, a 4 foot tall anchor baby who lives off SSI and has no marketable skills yet advocates libertarianism, Ron Paul needs no enemies.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

Psych, you're not the sharpest tool in the box are you?

Explain? I said supposedly in my first quote. As in, that's the prevailing opinion with the common folk.

Originally Posted by Rust

He was 69. Ron Paul will be 80. There is no cognitive dissonance, you just made my freaking point for me: It was an issue for Reagan, who was 69, why in the world wouldn't be an even bigger issue for Ron Paul who would be 80 at best? Reagan surpassed the problem because he had support. Ron Paul does not; at least not anywhere comparable.

So he would not only more than a decade older, but he'd have a fraction of the support.

That's what I said, 70.

It's a non-issue with both of them. It's just stupid ass hats like you and the media that try and use the age issue as if it really matters to anyone. It obviously doesn't since Reagan was a senior citizen and Paul has been elected to congress as a senior 10 times. If anything Old people ie the people who vote, can relate to them. So what the fuck you talking about?

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

With supporters like Psych, a Canadian who changes positions at the drop of a hat, and Malice, a 4 foot tall anchor baby who lives off SSI and has no marketable skills yet advocates libertarianism, Ron Paul needs no enemies.

Attack the supporters and not the man's ideas. Good idea. Distraction works for magicians, too.

[Tachosomoza]

Nah, his ideas attack themselves, which is why he has no support. At least Reagan's handlers was manipulative enough to sell his shit and win him two elections, Ronnie the Deuce is just a big ball of stupidity and fail.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

That's what I said, 70.

And he was actually 69, not 70. Thank you. I know you want to shave off that year, but that's not going to happen.

It's a non-issue with both of them. It's just stupid ass hats like you and the media that try and use the age issue as if it really matters to anyone. It obviously doesn't since Reagan was a senior citizen and Paul has been elected to congress as a senior 10 times. If anything Old people ie the people who vote, can relate to them. So what the fuck you talking about?

Bullshit. It is an issue. The data (i.e. not your meaningless opinion) shows it's an issue:



Notice not only the bell curve with a peak at 50-54, but the complete absence of any president older than 70. It matters.

I'm not saying it's philosophically right or wrong (i.e. I'm not saying an old President couldn't be just as good or even better than a younger one), I'm saying it's a statistical fact that the probability of getting elected once you reach that age is tiny. And it gets tinier the older you get.

The facts don't change because you have a hard-on for Ron Paul.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

Attack the supporters and not the man's ideas. Good idea. Distraction works for magicians, too.

Says the man who called me an asshat just a couple of seconds ago. Any other double standards you want let us know about?

[Malice]

The serious fact is that the bulk of the really important things that economics has to teach are things that people would see for themselves if they were willing to see - Frank Knight

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Tachosomoza

he has no support.

Originally Posted by Rust

And he was actually 69, not 70. Thank you. I know you want to shave off that year, but that's not going to happen.

Shut up you anal dick wad. 70 is 69 especially when you consider he was much closer to 70 than 69. So if you want to be an anal tard, he was 69.712, which rounds up to 70. Whichs is an entirely pointless thing to point out. Typical of you to focus on such an meaningless trivia. Anything to win an argument, eh?

Bullshit. It is an issue. The data (i.e. not your meaningless opinion) shows it's an issue:



Notice not only the bell curve with a peak at 50-54, but the complete absence of any president older than 70. It matters.

I'm not saying it's philosophically right or wrong (i.e. I'm not saying an old President couldn't be just as good or even better than a younger one), I'm saying it's a statistical fact that the probability of getting elected once you reach that age is tiny. And it gets tinier the older you get.

The facts don't change because you have a hard-on for Ron Paul.

It doesn't matter and you and the media bring it up under false pretenses. Of course no one over seventy has been elected (yet) because how many people over seventy have even ran, or been alive to run in the first place? If you actually believe that age is the factor people are considering when voting, you're retarded.

Originally Posted by Rust

Says the man who called me an asshat just a couple of seconds ago. Any other double standards you want let us know about?

I attacked your idea while simoultaneously calling you an asshat. So suck it, asshat.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Psych

Shut up you anal dick wad. 70 is 69 especially when you consider he was much closer to 70 than 69. So if you want to be an anal tard, he was 69.712, which rounds up to 70. Whichs is an entirely pointless thing to point out. Typical of you to focus on such an meaningless trivia. Anything to win an argument, eh?

Don't get your panties in bunch. If you really need that 1 year for your point you can have it; your point is awful regardless.

It doesn't matter and you and the media bring it up under false pretenses. Of course no one over seventy has been elected (yet) because how many people over seventy have even ran, or been alive to run in the first place? If you actually believe that age is the factor people are considering when voting, you're retarded.

What false pretenses? I'm stating a statistical fact. One you didn't even deal with. And there's been plenty of Presidential candidates in their 70s. Reagan? McCain? Dole? There has been enough candidates in their 70s that we can tell the probability of being elected is small. Moreover, even if there hadn't been, you can still see the trend in those in their 60's, which is already diminishing. It would be absolutely retarded to conclude that suddenly there would be a spike at 70+ if more candidates were of that age.

Oh, and age is demonstrably a factor when people go to vote with almost 50% saying they are less likely to vote for a candidate in their 70s (let alone in their fucking 80s):

Notably, about half of Americans (48%) say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate in their 70s; just 5% say they would be more likely to vote for someone of that age. By comparison, 8% say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate in their 40s, while 18% say they would be more likely to support such a candidate."

Pew Research Center
http://www.people-press.org/2007/02/...o-high-gear/4/


Moreover, when people are polled about what age a President should be, under 60 is the ideal age:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/FE...L_ELECTION.pdf


You're wrong. Stop grasping at straws because you like Ron Paul. It's pathetic.

[Psych]

Originally Posted by Rust

Don't get your panties in bunch. If you really need that 1 year for your point you can have it; your point is awful regardless.

What false pretenses? I'm stating a statistical fact. One you didn't even deal with.

lol. Age is a non-issue. Unfortunately people such as yourself and the media who just need something to talk about, think it is. It's not.

And there's been plenty of Presidential candidates in their 70s. Reagan? McCain? Dole? There has been enough candidates in their 70s that we can tell the probability of being elected is small.

3? Big sample size there. And McCain won the nomination, even though age is supposedly an important factor. I know he lost to Obama, but no one was going to beat the great black hope.

Moreover, even if there hadn't been, you can still see the trend in those in their 60's, which is already diminishing. It would be absolutely retarded to conclude that suddenly there would be a spike at 70+ if more candidates were of that age.

There wouldn't be a spike, dunce. There would obviously be a couple of 70 year olds if more than a handful ever got the chance to run. If you take the last ten presidents compared to the ten before that, the trend shows that presidents are getting older.

Oh, and age is demonstrably a factor when people go to vote with almost 50% saying they are less likely to vote for a candidate in their 70s (let alone in their fucking 80s):

Notably, about half of Americans (48%) say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate in their 70s; just 5% say they would be more likely to vote for someone of that age. By comparison, 8% say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate in their 40s, while 18% say they would be more likely to support such a candidate."

Pew Research Center
http://www.people-press.org/2007/02/...o-high-gear/4/

Ron Paul, the oldest candidate gets the most votes from the youngest segment of the voters. Age does not matter. People are basing their voting decisions on what they believe to be much more important criteria. Like war, economics, health care, etc. If a candidate appeals to them on that level, they won't give a fuck about the age of the candidate.

Moreover, when people are polled about what age a President should be, under 60 is the ideal age:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/FE...L_ELECTION.pdf

And yet 25% of the 42 presidents have been over 60. Ideal age doesn't mean shit. Age doesn't mean shit. It's bullshit that is not important.

You're wrong. Stop grasping at straws because you like Ron Paul. It's pathetic.

Nice presupposition of me being desperate. Grasping at straws? Really?

Age doesn't matter. Old people are electable. You will just argue any point.