Ron Paul Wins Iowa GOP Debate

Exscentric,

Just put Poncho in the killfile and be done with it. Save yourself a lot of aggravation.

 

If I do that will he and Obama get along okay?

 

In any group of 100,000 people Ronnie can bet on having 2000 for him. However, he can never reach the 4000 level. He has a base and that appears to be all he has.

 

I have no doubt that a country that could be tricked into voting for Obama, with his vacant platitudes & ear-tickling class warfare, would shy away from someone who makes as much sense as Dr. Paul.

 

Bachman bought 6000 votes, and got 4800...I think that is a pretty firm loss! :laugh:

 

That is not even CLOSE to the truth. A couple of different organizations did mock up polls, with Republican candidates against Obama. Paul did the best out of all of them. Paul is also the only other candidate that is beloved among younger voters.

 

"Bachman bought 6000 votes, and got 4800.."

If there is meaning in this to me guess you should explain it.

 

Don't recall saying it was an official deal.

I mentioned she won, I was asked for proof, I gave it, and nothing more was on my mind, others have been telling about something I did not comment about nor particularly care about.

She won it no matter what unless someone can show where she did not - I didn't count the votes, just reported the outcome for which I am beginning to regret.

Edit: maybe others should also give proof of their comments, like that she bought so many, that they even buy votes, or that anyone really cares

 

Ummm....she's married.

 

Make that three. I've converted and I'm convinced.
Paul - :thumbs:
Fox News -

 

Originally Posted by poncho
How rare can it be Bro? I mean there's only a couple Ron Paul supporters on this board. Everyone else is in love with the international elitists that've been reducing this country to a police state dictatorship.

Now that just screams for a request for source of information since we are so stuck on that sort of thing.

Not sure facts matter in this thread

 

Heres the deal: Paul has a great chance against Obama, if he can just get past the primary. Establishment Republicans, faced with another 4 years, will vote for him. Here is the deal, though; independents, libertarians, and even anti-war liberals who are disillusioned with Obama, will vote for him. I believe it would be a landslide, in fact, since the 4-6 percent of the vote that goes to the libertarian party candidate in some states, normally, might well go to Paul instead.

What would we get with Paul? No compromise. A balanced budget. The government out of our lives. A TRUE, CONSISTENT, anti abortion candidate, who will actually make it a priority. Defended borders. Troops brought home to guard them. A stronger defense (instead of offense). An end to TSA groping little kids.

Sounds like a GREAT thing...

 

Do a search for the Ron Paul voting record I posted before. He has a weak voting record on pro-life issues, and is chock full of inconsistencies on homosexual rights, medical spending, etc. He is the poster-child for the pseudocon wing of the GOP. http://www.votesmart.org/ is a good place to look, but I've done all the digging in other threads on here. Of course, some never let facts and statistics get in the way of a good myth, so examine these at your own risk.

I wish Rand could teach Ron a thing or two.

 

At the GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate on Sep 17, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what he will do to restore legal protection to the unborn:

“As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there’s a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there’s an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it.”
​

At the GOP YouTube debate in St. Petersburg, Florida, on Nov 28, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what a women would be charged with if abortion becomes illegal and she obtains an abortion anyway:

“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
​

In an Oct. 27, 1999 speech to Congress, Ron Paul said:

“I am strongly pro-life. I think one of the most disastrous rulings of this century was Roe versus Wade. I do believe in the slippery slope theory. I believe that if people are careless and casual about life at the beginning of life, we will be careless and casual about life at the end. Abortion leads to euthanasia. I believe that.”
​

 

Again, give an example. I have pointed out, in the other thread, that even according to the website you quote, Paul's record is extremely consistently pro-life. As far as "homosexual rights," the only thing that Paul has ever said, was that the government needs to get out of the marriage business altogether; that is, that government should not be licensing and officiating marriages in the first place. It is a religious matter, that should be handled between the person and clergy. I agree with him WHOLEHEARTEDLY. The government has no business endorsing any marriage (or charging "fees"); it is a private matter.

 

Ron Paul's pro-life speech in Ames, Iowa, 2011-08-13.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVg1C0PkLI

 

No, I assumed nothing, merely reported something related - that he was second in the vote which you called lies of the media.