Ron Paul has not dropped out got it?

I'm not trying to be clever. It would be the easiest thing in the world for you to just type a name, so why won't you do it?

 

That's the stupidest thing ever. We should just keep voting for the corrupt ones because the honest ones will never get elected. The honest ones dont get elected because people like you keep voting for the corrupt ones and sending everyone a message that if you are corrupt, only then you will be elected. If you are honest, you don't have a chance.

Ever heard of self fulfilling prophecy?

 

The stupidest thing is voting for an empty talking dufus that cannot get 10% of the vote.

The 2 party system works. Truman was excellent, Ike was excellent, Reagan was excellent, Kennedy was good, Clinton was good. That's 2 R's and 3 D's that were good to excellent.

The problem is not the 2 party system. The problem is that most times we only get to pick one politician or the other.

And when they are just politicians, their ONLY interest is self interest, not the country. obama is strictly a self interested politician. Paul is strictly a self interested politician. Will we see what Romney turns out to be when he is elected.

 

No matter which party you vote for, they are both controlled by the big corporations so you are screwed either way. Whether you vote for Obama or Romney or anyone else from that party, it doesn't make a difference. They know they can only succeed if they side with the big corporations. Paul is no angel but is certainly far better than the rest. The fact that he has few friends in either party shows that he is not as corrupt as the rest of them.

He only got 10% votes because idiots like yourself insist on backing the same corrupt ones who tow the party line. He failed because the powers that be wanted him to fail and made sure via the media coverage that he did.

 

So you finally have faced reality and now know Paul lost BIG, as usual.

 

Iknew from day 1 that he would win. Doesn't mean one shouldn't vote for him. Do you only vote so that you can gloat that you voted for the winning party?

 

it would be easy wouldn't it ? You sure are on to something.

 

well, ......if you want to be a mindless drone, .......yes.

 

WHAT, other than totally wasting your vote, does voting for anyone that has no chance, DO? It accomplishes NOTHING! Just as Paul accomplished NOTHING.

We live in a Democracy, meaning that we MUST work together. So I vote for the person, THAT CAN WIN, that is most likely to work with the other party to accomplish that.

We have a system. The system is NOT the problem, individual politicians are the problem. Paul was an empty talking career politician that NEVER accomplished ANYTHING positive for the nation. His minuscule accomplishments were pure pork for his home district. In potential presidents from this year, Paul would finish ahead of obama, ONLY! He'd be a worse choice than Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Cain, Huntsman, and others..
Voting for a 3rd party loser is as dumb as one can treat their vote. It is exactly the same as not voting at all AND it IS a positive for the most evil choice.
You claim we have 3 choices, the greater evil, the lesser evil, and the loser, NO chance, Paul. A vote for the loser, NO chance, Paul is GOOD for the greater evil. That's all it does. And to do that is blatantly stupid.
I see this vote as the need to remove a totally incompetent clown from an office he was never equipped to hold. Romney and Gingrich are both much more qualified to hold the office. That is not saying they'd be great presidents but we know the b.o. is terrible and WILL NOT improve. He doesn't have the talent to improve.
Paul is and always was, meaningless nonsense that should not have run in 88,08, or 12. He never had a chance but our system allows him to be a stupid distraction.

 

A protest vote , such as for a third party candidate, is a sensible valid option. It serves, if nothing else, as a measure of discontent with the choices, but it may do more than that.

In 1992, I voted for Perot. He got about 20% of the vote. Clinton won. That 20% that went to Perot certainly cost Bush Sr. the election. Can't say I'm unhappy about that, given the choices. I would have preferred for Perot to win, but between Clinton and Bush, Clinton was certainly the lesser of 2 evils.

I have never voted for a Democrat, but I won't vote for a man just because of an 'R' next to his name. This time out, I'll be voting for Johnson if Ron Paul is not on the ballot. Hell will freeze over before I vote for Romney.

I'm supposing you're a Romney supporter. Why not start a thread making the case FOR Romney if he's so much better than Obama rather than waste time on Ron Paul threads? He's a loser, right? So go ahead and make a case for Romney and see if it stands up to scrutiny.

 

Electing a corporatist whore is certainly not a waste. Congratulations on your success.

 

his logic is hysterical that Romney is so much better.hahahahahahaahahaaa a guy who whos camp committed vote fraud for him in this election.

 

It's ironic that you constantly insult others for electing corporatists while you also vote for corporatist candidates.

 

Your supposition is as all your other positions, completely wrong. Romney wasn't even my second choice. obama must, for the good of the nation, be defeated. Romney now stands the best, and ONLY chance to defeat obama.

Johnson will get more votes than the do nothing Paul. Most Paulobots will vote for obama out of a childish snit.

 

I'm not supposing wrong at all. You go on and on about beating Obama and how you have to vote for a winner. Romney's your guy....so make the case for him.

Or, admit that you really only want to bash Ron Paul...the loser...the guy that never had a chance...do nothing Paul.

Hey, anything's better than trying to defend Romney, though....right?

 

that's an awfully big word, are you sure you know what it means ?

 

Nice. Demeaning insults. You think that kind of crass behavior erases your hypocrisy?

 

hypocrisy, that's funny coming from the newb who shows up parading as a progressive unwilling vote for Obama.
Don't look now, but very few are believing you.

 

If you're right, and nobody believes me, how does it matter? Do I need to show documentation that people on the internet believe me before I cast a vote for a candidate?

You try to demean anyone who refuses to remain within the confines of the two party system, and that's a very old shtick. You're not doing anything that independent thinkers haven't encountered in the past.

 

giggles, you are so cute.

 

Go ahead and keep belittling those who disagree with you. Freeminded individuals tend to also have thick skin, so you'll find it doesn't really bother us.

 

The same could be said about imbeciles.

 

It's pretty easy to get a rise out of imbeciles.

 

I'll take your word for that bit of advice.

 

How foolish and blind can one person be? Paul wore out a seat in Congress accomplishing absolutely nothing in 30 years of sprouting BS.

obama is breaking the country and very likely has "led" us into another recession. [If 2nd qtr GDP is again lower, and it looks like it WILL be, that signals a NEW recession]

And Romney. SUCCESSFUL Olympic chief.
SUCCESSFUL businessman.
SUCCESSFUL Governor.
But not an exciting personality. You like exciting personalities that lie to you so you can avoid the reality YOU brought on yourself. Knock yourself out. I like people that get things done. That eliminates b.o. and Paul.
Will Romney be good? Don't know.

Do know that both obama and Paul would be bad.