The more people that here this, the more that will wake up to the fact the Republicans need a real conservative who is not retarded (i.e. Fred Thompson) to run against Hillary.

 

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/files/RonPaul_RealGOP.mp3

A true khanservative.

 

I support Khan Paul, and I'm going to vote for him in the primary, but I realize it's hopeless.

A true khanservative.

 

I support Khan Paul, and I'm going to vote for him in the primary, but I realize it's hopeless.

It's only hopeless if everyone accepts that it is and votes for a "real" candidate.

 

I believe (and hope it is true) that people are waking up.

No, it is hopeless.

 

I have as much a chance of being sworn in to the office of President as Paul actually does, which is zero.

 

I'd vote for a Democrat before Paul.

A true khanservative.

 

I support Khan Paul, and I'm going to vote for him in the primary, but I realize it's hopeless.

It's only hopeless if everyone accepts that it is and votes for a "real" candidate.

 

I believe (and hope it is true) that people are waking up.

No, it's not only hopeless its a semi joke. He has considerably more money than Mike Huckabee, or the now gone Sam Brownback and he was consistently getting downed by both those men in polls. When you are running with the likes of Tom Tancredo, and you actually have money and a vast army of supporters, you suck as a canidate.

 

I bet one of my friends 20 that Ron Paul would not win a state and this was a week ago. Easiest money ever, because his supporters despite claiming to support the most rational canidate are completely irrational in their outlook on this race. I just wish one of the diehard supporters here would have taken my bet two months ago. My canidate who despite being a long shot can at the end of the day actually say he moved up in the polls based on good campaigning would have had a little more cash.

Amen.

 

I'm so sick of the holier than thou, intellectual superiors that anyone who supports Paul think they are. I have a Fred 08 sticker on my truck (although I'm not locked in to him like some of you think, I support the man more then the campaign at this moment) and one of my co-workers saw and approached me at lunch with his Paul propaganda and nonsense, unwarranted, and without me even wanting to talk to him.

 

I absolutely sick of that campaign and can't wait until the veil is lifted from his supporters eyes that he has absolutely no chance of winning and just because you say he is Jesus reincarnated doesn't make it so.

Amen.

 

I'm so sick of the holier than thou, intellectual superiors that anyone who supports Paul think they are. I have a Fred 08 sticker on my truck (although I'm not locked in to him like some of you think, I support the man more then the campaign at this moment) and one of my co-workers saw and approached me at lunch with his Paul propaganda and nonsense, unwarranted, and without me even wanting to talk to him.

 

I absolutely sick of that campaign and can't wait until the veil is lifted from his supporters eyes that he has absolutely no chance of winning and just because you say he is Jesus reincarnated doesn't make it so.

Thank you, and before you get jumped on for this or as I have for many times. These are generalizations based on what we see, I'm tired of hearing "well I'm not like that, I'm not a rich pot head therefore you are wrong". Yes, you may be one of the few non douche's but then go to New York and watch Ron Paul supporters make a complete scene by screaming at the top of their lungs about ending the war and taxes.

Its in person, its in the comments of the YouTube videos they publish, its on the forums, in the blogosphere.

 

The hardcore Paul supporters are a different kind of animal then I've seen in a political campaign in my lifetime.

 

I'm not even kidding when I say I'd vote for a Democrat over Paul. If by some pig flying universe, Paul was the 'Republican' nominee I'd not only vote for Hilary, I'd actively campaign for her.

If it becomes Hilary vs. Paul I'm voting for whichever third party candidate has the best name.

Rune, would you bet a substantial some of money on Bill Richardson being the nominee(assuming you still support him?). Does everyone have to fall in line with the favorite based on whether they would put money on them?

 

And it's a fundamental logical fallacy(sorry about being a holier than though acadamic elitist) to attack someone's argument based on who supports them. Paul is not even remotely what I would vote for, but at least the guy has enough guts to have a principled platform and not just through rhetoric out there, which people on both sides(including Obama) are doing.

The fringe candidates are always the ones who don't spout rhetoric.

Rune, would you bet a substantial some of money on Bill Richardson being the nominee(assuming you still support him?). Does everyone have to fall in line with the favorite based on whether they would put money on them?

 

It's said so much why not again? If you'd go back and read... Well if you accomplished that goal than you would have read in the original thread several discussions with many of the Paul supporters, most notably Nightphantom with who I was talking of the subject of Paul's viability. He maintained that Paul's campaign would continue to grow as momentum picked up, well I then asked if he'd be willing to stake money on it, or anyone for that matter. Sorry if that offended you.

 

And it's a fundamental logical fallacy(sorry about being a holier than though acadamic elitist) to attack someone's argument based on who supports them. Paul is not even remotely what I would vote for, but at least the guy has enough guts to have a principled platform and not just through rhetoric out there, which people on both sides(including Obama) are doing.

Um, really? Like you've never made several jabs at common right wing stereotypes, christian conservatives and various groups. No, actually it's not an illogical fallacy or for those who want common vernacular, it's not wrong to say that what so ever. I love this argument, we're not supposed to judge someone based on who their supporters and who they send out.

 

Well, I guess all then scientology is for me because I thought it was a cult by the way their people acted, but that was wrong of me. I need to look deeper and realize the beauty of Xenu. Same thing with the mormons, I mean I was annoyed by the fact that they knock on my door and will not go away but that was wrong of me. Sorry, I'm human, and I have human emotions and I'm not about to sign up for a guy who sends out annoying college kids who will berate me if when they come up to me with this stuff I tell them their wrong.

 

If the Ron Paul people would stop shoving all this garbage in my face, I go away but for every f***ing pamplet I get, or every time someone draws Ron Paul all across campus's sidewalks I will continue to be annoyed and hope he goes away. God, I can't wait for the convention

Rune, would you bet a substantial some of money on Bill Richardson being the nominee(assuming you still support him?). Does everyone have to fall in line with the favorite based on whether they would put money on them?

 

It's said so much why not again? If you'd go back and read... Well if you accomplished that goal than you would have read in the original thread several discussions with many of the Paul supporters, most notably Nightphantom with who I was talking of the subject of Paul's viability. He maintained that Paul's campaign would continue to grow as momentum picked up, well I then asked if he'd be willing to stake money on it, or anyone for that matter. Sorry if that offended you.

If you put your time and resources into a candidate, clearly you think they have enough to win. Do you still support Bill Richardson for president? Are you willing to put money on his winning?

 

 

And it's a fundamental logical fallacy(sorry about being a holier than though acadamic elitist) to attack someone's argument based on who supports them. Paul is not even remotely what I would vote for, but at least the guy has enough guts to have a principled platform and not just through rhetoric out there, which people on both sides(including Obama) are doing.

 

Um, really? Like you've never made several jabs at common right wing stereotypes, christian conservatives and various groups. No, actually it's not an illogical fallacy or for those who want common vernacular, it's not wrong to say that what so ever. I love this argument, we're not supposed to judge someone based on who their supporters and who they send out.

 

Well, I guess all then scientology is for me because I thought it was a cult by the way their people acted, but that was wrong of me. I need to look deeper and realize the beauty of Xenu. Same thing with the mormons, I mean I was annoyed by the fact that they knock on my door and will not go away but that was wrong of me. Sorry, I'm human, and I have human emotions and I'm not about to sign up for a guy who sends out annoying college kids who will berate me if when they come up to me with this stuff I tell them their wrong.

 

If the Ron Paul people would stop shoving all this garbage in my face, I go away but for every f***ing pamplet I get, or every time someone draws Ron Paul all across campus's sidewalks I will continue to be annoyed and hope he goes away. God, I can't wait for the convention

 

Everyone has supporters that are not very flattering. Bush had to go to Bob Jones U to get support. McCain had to grovel at the feet of the Christian right.

 

I don't care if you call the Ron Paul supporters that are actually spoiled little rich kids who smoke pot by what they are, spoiled little rich kids who smoke pot. But that doesn't make their arguments wrong and that doesn't make Ron Paul wrong. Actually debating them on the ideas and pointing out where they are wrong makes them wrong.

 

NightPhantom(Juanky) is no anti-war hippie rich kid. I've had a lot of arguments with him on this board and he is pretty smart and knows his stuff, especially issues of the constitution. This includes issues that go directly against my left viewpoints.

 

Do I think a lot of Christian right wingers are nut-jobs without a clue? Of course. But if one of them came on here and laid our arguments about intelligent design being taught in schools, I wouldn't just call him a stupid Christian nut-job. I'd try and actually refute his arguments.

Basically, pwn those uber-n00bs with your leet skillz next time they hand you a pamphlet.

The thing that I especially dislike about Ron Paul is the fact that he essentially wants to disband the entire government.

No, it is hopeless.

 

I have as much a chance of being sworn in to the office of President as Paul actually does, which is zero.

 

I'd vote for a Democrat before Paul.

 

Some conservative you are.

The hardcore Paul supporters are a different kind of animal then I've seen in a political campaign in my lifetime.

 

I'm not even kidding when I say I'd vote for a Democrat over Paul.

 

QFT.

 

Being close to New Hampshire, I've gone to a couple of events for the McCain campaign over there. Paul's supporters actually show up to PROTEST a campaign rally. What legitimate campaign has supporters who do something like that?

 

I really don't understand why people consider him to be "a true conservative." People like this scare me. Alot. Paul embodies the idea of an individual who takes an ideology to its utmost extreme. Hearing him talk you'd think that everything we've collectively learned as a nation since around the 1920s is unimportant. For starters, the guy wants to do away with the Federal Reserve. Additionally if you look at some of the other things he's sponsored, he has a convenient understanding of constitutionality. His "We the People Act" demonstartes a pretty big misunderstanding of how Congress can limit the judiciary. And, that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

The hardcore Paul supporters are a different kind of animal then I've seen in a political campaign in my lifetime.

 

I'm not even kidding when I say I'd vote for a Democrat over Paul.

 

QFT.

 

Being close to New Hampshire, I've gone to a couple of events for the McCain campaign over there. Paul's supporters actually show up to PROTEST a campaign rally. What legitimate campaign has supporters who do something like that?

 

I really don't understand why people consider him to be "a true conservative." People like this scare me. Alot. Paul embodies the idea of an individual who takes an ideology to its utmost extreme. Hearing him talk you'd think that everything we've collectively learned as a nation since around the 1920s is unimportant. For starters, the guy wants to do away with the Federal Reserve. Additionally if you look at some of the other things he's sponsored, he has a convenient understanding of constitutionality. His "We the People Act" demonstartes a pretty big misunderstanding of how Congress can limit the judiciary. And, that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

 

Define a true conservative for me please.

The hardcore Paul supporters are a different kind of animal then I've seen in a political campaign in my lifetime.

 

I'm not even kidding when I say I'd vote for a Democrat over Paul.

Heaven forbid people get excited and get involved when they see a candidate who they can actually believe in and who has some integrity.

 

Being close to New Hampshire, I've gone to a couple of events for the McCain campaign over there. Paul's supporters actually show up to PROTEST a campaign rally. What legitimate campaign has supporters who do something like that?

 

I really don't understand why people consider him to be "a true conservative." People like this scare me. Alot. Paul embodies the idea of an individual who takes an ideology to its utmost extreme. Hearing him talk you'd think that everything we've collectively learned as a nation since around the 1920s is unimportant. For starters, the guy wants to do away with the Federal Reserve. Additionally if you look at some of the other things he's sponsored, he has a convenient understanding of constitutionality. His "We the People Act" demonstartes a pretty big misunderstanding of how Congress can limit the judiciary. And, that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

What's wrong with doing away with the Federal Reserve? Why do we need a private organization in control of our currency with the ability to artificially alter our inflation rates and who long term have debased our currency to near worthlessness? Or do you think this government is in good shape long term?

 

As far as them "protesting", I think they are just trying to get their candidate's message to other people who are interested in the politics, but likely haven't heard Ron Paul's message. You may think it inappropriate to "crash" another candidate's rally, but the thing is we assume those people attending are interested in this country's future, and there's a good chance that Dr. Paul's message will resonate with many among them.

 

People consider him so because he is a conservative. How do you define a conservative? Never voted to raise taxes. Never voted for an unbalanced budget. Never voted for gun control. Consistently opposes the expansion of the Federal government into realms where it has no constitutional authority (Healthcare, education, emergency response, etc). He opposes using the military to fight wars for any reason other than defense (such as "spreading Democracy", enforcing UN resolutions, protecting economic interests, or deposing "unfriendly" regimes). Every other conservative seems to agree that the UN is a corrupt and inept organization, but Dr. Paul is the only one to dare suggest we need not continue to prop it up as a member.

How exactly can he be anymore conservative?

Do you think it is conservative for the federal government to expand it's authority to regulate things such as marriage? Do you think it is conservative to suggest our money should be spent to prop up a malformed government in the middle of a civil war and that our troops should be working there as policemen?

The hardcore Paul supporters are a different kind of animal then I've seen in a political campaign in my lifetime.

 

I'm not even kidding when I say I'd vote for a Democrat over Paul.

 

Hearing him talk you'd think that everything we've collectively learned as a nation since around the 1920s is unimportant. For starters, the guy wants to do away with the Federal Reserve. Additionally if you look at some of the other things he's sponsored, he has a convenient understanding of constitutionality. His "We the People Act" demonstartes a pretty big misunderstanding of how Congress can limit the judiciary. And, that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

 

 

:thumbup At least somebody finally attacks his ideas, instead of his supporters. Who gives a flying F about how crazy his supporters are? I don't. Attack his ideas or an issue you don't agree with him, not something as meaningless about who supports him.

Seems pretty split here, I'm outing myself (again) as a Ron Paul supporter. I don't agree with everything he says, but as a libertarian he's the only candidate for president I could comfortably support. Frankly, I think that's a lot of the reason for the backlash against his supporters. Libertarians are a pretty marginalized bunch of people for the most part, and this is literally the only time where there is a major-party candidate who is going to get airtime, who is going to express a point of view that is basically absent from the political discourse today, and so people tend to get a bit overzealous. (Unfortunately, a lot of genuine nutcases have also attached himself to his campaign for reasons that are completely beyond me, and if you're not already inclined to hate Ron Paul, trust me when I say that they are a distinct minority among his supporters.)

 

I think as well that most of us are fairly realistic about his chances, but this is by far the most attention a libertarian has gotten in...well I'm only 23, but I'm going to assume it's the most attention a libertarian has ever gotten. So in that regard it's already a victory. Seriously if you want to get some sort of idea of the general sort of people who support Ron Paul, go over to Reason Magazine's Hit & Run blog and peruse some of the Paul-related posts (or the other stuff as well, because it's a really informative all-purpose libertarian site) and read what people have to say.

 

Also, he raised $5 million in the third quarter and is on pace to raise more than that from now to the end of the year (he raised a bit over $400k in the last three days alone), and it's basically all in small donations. So there's not a huge, but a reasonably-sized base of support for him, and for the most part they won't vote for a candidate from either major party next year (assuming he doesn't win the nomination, which is a pretty good assumption). So Paul voters are available, so to speak, as a "tiebreaker" in the election if anyone's willing to make a convincing argument aimed at them.

Define a true conservative for me please.

Actually, I was trying to use the term facetiously to reference the view in the thread title and initial post. However, rather than using "real conservative" I mistakenly used "true conservative" instead.

For the record, I'm not a Ron Paul "supporter" by the definitions being thrown around in this discussion. He's in my final three as far as who I could see myself voting for in the primary, though.

 

And overall, people on all sides are doing a good job of stooping to each other's levels and just throwing out random insults without attacking on the merits, as politics continues to fall farther into its own stereotype.

For the record, I'm not a Ron Paul "supporter" by the definitions being thrown around in this discussion. He's in my final three as far as who I could see myself voting for in the primary, though.

 

And overall, people on all sides are doing a good job of stooping to each other's levels and just throwing out random insults without attacking on the merits, as politics continues to fall farther into its own stereotype.

 

 

You put that perfectly, and I agree on all points.

Ron Paul reminds me alot of prior years of the republican party before I changed my own party affiliation. I would vote for him even though I think a few of his stances are a little extreme.

 

That said I like him far more then I do some of the religious controlled nuts like the current one in office