http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publi...272617065.shtml

 

I have been following this for some time now, but I am surprised at the event's (Nov 5 "money bomb") success.

 

I really wonder how large Paul's base is after seeing this. My honest opinion is that this shows that Ron Paul has fervent support, but fervent support from about 20,00-60,000 voters...the sorts who think that Ron Paul is the country's last chance so they donate every last penny they have.

 

 

I would understand, because as I see corporatism rearing its ugly head, I would agree with them..but I haven't donated a cent...Wait, I bought a couple of shirts...

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publi...272617065.shtml

 

the sorts who think that Ron Paul is the country's last chance so they donate every last penny they have.

Considering the max is 2,000 that might not be the case. Especcially if you only have 2,000 in the bank a Ron Paul presidency might not be in your best interest.

:lol

 

Yeah, pretty much. But it's theirs to burn, I suppose.

At least Ron Paul is trying, which is more than what can be said for Fred Thompson.

...and Fred will still have a better turnout in the primaries.

 

I love how anything I say about a candidate comes back to my initial donation in to Thompson's campaign and my respect for the man. You guys act like I'm some campaigner for him or a die hard which couldn't be even farther from the truth. I'm not even so sure he is the candidate I like most right now.

 

Ad hominem attacks are far more fun then refuting that Paul has no chance which is, and has been, my point.

...and Fred will still have a better turnout in the primaries.

 

I love how anything I say about a candidate comes back to my initial donation in to Thompson's campaign and my respect for the man. You guys act like I'm some campaigner for him or a die hard which couldn't be even farther from the truth. I'm not even so sure he is the candidate I like most right now.

 

Ad hominem attacks are far more fun then refuting that Paul has no chance which is, and has been, my point.

I support Thompson as well, I'm just saying you can't really fault Ron and his supporters for trying.

Nope and I don't do that but I don't see what all this fundraising is getting as far as polling and overtaking some of his competitors nationally besides being blog fodder and being a monetary figure. So basically the picture was an illustration of those thoughts.

I don't care about what his electability is. He's planting the seeds for a reversion back to what the party was originally supposed to be.

 

I applaud anyone trying to derail us from this current two party system.

Ross Perot and his double digit poll performance planted seeds that ultimately failed.

 

Ron Paul and his inevitable single digit poll showing will be forgotten in two years.

I don't care about what his electability is. He's planting the seeds for a reversion back to what the party was originally supposed to be.

 

I applaud anyone trying to derail us from this current two party system.

Then why is Paul running as a Republican?

 

Why doesn't he run as a Libertarian?

 

Ron Paul on a national scale is what Ralph Nader and the Green Party is/was.

I would love to see Paul get the republican nomination I would vote for him.

I would love to see Paul get the republican nomination I would vote for him.

How does a Democrat idenitfy with Paul?

 

I'm not being facetious, I'm being generally curious.

I would love to see Paul get the republican nomination I would vote for him.

How does a Democrat idenitfy with Paul?

 

I'm not being facetious, I'm being generally curious.

 

 

I was registered Republican till 2004. I am an indy personally. I know I often take the counter point on these boards from my personal opinion and come off as a democrat because I find it most interesting for the debate. I consider myself pretty well in the middle upon alot of the major issues that divide the party. But, I think that some of Paul's ideas are interesting to me.

 

But I am against half of the ideals of the democratic party. At the same time I feel the religious right has controlled and destroyed much of the base of the republican party over the past 10-16 years.

 

 

Personally if any canidate can remove the all of the lobbyists from Washington for good I would consider voting for them. I feel that is the biggest mistake in the history of American internal politics was to allow the establishment of the current setup we have where the lobbyists have so much control over the government.

 

Be they the NRA (member of btw), or the Teachers Union.

 

PS also I feel that paul is actually the most interesting currently of the canidates as most of the others are spewing the same washing BS that is heard all of the time from both sides of congress. Washington was right that political parties shouldnt of been created but oh wells cant change that much.

I would love to see Paul get the republican nomination I would vote for him.

How does a Democrat idenitfy with Paul?

 

I'm not being facetious, I'm being generally curious.

 

 

I was registered Republican till 2004. I am an indy personally. I know I often take the counter point on these boards from my personal opinion and come off as a democrat because I find it most interesting for the debate. I consider myself pretty well in the middle upon alot of the major issues that divide the party. But, I think that some of Paul's ideas are interesting to me.

 

But I am against half of the ideals of the democratic party. At the same time I feel the religious right has controlled and destroyed much of the base of the republican party over the past 10-16 years.

 

 

Personally if any canidate can remove the all of the lobbyists from Washington for good I would consider voting for them. I feel that is the biggest mistake in the history of American internal politics was to allow the establishment of the current setup we have where the lobbyists have so much control over the government.

 

Be they the NRA (member of btw), or the Teachers Union.

Interesting, thank you. I probably shouldn't make generalizations and say where a poster leans and identifies himself when in reality I don't really know.

 

I'm 100% with you on the religious right for sure.

I would love to see Paul get the republican nomination I would vote for him.

How does a Democrat idenitfy with Paul?

 

I'm not being facetious, I'm being generally curious.

 

 

I was registered Republican till 2004. I am an indy personally. I know I often take the counter point on these boards from my personal opinion and come off as a democrat because I find it most interesting for the debate. I consider myself pretty well in the middle upon alot of the major issues that divide the party. But, I think that some of Paul's ideas are interesting to me.

 

But I am against half of the ideals of the democratic party. At the same time I feel the religious right has controlled and destroyed much of the base of the republican party over the past 10-16 years.

 

 

Personally if any canidate can remove the all of the lobbyists from Washington for good I would consider voting for them. I feel that is the biggest mistake in the history of American internal politics was to allow the establishment of the current setup we have where the lobbyists have so much control over the government.

 

Be they the NRA (member of btw), or the Teachers Union.

Interesting, thank you. I probably shouldn't make generalizations and say where a poster leans and identifies himself when in reality I don't really know.

 

I'm 100% with you on the religious right for sure.

 

 

No problem dude, I completely respect your opinion specially since you are often in the minority in alot of the debates upon this board it seems. I love seeing the insight of both sides of the issue before deciding upon them. You normally bring out the good debate for one side and a few posters normally upon the other.

 

No worries on the generalizations though that is part of the fun of the message board here. After all if we didnt enjoy ourselves and enjoy posting why would we be? Besides picking up some interesting knowledge of the world events that is often not shown upon the controlled mass media in this nation (for one side or the other).

Perot was also a loon. That didn't help.

Perot was also a loon. That didn't help.

 

The problem with Perot was that Clinton ended up being a very popular president. Perot clearly took votes away from Bush 41 and in the end many conservatives that voted for Perot did not want to vote for another third party candidate in later elections for fear that an ideological opposite may become president and stay there for 8 years. Which is I'm sure how many Nader voters in 2000 feel.