RNC changes rules last minute

[Forever_frost]

Yes, it really is. Unless you have the numbers to actually get what you want, it's a wasted vote. Paul is out. He ran as a Republican and R's didn't want him. His Paulbots account for what? 1% of the voting population?

And again, you say no difference between Romney and Obama. Have you seen their policies? Which are the same?


Edit: You want to know why most can't stand Paulbots? Did you see how rabid they became when Rand said he supported Romney? They called Rand the son of the devil. No, he's the son of Ron Paul

[Vertnut]

That's right, because when you're on the side of liberty there is no compromising. DR Paul supporters know there is no difference between the two goldman sachs candidates, except their skin color.

Dude, please...none of you will even acknowledge some of the facts about RP. Move along with that "liberty" BS. You think you're more of a patriot than me because you are going to blow a vote writing in for RP?

[Reefer Rae]

Not compromising and sticking with your candidate is not a wasted vote. Everyone has the right to vote for who they want. Just because you don't supportDR Paul doesn't mean it's a "wasted vote." The DR Paul supporters understand that a vote for Obama is vote for Romney, there is no difference between them. DR Paul supporters want a liberty minded candidate, and neither of the goldman sachs candidates offer that.

You are really making it hard for folks to call Forrest crazy on this one , they probably will anyways though

[Vertnut]

I don't think Paul is a Republican. He only wears the mantle when he wants to win an election. Every other time he bad mouths the party. He's a Libertarian who doesn't have the balls to run under that. He's like the Republican who switched to Democrat to try to win an election and lost. Liberman I think.

He's not a republican. He shit all over Ronnie back in '86, then crawled back to the party so he might have a prayer this time around. Even as a Rep, he pulled an average of 10% of the states' votes.

[Vertnut]

I'm not surprised, it was pretty much to be expected. This was the entire reason the party pulled shenanigans in some of the states during the delegate selection process.

Paul's people pulled their share of tricks, too.

[jw33]

I don't think Paul is a Republican. He only wears the mantle when he wants to win an election. Every other time he bad mouths the party. He's a Libertarian who doesn't have the balls to run under that. He's like the Republican who switched to Democrat to try to win an election and lost. Liberman I think.

Ok, let us both just agree he is not a republican if that make it easier to answer.

Do you honestly believe Ron Paul or someone like him is "bad" for politics, the republican party, of our country?

[jw33]

Paul's people pulled their share of tricks, too.

Such as?

[Forever_frost]

Ok, let us both just agree he is not a republican if that make it easier to answer.

Do you honestly believe Ron Paul or someone like him is "bad" for politics, the republican party, of our country?

That's not even a question. It's too general. Paul is bad for the country because he believes we can curl up in a shell like we did pre WW2 and if we dont' interfere, no one will bother us. I like his monetary policy but that's about it. His foreign policy scares the hell out of me.

Is he bad for the Republican party? You mean a 70 year old man who has never ran for governor who thinks he deserves the big seat? Yes. We see what happens when someone with no executive experience and his fanatical followers decide they DESERVE the presidency and go nuts on anyone who disagrees with any of his ideals. We got Obama.

[teal93derp]

Yes, it really is. Unless you have the numbers to actually get what you want, it's a wasted vote. Paul is out. He ran as a Republican and R's didn't want him. His Paulbots account for what? 1% of the voting population?

And again, you say no difference between Romney and Obama. Have you seen their policies? Which are the same?


Edit: You want to know why most can't stand Paulbots? Did you see how rabid they became when Rand said he supported Romney? They called Rand the son of the devil. No, he's the son of Ron Paul

I have seen their policies but on Romneys side it's all talk because he can't show anything unless elected. I know he won't repeal the patriot act, or ndaa. He may talk about an audit of the fed, but if you aren't talking about ENDING the fed you ain't talking IMO. We all know where Obama stands on his policies.

As far as the Repubs not wanting DR Paul that's fine, but at least adhere to rules that were in place to nominate Mitt. When you change the rules last minute like that, it's BS chicken spit.

The reason a lot of DR Paul's supporters were mad at Rand is because they expected him to endorse his father. I understand that would end Rands political career, but some DR Paul supporters just feel he should have endorsed his father regardless.

I don't think we will get to see if Mitt was what he claims to be. There are too many people currently on the government programs who will re elect Obama. And the "one percent" of Paul Voters writing him in surely can't impact the election since there is so few of them.

On a side note that's most likely irrelevant but interesting. Last week the vegas odds of Obama to win were -170 now as of Saturday up to -220. Vegas seems to think Obama has it in the bag.

[Vertnut]

Such as?

Tinkering around with delegates and procedure.

[Vertnut]

I have seen their policies but on Romneys side it's all talk because he can't show anything unless elected. I know he won't repeal the patriot act, or ndaa. He may talk about an audit of the fed, but if you aren't talking about ENDING the fed you ain't talking IMO. We all know where Obama stands on his policies.

As far as the Repubs not wanting DR Paul that's fine, but at least adhere to rules that were in place to nominate Mitt. When you change the rules last minute like that, it's BS chicken spit.

The reason a lot of DR Paul's supporters were mad at Rand is because they expected him to endorse his father. I understand that would end Rands political career, but some DR Paul supporters just feel he should have endorsed his father regardless.

I don't think we will get to see if Mitt was what he claims to be. There are too many people currently on the government programs who will re elect Obama. And the "one percent" of Paul Voters writing him in surely can't impact the election since there is so few of them.

On a side note that's most likely irrelevant but interesting. Last week the vegas odds of Obama to win were -170 now as of Saturday up to -220. Vegas seems to think Obama has it in the bag.

RP has no "proven policies" either. Rand has it right. He has a REAL future in the republican party, and knows it.

[teal93derp]

RP has no "proven policies" either. Rand has it right. He has a REAL future in the republican party, and knows it.

You're right, they aren't proven because everyone wants to continue doing the same failed policies that continually have buried us deeper in debt and more wars. We will never know what DR Paul's policies could have done good or bad if we never even give them a chance. It is what it is, and IMO this sinking ship whether Barry or Mitt is at the helm is in big trouble.

[Vertnut]

You're right, they aren't proven because everyone wants to continue doing the same failed policies that continually have buried us deeper in debt and more wars. We will never know what DR Paul's policies could have done good or bad if we never even give them a chance. It is what it is, and IMO this sinking ship whether Barry or Mitt is at the helm is in big trouble.

The "Tea Party" is finally making some true in-roads into D.C. Your attitude, along with other "lock-step" RP follower's will have no positive affect on any of it. It's easier to just throw the towel in and quit, I suppose. Do what you need to do. Live long and prosper!

[Forever_frost]

I have seen their policies but on Romneys side it's all talk because he can't show anything unless elected. I know he won't repeal the patriot act, or ndaa. He may talk about an audit of the fed, but if you aren't talking about ENDING the fed you ain't talking IMO. We all know where Obama stands on his policies.

As far as the Repubs not wanting DR Paul that's fine, but at least adhere to rules that were in place to nominate Mitt. When you change the rules last minute like that, it's BS chicken spit.

The reason a lot of DR Paul's supporters were mad at Rand is because they expected him to endorse his father. I understand that would end Rands political career, but some DR Paul supporters just feel he should have endorsed his father regardless.

I don't think we will get to see if Mitt was what he claims to be. There are too many people currently on the government programs who will re elect Obama. And the "one percent" of Paul Voters writing him in surely can't impact the election since there is so few of them.

On a side note that's most likely irrelevant but interesting. Last week the vegas odds of Obama to win were -170 now as of Saturday up to -220. Vegas seems to think Obama has it in the bag.

I'm not sure if you actually know the power of the executive branch, but they can only repeal things that come across their desk after being voted on and approved by congress. If Congress sends him a repeal, I am betting he'll sign it.

[Forever_frost]

You're right, they aren't proven because everyone wants to continue doing the same failed policies that continually have buried us deeper in debt and more wars. We will never know what DR Paul's policies could have done good or bad if we never even give them a chance. It is what it is, and IMO this sinking ship whether Barry or Mitt is at the helm is in big trouble.

So, Romney is Obama because in order to see his policies you have to vote him in, but Paul has none because he hasn't been voted in so we can see them. You are aware your argument makes no sense when you're claiming a Paul exemption from your own criticism, right?