Presidential Election: 2012

  • Thread starter Omnis
  • 3,780 comments
  • 143,270 views

Omnis

Not Even A Real Mod
Staff Emeritus
38,680
United States
Application hell
MP-Omnis
Ron Paul: He's in.


And since Ron Paul is in the race, I think it's time we create a new thread on the matter. This will be where we can all complain about the garbage the GOP will field. It will be interesting to see where this race goes. To be honest, I think Paul will be the perfect person to unseat Obama. Not sure if anyone else can do it. Actually, I'm pretty sure Obama will be gone, but unless Ron Paul or Gary Johnson gets in there, I'm not sure much will change. It will also be interesting to see what Gary Johnson does with his campaign now that RP's exploratory committee is set up.

If Paul does somehow manage to be the republican nominee, the following race will have been foreseen by the first edition of the Young Americans for Liberty newspaper, Young American Revolution.

ronpaul.jpg
 
Last edited:
Haha. Ron Paul says "Yes" and suddenly the Presidential race has begun. It could have been the day before the election and the race wouldn't have begun until he was on the starting line.

Exposure is what he needs. Simple language is what he needs. Actually, what he needs is to be a little more like Rand. More subdued, more mainstream in appearance, so he doesn't scare away his largest and most stubborn audience, the baby boomers. Rand doesn't ramble as much and makes sense to a lot more people. Whether he's as "hardcore" underneath as Ron is on the surface, I don't know, but the same talk that makes people like us love Ron is what makes everybody else think he's crazy. They don't have nearly enough background and are far too naive to follow his logic. If he's going to win he will need to ignore us a little bit - it's okay, we already know what he's about - and dumb it down to appeal to the people who are, frankly, idiots.
 
Last edited:
Keef
Haha. Ron Paul says "Yes" and suddenly the Presidential race has begun. It could have been the day before the election and the race wouldn't have begun until he was on the starting line.

Lol. I think that no matter who is in office, they can't make things right because of all the corruption in our government. I cant complain though, because moving to another country and starting over would cost a lot and the price of normal expenses would be higher. Also at least we aren't corrupt like nations with dictators.
 
Lol. I think that no matter who is in office, they can't make things right because of all the corruption in our government. I cant complain though, because moving to another country and starting over would cost a lot and the price of normal expenses would be higher. Also at least we aren't corrupt like nations with dictators.
It isn't the president's job to make it right, no matter who is in office. The best he can do is be a figurehead to speak to the country and tell us all like it is. It's sketchy, but seeing as how presidents love to abuse their power, Ron could even abuse his power in a positive way, to shed light on shenanigans, order investigations, use executive orders to repeal previous ones, etc. But if he chooses to lead by example, which is probably what he would do, he can still shed light on everything that is wrong. Having a president more concerned about the people, instead of constantly making excuses for why the government is right, would be hella refreshing.
 
Last edited:
Keef
It isn't the president's job to make it right, no matter who is in office. The best he can do is be a figurehead to speak to the country and tell us all like it is. It's sketchy, but seeing as how presidents love to abuse their power, Ron could even abuse his power in a positive way, to shed light on shenanigans, order investigations, use executive orders to repeal previous ones, etc. But if he chooses to lead by example, which is probably what he would do, he can still shed light on everything that is wrong. Having a president more concerned about the people, instead of constantly making excuses for why the government is right, would be hella refreshing.

True... If you want to know what our government does... Look at the released documents on Wikileaks, it makes our government look bad and they wanna try to try Assange for treason because the documents he released show what our government is actually doing in other parts of the world.

hambone8611
The way I see it Obama is unbeatable, but I look forward to the race it should be a laugh fest

Exactly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The way I see it Obama is unbeatable, but I look forward to the race it should be a laugh fest

Unbeatable if only idiots who haven't been paying attention are voting. The guy is in no way similar to the candidate Obama at all. Then again, Bush was exactly the same and still got reelected. The anti-war movement vanished into thin air (except for the Paul/Kucinich people). Guess lazy jobless young people don't bother protesting against Presidents when they don't have Soros bankrolling them.

Also, Donald Trump is an idiot. I'll puke if I have to listen to this guy in a debate. You know he'll get so much time just because he's a billionaire. Hannity was an asshat to Ron Paul but kissed Trump's ass so much that his lips grew a toupee.
 
If the right cannot find a true leader before to long, were screwed, put simply. I find Trump very appealing but also very repulsive all at the same time. What I like about him though, is the fact that he isn't a politician, he's a businessman. And he knows how to "get things done".
 
The way I see it Obama is unbeatable, but I look forward to the race it should be a laugh fest

Actually, I'm going to go into an self-imposed media blackout while every political action committee gets to hurl mud at anything and everything while simultaneously poking every possible head with a white-hot skewer which claims that the other guy is going to cause you to give up your handgun, pickup truck, job, hard-earned cash, dead grandmother, local park, religion, squeaky sea creatures, abortion rights, and that awesome parking space you once had three years ago.

The first candidate that can successfully navigate a full-fledged campaign without resorting to utter bull:censored: gets my vote, if not a realistic chance at a single percentage point.

Seriously, good luck to Ron Paul.
 
Here's what Adam Kokesh has to say about Donald Trump. Skip to 1 minute in or click this link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvwYQ4BJ70I#t=1m

[youtubehd]IvwYQ4BJ70I#t=1m[/youtubehd]

He also addressed your "He's a businessman and gets things done" comment, Sam48.
 
Last edited:
While I don't really care for Ron Paul on a lot of levels, I think I could live with him being president if he was elected. With all the names being thrown around by the GOP he's definitely the lesser of all the evils. Although with the support he's getting from the Tea Party goons it might hurt his chances among the moderates.

I think Obama has a very good chance of staying in power mainly because the GOP is so divided. Unless they can unite over a candidate they are screwed, which wouldn't really be an issue for me because I, personally, do not want any Republican in charge. This is not to say I want a Democrat or Libertarian either.

If Donald Trump wins by some miracle I would have to try everything in my power to move away from America. I just couldn't take him running this nation and all of the dimwits he'd put in charge. I don't think he has a snowballs chance though, he's more of a novelty candidate, much like Sarah Palin.

What America needs, and who I'd vote for hands down, is a candidate that looks out for the citizens and focuses getting this country back on track. I don't care about bombing a third world nation, I don't care about arguments over planned parenthood, I don't want to argue over whether gays can get married or serve in the military. What I want is an economy that doesn't suck, a healthcare system that works, an environment that isn't being destroyed, and taxes that are reinvested in the nation instead of abroad.
 
Lesser of the evils? That's hilarious.

How is that funny? I don't think Ron Paul is a good candidate at all, however I do think he's the most sound name being thrown around from the GOP camp. If he does win he's at least tolerable for four years. Four years with Donald Trump would be painful.
 
I just don't know how you can describe all of that which you want and then say Ron Paul is a terrible candidate. I sense dissonance there. We don't have to argue though since I know it will be fruitless.
 
I just don't know how you can describe all of that which you want and then say Ron Paul is a terrible candidate. I sense dissonance there. We don't have to argue though since I know it will be fruitless.
Hear that? That's the sound of somebody who has no idea what he's talking about.

Also, Dapper, your post make no sense whatsoever. That wasn't even a good troll. If you're trying to troll you have to make us think you make sense, but that...just doesn't.
 
If America was a person whose lower leg was viciously mauled by a tiger so that it no longer looked like anything, it's president would be the person who could convince the most people that they can complete the impossible task of putting it neatly back together. Whereas Ron Paul, with knife in hand and as certain as a soldier, would do the sensible thing and sever the leg just below the knee.

Maybe 2012 is the year people finally realize that they're going to have to sacrifice the limb!
 
Well, he is a doctor after all. :P

Dre was right. This country needs a doctor.
 
I think Obama has a very good chance of staying in power mainly because the GOP is so divided. Unless they can unite over a candidate they are screwed, which wouldn't really be an issue for me because I, personally, do not want any Republican in charge. This is not to say I want a Democrat or Libertarian either.

The likelihood of Obama being kicked out of office is, at least now, slim to none. Like you mention, the GOP is still far too divided to get behind a single candidate. Furthermore, when you look at them trying to play ball with the budget and are threatening to cut Medicare after "protecting it" last year, they're not winning over many seniors.

As one of the more vocal Obama supporters here, I'll admit that I have not been happy with everything he's done. In fact, there are some things that frustrate me greatly (not ending the Bush tax cuts, Bradley Manning, etc.). But, I can't see myself voting for anyone else. I respect Ron Paul for who he is his stance on certain issues, in fact me may be the most credible challenge to Obama at the moment, but it is very unlikely that I'd choose to put him in office.

If Donald Trump wins by some miracle I would have to try everything in my power to move away from America. I just couldn't take him running this nation and all of the dimwits he'd put in charge. I don't think he has a snowballs chance though, he's more of a novelty candidate, much like Sarah Palin.

So we plan on moving to Vancouver, just in case? Can any of the Aussies fill me in and tell me if they're accepting political asylum seekers?
 
The likelihood of Obama being kicked out of office is, at least now, slim to none. Like you mention, the GOP is still far too divided to get behind a single candidate. Furthermore, when you look at them trying to play ball with the budget and are threatening to cut Medicare after "protecting it" last year, they're not winning over many seniors.

Nobody is threatening to cut Medicare. Also, the GOP aren't going to kick Obama out. Those that will are the people that should be upset with Obama because he's become exactly the opposite of everything he campaigned as, which brings me to my next point...

As one of the more vocal Obama supporters here, I'll admit that I have not been happy with everything he's done. In fact, there are some things that frustrate me greatly (not ending the Bush tax cuts, Bradley Manning, etc.). But, I can't see myself voting for anyone else. I respect Ron Paul for who he is his stance on certain issues, in fact me may be the most credible challenge to Obama at the moment, but it is very unlikely that I'd choose to put him in office.

Why not? Obama was supposed to be the peace candidate in 2008. He was supposed to be the civil liberties democrat guy that would undo all the wrong Bush did. Just when are you Obama supporters going to wake up and smell the coffee? You're delusional if you don't think Obama has become exactly what he campaigned against.

This is why it's been so easy for Rand Paul to stonewall and embarrass the Senate leadership. They are not what people voted for in 2008. The 2008 election was a scam and the power shift turned out to be meaningless.

So far, Ron Paul, and, to an extent, Gary Johnson are the only candidates in the race (because I know nobody from the left is going to challenge Obama) that are bringing to the table the solutions that the democrats have reneged on.

Right now, Rand Paul, Lee, and Graham have a plan in the Senate to fix Medicare and Medicaid, not to cut it. I mean, for god's sakes, you got Lindsey-freaking-Graham working on fixing something, you can get the rest of congress to do it too. If Ron Paul's solutions are set forth as President, however, there may not even need to be a plan considered because they could cover the cost of the baby boomer population discrepancy with all the money that could be saved.

You have to think about this for the election cycle. Right now we have a problem because all the two parties want to do is fight and bicker about who is going to exponentially increase the debt at whatever speed. The point is, whether fast or slow, that debt is still forecast to be skyrocketing for the next decade.

This represents a total failure of leadership. There is no leadership whatsoever on this issue. Not by anyone in power or in a position to do anything about it, anyway. Therefore, the onus is on us to kick anyone out that will not get in there and kick ass right away. Obama had four years and started 2 new wars and made things worse by the trillions. That's enough time for him as far as I'm concerned. I'm not OK with this new trend of giving assholes like Bush and Obama 8 years to screw up. That's a terrible precedent to set.
 
Last edited:
I have a hard time believing that electing someone new will magically solve all our problems, just like I believe that re-electing Obama will produce the same exact outcome(in other words, regardless of who's in the office after the election, we're still screwed).

I really think the problems are more to do with the house and senate as they are too busy doing everything but trying to make the country better(at least it seems that way). Of course there are a few who do try passing actual useful laws, but unfortunately they can't get much done due to idiots that view bi-partisanship as an evil thing.
 
I find Trump very appealing but also very repulsive all at the same time. What I like about him though, is the fact that he isn't a politician, he's a businessman. And he knows how to "get things done".
He also knows how to bankrupt a casino. I don't know how you bankrupt a business where every transaction is rigged to be in your favor, but he did it.

And as a Republican he flip flops more than Romney.

While I don't really care for Ron Paul on a lot of levels, I think I could live with him being president if he was elected. With all the names being thrown around by the GOP he's definitely the lesser of all the evils. Although with the support he's getting from the Tea Party goons it might hurt his chances among the moderates.
People said the same things about Rand Paul too in regard to the tea party and whatnot. Yep, the crazy vocals were out there, yep the media made him out to be some kind of racist, but he still won by a large margin and has, as Jon Stewart put it, been the walkiest of the talkiest, meaning he is actually attempting to do what he said he would do and be the politician he said he would be.

Don't write off anyone just because a loony fringe supports them. If that is all it takes then Obama shouldn't have won either. If you don't remember what I mean Oprah will reprise her Obamagasm for her last episode. And don't forget the people who thought he would pay for their house and car.

I think Obama has a very good chance of staying in power mainly because the GOP is so divided. Unless they can unite over a candidate they are screwed, which wouldn't really be an issue for me because I, personally, do not want any Republican in charge. This is not to say I want a Democrat or Libertarian either.
Green party? Any categorical group you can say most represents you?

What America needs, and who I'd vote for hands down, is a candidate that looks out for the citizens and focuses getting this country back on track.
What kind of policy do you think would achieve these goals?

I have a hard time believing that electing someone new will magically solve all our problems,
And no one here thinks that will happen, but you must start somewhere. Did I believe that having Rand Paul in the Senate would magically change things? Nope, but I did believe he would stir some stuff up, and he has. He's pointed fingers at both parties and started conversations that should be had if we even hope to have a chance of getting things balanced and on a proper track. He creates a problem where heads of agencies being questioned by him can't back up their bad policies by saying it had bipartisan support. When someone tells him someone following the Constitution on something is unprecedented he gives them a glare and shakes his head.

It is a start. True recovery is a long road. The hope is that a Ron Paul presidency will push people to have to think differently, to debate the Constitution vs what is now precedent. When someone tries to argue against Constitutional policy with "well, society doesn't work that way today," they will be faced with the response, "Society isn't working this way."

I know that sounds like a fantasy, but think about the differences between 2007/2008 and today. In 2007 most people did not know who Ron Paul was. He was that crazy guy during primary debates who talked about some insane notion that the housing market was going to crash. Everyone on stage laughed at him for that crazy idea. Sean Hannity mocked him for his doom and gloom attitude and yelled down anyone that tried to say he has a point. Then...it happened. He was right. People took note, enough for him to get a chairmanship on the Financial Services Committee. Suddenly he has oversight of the same people he said to look out for in 2007.

And this is why I hope at least one of the people who ran then run now, like smirking Mitt Romney. I want to see this point brought up in debate and watch anyone who was laughing him off explain themselves and why history hasn't proven Ron Paul to be as crazy as they said. It has proven him to be right.

Now, imagine that same guy gets to be president. He gets 4 years to say these things over and over and tell Congress to straighten up. He will get vetoes overturned, he will get voted down on a thousand things, and he may even lose after four years because he can't get things done and refuses to just make illegal executive orders, but his message will have been heard and an entire generation will see if he is right or wrong over time. If he is right, people will start to push more for his policy ideas. And over time the change will occur. That is how peaceful change happens.
 
Before replying I would like to point out I am not looking for a huge ass debate over things. This is just my opinion on the matter and I'm not saying I'm right, all I'm saying is this is how I see things and how I think.

People said the same things about Rand Paul too in regard to the tea party and whatnot. Yep, the crazy vocals were out there, yep the media made him out to be some kind of racist, but he still won by a large margin and has, as Jon Stewart put it, been the walkiest of the talkiest, meaning he is actually attempting to do what he said he would do and be the politician he said he would be.

Don't write off anyone just because a loony fringe supports them. If that is all it takes then Obama shouldn't have won either. If you don't remember what I mean Oprah will reprise her Obamagasm for her last episode. And don't forget the people who thought he would pay for their house and car.

I'm not writing him off and like I said, I like him the best out of all the GOP names being thrown around. I wouldn't vote for him but I wouldn't hate him being president like I would Trump. Having so much support from the Tea Party though will turn off moderates and moderate Republicans. You also will never sell him to liberals.

My problem with Ron Paul is that he is being made out to be the Messiah, exactly like people did with Obama. He will more then likely fail at delivering on the expectations being put on him whether he wants to or not, unfortunately. Paul could work harder then any president in the history of the country and would be almost certainly stonewalled at every turn by a Congress that likes to have ideological pissing matches and enough red tape to choke several horses.

If and when Paul failed to deliver on everything, it would more than likely further polarize the Republican party and even less would get done.

Green party? Any categorical group you can say most represents you?

I actually don't mind the Green Party. I like a lot of their ideals but a lot of it is based on pure fantasy and would only work on fantasy island.

My political leanings according to the Political Compass are that of a liberal libertarian and are similar to Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. I fit the closest with Denis Kucinich per the compass, but looking at where he stands I only agree with him on about half the issues.

At this time I haven't found a political party that I agree with and that I feel would do a good job with the country. If the election was tomorrow I wouldn't vote because I don't think any of the names I've heard are deserving of it. I don't think Obama should keep his job either since I don't think he has done a good job. I know he was stonewalled by Congress on a lot of things but I think he failed on many things...mainly getting us into another conflict and not getting us out of other ones.

What kind of policy do you think would achieve these goals?

I don't know what the best policies are, all I know is what I would like to see. I want a working economy, I want a healthcare system that work, I want properly funded schools, I want infrastructure that isn't broken/outdated (roads, bridges, water, sewer, power, etc), and I don't want to go to war all the friggen time. I won't mind paying taxes as long as it's reinvested in the nation and it's people instead of pissing it away outside the country.
 
And no one here thinks that will happen, but you must start somewhere.

I was talking more about how the news programs(and to some extent, the general public) are acting, I fully realize that this forum has a much higher intelligence than most of the idiots on TV.
 
I don't know what the best policies are, all I know is what I would like to see. I want a working economy, I want a healthcare system that work, I want properly funded schools, I want infrastructure that isn't broken/outdated (roads, bridges, water, sewer, power, etc), and I don't want to go to war all the friggen time. I won't mind paying taxes as long as it's reinvested in the nation and it's people instead of pissing it away outside the country.
The policy I want enacted is the policy of liberty. As Ron Paul states here on the first page of Liberty Defined, "Liberty means to exercise human rights in any manner a person chooses so long as it does not interfere with the exercise of the rights of others."

Ron thinks I should be able to do whatever I want as long as it doesn't step on your toes, Joey. He thinks that you, Joey, should be able to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't step on my toes.

That sounds like the squarest deal I've ever heard.
 
I would vote for Obama, just because hes black, and he somehow understands the situation in the middle east better than others. I can be a bit afrocentric some times, even if im not black.
 
I would vote for Obama, just because hes black, and he somehow understands the situation in the middle east better than others. I can be a bit afrocentric some times, even if im not black.

Skin color is clearly the best way to decide on the leader of a nation.

I thought all people were equal in your mind, yet here you are favoring genetic lotteries.
 
I'm not writing him off and like I said, I like him the best out of all the GOP names being thrown around. I wouldn't vote for him but I wouldn't hate him being president like I would Trump. Having so much support from the Tea Party though will turn off moderates and moderate Republicans. You also will never sell him to liberals.
The point I was attempting to make, and likely failed to do, is that tea party support has not historically been shown to turn off moderates. The only candidates where the tea party relationship hurt them in 2010 were the ones that acted like the loonier or more racist members. Candidates that presented things from a sensible point of view and avoided birther discussions and other wild conspiracy ideas, but also had tea party support, did well and/or won.

My problem with Ron Paul is that he is being made out to be the Messiah, exactly like people did with Obama. He will more then likely fail at delivering on the expectations being put on him whether he wants to or not, unfortunately.
Fortunately his base supporters are not like that, for the most part, and think of it more as step 1 in heading in the right direction. But yeah, if media grabs hold of his ideas and he grows popular enough to win election I can definitely see the failed expectations thing happening.

It would be interesting to see if someone other than Obama could handle that better, as Obama waited until only a few weeks before the election to say those were unrealistic expectations. By that point it was too late. But I also believe Obama failed to attempt meeting many of his own actual promises on things like foreign policy and the wars and transparency, at least in a way the public could see.

I actually don't mind the Green Party. I like a lot of their ideals but a lot of it is based on pure fantasy and would only work on fantasy island.
I was just curious as I know you seem to have become disillusioned with all of politics over the past few years. I just wondered if you have found anyone you can say best represents you yet.

I don't know what the best policies are, all I know is what I would like to see.
If you don't know what kind of policy would best achieve what you would like to see, then how do you know who to vote for?

Skin color is clearly the best way to decide on the leader of a nation.

I thought all people were equal in your mind, yet here you are favoring genetic lotteries.
troll.jpg
 
Back