Posted on 09/07/2007 8:46:32 AM PDT by PlainOleAmerican
Dear Friends,
We all want to see Ron Paul as the next president of the United States. In order to get there, he will first have to win the Republican nomination. I have seen him state on television that he will not run as a third party candidate, so it is vital that he win the nomination. This article from Wikipedia outlines the Republican primaries schedule.
Why is this important? As alert reader Verbatim writes:
As you may realize, there are many people from across the spectrum planning to support Ron Paul: Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Green Party members, disenfranchised Democrats, and of course the disenfranchised Republicans.
Many of these people may not realize that they NEED to change party affiliations to Republican to vote in the GOP Primary in many States. I think this information is important to get out as is instructions on how to change ones' party affiliation and the DEADLINE for each State. I think this information would be useful on every Ron Paul supporter website in existence, even if it is simply linked to.
Thanks, Verbatim
This is the preliminary schedule...
(Excerpt) Read more at dailypaul.com:80 ...
He is certainly aligned with Demorats!
Perfect!
NO TRUE "CONSTITUTIONALIST" WOULD EVER USE SUCH TACTICS TO MANIPULATE A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC!That's funny, we've been doing it to the 'Rats since I've been on here...
Why are his followers a threat?
One man, one vote. Parties are just coalitions of people. I know what your objection is, that it’s not a “true” change of party. But the reality is that some will be; Paul is wrong on Iraq but he’s right on small government and Constitutional limits on the Federal Government.
Who’s Ron Paul?
Remind me again, there was a certain group of people that Reagan brought over to the party. Started with a D....guess they shouldn’t have gotten involved either...
And this tactic supports the legitimate constitutional process how exactly?
why the ‘dr’ in quotes? I heard he was an M.D.
What does that statement have to do with the comment you're replying to? In any fashion?
Who cares, this whackjob just opens his mouth and people go “whoa”, what a whackjob.
My dieheard liberal relatives emailed me yesterday even saying “this guy sounds 75% Democrat and is a complete nutjob”. For which I had the pleasure of reminding them that they are indicting themselves. :)
You said you were a LIBERAL!
Wow. That’ll get him all the way up to 2%, perhaps...
They may be anti-war, but many of Ron Pauls supporters generally like his SMALLER Government Stances (which would be very much Reaganesque): Mind you I am not a Ron Paul supporter, yet this inacuracy at calling most of his suppoters “anti-American” must be pointed out!
I infact like Tom Tancredo!
Paul Cicero in 08!
Because he might move slow, but he doesnt have to move for anybody.
Actually, I ahve tow points...
1) It all comes down to whether one believes America has a right to defend herself here and aborad or not. Those who think we do, know what we are doing in Iraq and beyond. Those who think we don’t, think we shouldn’t be in Iraq or anywhere else. Ron Paul and his supporters, like Sheehan, Teddy and most liberal Democratic Socialists are on the wrong side of this issue.
2) Ron Paul is also wrong on his notions of smaller less powerful government. Not wrong to desire such things, because these ideas are entirely “conservative”. But the desire alone isn’t enough and that’s where libertarians are wrong.
Supporting or allowing liberal social policies to exist makes it impossible limit or reduce the size and scope of the federal government that must deal with the natural social consequences of liberal social policies.
I have nothing personally against Homosexuals. But my tax dollars would not be going into AIDS research and government would not be involved in AIDS research if a moral society was a bit less carefree with their sexual exploits.
Not to pick on any particualr group, but this was an easy example.
This is where libertarians miss the target. They are right to desire smaller more limited government. But wrong to overlook what causes BIGGER more POWERFUL government reaching further and further into our pockets to fund social programs that wouldn’t be necessary in a socially responsible society.
I would think that GOP leaders would welcome Ron Paul's efforts to expand the party's shrinking base.....that if they don't want a repeat of the 2006 election debacle.
PaleoPaulie: Can't be bothered to defeat our Islamofascist enemies. Can't be bothered to FEDERALLY outlaw abortion since that only involves innocent human lives and not cash Almighty. Can't be bothered to DO almost anything federally other than to lard up appropriations bills with genuinely unconstitutional pork for his constituents knowing that the bill will be passed over his NO vote as he poses for "fiscally responsible" and "constitutionalist" holy pictures. Wow, what a candidate!!!! Throw the little tax-subsidized shrimp on the barbie!
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.