***Official*** CNN/YouTube GOP debate

[JayTee]

Bahhhhh I'm angry about Paul's treatment tonight and let my emotions get the best of me. I'll lay off posting for awhile. My apologies, Adanthar.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Bahhhhh I'm angry about Paul's treatment tonight and let my emotions get the best of me. I'll lay off posting for awhile. My apologies, Adanthar.

[/ QUOTE ]

np

[Ineedaride2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lots of words about why Paul can win

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally staying away from any personal opinions whatsoever:

http://www.thecherrycreeknews.com/content/view/2063/2/

I assume Paul has spent lots of money in Iowa - not as much as in NH, but it has to be a significant outlay. Results:

[ QUOTE ]
Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 77%, Huckabee by 76%, Giuliani by 68%, and Thompson by 71%. Those numbers reflect an eleven point-gain for Huckabee and a six-point decline for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged.

As for unfavorables, just 20% offer a negative assessment of Huckabee. Twenty-one percent (21%) have an unfavorable opinion of Romney, 24% say the same about Thompson, and 30% have a negative opinion of Giuliani.

McCain’s numbers have fallen since the previous Rasmussen Reports survey. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 54% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 44% have an unfavorable view.

Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 39% and unfavorably by 52%.

[/ QUOTE ]

His ratings are dead last in what is technically his own party.

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar,

Because 2+2's search function sucks so bad (not your fault), I can't find a post that exemplifies why you hate Ron Paul so much.

I've read the Redbean posts, so I understand your views there. However, that's one issue among many, and I was wondering if you would be willing to divulge why you are so adamantly against him in every politics thread I see you in.

Granted, in this thread you simply posted some random poll results. I'm generally drawing from your passing comments in several other threads where Ron Paul has been the subject.

Posting a link to a former thread in which you opinion is adequately explained would be perfectly acceptable.

If you fail to respond to this post, I will take that to mean you have no response to this question, and do, in fact, admit defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I try not to troll here. I try not to overly criticize a forum member. But really, this has to be the dumbest [censored] thing I've ever read on this forum. "I'm calling you out. Answer my stupid [censored] question or you lose."

[/ QUOTE ]

That last line was in jest, but considering that you believe that 'this was the dumbest [censored] thing you've ever read on this forum,' I shouldn't even dignify this response with a rebuttal. You obviously have a LOOOT of people on ignore.

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
Bahhhhh I'm angry about Paul's treatment tonight and let my emotions get the best of me. I'll lay off posting for awhile. My apologies, Adanthar.

[/ QUOTE ]



I don't understand what you are angry about? He got much more time than he usually does, he answered the questions well generally. (a little too passionate on one of them so he fumbled his words a bit) I don't know what you were expecting?

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
That last line was in jest, but considering that you believe that 'this was the dumbest [censored] thing you've ever read on this forum,' I shouldn't even dignify this response with a rebuttal. You obviously have a LOOOT of people on ignore.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't, but I do ignore a lot of what is written here (usually based on the topic, not the poster.)

[Ineedaride2]

Yeah, it wouldn't let me read the forum posts.

Oh well.

[ QUOTE ]
wow, that's a random hijack, but okay. rather than go dig up my posts here, I'll give you a link:

http://forums.somethingawful.com/sho...readid=2619669

warning: this thread is on a $10/registration forum - though I think you can read w/o registering - and has like 8 billion replies (in fact, it's one of around half a dozen of those threads) so you're probably not going to care. if you feel like trawling through the whole thing, though, feel free. I know I have a bunch of posts on the subject there.

[/ QUOTE ]

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bahhhhh I'm angry about Paul's treatment tonight and let my emotions get the best of me. I'll lay off posting for awhile. My apologies, Adanthar.

[/ QUOTE ]



I don't understand what you are angry about? He got much more time than he usually does, he answered the questions well generally. (a little too passionate on one of them so he fumbled his words a bit) I don't know what you were expecting?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm talking about McCain calling him an isolationist and comparing the current situation to WW2 while saying it is nothing like Vietnam. I'm talking about retard biased panelist talking about him like he is a kook. It's about watching someone that has more integrity than anyone in that room being treated poorly. It's all cool though, it spurred to make another donation in addition to the ones I'll be making on the 30th and the 16th. Apparently RP gave an "amazing" speech that was shown on justin.tv. Hopefully someone will post a link when it comes up. I'll keep an eye out.

[Bump_Bailey]

^^ The little bit I saw was really good.

[richie]

Where is Copernicus at? He's a Romney supporter, lol. Did Romney even answer a question tonight?? What a friggin' loser. He showed his true flip-flopping, undeciding, fence-straddling persona tonight. Anybody that would vote for Mitt after this display IMHO is nutso. And Julieannie wasn't much better. I find it ironic that these two are the MSM frontrunners that people are supposed to vote for. These are the 2 worst candidates that one could vote for.

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People like Adanthar are opposed to Ron Paul because to support him is to admit that individuals are capable of taking care of themselves. That a government isn't needed to force people to take the correct course of action.

[/ QUOTE ]
lool. supporting someone is not "admitting" that you agree with them on everything. are anarchists who support Ron Paul admitting that a state is necessary?
I tentatively support Paul and I'm like, near socialist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm, If you are "near Socialist" I don't understand how you can support Ron Paul. Care to explain?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure. I don't agree with any candidate on everything. I'm sort of a "libertarian socialist" in that I support moderately high taxes, translated into public services such as health care, education and day care, but I also strongly oppose throwing people into jail for non-violent drug use, prostitution, gambling and things of that nature. Unlike Paul, I'm not completely non-military-interventionalist. However, I think being completely non-interventionist would be far preferable to engaging in the kinds of intervention both that we are engaging in right now and that we've engaged in historically. The US foreign policy is an imperialist one, which I consider both immoral and detrimental. All Democrats talk about is getting out of Iraq (which most of them voted for and kept voting to fund) and being "anti-war". Paul actually talks about things like the immoral actions of the CIA and talks about much more major foreign policy change than simply withdrawing from Iraq.

Areas I like Democrats over Paul: pro taxes (esp. graduated), pro public healthcare (I doubt Hillary would do anything good on this tho'), pro public education.

Areas I like Paul over Democrats: Foreign policy, ending the war on drugs, cutting back on spending (not always something I'd care about, but certainly important right now)

I think THE BEST things we could do as a nation by far right now would be to stop antagonizing foreign countries with our imperialism and to end the war on drugs. That's why I like Paul... but I've been swinging back and forth on him TBH.