Ron Paul could have won this election.....

Ron Paul is too radical for the American public to win even if he were the Republican nominee.

No, he wants to gut the military to near uselessness. Most conservatives support the military.

Ron Paul is too radical for the American public to win even if he were the Republican nominee.

XaosII

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]if he were the Republican nominee. Without a doubt he could have one this.danjammer69

I don't know about that man

he receivedheck of alot of money in the primaries.

I don't think he could win. I would've voted for him over Obutthead, but Ron Paul is one of the guys I least wanted to win the nomination (down there with Huntsman and Johnson, and at one point I was hoping it wouldn't be Romney, though I started to like him better as time passed).

[QUOTE="danjammer69"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]if he were the Republican nominee. Without a doubt he could have one this.sexyweapons

I don't know about that man

he receivedheck of alot of money in the primaries.

Ron Paul is one of the guys I least wanted to win the nomination (down there with Huntsman and Johnsonwhipassmt

No chance. He's no moderate.Stevo_the_gamer

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]No chance. He's no moderate.Laihendi

I dont think anyone cares anachronistic definitions of moderate and extremist. Ron Paul is not a moderate.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]Ron Paul is one of the guys I least wanted to win the nomination (down there with Huntsman and JohnsonJebus213

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]No chance. He's no moderate.Laihendi

I don't think a racist bigot like Paul could have won anything.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]No chance. He's no moderate.nocoolnamejim

Good thing we can rely on you to produce a TOTALLY none biased source Jim!

I don't think a racist bigot like Paul could have won anything.

Aljosa23

Romney got pretty close.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] According to the standards set by our constitution, Ron Paul is a moderate and Obama/Romney are extremists.sexyweapons

Good thing we can rely on you to produce a TOTALLY none biased source Jim!

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

I don't think a racist bigot like Paul could have won anything.

sexyweapons

Romney got pretty close.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"][QUOTE="whipassmt"]Ron Paul is one of the guys I least wanted to win the nomination (down there with Huntsman and Johnsonwhipassmt

[QUOTE="sexyweapons"]

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

I don't think a racist bigot like Paul could have won anything.

Aljosa23

Romney got pretty close.

:lol:

[QUOTE="Jebus213"][QUOTE="whipassmt"]Ron Paul is one of the guys I least wanted to win the nomination (down there with Huntsman and Johnsonwhipassmt

Yes it does.

To my knowledge he didn't write and publish a bunch of newsletters like RP.

Aljosa23

[QUOTE="sexyweapons"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] Oh really?nocoolnamejim

Good thing we can rely on you to produce a TOTALLY none biased source Jim!

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="sexyweapons"]

Good thing we can rely on you to produce a TOTALLY none biased source Jim!

Laihendi

[QUOTE="danjammer69"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]if he were the Republican nominee. Without a doubt he could have one this.Jebus213

Its true. The bankers and ultra large corporations hate him because he doesn't put up with their crap. Obama and Romney on the other hand are loved by the lobbyists and banks because they will give free goodies to them. He would never raise as much money as them.

Okay then. You're a Ron Paul supporter. There are 15 things Ron Paul mentions as being unconstitutional in that video. You complain that the video doesn't have his explanations for WHY they are unconstitutional (though in the cases of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid it does). Explain why those 15 things are unconstitutional. nocoolnamejim

Isn't it obvious? The government isnt given the authority by the Constitution to do those things. There isn't anywhere in the Constituion that says the federal government should mandate standard for education or anyting else of the 15 thing he's mentioned.

Don't get me wrong, i think it would crazy remove most of the things he's listed... But he isn't wrong.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] Okay then. You're a Ron Paul supporter. There are 15 things Ron Paul mentions as being unconstitutional in that video. You complain that the video doesn't have his explanations for WHY they are unconstitutional (though in the cases of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid it does). Explain why those 15 things are unconstitutional. XaosII

Isn't it obvious? The government isnt given the authority by the Constitution to do those things. There isn't anywhere in the Constituion that says the federal government should mandate standard for education or anyting else of the 15 thing he's mentioned.

Don't get me wrong, i think it would crazy remove most of the things he's listed... But he isn't wrong.

Ron Paul is too radical for the American public to win even if he were the Republican nominee.

XaosII

I'm sure the hookers & drugs planks would rally the base like never before.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] Okay then. You're a Ron Paul supporter. There are 15 things Ron Paul mentions as being unconstitutional in that video. You complain that the video doesn't have his explanations for WHY they are unconstitutional (though in the cases of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid it does). Explain why those 15 things are unconstitutional. nocoolnamejim

Isn't it obvious? The government isnt given the authority by the Constitution to do those things. There isn't anywhere in the Constituion that says the federal government should mandate standard for education or anyting else of the 15 thing he's mentioned.

Don't get me wrong, i think it would crazy remove most of the things he's listed... But he isn't wrong.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]

Okay then. You're a Ron Paul supporter.

There are 15 things Ron Paul mentions as being unconstitutional in that video. You complain that the video doesn't have his explanations for WHY they are unconstitutional (though in the cases of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid it does).

Explain why those 15 things are unconstitutional. nocoolnamejim

Actually, no. You started this by claiming that Obama/Romney are extremists and Paul is a moderate. I posted a video showing him wanting pretty much every facet of modern day government eliminated because they are unconstitutional. These are positions well outside the mainstream.

You then objected because the video didn't allow Ron Paul to explain WHY he thought all those things are unconstitutional.

I'm giving you, a Paul supporter, a chance to fill in the blanks. It's not my fault that that when challenged you can't back up your talk.

And TC: I'm well aware that you posted this thread just to rile up the Paulbots. I shall have my vengeance. In this life or the next.

Concerning paper money: Article 1, section 10No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Though the allegation against Ron Paul is still misleading, because he has no problem with using paper as long as they're backed up by gold/silver.

If you find something that's more than a collection of 3-5 second video clips that are devoid of any context (so basically if you find something that has any meaning) then maybe it will be possible to form a response to it.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]
:lol: Considering you're the one making an issue out of those things and making the claim that what he's saying is wrong, I'll leave the burden of proof on you.Laihendi

Actually, no. You started this by claiming that Obama/Romney are extremists and Paul is a moderate. I posted a video showing him wanting pretty much every facet of modern day government eliminated because they are unconstitutional. These are positions well outside the mainstream.

You then objected because the video didn't allow Ron Paul to explain WHY he thought all those things are unconstitutional.

I'm giving you, a Paul supporter, a chance to fill in the blanks. It's not my fault that that when challenged you can't back up your talk.

And TC: I'm well aware that you posted this thread just to rile up the Paulbots. I shall have my vengeance. In this life or the next.

Concerning paper money: Article 1, section 10No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Though the allegation against Ron Paul is still misleading, because he has no problem with using paper as long as they're backed up by gold/silver.

If you find something that's more than a collection of 3-5 second video clips that are devoid of any context (so basically if you find something that has any meaning) then maybe it will be possible to form a response to it.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]
:lol: Considering you're the one making an issue out of those things and making the claim that what he's saying is wrong, I'll leave the burden of proof on you.Laihendi

Actually, no. You started this by claiming that Obama/Romney are extremists and Paul is a moderate. I posted a video showing him wanting pretty much every facet of modern day government eliminated because they are unconstitutional. These are positions well outside the mainstream.

You then objected because the video didn't allow Ron Paul to explain WHY he thought all those things are unconstitutional.

I'm giving you, a Paul supporter, a chance to fill in the blanks. It's not my fault that that when challenged you can't back up your talk.

And TC: I'm well aware that you posted this thread just to rile up the Paulbots. I shall have my vengeance. In this life or the next.

Concerning paper money: Article 1, section 10No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Though the allegation against Ron Paul is still misleading, because he has no problem with using paper as long as they're backed up by gold/silver.

If you find something that's more than a collection of 3-5 second video clips that are devoid of any context (so basically if you find something that has any meaning) then maybe it will be possible to form a response to it.

'no state'Abbeten

[QUOTE="Abbeten"]'no state'Laihendi