Ron Paul For President

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to start a thread voicing my support for Ron Paul as President in 2008. I know there is another thread along similar lines, however it is titled Stephen Colbert, and I will allow that thread to stand on it's own merits.

I'll encourage anyone with an open mind to view the video at the following link before posting a response to this thread. I look forward to the active discussion that will follow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA

Thanks for keeping an open mind.

That video is bias speced. Very nice propaganda.

Hi Zaelar,

You are right, it's propaganda, but that doesn't mean what's embedded within isn't fact. I think a bigger question we should ask ourselves is where do we stand on the issues, and is this a man of his integrity?

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

In other words, you can google Ron Paul and find videos from the 1988 election where he stands for the same issues as he does now.

If you think a third party candidate doesn't have a chance, I'd strong encourage you to check out the Wikipedia article on the 1992 US election, and read the section on Ross Perot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1992

I don't like starting political discussions but Ross Perot had the resources to make things happen and all he wound up doing was absorbing votes and swaying the election.

Not to say a third party candidate couldn't get elected.

But Ross didn't exactly get elected or anything close to it and he spent a fortune doing so (not that he couldn't afford it though).

Thanks Xzin for your response,

Ross Perot is a billionaire who funded his own campaign, and he certainly did have an impact on the election. In America I think it's time we have more than "Two" options, especially when those two options don't share the opinion of over 70% of America. All current presidential front-runners have pledged they won't get troops out of Iraq by 2013, and to me that is unacceptable.

One way of looking at it is that Ross Perot "swayed" the election, but what is wrong with that? I personally see democracy at work. Why is there a dichotomy in America and the people receive as the rule rather than the exception only two check boxes to choose from.

It sounds like we both agree Xzin that campaign finance reform is necessary for a fair and legitimate election process. I am going to vote for the candidate who promises to make this happen.

As Douglas Adams once wrote...

Quote:

---

...the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in.

---

Thanks Djarid, great quote!

So, currently, Stephen Colbert supporters are growing. As much as I would love Ron Paul as a presidential candidate, I think getting someone like Colbert elected would shock the heck out of the country, and might get rid of the crap that is most politicking this days. Who knows though?

Just to clarify on my previous post, it's because all it shows is one side of one coin. Saying something like, vote for (whoever), and then linking to a debate between them and other candidates would be better and not just look like shtick.

It's like the people saying google Ron Paul. It should be google Ron Paul and his opponents as well.

This forum seems to have a larger percentage of intelligent people compared to most others I visit so general propaganda isn't going to work as well here.

Politics, by nature, will be filled with both facts and propaganda on all sides. The educated person can distinguish between the two. While largely conservative, I don't subscribe to the theory that social liberals will neccessarily destroy America. I DO believe, though, that socialist experiments, confiscatory taxes and other forms of wealth redistribution will absolutely either destroy us outright or so hamstring our abilities as to knock us out of superpower status.

We'll see how things go over the next 9 months or so. I'm not making any bets this early, regardless of straw polls or what the unabashedly biased American media has to say about candidates.