Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks for the brilliant insight really. I think someone should vote for who they want when they vote not be forced into a box somebody else decides. Party, registered or not. Just so you know there are other states that don't do this. Yes you could be undeclared or a registered Dem, or Independent and actually vote for a Republican, there is also a time issue that could come into play. I would predict Romney though, though he fits S FL profile especially.
My point is this. The Republican Party needs to get it's house in order and start representing 'We, the People'. I can't understand why anyone not directly employed by government or the MIC would have a problem with that, but it's obvious that some of you do. Good Lord man, you do realize that the Neocon masses last night booed the Golden Rule? I'm pretty sure that that rule was first spoken of by Christ Himself, which would mean (roughly) that the crowd in Myrtle Beach booed Jesus. Incredible!!
With behavior like that it's no wonder we get ridiculed...
Well what consitutes representing 'we the people' is in the eye of the beholder.Many supporters of president obama feels he is representing them.Many evangelical christians feel that the gingrich/santorum/perry trio would represent them.You feel that way about Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is running for the nomination of the republican party.If enough republicans agree with you he will get the nomination.If he doesn't he wont...its not complicated.If he actually got the nomination most members of the romney/perry/gingrich/santorum fan clubs would support him over obama. Ron Paul is the only one running for the nomination who has a large percentage of supporters who would happily stay home/go third party/or vote for obama just to 'jam a stick in the eye' of whatever candidate did win the nomination if it isn't Ron Paul.Nobody has forced Ron Paul to run as a republican,he has done so knowing that a lot of his ideas are a good fit for the party while others are not.
I like a lot of Ron Pauls ideas myself.I think he goes too far in some areas.I'm not thrilled with any of the others running either.I've followed Ron Paul to some extent since the '88 election.I know that some of you can't fathom that some people can actually read about Ron Paul,listen to him talk,research the issues.....and still not think he is the 'messiah sent from God above to save the United States'.I wouldn't have booed him the other night.......but to equate those that did with boooing Jesus is one of the sillier comments i've read so far.I think Ron Paul is a good guy....hes not Jesus.
Most of his supporters are under 30.I doubt that the republican party is going to be taken over by the youth vote but if you all can pull it off more power to you.
Thanks for the brilliant insight really. I think someone should vote for who they want when they vote not be forced into a box somebody else decides. Party, registered or not. Just so you know there are other states that don't do this. Yes you could be undeclared or a registered Dem, or Independent and actually vote for a Republican, there is also a time issue that could come into play. I would predict Romney though, though he fits S FL profile especially.
I am very much aware all states have their policy on open primaries, versus closed. This doesn't mean I think it should be that way. Give me one reason you should decide who my party chooses as their candidate? Have you thought about how many will vote for someone they think can be defeated? If a person really feels strongly about a particular candidate, take the time to re-register and vote for that person in the primary. We did this once in Ca. We really supported a candidate of the "other" party, we took the time and made the effort to re-register as we would have strongly supported him in the general election. As it turned out he didn't win the primarey anyway.
Ron Paul is running for the nomination of the republican party.If enough republicans agree with you he will get the nomination.If he doesn't he wont...its not complicated. If he actually got the nomination most members of the romney/perry/gingrich/santorum fan clubs would support him over obama. Ron Paul is the only one running for the nomination who has a large percentage of supporters who would happily stay home/go third party/or vote for obama just to 'jam a stick in the eye' of whatever candidate did win the nomination if it isn't Ron Paul
I appreciate your trying to be reasonable, but I disagree with you here, and wonder why you word this the way you did. On the one hand you say that if Paul got the nomination 'most' of the other guys' supporters would back him, but based on what I've seen here at C-D, I have a hard time believing it. The vitriolic attacks on Ron Paul from those folks (kook, crazy, etc.) would lead me to believe that there would be less than enthusiastic support coming from the 'traditional' Republican base.
On the other hand you claim that Paul supporters motivation for NOT supporting a nominee other than Paul would be motivated by the desire to 'jam a stick in the eye' of a different nominee. That conclusion marginalizes what Ron Paul supporters ACTUALLY believe, and presents your opinion of them as the REAL picture. Ron Paul supporters are fed up with the status quo, PERIOD. We've seen our reasonableness in voting for the lesser of 2 evils absolutely betrayed time after time, as the government continues to grow exponentially, and consume our God-given rights at a similar, if not accelerated pace, regardless of who is in charge of the White House.
I am very much aware all states have their policy on open primaries, versus closed. This doesn't mean I think it should be that way. Give me one reason you should decide who my party chooses as their candidate? Have you thought about how many will vote for someone they think can be defeated? If a person really feels strongly about a particular candidate, take the time to re-register and vote for that person in the primary. We did this once in Ca. We really supported a candidate of the "other" party, we took the time and made the effort to re-register as we would have strongly supported him in the general election. As it turned out he didn't win the primarey anyway.
NIta
I just gave you a reason. You are entitled to your opinion, of course. However, I simply do not agree w/ you. I was stating my opinion on the closed primary not asking for voting advice, as it appears you interpreted.
Well what consitutes representing 'we the people' is in the eye of the beholder.Many supporters of president obama feels he is representing them.Many evangelical christians feel that the gingrich/santorum/perry trio would represent them.You feel that way about Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is running for the nomination of the republican party.If enough republicans agree with you he will get the nomination.If he doesn't he wont...its not complicated.If he actually got the nomination most members of the romney/perry/gingrich/santorum fan clubs would support him over obama. Ron Paul is the only one running for the nomination who has a large percentage of supporters who would happily stay home/go third party/or vote for obama just to 'jam a stick in the eye' of whatever candidate did win the nomination if it isn't Ron Paul.Nobody has forced Ron Paul to run as a republican,he has done so knowing that a lot of his ideas are a good fit for the party while others are not.
I like a lot of Ron Pauls ideas myself.I think he goes too far in some areas.I'm not thrilled with any of the others running either.I've followed Ron Paul to some extent since the '88 election.I know that some of you can't fathom that some people can actually read about Ron Paul,listen to him talk,research the issues.....and still not think he is the 'messiah sent from God above to save the United States'.I wouldn't have booed him the other night.......but to equate those that did with boooing Jesus is one of the sillier comments i've read so far.I think Ron Paul is a good guy....hes not Jesus.
Most of his supporters are under 30.I doubt that the republican party is going to be taken over by the youth vote but if you all can pull it off more power to you.
I think it is important to note the poster said NOTHING about comparing RP to Jesus. He was associating the philosophy or ideal represented by the statement, not the person. These kind of misunderstandings really make a mess of things. I would not characterize it the way he did, but I do find it fairly disheartening and a bit bizarre that human beings would boo such a statement.
I think it is important to note the poster said NOTHING about comparing RP to Jesus. He was associating the philosophy or ideal represented by the statement, not the person. These kind of misunderstandings really make a mess of things. I would not characterize it the way he did, but I do find it fairly disheartening and a bit bizarre that human beings would boo such a statement.
Thank you for that reply, I think it's ludicrous for anyone to assume that I was comparing Ron Paul to Jesus, but that's the kind of pig-headedness we're up against. It doesn't really seem to matter what words we use to try and explain things, there are people out there that see any kind of support for Dr. paul as sycophantic, when in all actuality it is those people who are guilty of it by irrationally supporting the same system that has given them nothing but the finger for the past 100 years.
Thank you for that reply, I think it's ludicrous for anyone to assume that I was comparing Ron Paul to Jesus, but that's the kind of pig-headedness we're up against. It doesn't really seem to matter what words we use to try and explain things, there are people out there that see any kind of support for Dr. paul as sycophantic, when in all actuality it is those people who are guilty of it by irrationally supporting the same system that has given them nothing but the finger for the past 100 years.
Well I don't think they were saying you were making the comparisons, but the language in both statements was getting a bit confusing so I simply wanted to clarify that before it became some kind of "people think RP is a messiah" load of hooey. Yes Stockholm Syndrome appears to be alive and well I am sorry to say.
I think it is important to note the poster said NOTHING about comparing RP to Jesus. He was associating the philosophy or ideal represented by the statement, not the person. These kind of misunderstandings really make a mess of things. I would not characterize it the way he did, but I do find it fairly disheartening and a bit bizarre that human beings would boo such a statement.
Well when a person makes a statement like,"I'm pretty sure that that rule was first spoken by Christ himself,which would mean(roughly) that the crowd in Myrtle Beach booed Jesus",it would seem that to many people a comparison of the two is at least infered.......I will agree that it could also be understood in the context in which you framed it.I will also agree that it is bizarre that some would boo Ron Pauls statement and already stated I wouldn't have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think Ron Paul is a good guy....hes not Jesus.
Yes Stockholm Syndrome appears to be alive and well I am sorry to say.
