OK...Answer These Questions Then About Ron Paul...

[Astute Perspicuous]

For all of you people that say;

"A very small group of Ron Paul supporters are spamming the polls."

The questions are;

Do spam bots have bank accounts?

Do spam bots have 19 million dollars to spend in 3 months?

How can spam bots cause Ron Paul to have more donors this quarter than any other GOP cadidate?

Do spam bots march in big demonstrations like the one in Austin, TX on Dec 16th?

Face the facts people...Ron Paul has WAY MORE Supporters than any other GOP candidate.

Ron Paul supporters are active...we will be there at the primary elections, the caucuses...in force.

WE ARE LEGION

[littlehulkster]

Answering all the questions with this:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:HR07955:@@@L&summ2=m&

[Astute Perspicuous]

That did not answer a single question. Get real.

WE WIN.

[Axiom_Blade]

Why, then, do all official polls put him dead last?

[Astute Perspicuous]

Why, then, do all official polls put him dead last?

OK...I will answer that question quick and easy. More than one person has reported this too.

When you get a call from the phone poll it says...

Please press 1 for Giuliani
Press 2 for Romney
Press 3 for Mccain
Press 4 for Huckabee
Press 5 for other
Press 6 to be taken off the calling list

When you press 5 it says;

"THANK YOU, YOUR NUMBER HAS BE REMOVED FROM OUR SYSTEM"

So, you don't even have a chance to select Ron Paul.

Just wait until the primaries and we will see. Like I said before, spam bots did not donate 19 million in 3 months.

Over 100,000 donors in 3 months and stats say that only a fraction of actual voters donates.

Those numbers are not in question.

[ZenFountain]

Iowa caucus is a week away, New Hampshire primary five days after that. You'll know in one to two weeks whether the support is real and willing to vote or a boisterous web mob. Give it a rest already, RP talk has been exhausted on all fronts besides the breaths net citizens everywhere are saving for when RP drops and his supporters go away as fast as they came.

[littlehulkster]

OK...I will answer that question quick and easy. More than one person has reported this too.

When you get a call from the phone poll it says...

Please press 1 for Giuliani
Press 2 for Romney
Press 3 for Mccain
Press 4 for Huckabee
Press 5 for other
Press 6 to be taken off the calling list

When you press 5 it says;

"THANK YOU, YOUR NUMBER HAS BE REMOVED FROM OUR SYSTEM"

So, you don't even have a chance to select Ron Paul.

Just wait until the primaries and we will see. Like I said before, spam bots did not donate 19 million in 3 months.

Over 100,000 donors in 3 months and stats say that only a fraction of actual voters donates.

Those numbers are not in question.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:HR07955:@@@L&summ2=m&

[skoob]

Press 6 to be taken off the calling list

When you press 5 it says;

"THANK YOU, YOUR NUMBER HAS BE REMOVED FROM OUR SYSTEM"
Are you sure you didn't press 6?

[Kerberos]

Why, then, do all official polls put him dead last?

It's a conspiracy.

[danielk]

Astute one, congratulations for convincing me that Ron Paul is a nut job. If the guy himself is just a tiny bit as nutty as his supporters appear to be, then I don't know what would happen if he became president.

You can thank FSM that I'm not a US citizen.

[Astute Perspicuous]

Astute one, congratulations for convincing me that Ron Paul is a nut job. If the guy himself is just a tiny bit as nutty as his supporters appear to be, then I don't know what would happen if he became president.

You can thank FSM that I'm not a US citizen.

Believe me, I am very thankful that you are not a US citizen. Our landfills are already filling up so there is not much room for you.

[danielk]

I had hoped it wouldn't be necessary to spell it out for you, but there may be others besides me who reached the same conclusion and are US citizens. In short, you're doing a pretty good job at driving people away.

[Astute Perspicuous]

You can't dispute that;

OVER 100,000 donors in the 4th quarter.

You can't dispute that he is now the;

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY

or

THAT HE HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATED TO HIM IN THE 4th QUARTER THAN ANYONE IN THE GOP

or

THAT HE DWARFS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH REPUBS AND DEMS IN MEETUP GROUPS

or

THAT HE GOT MORE MONEY DONATED BY MILITARY PEOPLE TO HIM THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

or

THAT ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH DEMS AND REPUBS TAKE CORPORATE DONATIONS, HIS DONATIONS ARE ALL FROM THE PEOPLE.

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.

[danielk]

Carry on...

[Astute Perspicuous]

I had hoped it wouldn't be necessary to spell it out for you, but there may be others besides me who reached the same conclusion and are US citizens. In short, you're doing a pretty good job at driving people away.

That was about the most lame thing I have ever heard in my life.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to convert you. We don't want you on our side because you would just sour the stew.

I am just here to prove you wrong.

And...BTW...you never did answer not one single question I put in this thread so, basically, you are doing nothing but spewing malarky

[Kerberos]

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.
QFT.

[Grimes]

For all of you people that say;

"A very small group of Ron Paul supporters are spamming the polls."

The questions are;

Do spam bots have bank accounts?

Do spam bots have 19 million dollars to spend in 3 months?

How can spam bots cause Ron Paul to have more donors this quarter than any other GOP cadidate?

Do spam bots march in big demonstrations like the one in Austin, TX on Dec 16th?

Face the facts people...Ron Paul has WAY MORE Supporters than any other GOP candidate.

Ron Paul supporters are active...we will be there at the primary elections, the caucuses...in force.

WE ARE LEGION

It's so precious to see people first becoming interested in politics.

[WildCat]

Iowa caucus is a week away, New Hampshire primary five days after that. You'll know in one to two weeks whether the support is real and willing to vote or a boisterous web mob.
I predict that when Ron Paul gets only 5% of the vote the Paulistas will see that as prima facie proof of election fraud.

[maxpower1227]

So is this AP's unhinged reaction to getting completely owned in the other thread and having his long, defiant rant blow up in his face?

[Axiom_Blade]

You can't dispute that;

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.

A) The other candidates STILL have a LOT more money than Paul, regardless of how much he made in one day.

B) Meetup groups are not a significant factor in any election.

I doubt Paul will even get 5% of the vote, but he might surprise me. The problem is that his street team's strategy is to get on forums like this one and start arguments about libertarianism. This is not getting Paul any votes.

If you actually want people to vote for Paul, you have to go outside, pass out leaflets, engage the average citizen in polite, friendly conversation...basically, traditional, time-tested campaigning. Get Paul to come to your area to speak. Organize rallies. Go to your local college, and get the youth interested in Paul's message. All these acrimonious arguments and puffery are a waste of time.

[corplinx]

Shouldn't this be in the Ron Paul subforum?

[Rob Lister]

That was about the most lame thing I have ever heard in my life.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to convert you. We don't want you on our side because you would just sour the stew.

I am just here to prove you wrong.

And...BTW...you never did answer not one single question I put in this thread so, basically, you are doing nothing but spewing malarky

The results will prove us wrong, or more likely right, as the case may be. Therefore yours is an exercise in futility. But carry on...at least you're entertaining. Sort of like Ron.

[jsiv]

I think this proves that 89% of Americans are behind Ron Paul and that if he doesn't win the elections it's because of a conspiracy by the ruling elite to keep him out of power.

[Suddenly]

A great line (http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/Default.aspx)describing the state of the Ron Paul campaign...


Ideas like the money bomb and the blimp get floated on various Ron Paul forums, where they’re alternately nurtured, rejected, developed, and finally acted upon. That’s why it’s hard for one person to take all the credit. The clown car is bigger than ever, but no one person is steering.

[Elizabeth I]

OK...I will answer that question quick and easy. More than one person has reported this too.

When you get a call from the phone poll it says...

Please press 1 for Giuliani
Press 2 for Romney
Press 3 for Mccain
Press 4 for Huckabee
Press 5 for other
Press 6 to be taken off the calling list

When you press 5 it says;

"THANK YOU, YOUR NUMBER HAS BE REMOVED FROM OUR SYSTEM"

So, you don't even have a chance to select Ron Paul.



I have participated in several political phone polls and not one was a "press 1 for..." type of poll. I'm not sure the one you are referencing is in any way scientific or valid.

ETA: Wouldn't you have to call in for a "press 1..." poll? Can they call you and have you press 1, 2, etc.? AP, would you post the phone number for this putative poll?

[Donal]

OK, seriously, being more obnoxious doesn't make you right. It only makes your garbage harder to read.

You can't dispute that;

OVER 100,000 donors in the 4th quarter.

Where were they the rest of the year?


You can't dispute that he is now the;

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY

Because his supporters held back until that one day. Its one spike in an otherwise very straight, low line.

or

THAT HE HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATED TO HIM IN THE 4th QUARTER THAN ANYONE IN THE GOP

Thats just the same thing over and over.

or

THAT HE DWARFS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH REPUBS AND DEMS IN MEETUP GROUPS

You really think that means something? what are the requirements for those? What do you think that means in the terms of an election?

or

THAT HE GOT MORE MONEY DONATED BY MILITARY PEOPLE TO HIM THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

By military, do you mean the Militia Men of Montana?

or

THAT ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH DEMS AND REPUBS TAKE CORPORATE DONATIONS, HIS DONATIONS ARE ALL FROM THE PEOPLE.

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.

He takes corporate donors too. and many of his donors are actually underage and/or foreign, so it means nothing (except perhaps grounds for an investigation). He is also very happy to see money from white supremacist groups.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

You can't dispute that;

OVER 100,000 donors in the 4th quarter.

You can't dispute that he is now the;

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY

or

THAT HE HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATED TO HIM IN THE 4th QUARTER THAN ANYONE IN THE GOP

or

THAT HE DWARFS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH REPUBS AND DEMS IN MEETUP GROUPS

or

THAT HE GOT MORE MONEY DONATED BY MILITARY PEOPLE TO HIM THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

or

THAT ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH DEMS AND REPUBS TAKE CORPORATE DONATIONS, HIS DONATIONS ARE ALL FROM THE PEOPLE.

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.

Concentrate, Danielson. Look eye. Always look eye.

(Mr. Miyagi smacks Daniel on the head)

[danielk]

Heh.

[fuelair]

You can't dispute that;

OVER 100,000 donors in the 4th quarter.

You can't dispute that he is now the;

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY

or

THAT HE HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATED TO HIM IN THE 4th QUARTER THAN ANYONE IN THE GOP

or

THAT HE DWARFS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH REPUBS AND DEMS IN MEETUP GROUPS

or

THAT HE GOT MORE MONEY DONATED BY MILITARY PEOPLE TO HIM THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

or

THAT ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH DEMS AND REPUBS TAKE CORPORATE DONATIONS, HIS DONATIONS ARE ALL FROM THE PEOPLE.

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D: D:D:D:D:D:D
(That would me - and I missed your answer on the lousy statistics and your even worse interpretation of them in the other version of this thread you seem to have vanished from):D

[brodski]

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY


How many worlds is he running on?

[fuelair]

Wonder if he started another hit-and-run thread - since he's not responded in 12 + hours. Ah, well, when you are pushing a loser for all you are worth (and I'll leave that to the imagination remembering it's work with statistics earlier)...........

[hgc]

Why, then, do all official polls put him dead last?


Let's be careful here. There's not such thing as an "official" poll, except for when the votes are counted.

You might instead point to polls using good sampling and adjustment methodologies, from outfits with proven track records. Of course "proven" is a little slippery here too, since the results are only verified on election day.

[Mister Agenda]

Why, then, do all official polls put him dead last?

The official polls in New Hampshire put him ahead of Thompson and Huckabee.

[Suddenly]

He's probably also ahead of Max Hedroom, Randee of the Redwoods, and Berry Goldwater....

[Mister Agenda]

He's probably also ahead of Max Hedroom, Randee of the Redwoods, and Berry Goldwater....

That's 'Headroom'.

[Darth Rotor]

YOVER 100,000 donors in the 4th quarter.

WORLDS RECORD HOLDER FOR MOST DONATIONS IN ONE DAY

THAT HE HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATED TO HIM IN THE 4th QUARTER THAN ANYONE IN THE GOP

THAT HE DWARFS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH REPUBS AND DEMS IN MEETUP GROUPS

THAT HE GOT MORE MONEY DONATED BY MILITARY PEOPLE TO HIM THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

THAT ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES BOTH DEMS AND REPUBS TAKE CORPORATE DONATIONS, HIS DONATIONS ARE ALL FROM THE PEOPLE.

We shall see who has the last laugh very soon.
I am already laughing at you, as well as your reliance on large font, red text color, and foaming at the mouth. Large red letters are no substitute for critical thinking.

Thanks for the entertainment.

DR

[Mister Agenda]

I have participated in several political phone polls and not one was a "press 1 for..." type of poll. I'm not sure the one you are referencing is in any way scientific or valid.

ETA: Wouldn't you have to call in for a "press 1..." poll? Can they call you and have you press 1, 2, etc.? AP, would you post the phone number for this putative poll?

I got a call like that at work, it was a person who transferred me to a button-pushing system. Ron Paul was one of the choices, though.

[Richard Masters]

Astute one, congratulations for convincing me that Ron Paul is a nut job. If the guy himself is just a tiny bit as nutty as his supporters appear to be, then I don't know what would happen if he became president.

You can thank FSM that I'm not a US citizen.

More guilt by association fallacies? Let's recap: you have no basis for judging Ron Paul, so you go after his supporters. But you have no basis for judging his supporters either.

[Richard Masters]

I predict that when Ron Paul gets only 5% of the vote the Paulistas will see that as prima facie proof of election fraud.

That may be the case. Why does this matter?

[Richard Masters]

A) The other candidates STILL have a LOT more money than Paul, regardless of how much he made in one day.

B) Meetup groups are not a significant factor in any election.

I doubt Paul will even get 5% of the vote, but he might surprise me. The problem is that his street team's strategy is to get on forums like this one and start arguments about libertarianism. This is not getting Paul any votes.

If you actually want people to vote for Paul, you have to go outside, pass out leaflets, engage the average citizen in polite, friendly conversation...basically, traditional, time-tested campaigning. Get Paul to come to your area to speak. Organize rallies. Go to your local college, and get the youth interested in Paul's message. All these acrimonious arguments and puffery are a waste of time.

B) Meetup groups have never been significant in the past (because they were non-existent). Under what reasoning do you discount them today?

"I doubt Paul will even get 5% of the vote, but he might surprise me. The problem is that his street team's strategy is to get on forums like this one and start arguments about libertarianism."

I could say your strategy is to call him a kook with no basis for your arguments. But then, I'd be engaging in truisms as are you.

"Get Paul to come to your area to speak. Organize rallies. Go to your local college, and get the youth interested in Paul's message."

This is already going on.

[Mister Agenda]

True that. I went to a rally in Greenville and was struck by how many of the attendees were in their late teens to early twenties. Of course historically this has not been a reliable group to go out and vote in primaries.

[Richard Masters]

By military, do you mean the Militia Men of Montana?

Active Duty military personnel.

He takes corporate donors too. and many of his donors are actually underage and/or foreign

Which donors are underage and foreign? I get the feeling you are making things up.

He is also very happy to see money from white supremacist groups.

I would be, too. Isn't it great to take money from people you hate and put it to good use?

[Donal]

So, you want him to lie to people?

[Richard Masters]

So, you want him to lie to people?

Is this a loaded question?

[Pardalis]

WE ARE LEGION
:dl::dl::dl:

[Donal]

No, its fairly straight forward. If Ron Paul accepts that money but goes against what donors wanted, isn't that lying? Isn't that one of the reasons the Paulites oppose the other politicians?

Isn't the honest thing to return the money and denounce them? "Thanks you, but I cannot accept this because I oppose your views."

[OneShotKi11]

Are you sure you didn't press 6?

They actually have a video on youtube where a man got this call and pressed 5 and was taken of the voters list. The video can be faked so i guess we will never know!!!

So if he wanted to yell conspiracy he does have some sort of credence behind his claims.

YOu guys yell conspiracy as if it automatically means the guys is a nut job.

[Richard Masters]

No, its fairly straight forward. If Ron Paul accepts that money but goes against what donors wanted, isn't that lying? Isn't that one of the reasons the Paulites oppose the other politicians?

Isn't the honest thing to return the money and denounce them? "Thanks you, but I cannot accept this because I oppose your views."

No. It's your responsibility to understand a candidate before you donate money to him/her. If Ron Paul accepts money from someone he can assume that it is the donor who accepts Ron Paul's policies and stances on issues. Not the other way around.

Therefore there is no lying involved, unless you have proof that Ron Paul lied about a particular stance on an issue.

"Isn't the honest thing to return the money and denounce them?"

No. The honest thing to do is make it clear that you accept the money because you assume the donor believed in your message, and not the other way around.

[OneShotKi11]

No. It's your responsibility to understand a candidate before you donate money to him/her. If Ron Paul accepts money from someone he can assume that it is the donor who accepts Ron Paul's policies and stances on issues. Not the other way around.

Therefore there is no lying involved, unless you have proof that Ron Paul lied about a particular stance on an issue.

"Isn't the honest thing to return the money and denounce them?"

No. The honest thing to do is make it clear that you accept the money because you assume the donor believed in your message, and not the other way around.

I just had to add that this was very nicely put. I dont think anyone can argue with this logic and i believe it definitely holds true.
If they donate to Paul they are endorsing his ideas and views!

[Donal]

No, once you know what the donor stands for, you sever the relationship. that money was given to you based on an understanding. If you find that you can't give the donors what they are expecting, you give it back.

I'm willing to concede it was impossible for RP to know who exactly gave him every dollar, but the issue has been brought to his attention repeatedly. He now knows where the money is coming from.

Politicians accepting money shows a relationship with the donor.

So, is Paul cuddling up to white supremacists, or is he a liar?

[OneShotKi11]

No, once you know what the donor stands for, you sever the relationship. that money was given to you based on an understanding. If you find that you can't give the donors what they are expecting, you give it back.

I'm willing to concede it was impossible for RP to know who exactly gave him every dollar, but the issue has been brought to his attention repeatedly. He now knows where the money is coming from.

Politicians accepting money shows a relationship with the donor.

So, is Paul cuddling up to white supremacists, or is he a liar?

Neither! You are the one attaching the sentiments of if he excepts the money they therefore have a relationship.
Ron Paul does not look at it this way for if you know DR. Paul he is beyond firm on his stances and already stated his beliefs. So any donor that comes to his party must already know what they are contributing to, and that in no way will he change his politics for anyone.

He is not bargaining with people on his beliefs. He is not making arrangements to accept money and in return do something for them!
No bargaining is being done, this is a donation!

legal aspect of the term Donation:
Donations are gifts given without return consideration

Maybe in your corrupt form of government accepting a donation means you will do something for them but not in ours! They believe in his ideals and want to contribute, and thats it.

It could be for his stance on the war or his wanting to cut taxes, but who knows what they donate for and to what Dr. Paul cause they believe in.
Although the are white nationalists they are still Americans born of this country and are allowed to participate in its politics accordingly.

Say they donated to him because they believe the IRS should be gone and they want to be rid of the income tax. What would you say? They wouldnt be donating for there evil purposes but for a cause many normal Americans are donating for!
Is there something wrong with that?

[Donal]

So they donate to him because they believe in what he will do, but they don't expect him to do anything?

You don't donate to someone unless you want them to do a certain thing. I donate to the Red Cross because I expect them to help people in emergencies. I donate to the American Cancer Society because I expect them to help further research into curing cancer. Should they decide that they have no intention of doing so, I'd say that myself and their other supporters deserve a check in the mail.

Politicians are beholden to their supporters. Its a side effect of democracy.

they have every right to donate and he has every right to accept and use the money. I didn't say otherwise.

What I said is that the Paulites need to accept that this does indeed create a relationship between them.

[OneShotKi11]

So they donate to him because they believe in what he will do, but they don't expect him to do anything?

You don't donate to someone unless you want them to do a certain thing. I donate to the Red Cross because I expect them to help people in emergencies. I donate to the American Cancer Society because I expect them to help further research into curing cancer. Should they decide that they have no intention of doing so, I'd say that myself and their other supporters deserve a check in the mail.

Politicians are beholden to their supporters. Its a side effect of democracy.

they have every right to donate and he has every right to accept and use the money. I didn't say otherwise.

What I said is that the Paulites need to accept that this does indeed create a relationship between them.

HAAHAHAHAHAH this has to be a joke right?:confused:Right??????

Ofcourse they donate and expect him to do something. They expect him to do exactly what he has been claiming he would do for the nation in everyone of his interviews and debates.

You would donate to Red Cross expecting them to help people in emergencies because thats what they are there to do. You donate to American Cancer Society expecting them to help further research into curing cancer because thats what they said they do with the money.
Both of these companies ahead of time state what they will do with the money when it comes in the same as Ron Paul states what he is going to do with the money when it comes to him. You donate to these companies because you believe in them and would like to endorse what they do and stand for.

You do not donate to the American Cancer Society expecting them to help the homeless do you? No, you donate to them expecting them to do what they stated they are going to do with the money, nothing more nothing less.

So why would you think any different for Ron Paul. Why would you donate to Ron Paul and expect him to do something different then what he has already stated he would do with the money?

Would you donate to American Cancer Society asking them to put laptops in all the classrooms of the nation? If so would you expect them to actually do it after your donation?

[Richard Masters]

No, once you know what the donor stands for, you sever the relationship. that money was given to you based on an understanding. If you find that you can't give the donors what they are expecting, you give it back.

The understanding is based on whatever the candidate is campaigning on. Ron Paul is NOT campaigning on white supremacy. So it is unreasonable to expect a donor to donate to him for that reason.

I'm willing to concede it was impossible for RP to know who exactly gave him every dollar, but the issue has been brought to his attention repeatedly. He now knows where the money is coming from.

He knows that 500 dollars came from an alleged white supremacist. Whether the donor is or isn't doesn't matter as long as the money isn't used to further the supremacists agenda.

Politicians accepting money shows a relationship with the donor.

Yes. I'm sure Ron Paul will abandon his entire platform for 500 bucks.

So, is Paul cuddling up to white supremacists, or is he a liar?

Liar about what? Is taking money from someone you disagree with "cuddling up"?

[Richard Masters]

So they donate to him because they believe in what he will do, but they don't expect him to do anything?

You don't donate to someone unless you want them to do a certain thing. I donate to the Red Cross because I expect them to help people in emergencies. I donate to the American Cancer Society because I expect them to help further research into curing cancer. Should they decide that they have no intention of doing so, I'd say that myself and their other supporters deserve a check in the mail.

Politicians are beholden to their supporters. Its a side effect of democracy.

they have every right to donate and he has every right to accept and use the money. I didn't say otherwise.

What I said is that the Paulites need to accept that this does indeed create a relationship between them.

So if a white supremacist donates to the Red Cross, the Red Cross is pro-White Supremacy? Is it possible that the white supremacist donated to the Red Cross for the same reasons that you donated?

Should the Red Cross forego money that could say someone's life just to make a point? Or is the right thing to do save a person's life with money that was presumably intended for that purpose?

[dudalb]

So the fact that Paul is willing to take support from out and out white supremacist does not concern you?
Sad ,Really Sad.
Or an indication of an "Ends Justifies The Means" philosophy that is really scary.
The reason Paul has not been ripped to shreds on this is he is not considered a major candidate,just an amusing side show.

[danielk]

More guilt by association fallacies? Let's recap: you have no basis for judging Ron Paul, so you go after his supporters. But you have no basis for judging his supporters either.
Yep, guilty by association. Despite frequently heard claims to the contrary, I believe there is indeed such a thing as bad publicity, and this thread is an example of it. Apart from that, you are kidding yourselves if you really think his supporters are the only reason why I don't think he would make a good president.

More importantly, what the hell are you doing on this forum arguing with people? What kind of marketing strategy is this supposed to resemble?

[Richard Masters]

"So the fact that Paul is willing to take support from out and out white supremacist does not concern you?"

It did when I first heard about it. Now that I know why and what Ron Paul has to say about it, I am no longer concerned.

Sad ,Really Sad.

"Or an indication of an "Ends Justifies The Means" philosophy that is really scary."

That statement suggests that the means are morally wrong on their own, which they are not. Furthermore, one 500 dollar donation is quite tiny to even be significant.

"The reason Paul has not been ripped to shreds on this is he is not considered a major candidate,just an amusing side show."

Any facts or just more speculation?

[Richard Masters]

Yep, guilty by association. Despite frequently heard claims to the contrary, I believe there is indeed such a thing as bad publicity, and this thread is an example of it.

I'm not here for publicity. Are you?

Apart from that, you are kidding yourselves if you really think his supporters are the only reason why I don't think he would make a good president.

I never took that position. I simply wanted to challenge your faulty reasoning.

More importantly, what the hell are you doing on this forum arguing with people? What kind of marketing strategy is this supposed to resemble?

What the "hell" are you doing on this forum arguing with people? Apparently not refining your debate skills.

[danielk]

Richard, are you for real? My post wasn't an attempt at a formal proof; I simply reflected on the impression I have of the Ron Paul campaign. As to your other points: stop playing dumb, it doesn't make you look good.

[Axiom_Blade]

Here's an interesting article:
Ron Paul and His KKK, White Supremacist, and Neo-Nazi Supporters (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/11/27/011749.php)

... Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks. "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote. Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said. Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

[Richard Masters]

Here's an interesting article:


This one, retracted by the New York Times, is even more interesting:
http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/editors-note-the-ron-paul-vid-lash/

[leftysergeant]

If you pander to racists, superstitious nut jobs and selfish little minds, you can always draw a following.

That these people are far less numerous than they make themselves appear is, of course, a problem for the candidate.

As soon as rational people find out the kinds of superstitious crap Paul believes, and how little concern he shows for the institutions and movements that have made America grerat, or how little concern he shows for the common wealth of the country, they tend to fall away.

I have noticed on other boards that the RP supporters try to insert their candidate into the conversation as the last hope for America. They act as though they own an board that discusses 9/11 conspiracies They are mostly MIHOP.

And they will invade any liberal discussion forum, selling the message that both parties are so corrupt that we NEED someone like RP to upset the apple cart and reset the whole game.

And the nut jobs think they are scoring points for RP when all the liberals jump on the RP posters.

What an interesting universe they live in. Glad I do not live there.

[OneShotKi11]

First off it has been made known that Dr. Paul did not actually write that article and also publicly apologized for its publication.

Secondly the rest of the article and things stated within it too me really werent that offensive! Some i believe to be true!

The force hiring of colored individuals in the work force has not helped racial tensions what so ever, and if anything hurt them! So the fact that Ron Paul has said this on the floor is not surprising and or hurtful to anyone.

[NeoRicen]

First off it has been made known that Dr. Paul did not actually write that article and also publicly apologized for its publication.

Secondly the rest of the article and things stated within it too me really werent that offensive! Some i believe to be true!

The force hiring of colored individuals in the work force has not helped racial tensions what so ever, and if anything hurt them! So the fact that Ron Paul has said this on the floor is not surprising and or hurtful to anyone.

No, Ron Paul SAID it wasn't him. He could very very easily be lying. And given the fact he's accepting money from white supremacists makes it a tad more likely he's lying.

Even if he didn't write it, it was an incredibly small publication with a small circulation. There's no reason he couldn't have (at least) quickly skimmed over it. He either wrote it and later denied it or he approved it's publication, or at the VERY least he is extremely careless about the people he gets to represent him.

Everything points to him being a racist. He accepts money from racist groups, he has been strongly connected to racist statements , he writes articles for the website of the former head of the KKK and did I mention HE WRITES ARTICLES FOR THE WEBSITE OF A FORMER KKK LEADER!

Am I the only one who's noticed that Ron Paul seems rather moderate when compared to the things he's said and done when not running for President?

[OneShotKi11]

Yet you hear almost nothing about Obama belonging to a Black Nationalist church! Obama Admits and proudly sports it for all to see!

[leftysergeant]

First off it has been made known that Dr. Paul did not actually write that article and also publicly apologized for its publication.

And you better carry an umbrella tonight, The flying pigs are migrating.

Secondly the rest of the article and things stated within it too me really werent that offensive! Some i believe to be true!

That he associates with terrorists is reason enough to write him off as a waste of ballot space. He is consorting witrh enemies of humanity.

The force hiring of colored individuals in the work force has not helped racial tensions what so ever, and if anything hurt them! So the fact that Ron Paul has said this on the floor is not surprising and or hurtful to anyone.

That you buy into Duke's [rule8] marks you as too uninformed or malevolent toward America to be taken seriously. Now, do you still wonder why people get hostile when you try to sell RP to progressives and intellectuals?

[NeoRicen]

Yet you hear almost nothing about Obama belonging to a Black Nationalist church! Obama Admits and proudly sports it for all to see!
It's obvious I just proved you wrong seeing as you've diverged WAY off topic. We're not talking about Obama, and what evidence do you have that this church is a 'Black Nationalist' church?

From 2 seconds on Wikipedia I can see that it even ran an ad saying:
The United Church of Christ: No matter who you are, or where you are on life's journey, you're welcome here
Sounds a lot like a black nationalist church doesn't it? Oh wait, sorry, I forgot, they accept black people, they MUST be black nationalists!

[Mister Agenda]

Yet you hear almost nothing about Obama belonging to a Black Nationalist church! Obama Admits and proudly sports it for all to see!

Are you sure you haven't been confused by Louis Farrakhan's endorsement of Obama? I'm pretty sure the UCC is a mainstream Protestant church.

[WildCat]

Are you sure you haven't been confused by Louis Farrakhan's endorsement of Obama?
Obama and Farrakhan actually live in the same neighborhood, 2 blocks from each other.



Conspiracy theorists/Hillary campaign workers - there's your bait! :golf:

[Mister Agenda]

Obama and Farrakhan actually live in the same neighborhood, 2 blocks from each other.

Conspiracy theorists/Hillary campaign workers - there's your bait! :golf:

This whole page has been about slamming Paul over the supposed relationship some WN jackass making a donation creates, but as soon as Obama and Farrakhan are mentioned in the same breath you get touchy? Are you making my point deliberately or was it a happy accident?

[WildCat]

This whole page has been about slamming Paul over the supposed relationship some WN jackass making a donation creates, but as soon as Obama and Farrakhan are mentioned in the same breath you get touchy? Are you making my point deliberately or was it a happy accident?
Hey, I'm just a casual observer in the whole WN/Ron Paul/Farrakhan thing. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[Mister Agenda]

Hey, I'm just a casual observer in the whole WN/Ron Paul/Farrakhan thing. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Cool. For the record, I don't think a Farrakhan endorsement reflects badly on Obama, I was just speculating about the source of the idea that his church is some sort of black nationalist organization. Now if Obama said he appreciated Farrakhan's endorsement BECAUSE Farrakhan is a black nationalist, that would be different. If the head of the KKK endorsed Edwards I wouldn't take it seriously, the endorsement alone means nothing.

[Richard Masters]

If you pander to racists, superstitious nut jobs and selfish little minds, you can always draw a following.

Ron Paul doesn't pander to racists or the superstitious. If you have evidence that he does, please reference it.

That these people are far less numerous than they make themselves appear is, of course, a problem for the candidate.

Of course.

As soon as rational people find out the kinds of superstitious crap Paul believes, and how little concern he shows for the institutions and movements that have made America grerat, or how little concern he shows for the common wealth of the country, they tend to fall away.

For someone who considers himself rational, you are not very. Would you like to back up your assertions somehow?

I have noticed on other boards that the RP supporters try to insert their candidate into the conversation as the last hope for America. They act as though they own an board that discusses 9/11 conspiracies They are mostly MIHOP.

I agree that there are supporters that like to discuss 9/11. They are a minority. They like Ron Paul because he doesn't believe the government was competent enough to deal with 9/11. Ron Paul doesn't believe 9/11 is the result of a conspiracy, as you would like to believe.

And they will invade any liberal discussion forum, selling the message that both parties are so corrupt that we NEED someone like RP to upset the apple cart and reset the whole game.

This is probably true.

And the nut jobs think they are scoring points for RP when all the liberals jump on the RP posters.

What does liberalism have to do with it?

What an interesting universe they live in. Glad I do not live there.

I think you like to lump people into groups and make baseless characterizations. Both liberals and conservatives support Ron Paul for various reasons. The majority are nothing like what you characterize them as.

Please stop making baseless partisan attacks that don't contribute to advancing the discussion.

[Richard Masters]

No, Ron Paul SAID it wasn't him. He could very very easily be lying. And given the fact he's accepting money from white supremacists makes it a tad more likely he's lying.

Even if he didn't write it, it was an incredibly small publication with a small circulation. There's no reason he couldn't have (at least) quickly skimmed over it. He either wrote it and later denied it or he approved it's publication, or at the VERY least he is extremely careless about the people he gets to represent him.

Everything points to him being a racist. He accepts money from racist groups, he has been strongly connected to racist statements , he writes articles for the website of the former head of the KKK and did I mention HE WRITES ARTICLES FOR THE WEBSITE OF A FORMER KKK LEADER!

Am I the only one who's noticed that Ron Paul seems rather moderate when compared to the things he's said and done when not running for President?

Such as?

[Richard Masters]

And you better carry an umbrella tonight, The flying pigs are migrating.



That he associates with terrorists is reason enough to write him off as a waste of ballot space. He is consorting witrh enemies of humanity.



That you buy into Duke's [rule8] marks you as too uninformed or malevolent toward America to be taken seriously. Now, do you still wonder why people get hostile when you try to sell RP to progressives and intellectuals?

You consider yourself an intellectual? Then why don't you try thinking critically?

[leftysergeant]

RP willfully has his positions posted to a David Duke venue. He does not confront Duke. Sounds like he is pandering to Duke's band of slime things.

Racism is irrational. RP is courting irrational people. His own rationality is called into question.

[Axiom_Blade]

Racism is irrational. RP is courting irrational people. His own rationality is called into question.

The way he runs his campaign makes me question his ideology, his sanity, or both.
Why doesn't he try to get his message out to the mainstream, instead of appearing on the Alex Jones Show and pandering to racists? Isn't that what any sane, respectable person who wanted to win would do?

[Richard Masters]

RP willfully has his positions posted to a David Duke venue. He does not confront Duke. Sounds like he is pandering to Duke's band of slime things.

Racism is irrational. RP is courting irrational people. His own rationality is called into question.

More guilt by association. Ron Paul has more black supporters than any other Republican. Ron Paul also doesn't confront black people. Does this mean Ron Paul is black?

Ron Paul is courting rational people also. Does this mean he is rational?

Ron Paul admires Muhammad Ali, Rosa Parks and denounces racism. Does his admiration for Rosa Parks make him a woman?

Under your flawed reasoning. It does.

[Richard Masters]

The way he runs his campaign makes me question his ideology, his sanity, or both.
Why doesn't he try to get his message out to the mainstream, instead of appearing on the Alex Jones Show and pandering to racists? Isn't that what any sane, respectable person who wanted to win would do?

You are assuming Ron Paul doesn't try to get his message out to the mainstream. Ron Paul doesn't pander to racists. He deals with everyone the same way.

[abenja1]

I'm going to put my 2 cents in this whole Ron Paul debacle. Do I think he's a closeted racist? Quite possibly. Maybe. I don't know. It doesn't help that he wrote for the American Free Press, which has been known to lean towards the nutty, CT, anti-semitic world. I'm always willing to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, but unfortunatly, Mr. Paul is not helping his image with these little skeletons he has in the closet. But I would like to address that "racist" issue newsletter he sent. If he didn't write it, then he is an irresponsible idiot who shouldn't be a congressman, let alone running for president. The newsletter was under his name, therefore he should've been smart enough to check it before it ran.

[Richard Masters]

I'm going to put my 2 cents in this whole Ron Paul debacle. Do I think he's a closeted racist? Quite possibly. Maybe. I don't know. It doesn't help that he wrote for the American Free Press, which has been known to lean towards the nutty, CT, anti-semitic world. I'm always willing to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, but unfortunatly, Mr. Paul is not helping his image with these little skeletons he has in the closet. But I would like to address that "racist" issue newsletter he sent. If he didn't write it, then he is an irresponsible idiot who shouldn't be a congressman, let alone running for president. The newsletter was under his name, therefore he should've been smart enough to check it before it ran.

I agree that he should have done more to clear his name.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Ron Paul is courting rational people also.

Unfortunately, he can´t get any of them to support him.

[Axiom_Blade]

More guilt by association. Ron Paul has more black supporters than any other Republican. Ron Paul also doesn't confront black people. Does this mean Ron Paul is black?

Ron Paul is courting rational people also. Does this mean he is rational?

Ron Paul admires Muhammad Ali, Rosa Parks and denounces racism. Does his admiration for Rosa Parks make him a woman?

Under your flawed reasoning. It does.

Got any evidence for any of these claims?

[leftysergeant]

It doesn't help that he wrote for the American Free Press, which has been known to lean towards the nutty, CT, anti-semitic world. I'm always willing to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, but unfortunatly, Mr. Paul is not helping his image with these little skeletons he has in the closet...

it is a clear proof that he is pandering to undesireables that he deals so amicably with them as to contribute material under his own rubric.

But I would like to address that "racist" issue newsletter he sent. If he didn't write it, then he is an irresponsible idiot who shouldn't be a congressman, let alone running for president. The newsletter was under his name, therefore he should've been smart enough to check it before it ran.

I am a military man and I value attention to detail in a leader. If some dreck that he doesn't endorse got into the whackadoo press under his name, with his fore-knowldege, he has shown little regard for an important detail and is not to be trusted to make major decisions on behalf of the nation.

Slovenly leadership skills, at best.

[Astute Perspicuous]

it is a clear proof that he is pandering to undesireables that he deals so amicably with them as to contribute material under his own rubric.

OK...so you call US MILITARY VETS undesirables?

FACT: RON PAUL HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATIONS FROM MILITARY VETS AND ACTIVE MEMBERS THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

Nice try but NO COOKIE...

Ron Paul only trails behind Obama for number of DONORS, with Hillary behind Paul.

[Kerberos]

OK...so you call US MILITARY VETS undesirables?

FACT: RON PAUL HAS GOTTEN MORE DONATIONS FROM MILITARY VETS AND ACTIVE MEMBERS THAN ALL THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES COMBINED

Nice try but NO COOKIE...

Ron Paul only trails behind Obama for number of DONORS, with Hillary behind Paul.

Unfortunatly what matters is voters not donors.

No cookie.

[MaGZ]

Yet you hear almost nothing about Obama belonging to a Black Nationalist church! Obama Admits and proudly sports it for all to see!

...or that Hillary helped defend radical Black Panthers when she was a student at Yale.

[MaGZ]

Cool. For the record, I don't think a Farrakhan endorsement reflects badly on Obama, I was just speculating about the source of the idea that his church is some sort of black nationalist organization. Now if Obama said he appreciated Farrakhan's endorsement BECAUSE Farrakhan is a black nationalist, that would be different. If the head of the KKK endorsed Edwards I wouldn't take it seriously, the endorsement alone means nothing.

If Farrakhan gave a $500 donation to Obama, would that be any different from the Don Black donation to Ron Paul? Should Obama give back that donation?

[OneShotKi11]

...or that Hillary helped defend radical Black Panthers when she was a student at Yale.

What about Hillary's screwing over Stan Lee (spiderman) and that situation!

[hgc]

What about Hillary's screwing over Stan Lee (spiderman) and that situation!


:eek: What's that all about?!?

[rtalman]

:eek: What's that all about?!?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_F._Paul

[Richard Masters]

Got any evidence for any of these claims?

Yes.

[NeoRicen]

Yes.
And.........................

[Tsukasa Buddha]

And.........................

It's a secret.

[Pardalis]

Somehow, at the turn of the year, I expected Ron Paul to disappear.

I guess everybody can be a victim to a moment of magical thinking every once and a while...

[Mister Agenda]

If Farrakhan gave a $500 donation to Obama, would that be any different from the Don Black donation to Ron Paul? Should Obama give back that donation?

No, it's just a donation. Farrakhan has no reasonable expectation that Obama will do anything differently because of his $500 donation. It's the $5M donations you have to watch out for.

[Mister Agenda]

Somehow, at the turn of the year, I expected Ron Paul to disappear.

I guess everybody can be a victim to a moment of magical thinking every once and a while...

I think six months ago PAUL expected to be cooling his heels back in TX by now.

If it's magical thinking at least the reality check is coming up fast. And what will RP supporters have learned if their man bites the dust? That no matter how much money they raise (about $30M), how many straw polls they attend, how many forums they post in, or how many online or text-messaging polls their guy wins, there's no beating the Rasmussen poll. That should put a damper on any similar effort in the near future.

[Richard Masters]

Got any evidence for any of these claims?

Unfortunately, he can´t get any of them to support him.

I consider myself a rational Ron Paul supporter. But I will admit I'm having trouble finding too many who are not simply projecting their own views unto Ron Paul (for example some 9/11 "truthers", the more recent batch which enjoyed the propagandist but contradictory immigrant ad, etc.)

And.........................

It's a secret.

Nah, it's all over the place.



Ron Paul has more black supporters than any other Republican.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/15/ron-paul-is-highest-polling-republican-among-black-voters/

Ron Paul admires Muhammad Ali,

Muhammad Ali's 65th birthday.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=110-h20070117-38&bill=hr110-58#sMonofilemx003Ammx002Fmmx002Fmmx002Fmhomemx002F mgovtrackmx002Fmdatamx002Fmusmx002Fm110mx002Fmcrmx 002Fmh20070117-38.xmlElementm12m0m0m

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 58. I saw Muhammad Ali as a man of great courage, and I admired him for this, not because of the courage that it took to get in a ring and fight men bigger than he, but because of his stance in 1967.

In 1967, he was 25 years old. He was the heavyweight champion of the world, and for religious beliefs, he practiced what Martin Luther King made popular, civil disobedience, because he disagreed with the war. I thought his comments were rather astute at the time and were not complex, but he merely said, I have no quarrel with the Viet-Cong. He said the Viet-Cong never called him a name, and because of his religious convictions, he said he did not want to serve in the military. He stood firm, a man of principle, and I really admired this as a quality.

He is known, of course, for his athletic skills and his humanitarian concerns, and these are rightly mentioned in a resolution like this. But I do want to emphasize this because, to me, it was so important and had such impact, in reality, what Muhammad Ali did eventually led to getting rid of the draft, and yet we as a people and we as a Congress still do not have the conviction that Muhammad Ali had, because we still have the selective service; we say, let us not draft now, but when the conditions are right, we will bring back the draft and bring back those same problems that we had in the 1960s.

I see what Muhammad Ali did as being very great. He deserves this recognition, but we should also praise him for being a man of principle and willing to give up his title for 3 years at the age of 25 at the prime of his career. How many of us give up something to stand on principle? He was a man of principle. He believed it and he stood firm, so even those who may disagree with his position may say at least he stood up for what he believed in. He suffered the consequences and fortunately was eventually vindicated.

[admires] Rosa Parks,

Wolf Blitzer CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVwuYKGIn38

and denounces racism.

PBS Special
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP1kVMEtP_U

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups.

Conservatives and libertarians should fight back and challenge the myth that collectivist liberals care more about racism. Modern liberalism, however well intentioned, is a byproduct of the same collectivist thinking that characterizes racism. The continued insistence on group thinking only inflames racial tensions.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free market, businesses that discriminate lose customers, goodwill, and valuable employees – while rational businesses flourish by choosing the most qualified employees and selling to all willing buyers. More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism.

:crowded:

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Ron Paul has more black supporters than any other Republican.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/15/ron-paul-is-highest-polling-republican-among-black-voters/

Yeah, I read that. It sucks.

Look here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html). McCain has the best score head to head out of all the Republicans going against Hillary. But does he have more supporters than any other Republican? No.

They are just making over-hyped claims because they fail at statistics.

[Richard Masters]

Yeah, I read that. It sucks.

Look here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html). McCain has the best score head to head out of all the Republicans going against Hillary. But does he have more supporters than any other Republican? No.

They are just making over-hyped claims because they fail at statistics.

"Yeah, I read that. It sucks."

Why does that suck?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

"Yeah, I read that. It sucks."

Why does that suck?

I showed why in the rest of my post.

[Richard Masters]

I showed why in the rest of my post.

I see your point, but the results are not analogous.

The more accurate statement would be "In races against Hillary Clinton or Obama, Ron Paul receives more votes from black voters than other Republicans".

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I see your point, but the results are not analogous.

The more accurate statement would be "In races against Hillary Clinton or Obama, Ron Paul receives more votes from black voters than other Republicans".

Yes, that is true.

However, that was not the claim made by either you or the RP release.

[Richard Masters]

Yes, that is true.

However, that was not the claim made by either you or the RP release.

You are correct. I should have checked my sources instead of relied on hearsay.