Longshot Theoretical Question: Paul v Hillary

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What would happen is this: Ron Paul would get slaughtered because his platform explicitly includes not giving away the store to corporations and other special interests. Hillary will do the usual thing and raise taxes in order to give the money to the rich. She'll get all the support of the rich and of the dupes who think raising taxes makes things "fair".

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic kind of fails if he's already won the primary since by the same logic it should have been impossible for him to win the primary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. But it's an exercise in absurdism to imagine Ron Paul as the republican candidate, because of that fact. The same reasons apply to why he won't get the nomination.

All the major candidates are mostly a collection of special interest give-aways. Whichever special interests you'd like to see take money from the poor, just pick the candidate who is in bed with them and you've got your man.

Ron Paul represents the complete absence of special interest payoffs, and thus he cannot win.

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

A LOT of Americans are sick of politics as usual and the usual bullcrap served up by our politicians. Special interests are one thing but the average American is fed up with all the baloney; see approval ratings too.

The average American is starting to see that we are getting into real trouble with inflation, the dollar, oil prices, the Iraq war, loss of civil liberties, and more. I don't think the average American has much confidence in any of the frontrunners or the administration or even in Congress as a whole (which almost routinely flouts the will of the American people).

All of this to me means that if Ron Paul's message can really reach enough people, and if they have the chance to truly explore and understand it, he has an actual chance to win.

Grassroots America can overcome the lobbies if grassroots America really gets united and activated behind something. Grassroots America got rid of the phony and seditious "not an amnesty" immigration bill, and grassroots America can overcome a great deal more if united. Ron Paul's message (and the honesty of the man himself) just might be capable of uniting much of America.

It's a bit surprising to me that so many people have a default stance of defeatism when it comes to a candidate with genuine integrity and with good basic ideas and whose past record comports with those things. Talking out of both sides of one's mouth isn't necessarily a prerequisite for holding political office, but a lot of people are acting like a real person hasn't a chance.

Maybe you don't realize that much of America may be nearly as fed up, worried and lacking confidence in government as you are. People know something is wrong and that it isn't going to be fixed by the way the current system is working, or by more of the same, or by more of the same candidates which are all basically alike with just a little variation thrown in.

All it takes is a spark people can believe in, and Ron Paul and his message may be that spark. If he can keep raising money like this he won't need special interest money for his campaign.

Thanks for reading.

[Max Raker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What would happen is this: Ron Paul would get slaughtered because his platform explicitly includes not giving away the store to corporations and other special interests. Hillary will do the usual thing and raise taxes in order to give the money to the rich. She'll get all the support of the rich and of the dupes who think raising taxes makes things "fair".

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic kind of fails if he's already won the primary since by the same logic it should have been impossible for him to win the primary.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, for Ron Paul to get the nomination all the other viable republican candidates would have to undergo separate misfortunes like Mr. Burns' softball team from the Simpsons. Romney gets charged for every crime in NY city, Romney gets hypnotized and thinks he is a chicken etc...

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What would happen is this: Ron Paul would get slaughtered because his platform explicitly includes not giving away the store to corporations and other special interests. Hillary will do the usual thing and raise taxes in order to give the money to the rich. She'll get all the support of the rich and of the dupes who think raising taxes makes things "fair".

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic kind of fails if he's already won the primary since by the same logic it should have been impossible for him to win the primary.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, for Ron Paul to get the nomination all the other viable republican candidates would have to undergo separate misfortunes like Mr. Burns' softball team from the Simpsons. Romney gets charged for every crime in NY city, Romney gets hypnotized and thinks he is a chicken etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Or maybe just for many Americans to realize that there actually is an alternative to the failing status quo and to politicians being FOS.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
First, do the Republicans "stand by their man" if Paul wins? How would it effect the party?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they do. After the nominee is chosen, the parties have been pretty consistent in unifying behind their candidate. If Paul gets the nod, I think you'll be surprised at how many Republicans "agreed with him all along."

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
When faced with RP vs Hill, the dems (hopefully) will realize that he beats the balls off her on the war, the patriot act (and many other issues).

[/ QUOTE ]

Hillary isn't liberal enough, so instead, the Democrats will cross the aisle to vote for the only man in Congress who is on the record as being against the Civil Rights Act.

In what world would this scenario be plausible to you?

[owsley]

"Or maybe just for many Americans to realize that there actually is an alternative to the failing status quo and to politicians being FOS."

"Ron Paul represents the complete absence of special interest payoffs, and thus he cannot win.

Thus his appeal to the masses."

and the best one: "The average American is starting to see that we are getting into real trouble with inflation, the dollar, oil prices"

uh, LOL! What planet are you guys living on? RP has gotten an enormous surge of support in the last couple months but the people he is catching in with are a slight and specific minority in the scheme of things it takes to win a US election.

The idea that the average american is waking up the concept of what fiat money is doing to our country and that the masses are just about to start using elections to their advantage is utter fantasy. I am optimistic about what RP will achieve during this election, don't get me wrong, but there is a line between noticing progress and getting carried away.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
"Or maybe just for many Americans to realize that there actually is an alternative to the failing status quo and to politicians being FOS."

"Ron Paul represents the complete absence of special interest payoffs, and thus he cannot win.

Thus his appeal to the masses."

and the best one: "The average American is starting to see that we are getting into real trouble with inflation, the dollar, oil prices"

uh, LOL! What planet are you guys living on? RP has gotten an enormous surge of support in the last couple months but the people he is catching in with are a slight and specific minority in the scheme of things it takes to win a US election.

The idea that the average american is waking up the concept of what fiat money is doing to our country and that the masses are just about to start using elections to their advantage is utter fantasy. I am optimistic about what RP will achieve during this election, don't get me wrong, but there is a line between noticing progress and getting carried away.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not just fiat money, it's a half-dozen or more things and they're all big ones.

If not this election, next election: when oil is through the roof, Middle America is feeling poor and pinched, the dollar is far lower and foreclosures and bankruptcies far higher, and the stupid Greater Middle East War will by then be going worse than ever.

People will be fed up (as they're already getting) but give it 5 more years and people won't just merely fed up but mad as hell. Why is Bush spending a TRILLION dollars in Iraq (by the end of 2008) for a dream that isn't working anyway? Why, as Ron Paul asks, are our U.S. border guards being shipped out for duty in Iraq instead of staying at home protecting our borders like they are supposed to be doing?

WTF is wrong with this entire picture? Most Americans want OUT of Iraq but our BULLHEADED leaders flat out DON'T CARE WHAT AMERICANS WANT. People are getting very fed up already and if they see a choice to vote against all this madness a lot of them are going to do it. Nothing galvanized the American people recently so much as did the phony immigration bill and IMO that is just the tip of the political iceberg coming.

The average American may not understand fiat money (yet) but they do understand oil prices and inflation, and at this point they sense the futility of being in Iraq, and they certainly understand the BS and evasiveness that are the hallmarks of nearly all politicians except Ron Paul.

People appreciate honesty, clarity and non-evasiveness and that's one very big edge Ron Paul has over the rest of the field.

[owsley]

Have you seen what % of voters support universal healthcare?

Pass me some of that good [censored] you are smoking.

[ConstantineX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When faced with RP vs Hill, the dems (hopefully) will realize that he beats the balls off her on the war, the patriot act (and many other issues).

[/ QUOTE ]

Hillary isn't liberal enough, so instead, the Democrats will cross the aisle to vote for the only man in Congress who is on the record as being against the Civil Rights Act.

In what world would this scenario be plausible to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, I'm black and superficially it would seem the Civil Rights Act matters far less to me than it does to you (you've brought this up in numerous threads). I wonder why the Jewish population didn't need legislation to break into dominant positions in the population of Ivy League schools and prominent centers of finance. I think the reason you keep repeating this meme is part of this affliction of "intentions over outcomes" that many liberals have. When you say ZOMG Civil Rights Act, it never comes with a specific policy issue you're trying to address, rather than trying to equivocate Ron Paul's rational opposition with some vision of the racist '60s. Why should we care NOW that he's explicitly opposed? Wasn't George Wallace a Democrat?

[manbearpig]

[ QUOTE ]
All of this to me means that if Ron Paul's message can really reach enough people, and if they have the chance to truly explore and understand it, he has an actual chance to win.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is what is going to be the downfall. Not enough people really care to do the digging to find out what is really going on. Not enough people are smart enough to see through the rhetoric.

Do you think the average American has the ability to understand the financial crisis we are racing towards? Because I think that is where I first got on the bandwagon. I have never understood how we can spend more money than we bring in every year and be ok. But I dont think the majority of people understand that.

I think this fits in nicely with the preferences thread that was going. People say they care and want a change, but when it gets down to it they are unwilling to take the time to make it happen.

The only chance RP has is if the media begins to force feed him down peoples throats, and we all know that is not going to happen.