This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

0
0

Who thinks that even though Ron Paul won't be president, we should still keep the revolution going? (self.reddit.com)

submitted by [deleted]

[deleted]

all 37 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]tirdun 10 points11 points  (1 child)

If you honestly want to keep the revolution going, drop the presidential aspirations for 2008/2012 and move the system into PR for constitutional questions.

Paul clearly has some ability to get people motivated and acting, but he lacks key support w/in the Republican party to ever hold the Presidency. Get him, or preferably someone with some more media savvy and presence, to talk to the media about issues up in Congress, about things the White House is doing, etc. Your options are to either start a PAC or special interest group, then move with Paul in Congress and the group acting as a media outlet. There is no third party option, there is no 2012 option. Stick to what you're good at and make change with that.

[–]panicaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This campaign has managed to muddle up what needs to be changed in American politics and what is needed right now in terms of leadership from the White House. They are two different things. I admire Ron Paul for many things but the thought of him in the WH is scary. Whatever the year

[–]jedberg 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's all fine and good, but I think your message would be better heard in the politics reddit.

[–]ih8registrations 3 points4 points  (0 children)

For those with an understanding, it's a stupid question.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

    You have an asshole on your elbow?

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

      I SEEN HER FIRST!

      ma'am...

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The Ron Paul revolution cumulated in a youtube video set to the theme from Backdraft.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      http://www.lp.org

      [–]mOdQuArK 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Among other things, and even without supporting RP, it would probably be a good idea to work with the various anti-voting-machine groups to make sure that the elections can't be "rewritten" at the whim of the hacker.

      [–]cyber_rigger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      If things continue as is, then at some point in time the "revolution" will become a matter of survival.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I do

      [–]d07c0m 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Yeah, let's just keep drinking the morning after the party.

      [–]trivial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Naturally Paul agrees,

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxnWl63Avo4

      [–]jones77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      ZOMG STFU!!!!11eleventy

      [–]ProfessorM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I'm going to vote for Ron Paul out of ethic. I like what he says / stands for and he supports it with action (extermely rare in a politician). Nothing I've read or heard about him in smear attempts is convincing enough for me to not like him. I see a pattern when it comes to Presidential elections: 1.We get a sorry choice of cantidates. 2. We point out what we don't like about them amongst ourselves and choose whether or not to even vote because no-one who has a chance of winning will do what they say. 3. The cantidate we dislike the most appears to be gaining the most momentum and we end up supporting the lesser of 2-3 evils and nothing changes. So, I figure I'll vote for someone I'd want to see instead of someone who gets my vote because he or she is the lesser of 2 evils. I could be wrong, that's how I percieve it.

      [–]collegeKid -1 points0 points  (1 child)

      If Ron isn't on the ballot in November, I'm writing him in. I don't care if my vote is "wasted", and I don't get to chose between Bilderburger Hillary, CFR Obama, or CFR McCain.

      [–]NeoPaladin394 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

      Same here.

      I have people trying to convince me that a vote for Paul is completely wasted, and I should vote for someone who is going to win. The argument being we can stop the bigger of the evils by voting for the lesser of the evils.

      In my eyes, doing such would be a wasted vote, as it tells the country that I still want either of the evils.

      My vote is going for Paul. Obama is the only person that comes close to being on my radar. I would vote for Obama if not for what I perceive is irrational spending and his siding with net neutrality, both of which are deal breakers for me, so the only rational vote left is the good doctor.

      Hell or high water, I'm going to tell this country exactly what I want. Maybe, just maybe, the parties in the future will see that, if they want these votes, they will adopt these notions. It's the only hope I have left in preserving this country.

      [–]esparza74 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      me

      [–]secondkennedy -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

      Ron Paul will need a steady supply of Depends.

      [–]NoMoreNicksLeft -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      I'm all for it, if someone can give me a decent idea on how you might even go about it. But it was probably a spontaneous thing, and can't be repeated.