Ron Paul supporters?...

[santahog]

I was looking at a Perry commercial on Youtube an hour or so ago and I couldn't decide which were the nastier bunch of respondents, the RP supporters or the ametuer homosexual advocates, (as opposed to the ones who get paid to do it).. I went over to the RP page on Facebook and said exactly that, and asked them to lighten up a little.. I wasn't mean to them and I didn't suggest who I was a supporter of.
Man! What a freak show... Talk about too much caffene!!! What a nasty bunch!!

[Timothy]

They're a rabid bunch ain't they?

My nephew, God bless him, is about 28 and every post on his FB account is about the Paul.  Most of his family just unsubscribed his account so they don't get a constant news feed!

At least he's standing for something.  He's been a conspiracy theorist for some time now though...

[santahog]

It's so strange, though!! It's not that he's half right.. He both! He's right on the debt. I'd love to seem over the Fed. (On the other hand, would you like to see Congress in charge of monitary policy??) He's more wrong on Foreign Policy that Jimmy Carter ever was. If it were 1880, I'd say "Great!" We've got our own problems. Jefferson already handled Tripoli anyway and Texas can handle Mexico..
His fans seem to be all kids, though! If they had any idea what it meant to be bound by the limits of the Constitution, they would bleed from their eyes and ears.. Could you see these guys reactions if the President himself had someone shot for Treason?! The Navy blowing up GreenPeace boats for hindering commerce? Please..

[tombogan03884]

Ron Paul first ran for President in 1988.
I don't know a single RP supporter who was alive in 1988.
At the time this "beltway outsider" had already been in Congress for 10 years.
Just another "politician" with a slightly different line of BS.

[Timothy]

Young people are all idealistic, I know I was at that age.  When I was 25, I too thought maybe I'd be able to effect a change but that was dashed by the fact that I lived in CT and eventually MA where they breed the sheep!   

At this point, supporting Ron Paul for these youngsters is more about getting laid on Friday night!  He talks a good talk but it's getting old.  He pulled in less than a half million votes in the general election last time around, I'd expect he may do better this time but not by much.  I have no doubt he'll try and hang round even though he's polling in single digits nearly everywhere, lets hope he doesn't "Perot" the election and hand it to the current Dipshit in Chief!

[Sponsor]

[billt]

The Paulie's are definitely crackpots. They all say if Ron Paul doesn't win, it doesn't matter who does. They are out there where the buses don't run, that's for sure. The funny part is they actually think he's going to win. Ron Paul is NOT a Republican. He is a Libertarian masquerading as a Republican. Libertarians have always been 10%'ers. That is where Paul is at, and it's where he's going to stay, until he folds up his tent and goes back to Texas a three time loser. Hopefully for good!

[tombogan03884]

The Paulie's are definitely crackpots. They all say if Ron Paul doesn't win, it doesn't matter who does. They are out there where the buses don't run, that's for sure. The funny part is they actually think he's going to win. Ron Paul is NOT a Republican. He is a Libertarian masquerading as a Republican. Libertarians have always been 10%'ers. That is where Paul is at, and it's where he's going to stay, until he folds up his tent and goes back to Texas a three  SEVEN time loser. Hopefully for good!

FIFY.
You would think he would have took a hint after 5, or run out of $   

[Herknav]

...lets hope he doesn't "Perot" the election and hand it to the current Dipshit in Chief!

Several thoughts spring to mind based on that sentence fragment:

First, Perot did not appreciably affect the '92 election.  He may have pulled in 19% of the popular vote, but it didn't change the outcome.  If every, single Perot vote went to Bush I (a BIG stretch), he still couldn't have pulled enough electoral votes to win.  Bush lost because he urinated on his base during his first term.  Remember "Read my lips.  'No new taxes'"?  (Brilliant!  Promise something you have very little control over.)  Remember the '89 import ban?  Only a Republican sycophant would blame Perot for Bush's loss as the math just isn't there.

Second, when Obama wins a second term, it will be because the current Republican presidential field is weaker than wet paper mache', not because there are more choices.  Honestly, somebody who seriously believes in what Paul believes in can't in good conscience vote for a Mitt or a Newt.  They'll just be part of the 45+% that sits this one out.

[Timothy]

Several thoughts spring to mind based on that sentence fragment:

First, Perot did not appreciably affect the '92 election.  He may have pulled in 19% of the popular vote, but it didn't change the outcome.  If every, single Perot vote went to Bush I (a BIG stretch), he still couldn't have pulled enough electoral votes to win.

Look at the data here and really analyze the numbers.  Perot most definitely affected the outcome of that election.  I agree that Bush wouldn't gain all 19.7 million of Perots votes but that race would have been a damn sight closer if Perot had stayed home.  If he'd gained even half of those votes in the states that normally would have gone to the GOP, GHW Bush would have had a second term.  You need to look at those states individually to see what effect Perot had on the Electoral College.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1992&off=0&elect=0&f=0

[tombogan03884]

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/13/ron-paul-supporters-crash-mock-newt-gingrichs-party/

WINDHAM, N.H. — A group of Ron Paul supporters staged a satirical protest outside at least two Newt Gingrich events today, pretending to be ardent fans of the former House Speaker while holding signs that criticized his past positions and personal baggage.

They call themselves the Party Crashers (or, they did, when asked if they had a name), and held signs with slogans including “Divorce Lawyers for Newt” and “TARP recipients.”

“We love Newt!” said one, when approached by The Daily Caller and asked who they were with.

“We stand out in the cold for Newt!” echoed another.

“We’re from America. We love America, that’s why we want Newt. He’ll start more wars. We want that,” said a girl with dreadlocks.

The group was reluctant to say which candidate they were actually supporting.

“Do a story on us without knowing who we’re with,” implored one female Crasher. “Please?”
Ads by Google

After some prodding, she finally agreed to give the initials of the candidate her group was in fact supporting: “R.P.”

“We’re with Mitt Romney,” another was overheard saying as they heckled Gingrich event attendees as they streamed out of Windham High School.

The Party Crashers handed out constitutional report cards on which Gingrich earned an F in every single category “so that everybody knows if you really want to destroy the constitution, this is the man,” one girl explained.

Only Ron Paul got straight A’s, a rating the group joking insisted was actually a bad thing.

“We want a Washington insider,” a girl said.

“We like Freddie Mac,” said another.

“He’ll keep the ‘too big to fail’ alive, sucking the last life out of the treasury. And we know that he wants individual mandates,” added another.

“We want to see corruption not only continue, but increase,” insisted one girl.

“And the wars!” another woman chimed in. “We want Syria bombed. And Iran.”

One cheerfully sarcastic Crasher scoffed at Gingrich’s current front-runner status in the polls.

“I don’t think he’s the flavor of the week. I really don’t. I think we’re good,” she said. “I think we’re going to stick, too. Because people are saying he’s the flavor of the week, but he has important people with lots of money and power and influence, so I think he’ll be the nominee.”

In a rare moment of seriousness, another Crasher criticized the former Speaker for not treating his supporters with respect. She noted that the Gingrich campaign had too many people to register for the event.

“They told all 1,200 people that they had seats, and that they just had to show up,” she said, though the venue seated only 650 people.

“We make sure we take care of the people who can take care of us,” she said. “We’re not dumb.”

With that exception, however, everyone the group stayed in character.

“He’s a dirty hippie,” said one girl, referring to a Paul supporter who was mentioned in conversation. “Ron Paul’s a dirty hippie,” she laughed.

The group came together through Meetup, a website that arranges group meetings. “The Meetup for Newt,” joked one. “Newtup! Newt Hampshire.”

“Today was the first day, but we plan to go a lot,” a girl explained. Another added later that her group planned to “increase our numbers” before next month’s New Hampshire primary.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/13/ron-paul-supporters-crash-mock-newt-gingrichs-party/#ixzz1gifaQdH2