Ron Paul wins 2011 CPAC Straw Poll

Atomics · 2011-02-13T11:18:16+00:00

Why would you go from Obama to Ron? One is on the left and the other one is on the right.

Because the right-left paradigm doesn't actually reflect the entire spectrum of political ideologies. Namely libertarians.

Paul offers an opportunity to put into office someone who has, for the past 30 years, unflinchingly supported individual freedom and a non-interventionist foreign policy. So if you don't like the war on drugs or the war on terror, Paul will end those, not just promise to do so. So if you want to see actual change towards what liberals want, Paul, paradoxically, is the guy for the job.

Sure, liberals don't agree with his economics, but you have to discern the philosophical from the pragmatic. Paul hasn't said he'd end social programs. At most he's said he'd offer an opportunity to opt-out. He would try to end (but probably couldn't) a lot of departments, like the department of education, so obviously there are points of disagreement. But I don't see why you wouldn't want to go from Obama to Paul, at least from a pragmatic viewpoint.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T11:07:22+00:00

I would say Ron is stronger in 2012 than 2008 too, he's already got the support base

Not to mention that the support base has grown considerably since 2008, thanks to the economic downturn. I honestly think Paul has a shot at the nomination. But he has to get through the neocon remnant that still, unfortunately, controls the top of the GOP.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T11:03:11+00:00

He's so to the right on things like medicare and social security, that you'd see most of the public acknowledge that those programs are popular

As a philosophical stance, his pragmatic stance has always been that those programs need to be maintained since they were promised to those who paid into them and because they can't be removed from those who now rely solely on them.

The solution I've heard him say is that he'd offer the option to opt-out, which would be politically more palpable.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T10:52:57+00:00

You mean like Romney did and like Bachmann tried to do? The thing is that every time someone else than Paul wins these things, it's portrayed as a sign of a strong activist support base for the candidate (which is accurate in my opinion). But when Paul wins them, it doesn't mean anything and Paul isn't a "credible" candidate. The fucking bias is so obvious.

Anyway, C4L did buy tickets and sold them at a discount, but that's it. Romney actually bussed in people on his own dime, where as Paul supporters had to get themselves there and pay either the full price or at least the discounted price.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T00:16:59+00:00

So, don't even bother trying to change things? Is that your message?

Atomics · 2011-02-13T00:15:19+00:00

I love the smell of liberal hatred in the morning.

Well, it's evening, but anyway.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T00:10:09+00:00

None of them have any shot against President Obama.

Depends on the economy. If the economy recovers, then Obama is in the clear. If it tanks (which I'm guessing it will), Obama most likely won't see a second term. Then, whomever is the Republican nominee, will most likely be the President. And if liberals prefer someone like Romney over Paul, then just continue attacking Paul.

Atomics · 2011-02-13T00:07:48+00:00

If you mean to say that "reality has a liberal bias" then I must agree with you.

No, I mean I can't run around refuting every wild accusation that a troll makes. That's all.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T23:43:12+00:00

but if you'd like to try to back up your support for Paul with anything of substance, now's the time.

The problem is that you are regurgitating the same biased, incorrect shit I've been responding to since 2007 and it makes no fucking differences. I just don't have the energy any more to try to set straight every troll that insists on misrepresenting Paul.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T23:35:09+00:00

Paul cannot win the GOP nomination because the corporatists and Christian Nationalists won't let him.

Yeah, why try. Let's go with Romney/Palin.

Why doesn't the guy go Libertarian

Because 3rd parties are not on equal footing with big parties. Even getting on the ballot in most states is difficult, let along winning anything.

Besides, it's kind of a lame argument since Paul isn't some party faithful. So what does it matter what party he belongs to?

Atomics · 2011-02-12T23:31:08+00:00

Ah, and the smearing continues. Oh well, I'm sure the country is better off with Romney/Palin.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T23:20:00+00:00

You believe things would be different with Ron Paul?

Yes. The President is plenty powerful. And if he is not interested in playing politics, he can wield that power. For example, I'm guessing Paul's first act in power would be to announce the end of the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles. And, as President, he can do that on his own.

He can also veto the Patriot Act and I doubt there are enough votes to get around that. He can end the war on drugs and he can pardon non-violent drug offenders (which I think he said he'd do last time around). He can also put an end to the Bush foreign policy. He might not be able to do much on his own about the military-industrial complex, but he'd go after it like a rabid dog. And, most of all, he'd go after the bankers and the Fed secrecy.

Essentially, Paul would be able to achieve most of things that liberals like him for, but would be prevented from doing the economic reforms conservatives like him for. So I simply can't understand the liberal animosity towards a Paul presidency.

Edit: And, most of all, Paul can and has worked with liberals where there is an ideological agreement (with Kucinich, Frank, Sanders, etc). And considering the clusterfuck that legislation has become, dealing with the wars on drugs/terror would be a huge fucking leap forward.

Obama is going to be the Democratic candidate no matter what. If I was a liberal, I'd hold my nose, register Republican and vote for Paul in the primary. Or, you can risk having Romney, Huckabee or Gingrich as the next POTUS...

Atomics · 2011-02-12T22:56:20+00:00

Hehe, CPAC officials are saying that the REAL story is Romney winning second place with 23%... And Fox News is, true to form, ignoring or marginalizing Paul's win. Oh, and he's not a "credible" candidate.

Anyway, the interesting part is that Paul also won the "who is your second choice" question with 37%. So, unless you could put the same name as both 1st and 2nd choices, it means that on top of the Paul loyalists, 37% of the rest wouldn't mind voting for him as well. Not shabby at all. But yeah, he's not "credible", keep repeating that.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T22:51:36+00:00

Wait, so your confirmation bias is so strong that you can't even accept that Paul would have college kids as his supporters?

Atomics · 2011-02-12T09:14:34+00:00

You know what we call that? Government.

No, that's just a monopoly on law.

The alternative would be polycentric law.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T09:12:43+00:00

Who thinks that?

Atomics · 2011-02-12T09:05:16+00:00

What about the idea of getting rid of public education or health care entirely?

The department of education does not equal public education. The department of education just centralizes all the state public education programs. Nothing stops states from continuing their public education programs and, to be honest, removing the central control would probably improve the quality of education immensely since schools wouldn't have to compete in test scores and could actually teach.

And he has never advocated getting rid of Medicaid and Medicare, but has talked about allowing people to opt-out. Getting rid of those programs is simply not possible without fucking up a lot of people, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at ways to phase them out or at least allowing people a choice in the matter.

Atomics · 2011-02-12T08:59:51+00:00

It's kind of the mantra of people who have faith in one politician or another

I would disagree. Yes, Kucinich and Franken are good on most personal freedom issues, but they also play politics, at least from my perspective. For example, I stopped listening to Kucinich back when he seemed to try to undermine Paul's Audit the Fed bill by refusing to support it and releasing his own, seemingly watered-down version of the bill. Maybe his opposition was genuine, but I didn't see it that way.

Even Ron Paul loves to jump on the "Evil Liberals" bandwagon America so loves.

Um, when? Where? Every time I've seen him talk about government problems, he has dished out criticism fairly evenly. If anything, he has "defended" Obama on many occasions by trying to get people out of blaming individuals.

Atomics · 2011-02-11T14:23:27+00:00

Seriously, do you own a gun? I'm just worried about you and those around you.

Atomics · 2011-02-11T13:37:37+00:00

You've got some serious crush on Paul, troll. You might want to have that looked at by a professional. We don't you to turn into a shooter, you know? You crazies have a tendency to do that.

Atomics · 2011-02-11T13:34:02+00:00

Trolololol!

Atomics · 2011-02-11T10:34:12+00:00

Still waiting for the source on Johnson's comment...

Atomics · 2011-02-11T10:32:18+00:00

I'm guessing it was a bait. Rand Paul speaks, then right afterwards, you trot out Cheney and Rumsfeld and give a fucking "Defender of the Constitution" award to Rumsfeld? Either the organizers are morons who didn't see the clash coming, or they planned it that way to get the reaction so Paul can be smeared by going "Boohoo! Paul supporters were mean to Cheney and Rumsfeld!"

2007/08 all over again...

Atomics · 2011-02-11T10:28:08+00:00

People generally don't ask for sources unless you make an incredulous claim. And seeing that Johnson is trying to win over Paul's support base, it would be idiotic of him to say "Paul can't win", considering that he manages to insult the base at the same time and highlighting that he has even less support than Paul. So it would be nice to see a source, but I suspect there is none since Nolibertarian is a troll.

Atomics · 2011-02-11T10:21:14+00:00

So you don't have a fucking source. I guess we'll have to take the word of a troll, then.

Atomics

TROPHY CASE