I voted for Ron Paul, Bitchez!

Well I did here in Florida. And I am NOT HAPPY that only 6% - 7% of conservatives / libertarians / Republicans joined me.

Mr. Romney has his work cut out for him to convince people like me that he can make difference.

I feel an "ancona-like" bout of pissed-offed-ness coming on...

Same here....

Who says only 6-7% voted for RP.

"It's enough that people are aware there was an election. What's important is who counts the votes" J. Stalin

An exit poll here, when Ross P was running, showed 45% of the vote for him. They reported, yup, 6-7% - the same they always do for someone not allowed to win.

I only turned on CNN briefly yesterday. I watched maybe 10 minutes of coverage, but I happened to catch when they segued over to a reporter at one of the voting precincts and he had interviewed a couple of people who had just voted (he was relating the stories, they didn't show the actual interviews at this time - maybe they showed them earlier).

The first person the reporter mentioned was a 76 year old man who voted for Ron Paul. The reporter asking him if he felt like he was throwing his vote away "since Ron Paul didn't campaign in the state" (derp). The old man gave him a littany of policy reasons why he supported Paul.

The second person the reporter mentioned was a mother who brought a young child with her. She said that she didn't know who she wanted to vote for, so when she got to the voting booth, her child pointed at a name and that's who she voted for (Romney).

I found that 10 minutes to really encapsulize what's wrong with America today. It's an Idiocracy:

Ron Paul's poltical life is outstanding, and his achievements during this campaign are fantastic. I'm sure he will do very well in the upcoming caucus states. Hopefully he wins Nevada or Maine and gets his momentum back.
Imho as a foreigner, just electing a wonderful president won't be enough, though.
The only way to fix US politics is from the bottom up. Everybody should get involved locally in order to gain control of one county after the other.
Decentralization is a great tool to enhance the impact of an organization and to make it more difficult to coopt it's goals.

it definitely needs to start at the local level.

Ron's sort of black and white take on things - most of which I agree with, mostly gets the young, which this country is demographically challenged in. He needs to get the old, they vote more. And his take on economy, correct as it is - scares the crap out of them on the entitlement front.

I can't count the number of "conservatives" I've talked to whose first response to RP is "if he wins, we're in the 3rd world war immediately". This makes no sense, but I suppose the Becks and Limbaughs are putting that one out there? I don't listen to them so I wouldn't know. And it doesn't even make any sense, his ideas aren't war oriented at all.

A very liberal friend commented on Rush when he lost his hearing due to the opiate addiction he was then talking about having others shot for - "God missed, he was going for the mouth!".
What a hypocrite.

On the other hand, Mitt says very warlike things - like "I'll make the military so strong no one will dare challenge it" - which frankly, is already the case for any rational actor. He's not going to convince the irrational ones - but making sense doesn't seem to matter.

In reality, I can like RP despite not wanting to, say, pull all our guys back from bases in friendly countries (we could surely reduce that some). I see benefits to all from the system there - cross training, friendships forming that will let the militaries of the countries work better together, and of course - we buy a lot of beer and help out their economies in ways like that. But reality - a president can't really do that alone, they are not yet pure autocrats, it would work out just fine I'm sure.

DCFusor said:

...
I can't count the number of "conservatives" I've talked to whose first response to RP is "if he wins, we're in the 3rd world war immediately".

Click to expand...

That is bizarre. Mitt, Newt and Santorum are the ones beating the drums for regime change in Iran and a potential global confrontation with Russia and China (Iran's trading partners and allies).

I believe that Ron captures a disproportionate share of the youth vote because they are more apt to use the internet for news and information than older folk who listen to establishment filters in talk radio and watch cable news.

Good things about Ron Paul as President:

1) As Commander-in-Chief he could bring back many of our troops right away. It's not we're fighting declared wars...

2) Yo, you guys in Congress, override THIS VETO, bitchez!

3) He is gold friendly. He is Constitution friendly. He is personal freedom and liberty friendly.

swissaustrian said:

.. just electing a wonderful president won't be enough, though.
The only way to fix US politics is from the bottom up. Everybody should get involved locally in order to gain control of one county after the other..

Click to expand...

I agree completely. My feelings are that one man, no matter how straight his moral compass is, cannot fix the problems that hundreds of corrupt people have a part in. So what if he's POTUS. They are only one man against an army of lobbied politicians.

From my experience, the real power lives at the place where "who gets to run" is decided - for local, that's the local republican or democratic party organization. It can be quite difficult to "infiltrate" if you're not perceived as a "go along with things" sort.

These people choose who everyone else sees as candidates to vote on. They can be incredibly off-point to what we voters care about, though they do care very much about elect-ability - far more so than policy in many cases. I was involved in the republican one many many years ago for my state, and saw all this from the inside.
Differing opinions had best be kept to one's self in these unless and until you wind up running them, to say the very least. These groups of unelected people are the real power over us all....along with whoever is bringing money to the table. This is how it's ensured that only the "right" people ever get elected from the point of view of some people who probably shouldn't have that power - corps and local "party bosses". By the time someone has been vetted through that process, it matters not so much to either party who wins - as long as it's one or the other of the two party system. They will quickly unite against any threat to that - seen it in person.

Anyone who is perceived as a "traitor" to business as usual within the two party system is united against - and oh yes, guess who checks the vote counts? With a wink and a nod, a third party sort gets votes tossed over the shoulder by either pubs or dems...seen that one too.

This is RP's problem - after all that crap in Iowa about a secret vote count location, 8 precinct's votes just go completely missing? With how many "officials" involved in each one? If you believe that "just happened"...I feel for your understanding (or lack thereof) about how things really work. Paul is a "traitor" to the two party system in their eyes.

DCFusor, all too true re politicians.

Ron Paul somehow got himself elected (there in Klute, TX) a long time ago, but has advanced no further.

Every other politician I can think of has the mentality and habits you describe. The SYSTEM IS against him. And it's not libertarians counting the ballots... I would only give him a, say, 1% probability of being the next POTUS.

But, the more who vote for him, the more the Republican Party "should" listen to him and to make some policy changes that we Tea Party types would like to see (real cuts in spending, smaller .gov, etc.).

Oh, I'm going to vote for him in the primary here certainly. By a fluke, no one but him and Mitt even got on the ballot, and there's now a court case by the others trying to change the rules (they didn't get enough signatures in time), though most of them have dropped out.

But a straight up run between RP and MR should be most entertaining, eh?

I think RP's popularity would skyrocket when going one on one with MR or BO. The plastic drone will more readily be seen as such when compared directly to the morden day founding father.

People who don't like RP often say that even if he gets elected he probably wouldn't be able to save us, and they may very well be right. They say he can't save us because he won't be able to implement his policies (an unintended admission that RP is right on the issues!), but even if we can cut $1T from the budget it year 1, balance it by year 3, bring the troops home, allow real money, and etc. it may actually not be sufficient. The subsequent liquidation of debts, while working in terms of market forces, may be too much to handle for our society. It would be so painful, despite being short lived, that the masses may not allow it to run its course, and that would put us in a very bad place.

dontdeBasemebro said:

I think RP's popularity would skyrocket when going one on one with MR or BO. The plastic drone will more readily be seen as such when compared directly to the morden day founding father.

People who don't like RP often say that even if he gets elected he probably wouldn't be able to save us, and they may very well be right. They say he can't save us because he won't be able to implement his policies (an unintended admission that RP is right on the issues!), but even if we can cut $1T from the budget it year 1, balance it by year 3, bring the troops home, allow real money, and etc. it may actually not be sufficient. The subsequent liquidation of debts, while working in terms of market forces, may be too much to handle for our society. It would be so painful, despite being short lived, that the masses may not allow it to run its course, and that would put us in a very bad place.

Click to expand...

If tshtf during a RP presidency, libertarianism would be blamed for that forever. That's a serious threat imho.
To be honest, I see one scenario under which Ron Paul could have huge success with his policies: After tshtf. Maybe he will be too old then, but those who will follow in his footsteps should assure that a major crisis doesn't end in a call for some kind of authoritarianism.