Is Ron Paul electable?

[Scrumdiddles]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=h0qVbVwYo3g Edited May 4, 2012 by Scrumdiddles

[Scrumdiddles]

Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking or circular logic), is a logical fallacy in which "the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with".^[1] A circular argument will always be logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, and will not lack relevance. Circular logic cannot prove a conclusion because, if the conclusion it doubted, the premise which leads to it will also be doubted.^[2]

So you say you would vote for ron paul if he is electable?

[Linda]

Scrumdiddles...if only everyone who is anti BO would vote against him it could make a world of difference...

Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking or circular logic), is a logical fallacy in which "the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with".^[1] A circular argument will always be logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, and will not lack relevance. Circular logic cannot prove a conclusion because, if the conclusion it doubted, the premise which leads to it will also be doubted.^[2]

So you say you would vote for ron paul if he is electable?

sounds a lot like 'situational ethics' if you think about it...that doesn't work either....

[Scrumdiddles]

Scrumdiddles...if only everyone who is anti BO would vote against him it could make a world of difference...

It is not just about voting against him for anyone. The right person has to be in office to undo what already has been done, Romney has not spoke a single word about repealing laws, getting rid of taxes, putting more money in peoples hands to stimulate the economy, reducing the debt, ending the wars, and many other great things for our nation. It has been a very long time since a peace, liberty candidate has run for office and even longer since one has been elected. So if you are to vote Romney, things will not change, because he talks of no change except for Obama not being in office. How does that make our country better? You can not just replace one yahoo that runs on change for another that runs on change and both are financed by Goldman Sacs.

[Linda]

It is not just about voting against him for anyone. The right person has to be in office to undo what already has been done, Romney has not spoke a single word about repealing laws, getting rid of taxes, putting more money in peoples hands to stimulate the economy, reducing the debt, ending the wars, and many other great things for our nation. It has been a very long time since a peace, liberty candidate has run for office and even longer since one has been elected. So if you are to vote Romney, things will not change, because he talks of no change except for Obama not being in office. How does that make our country better? You can not just replace one yahoo that runs on change for another that runs on change and both are financed by Goldman Sacs.

I agree, and the right one is sure not Romney...BO all over again...

[Scrumdiddles]

I agree, and the right one is sure not Romney...BO all over again...

haha yep, He would be BO the white version. BO 2.0, haha.

[JRob]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=h0qVbVwYo3g

scrum, you know there is effective treatment for OCD, right?

[Linda]

haha yep, He would be BO the white version. BO 2.0, haha.

BO isn't black...only dark skinned muslim...romney, ya, looks white...but where is the heart of these two?... believe both hearts are blackened and certainly not in the best interest of America...JMHO

[Nadita]

haha yep, He would be BO the white version. BO 2.0, haha.

Scrum,

That is funny. We haven't updated the system yet to BO 2.0 as it will run the same except where it's package is different

But i have confession to make I was going to give you +1 but my brain and my hand didn't work together tonight so you ended up with -1 I'm sorry

Can someone please be kind enough to even him ? Thanks

[TPSprayduster]

Scrum, i have a question can you explain to me why Dr Paul is so electable? He has not won a state during the campaign and only can get delegates by muscling the delegate selections. By doing that is that really representing the people? If he is the one to bring balance to the force why isn't he getting more votes during this years primaries?

[paperboy]

Nadita - I evened Scrum out for you. Keep those fingers nimble & ready - may need them for counting dinar.

[eastcreek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=h0qVbVwYo3g

Scrum, it's so obvious why you see no difference between BO and Romney. You are absolutely BLINDED by the irrationality of RP. RP would be good as Treasury Secretary. Beyond that he's a lost little puppy wandering in the wilderness.

[Nadita]

Nadita - I evened Scrum out for you. Keep those fingers nimble & ready - may need them for counting dinar.

Paperboy,

Don't we have a machine to do so ? Lol

Thanks a bunch... Umbrella on me

[Loco01]

Scrum, i have a question can you explain to me why Dr Paul is so electable? He has not won a state during the campaign and only can get delegates by muscling the delegate selections. By doing that is that really representing the people? If he is the one to bring balance to the force why isn't he getting more votes during this years primaries?

Simple the press and GOP decided who was going to be the GOP candidate was going to be.

So now all they have to do is not count his votes, ignore him and pump Romney.

They know by doing this they can make you vote for whom they want you to.

How does it feel being played?

Washington DC is afraid of Ron Paul They know that if Ron Paul makes it to the white house.

The good ole boys club will be terminated the slide away from the Constitution will cease.

And the people will no longer except their BS.It would set their agenda back decades.

And as much as I hate to believe this it looks like Americans like being lied to

We seem to be afraid of the truth.

Think about this. What if all the money we pay in extortion each year was to come home.

What if we could stop the IRS from giving illegal aliens billions in deductions and getting $13,000 refunds

when they don't pay any taxes to begin with.

What If we have a government that is afraid of us instead of us afraid of them.

Lose the fear and get mad get mad as hell Lets take back our country now.

Before we have to take it back with blood and bullets

[Shabibilicious]

Just a stupid question I have.....neg if you must. With Ron Paul's foreign policy.....the entire military of the United States of America would be stationed here on our shores. Am I the only one who thinks that would be very dangerous? Once again, it is just a question.

GO RV, then BV

[rightsonword]

Just a stupid question I have.....neg if you must. With Ron Paul's foreign policy.....the entire military of the United States of America would be stationed here on our shores. Am I the only one who thinks that would be very dangerous? Once again, it is just a question.

GO RV, then BV

How would a stronger national defense be very dangerous? I would think it would make the US safer. No other country is as spread out around the world as we are and they don't seem to be having many problems. According to the below link, Germany doesn't even has any troops stationed overseas. I believe this proves that wrong the myth that having a strong overseas military force is contingent upon national security. If anything, it creates animosity towards said country.

Would you like another countries having military bases within our borders? Believe Dwight D Eisenhower when he said to beware of the Military Industrial Complex. It;s all about fear mongering, money, and controlling the public; nothing more.

World Wide Military Deployments

BTW, no neg. It's a valid question. Thanks for asking.

Edited May 4, 2012 by rightsonword

[Linda]

[Can someone please be kind enough to even him ? Thanks

I evened him sout for you Nadita...

Shabbs...yes, a valid question...why must we be all over the world?...we are the most hated country going and yet the most used by other nations when they want help...we seen to be the first ones they call upon and then spew hatred against us...do you not think it is time to protect our borders and put a stop to all the nonsense going on here on the home front?...I am not saying we should not be willing to assist other countries, just that it is time we get our own act together here....

[Shabibilicious]

Shabbs...yes, a valid question...why must we be all over the world?...we are the most hated country going and yet the most used by other nations when they want help...we seen to be the first ones they call upon and then spew hatred against us...do you not think it is time to protect our borders and put a stop to all the nonsense going on here on the home front?...I am not saying we should not be willing to assist other countries, just that it is time we get our own act together here....

All very valid points Linda. I wasn't really referring to our intervention in other countries though. My point is this. Is it wise to have an entire military the size of ours completely on our home turf, under the control of a government we are not sure we can trust? It makes me ponder the possible consequences. As always, just my opinion.

GO RV, then BV

[rightsonword]

All very valid points Linda. I wasn't really referring to our intervention in other countries though. My point is this. Is it wise to have an entire military the size of ours completely on our home turf, under the control of a government we are not sure we can trust? It makes me ponder the possible consequences. As always, just my opinion.

GO RV, then BV

Gotcha. I'm not sure. Perhaps 40oz or Scrum might know, but I would assume the economics would mean a reduced overall military size which would mean less spending, but a stronger national defense since you would have more military within the nation.

[Linda]

All very valid points Linda. I wasn't really referring to our intervention in other countries though. My point is this. Is it wise to have an entire military the size of ours completely on our home turf, under the control of a government we are not sure we can trust? It makes me ponder the possible consequences. As always, just my opinion.

GO RV, then BV

I understand your point Shabbs...and I agree, that under the current government it would be of little or no benefit...the change definately needs to come from within and until "We the People" make that change we will continue to slide further down that slippery slope that we are currently on...our gov is no less corrupt than Iraq...perhaps more...and we do need to change the status quo...however, not the kind of change we have had of late...thank you for your response...it is appreciated...

[40oz]

Is it wise to have an entire military the size of ours completely on our home turf, under the control of a government we are not sure we can trust? It makes me ponder the possible consequences.

If you're worried about the possible consequences of having our troops here at home, imagine how the countries that we occupy and/or surround feel.

Edited May 4, 2012 by 40oz

[Scrumdiddles]

Just a stupid question I have.....neg if you must. With Ron Paul's foreign policy.....the entire military of the United States of America would be stationed here on our shores. Am I the only one who thinks that would be very dangerous? Once again, it is just a question.

GO RV, then BV

Throughout my life and probably your as well we have always been militarily in other countries. Just because that is how it has been does not mean it is right. There are other solutions. Why would all the troops being stationed here in the US be dangerous? Perhaps overkill for protection. We do have a missile defense system on both coasts, to shoot down missiles inbound to US. We could not be invaded due to the massive amount of troops here in the US. Ron Paul never said he would cut defense spending, he said he wanted to cut military spending. Two different things. Military spending example use by Ron Paul is Iraq Embassy, "you may call it military spending i call it waste". Troops in 130 different countries can come home. Why do we need to meddle in other countries affairs? Can we not trade with other countries without military? Why must we protect what is not rightfully ours, OIL? Occupy middle east countries because of oil, and that is a national security problem? What about the oil here in the US? Why is the US greedy? We want all your oil and when that is gone, we still have some. See for one to really understand the foreign policy of Ron Paul, you must really take a step back and look and what the US is doing to the rest of the world. People have a hard time doing that because of there conditioning. We have been conditioned our whole life to accept this way of dealing with the whole world. Listen to what the world is saying, Australia, Spain, Great Britain, and a few other countries, They support RON PAUL. The world is speaking if one would listen.

[PartyTime]

Just a stupid question I have.....neg if you must. With Ron Paul's foreign policy.....the entire military of the United States of America would be stationed here on our shores. Am I the only one who thinks that would be very dangerous? Once again, it is just a question.

GO RV, then BV

The simple answer is, you have been watching way too much tv. It is called, indoctrination, brainwashing, fear mongering. It is the only thing the bought and owned media can come up with in an attempt to spin the fear into the people to get them away from supporting Ron Paul. They have used the media to promote their made up terrorism to put fear in the people. So attack Ron Paul to promote more fear of being attacked. But if you listened to Ron Paul you would hear how he explains the only reason you would need to fear anyone is because of our own doing by our government who keeps invading their countries. How would you feel if other countries invaded this country?

As for whether Ron Paul is electable? Well, yes and no. Yes, he is very electable based on an honest election. The truth be known he already has the majority of votes, but the elite who control elections have chosen their puppet Romney and they will only allow Romney to run against their current puppet Obama. So it doesn't matter who anyone votes for because regardless of the votes, Romney wins by choice of the puppet masters. These elections are merely put on for show to have you THINK your votes count, but they don't count for anything. It's all just a show.

Think about it. How many people do you know that have stated they actually voted for Romney in all these primaries? I have yet to hear this from one single person. So how can it be that Romney has beaten all the other candidates with no one voting for him? I'm not saying no one has, but based on not hearing anyone admitting they voted for him, how can it be possible he has really won the majority of votes in all the primaries? Surely if you had the majority of the votes there would be LOTS of people admitting they voted for him, yet so far I have yet to hear from one person who said they voted for him. So what does that tell you? Start asking everyone you know. Did you vote in any of the primaries, and if so, did you vote for Romney or someone else? See how many say Romney, then ask yourself, how can he have won if very few, if any, admit they voted for him? It's all rigged and the votes don't matter! seriously. Out of all the candidates, what fools would have actually voted for Romney out of the other candidates to choose from? If people want Obama out, then why in the world would they vote for Romney in the primaries? It makes absolutely no sense at all! The game is rigged.

[Caye98]

It is not just about voting against him for anyone. The right person has to be in office to undo what already has been done, Romney has not spoke a single word about repealing laws, getting rid of taxes, putting more money in peoples hands to stimulate the economy, reducing the debt, ending the wars, and many other great things for our nation. It has been a very long time since a peace, liberty candidate has run for office and even longer since one has been elected. So if you are to vote Romney, things will not change, because he talks of no change except for Obama not being in office. How does that make our country better? You can not just replace one yahoo that runs on change for another that runs on change and both are financed by Goldman Sacs.

You're wrong Scrum, and that is an outright lie. You are either intentionally misrepresenting the TRUTH, are so blinded by your allegiance to RP, or are just ignorant.

Shabbs...yes, a valid question...why must we be all over the world?...we are the most hated country going and yet the most used by other nations when they want help...we seen to be the first ones they call upon and then spew hatred against us...do you not think it is time to protect our borders and put a stop to all the nonsense going on here on the home front?...I am not saying we should not be willing to assist other countries, just that it is time we get our own act together here....

Really? And that would be why the US has tens of thousands of people immigrating (or desiring to) every year? Perhaps more than any other country?

If you're worried about the possible consequences of having our troops here at home, imagine how the countries that we occupy and/or surround feel.

Safe, secure? Why did Afghanistan just insist on keeping a US presence until at least 2024?

Throughout my life and probably your as well we have always been militarily in other countries. Just because that is how it has been does not mean it is right. There are other solutions. Why would all the troops being stationed here in the US be dangerous? Perhaps overkill for protection. We do have a missile defense system on both coasts, to shoot down missiles inbound to US. We could not be invaded due to the massive amount of troops here in the US. Ron Paul never said he would cut defense spending, he said he wanted to cut military spending. Two different things. Military spending example use by Ron Paul is Iraq Embassy, "you may call it military spending i call it waste". Troops in 130 different countries can come home. Why do we need to meddle in other countries affairs? Can we not trade with other countries without military? Why must we protect what is not rightfully ours, OIL? Occupy middle east countries because of oil, and that is a national security problem? What about the oil here in the US? Why is the US greedy? We want all your oil and when that is gone, we still have some. See for one to really understand the foreign policy of Ron Paul, you must really take a step back and look and what the US is doing to the rest of the world. People have a hard time doing that because of there conditioning. We have been conditioned our whole life to accept this way of dealing with the whole world. Listen to what the world is saying, Australia, Spain, Great Britain, and a few other countries, They support RON PAUL. The world is speaking if one would listen.

It is called international agreements. The Arab countries by and large agree to exclusively use USD to trade oil in, in return the US agrees to provide protection. Is it ideal? Probably not, but it supports our economy.

I am all for accessing US fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas). Technology exists to TRIPLE energy production from current fuel sources, while reducing the environmental impact by nearly 2/3rds (bixbyenergy.com), BUT there is resistance to this emerging technology.

BROADEN your field of influence, and learn about TRUE global issues and impact (rather than talking points and one-sided arguments and naivete).

[divemaster5734]

Scrum, i have a question can you explain to me why Dr Paul is so electable? He has not won a state during the campaign and only can get delegates by muscling the delegate selections. By doing that is that really representing the people? If he is the one to bring balance to the force why isn't he getting more votes during this years primaries?

uh, you need to recheck your statement.

it is official, Ron Paul won Iowa and Nevada, with more final tally's to come, the medias deceptive remakes are now coming back to bit them in their lying asses.