Posted on 11/30/2007 9:07:21 AM PST by traviskicks
Anybody who votes for Ron Paul, and his frenchified white-flag surrender plan, was never going to vote for any decent Republican anyway.
How will a Paul presidency benefit leftists though? He opposes everything they support, and that's including the war because he's not a pacifist who'll use the military for "peaceful" purposes.
But, if you’re Soros, and you get ONE Rudy or Thompson or Mitt voter to switch to Paul’s song, then that’s as good as a free vote for HER Hitleriness.
But those who are already supporting Rudy or Thompson or Mitt in the primaries and if their guy loses, they're going to support Paul in the general. They're not going to vote for Hillary. Hillary would lose a substantial portion of the independent/liberal vote to Paul.
Didn't say it would.
Withdrawing from Iraq is not surrendering. Thousands of terrorists are dead. Saddam and his sons are dead. Both Iraq and Afghanistan have democratic governments now, and both the Taliban & Al-Quaida are weakened.
How long should we stay there?
was never going to vote for any decent Republican anyway.
So if people support the war, then why haven't Hunter gotten the fundraising and support? Where is it? He's the logical choice for Republicans. Look, the election dynamics have changed. Running on terrorism & promoting big government social conservatism simply isn't going to work in 2008. The GOP needs to work with Paul here instead of attacking him all the time. You want to beat Hillary or not?
Paul supporters will not support the Republican party against Hillary and I will not say anything good about them or their man. He’s not going to win the Republican nomination, so I don’t have face that horrible, horrible, prospect, but he is a Jew-hater, an Israel-basher, a Jihad-boot-licker and an extreme opportunist, with his phony small government big-earmark, stab-our-soldiers-in-the-back isolationism.
Republicans should neither expect nor count on the support of his pumped up gaggle of self-annointed “defenders of the constitution” to win the election against the Beast. We’ll do it because it needs to be done, without their help. Just like our military personnel are doing what needs to be done overseas, without the help of all the whiners, moaners, complainers and liars that fill the halls of congress and the streets of our wonderful country.
No, he can’t take the money for his personal use. However, he could do like Fred Thompson and start some political committee and put one of his kids in charge of it and pay him a big salary for doing practically nothing.
Your insightful, intelligent posts have convinced me of the evil of my ways (supporting Ron Paul), now I think I will renounce being a delegate for Ron Paul in W.V. and vote for Rudy.
Hell can you blame them? The only two worth supporting are Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo. The other candidates are jokes. If Rudy or Huckabee is nominated, I'm writing in Paul's name, and so will millions of other Americans.
He’s not going to win the Republican nomination, so I don’t have face that horrible, horrible, prospect, but he is a Jew-hater, an Israel-basher, a Jihad-boot-licker and an extreme opportunist, with his phony small government big-earmark, stab-our-soldiers-in-the-back isolationism.
ROFL. Nice rant!
Republicans should neither expect nor count on the support of his pumped up gaggle of self-annointed “defenders of the constitution” to win the election against the Beast.
Say hello to President Clinton, 2.0. The new version is scarier than the first. If the GOP doesn't libertarianize and reach out to the independents who oppose the war, whoever's nominated ain't going to win. And the GOP's base of religious conservatives and hawks is dwindling.
We’ll do it because it needs to be done, without their help. Just like our military personnel are doing what needs to be done overseas, without the help of all the whiners, moaners, complainers and liars that fill the halls of congress and the streets of our wonderful country.
We did our jobs over there. There's no need to stay in the Middle East for decades. Keep characterizing folks as a bunch of anti-war kooks and wackos. It may have worked in 2004 but it's not going to work in 2008.
Go Ron, your answer on the North American Union, the United Nations, big Government and Int’l Govt
Getting rid of the Dept of Education, IRS, Dept of Homeland Security, and defending our border and sovereignty is a great message.
Stick with those and your campaign will grow.
North American Union? Manufacturers of tin foil must really love you.
It's impossible to kill every single terrorist in the Middle East. There's always going to be terrorists, it doesn't matter even if you stay there forever or leave immediately.
Both AQ and the Taliban are weakened. They're not going to attack us again.
As long as it takes.
Get a dose of reality and realize that the war is having a direct impact on folks in terms of food and fuel. Fine, you pay for it then.
Maybe it has something to do with his extreme positions on immigration, or do you still insist that the low poll numbers for Hunter, Tancredo, and Paul have nothing do with that?
Actually, Hunter and Tancredo's immigration positions are shared by the majority of Americans. Both support the war. If people support the war, then it's obvious that they should have the support, right?
Paul is also a Congresscritter too and he's just as pro-border security as Hunter & Tancredo are. So why has he taken off in support and they haven't?
I'll support whoever the GOP nominee is except for Rudy. But you'd have to talk to the other Paul supporters. Unfortunately, they don't look at the bigger picture like I do.
Paul has the highest unfavorable rating of any Republican. Many will not support him period. He's simply unelectable. Hillary would steamroll over him.
That skewed poll doesn't mean a thing. Trust me, he'll get the non-moonbat liberal votes from Hillary, libertarians, and the traditional GOP base, including angry locksteppers mad that their RINO ain't the nominee.
So our military should stay and essentially be the equivalent of bug zappers, further being weakened and spent. Nice military strategy there.
As long as we keep taking the fight to them they won't.
There really isn't a "them" anymore. The terrorists have lost. How much longer do you want them to remain?
I see no evidence of this.
Gas and food prices are through the roof and the entitlements are about to collapse. Paul is the only candidate that has the wisdom of recognizing this.
Fred, Rudy, Mitt, McCain, and Huckabee all support the war and are doing better than your boy and the two cellar dwellers. Like I said, it's the anti-immigrant extremism that has sunk their campaigns.
Sure they are, that's why they raised $10.5 million dollars in two months like Paul has, right?
Paul is getting support from anti war liberals. Yet even with that he still is polling in the single digits.
I don't care who supports him, he's not going to change or pander to anyone. I've already debunked that polling crap earlier in the thread.
I'll support Fred and Oven Mitt though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.