I am disappointed in Ron Paul

I already know I'm going to catch hostile flack from the libertarian nut wing here, but I need to vent a little. Of all the people currently running for president on the GOP side, I am most disappointed (and totally befuddled) by Ron Paul. Here is a man who could have very easily been the next Ronald Reagan, and led a massive broad-based coalition to an easy landslide victory. I believe he had the clout and credentials with the ever-so-important swing voters, and could have parlayed that into one hell of a run. His problem is, he went off the tracks early and has continued to do so at every opportunity. Instead of reeling in the idea that his views might be a little wacky, he doubled down on wacky, and I just don't think mainstream America connects with wacky when it comes to presidents.

For the past decade or more, people have heard of Ron Paul, and have encountered enthusiastic Paul supporters along the way. This election was his chance to finally bend the ear of mainstream voters and take it to the next level. In my opinion, his strategy has to be one of the worst political strategies of all time. I mean, protesting the wars, really? I was not aware that any great massive and overwhelming number of GOP voters were vehemently opposed to military actions abroad, isn't that predominately a left-wing thing? The only reason G.W. Bush was re-elected, was because of voters who supported him on the wars, in spite of objecting to his spending and 'compassionate conservative' fiscal philosophy, which was dubbed 'liberal lite'. The "Anti-War Right" is a very small minority of mostly idiots who think they have smarts. The Pinhead Right!

So now Paul has aligned himself with about 17-18% of the people, who either hold these same wacky views, or don't care what kind of wacky views he has, they are just ready for the 'nuclear option' here, to shake things up. Moderate Anarchists, as it were. Through his liberal-sounding tirades in the debates, he has completely alienated the typical conservative voter out there, and his appeal is to the radicals. What is a shame is, most of mainstream America could have supported Paul's views on fiscal conservative policy and size/scope of government, that's where he totally missed his opportunity to be Reaganesque, in my opinion. Had he emphasized economics more, and stayed away from his foreign policy nuttiness, the result may have been quite different. I think Paul missed his chance at greatness.
 
Ron Paul is a guy with a ton of wacko ideas and a few good ones, not a guy with a ton of good ideas and a few wacko ones.
 
Well, I'll tell ya, Ron Paul is right about the Constitution, declaring war, and the Fed. The problem is when he talks about defense and Islamism. Then he sounds just like the far left and he makes me sick to my stomach.
 
He showed his true self here, a liar and a nasty person, just like most of the libtards here:
When asked by host Jay Leno what he thought of his rivals, Paul shook his head, slowed his voice and said, “she doesn’t like Muslims, she hates them, she wants to go get ‘em” ....

The comment even left the audience and host Jay Leno momentarily stunned.

In reference to Rick Santorum, Paul said he can’t stop talking about “gay people and Muslims.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...p-rivals-says-michele-bachmann-hates-muslims/
 
He's damn right on a couple big ones
War on drugs aka war on our own people generally the poor
Wars in general, obviously he's one of the few not on the take from the military industrial complex - an industry I won't invest in
 
He's damn right on a couple big ones
War on drugs aka war on our own people generally the poor
Wars in general, obviously he's one of the few not on the take from the military industrial complex - an industry I won't invest in


He's right on the legalization of marijuana. But he's not just in favor of marijuana legalization, he's in favor of legalizing all drugs (except birth control). And he was right on the Iraq War, but his anti-war views are so extreme that he doesn't think that the US should not have gotten involved in WWII.

Like I said, he has a few good ideas but most are wacko.
 
He's right on the legalization of marijuana. But he's not just in favor of marijuana legalization, he's in favor of legalizing all drugs (except birth control). And he was right on the Iraq War, but his anti-war views are so extreme that he doesn't think that the US should not have gotten involved in WWII.

Like I said, he has a few good ideas but most are wacko.

He actually said we should not have gotten involved in WWII? He's senile.
 
He's right on the legalization of marijuana. But he's not just in favor of marijuana legalization, he's in favor of legalizing all drugs (except birth control). And he was right on the Iraq War, but his anti-war views are so extreme that he doesn't think that the US should not have gotten involved in WWII.

Like I said, he has a few good ideas but most are wacko.

Dungheap, not a gotcha question just curious. Of the wars the U.S. has been involved in post WWII which ones, if any, did you support?
 
Dungheap, not a gotcha question just curious. Of the wars the U.S. has been involved in post WWII which ones, if any, did you support?


Most recently, Afghanistan.

And to clarify, Ron Paul said we should not have gotten involved in the war in Europe. I do not know where he stands on the war in the Pacific or if he is wacky enough to think that the bombing of Pearl Harbor did not justify war against Japan.
 
Most recently, Afghanistan.

And to clarify, Ron Paul said we should not have gotten involved in the war in Europe. I do not know where he stands on the war in the Pacific or if he is wacky enough to think that the bombing of Pearl Harbor did not justify war against Japan.

What are/were your thoughts on Korea, First Gulf war? I'm going to assume no on Vietnam and Iraq.
 
Most recently, Afghanistan.

And to clarify, Ron Paul said we should not have gotten involved in the war in Europe. I do not know where he stands on the war in the Pacific or if he is wacky enough to think that the bombing of Pearl Harbor did not justify war against Japan.

If it had not been for the USA supplying both Britain and Russia, Hitler would have won. The USA was not feared when he began his march because a lot of people were isolationists after WWI.

Ron Paul would allow tyrants to just run the world. If a person thinks that America can survive as the only free nation in a world of tyrants is either senile, ignorant, nuts, or a combination of all three.
 
Back
Top