Author Topic: Election 2012  (Read 231771 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Fiery Winds

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 2959
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #455 on: December 11, 2011, 02:57:47 AM »
Yeah, I got the impression too.  I only saw about 10 minutes, and here's my highly in depth analysis of the candidates based on months of following the race:

Bachmann:  Die Obamacare!!

Santorum:  Came across as a reasonable and nice guy.

Romney:  "I worked the private sector".  Something about his personality irks me.

Gingrich:  "I worked the private sector too Mitt!" (Referring to consulting with Freddie Mac, lol)

Paul:  Not as articulate as he used to be.

Perry:  Same as Romney regarding personality.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #456 on: December 11, 2011, 06:17:02 AM »
Regardless of that, my ENTIRE POINT was that as I have stated here, Ron Paul is a typical politician who will say whatever he needs to say in order to get elected. 

If this were true he'd say that gays are inhuman, drug prohibition is great, the patriot act is constitutional, and that we should bomb Iran.  The advertisement emphasizes a position he strongly believes in and fights for, which also concurs with the position of many voters.  This is certainly not the same as, "saying whatever he needs to say in order to get elected."

Wrong.  He doesn't have to say those things and you've missed my point.   But thanks for playing  :corn

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #457 on: December 11, 2011, 06:21:10 AM »
Yeah, I got the impression too.  I only saw about 10 minutes, and here's my highly in depth analysis of the candidates based on months of following the race:

Bachmann:  Die Obamacare!!

Santorum:  Came across as a reasonable and nice guy.

Romney:  "I worked the private sector".  Something about his personality irks me.

Gingrich:  "I worked the private sector too Mitt!" (Referring to consulting with Freddie Mac, lol)

Paul:  Not as articulate as he used to be.

Perry:  Same as Romney regarding personality.

You think it's "reasonable" to force a rape victim to carry the baby to delivery?

Because that's Rick Santorum's position.  No abortion, ever, under any circumstances of any kind.  Period.

So, let's say you were married, and through an unfortunate series of events, your wife was violently raped by "Bubba" the 280 lb African American career criminal.....in Rick Santorum's world, your wife would have no choice but to deliver Bubba's baby.

Still think he's "reasonable" and "nice" now? 

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #458 on: December 11, 2011, 09:31:25 AM »
Santorum is actually well-spoken, and actually seems sincere about his opinions. He doesn't pander like the others. He might even surge soon because all other panderers implode. But it's actually going to end up being Romney vs. Paul vs. Gingrich


Edit: watched the debates and all. I think RP might surge after this. Also, Newt handled himself extremely well but is eventually going to implode anyway.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 02:57:25 PM by jsem »

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #459 on: December 11, 2011, 03:05:04 PM »
I feel like Newt has a chance to ruin Romney.

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 25281
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #460 on: December 11, 2011, 04:58:11 PM »
That 10,000 dollar bet comment made Romney look like a real asshole.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2011, 02:24:45 AM by Chino »

Offline Fiery Winds

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 2959
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #461 on: December 11, 2011, 05:21:32 PM »
Yeah, I got the impression too.  I only saw about 10 minutes, and here's my highly in depth analysis of the candidates based on months of following the race:

Bachmann:  Die Obamacare!!

Santorum:  Came across as a reasonable and nice guy.

Romney:  "I worked the private sector".  Something about his personality irks me.

Gingrich:  "I worked the private sector too Mitt!" (Referring to consulting with Freddie Mac, lol)

Paul:  Not as articulate as he used to be.

Perry:  Same as Romney regarding personality.

You think it's "reasonable" to force a rape victim to carry the baby to delivery?

Because that's Rick Santorum's position.  No abortion, ever, under any circumstances of any kind.  Period.

So, let's say you were married, and through an unfortunate series of events, your wife was violently raped by "Bubba" the 280 lb African American career criminal.....in Rick Santorum's world, your wife would have no choice but to deliver Bubba's baby.

Still think he's "reasonable" and "nice" now?

Like I said, I'm not very familiar with any of the candidates right now other than what I saw last night. 

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #462 on: December 12, 2011, 06:22:54 AM »
^fair enough, and you're right that Santorum does come off as a nice person, but when you dig a little bit under the surface, it's not too surprising that he's never polled above about 5%


Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #463 on: December 12, 2011, 06:28:46 AM »
He doesn't have what it takes to bring out enthusiasm in people. But he still might end up surging as the other candidates implode.

I have Newt max 7 more days until he begins dropping.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #464 on: December 12, 2011, 07:25:08 AM »
Quote
RON PAUL: "We have dumped the debt on the American people through TARP funding as well as the Federal Reserve. So the debt is dumped onto people. And what did we do? We bailed out the people that were benefiting during the formation of the bubble. So as long as we do that, we're not going to have economic growth."  THE FACTS: The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program was proposed by President George W. Bush and passed by Congress in 2008 to help rescue banks and other imperiled financial institutions. Nearly all of the money has been paid back, with interest.
 Most economists credit the program with keeping the financial system from freezing up and helping to prevent the worst recession in 30 years from becoming another Great Depression. The Federal Reserve does not operate on taxpayer money and does not receive any operating funds from the Treasury. In fact, it makes money every year from its banking operations, and turns over profits to the Treasury.
Read more: https://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/politics/12006138449283/fact-check-plenty-to-question-in-gop-debate/#ixzz1gKVSRFsI
 
As much as I hate giving George W. Bush credit for anything, T.A.R.P. was successful.
Quote
Rep. Ron Paul of Texas made questionable and misleading claims about taxes in his state since Perry became governor, saying that “our taxes [in Texas] have doubled.” We could find no evidence that taxes for Texas residents had doubled under Perry. Paul also said: “Our spending has gone up double. Our debt has gone up nearly triple.” After adjusting for inflation and population growth, the spending increase was 21 percent, not a doubling. The debt claim is a reference to the state bond debt, which has nearly tripled in real dollars. That’s not the same as running a deficit; the state has a balanced budget requirement.

Read more: https://factcheck.org/2011/12/debate-watch/


More of that famous "principled" politicking  ::)    If he'd quit saying stuff like this, resorting to distorting facts to score cheap points in debates and running monster truck ads full of monstrous amounts of hyperbole, maybe he wouldn't be stuck at 8% to 10% in most of the polls.   Or maybe I'm wrong and he needs to dial the nonsense UP instead of down? 

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #465 on: December 12, 2011, 07:29:09 AM »
He doesn't have what it takes to bring out enthusiasm in people. But he still might end up surging as the other candidates implode.

I have Newt max 7 more days until he begins dropping.

Santorum isn't going anywhere in the polls, just like Bachmann isn't going anywhere, and Huntsman neither.  I'd be astonished if any of them make further than the Florida primaries.

I hope you're wrong about Gingrich, but Mitt Romney completely blew it with that ridiculous $10,000 bet thing.   And according to most Evangelicals (who make up a huge portion of Republican primary voters) he's in a cult, so they'd rather embrace Gingrich, the serial adulterer than a guy in a cult.  I guess you can "repent" from adultery, but being in a cult is a no-no.

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #466 on: December 12, 2011, 01:19:16 PM »
Why would you hope I'm wrong? I'm saying that Newt's poll numbers should begin to drop substantially within 7 days.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #467 on: December 12, 2011, 01:29:08 PM »
Why would you hope I'm wrong? I'm saying that Newt's poll numbers should begin to drop substantially within 7 days.

Why would I say I hope you're wrong?  Because Obama polls strongest against Gingrich in a general election match-up.  So, I want Gingrich to win the Republican Primaries and be their nominee, because frankly, I think Obama will landslide him.

Offline MetalMike06

  • DT.net Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1549
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #468 on: December 12, 2011, 01:29:58 PM »
Quote
RON PAUL: "We have dumped the debt on the American people through TARP funding as well as the Federal Reserve. So the debt is dumped onto people. And what did we do? We bailed out the people that were benefiting during the formation of the bubble. So as long as we do that, we're not going to have economic growth."  THE FACTS: The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program was proposed by President George W. Bush and passed by Congress in 2008 to help rescue banks and other imperiled financial institutions. Nearly all of the money has been paid back, with interest.
 Most economists credit the program with keeping the financial system from freezing up and helping to prevent the worst recession in 30 years from becoming another Great Depression. The Federal Reserve does not operate on taxpayer money and does not receive any operating funds from the Treasury. In fact, it makes money every year from its banking operations, and turns over profits to the Treasury.
Read more: https://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/politics/12006138449283/fact-check-plenty-to-question-in-gop-debate/#ixzz1gKVSRFsI
 
As much as I hate giving George W. Bush credit for anything, T.A.R.P. was successful.

Read this actually right before I read your post.
Quote
An Associated Press article purporting to correct the errors of the candidates in last weekend's GOP presidential debate includes the following passage:

Quote
RON PAUL: "We have dumped the debt on the American people through TARP funding as well as the Federal Reserve. So the debt is dumped onto people. And what did we do? We bailed out the people that were benefiting during the formation of the bubble. So as long as we do that, we're not going to have economic growth."

THE FACTS: The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program was proposed by President George W. Bush and passed by Congress in 2008 to help rescue banks and other imperiled financial institutions. Nearly all of the money has been paid back, with interest.

Most economists credit the program with keeping the financial system from freezing up and helping to prevent the worst recession in 30 years from becoming another Great Depression. The Federal Reserve does not operate on taxpayer money and does not receive any operating funds from the Treasury. In fact, it makes money every year from its banking operations, and turns over profits to the Treasury.

A necessarily speculative counterfactual claim made by some economists is scarcely a "fact," and we might wonder about the value of a consensus among economists in the first place in light of their rather unimpressive performance in understanding the economy over the past ten years. David Stockman, on the other hand, notes that "30 months after the fact, evidence that the American economy had been on the edge of a nuclear-style meltdown [at the time TARP was passed] is nowhere to be found."

On the "TARP money was repaid" front, I note the comments of Dean Baker:


Quote
We are also supposed to feel good that the vast majority of the TARP money was repaid. This is another effort to prey on the public's ignorance. Had it not been for the bailout, most of the major center banks would have been wiped out. This would have destroyed the fortunes of their shareholders, many of their creditors, and their top executives. This would have been a massive redistribution to the rest of society — their loss is our gain.

It is important to remember that the economy would be no less productive following the demise of these Wall Street giants. The only economic fact that would have been different is that the Wall Street crew would have lost claims to hundreds of billions of dollars of the economy's output each year and trillions of dollars of wealth. That money would instead be available for the rest of society. The fact that they have lost the claim to wealth from their stock and bond holdings makes all the rest of us richer once the economy is again operating near normal levels of output.

Instead, we have the same Wall Street crew calling the shots, doing business pretty much as they always did. The rest of us are sitting here dealing with wreckage of their recklessness: 9.6 percent unemployment and the loss of much of the middle class's savings in their homes and their retirement accounts. And the lackeys of the Wall Street crew are telling us that we should be thankful that we didn't have a second Great Depression. Maybe we don't have the power to keep the bankers from picking our pockets, but we don't have to believe their lies.

And finally, Ron Paul never said the Fed got money from the Treasury; presumably we can trust that a guy who's written as much as Ron Paul has on the Fed knows something as elementary as this. The point, rather, is that when the Fed qualitatively degrades its balance sheet, as when it swaps decent assets for lousy ones, it harms holders of dollars. The mechanism works like this: When the Fed wants to withdraw money from the economy it sells assets — but if its assets are lousy and won't fetch many dollars, it has a more difficult time reversing its earlier expansionist monetary policy, and the likelihood of price inflation is now all the greater.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #469 on: December 12, 2011, 01:37:15 PM »
Hmm, yeah, Dean Baker and the CEPR?  Nah, I'll stick with FactCheck.org.  And I'm a liberal.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #470 on: December 12, 2011, 02:49:20 PM »
We are also supposed to feel good that the vast majority of the TARP money was repaid. This is another effort to prey on the public's ignorance. Had it not been for the bailout, most of the major center banks would have been wiped out. This would have destroyed the fortunes of their shareholders, many of their creditors, and their top executives. This would have been a massive redistribution to the rest of society — their loss is our gain.

[...]The only economic fact that would have been different is that the Wall Street crew would have lost claims to hundreds of billions of dollars of the economy's output each year and trillions of dollars of wealth. That money would instead be available for the rest of society. The fact that they have lost the claim to wealth from their stock and bond holdings makes all the rest of us richer once the economy is again operating near normal levels of output.

It's hard to imagine a more retarded argument than that. I guess he doesn't like the Great Depression as a data point, does he?

rumborak
"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline abrahamclark

  • Posts: 538
  • Gender: Male
  • Signer of the Declaration of Independence
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #471 on: December 12, 2011, 07:21:26 PM »
Regardless of that, my ENTIRE POINT was that as I have stated here, Ron Paul is a typical politician who will say whatever he needs to say in order to get elected. 

If this were true he'd say that gays are inhuman, drug prohibition is great, the patriot act is constitutional, and that we should bomb Iran.  The advertisement emphasizes a position he strongly believes in and fights for, which also concurs with the position of many voters.  This is certainly not the same as, "saying whatever he needs to say in order to get elected."

Wrong.  He doesn't have to say those things and you've missed my point.   But thanks for playing  :corn

Your argument wasn't missed, it's simply nonsensical.  Your claim is almost laughable considering that Paul is one of the most consistent politicians of our day.  Even those who disagree with him will admit he votes in accordance with what he says.   

Offline MetalMike06

  • DT.net Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1549
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #472 on: December 12, 2011, 07:38:54 PM »

It's hard to imagine a more retarded argument than that. I guess he doesn't like the Great Depression as a data point, does he?


Many people don't. There's still plenty of debate over that to this day.

Offline abrahamclark

  • Posts: 538
  • Gender: Male
  • Signer of the Declaration of Independence
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #473 on: December 12, 2011, 09:18:01 PM »

It's hard to imagine a more retarded argument than that. I guess he doesn't like the Great Depression as a data point, does he?


Many people don't. There's still plenty of debate over that to this day.

Murray Rothbard's explanation for the Great Depression is the closest inline with Paul's. https://mises.org/Rothbard/AGD.pdf

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30562
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #474 on: December 12, 2011, 09:45:39 PM »
I'm kind of torn on Ron Paul.  I agree with a lot of what he says,  but he suffers from the same delusions that many Libertarians do, which is that political ideology has to be pure to work.  Hell,  Republicans and Democrats both occasionally get things right. 

I do think he has integrity.  I also think it's worth noticing that it's an easy thing to have when you know there aren't any consequences.  He can vote against spending bills because his general philosophy says to,  but he also knows that they'll pass anyway.  He certainly understands the game.  Attach expenditures and earmarks for your district, and then vote against the bill!   :lol

What I really do appreciate about him is something I read a while back from a former Republican Whip,  who said that there was a general understanding that you could crack any heads necessary to get a bill to pass,  but leave RP the hell alone.  Nothing you're going to do will persuade him,  so spend your efforts elsewhere.  I wish there were 500 more people like that in Congress.

Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline abrahamclark

  • Posts: 538
  • Gender: Male
  • Signer of the Declaration of Independence
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #475 on: December 12, 2011, 10:00:26 PM »
I'm kind of torn on Ron Paul.  I agree with a lot of what he says,  but he suffers from the same delusions that many Libertarians do, which is that political ideology has to be pure to work.  Hell,  Republicans and Democrats both occasionally get things right. 

I do think he has integrity.  I also think it's worth noticing that it's an easy thing to have when you know there aren't any consequences.  He can vote against spending bills because his general philosophy says to,  but he also knows that they'll pass anyway.  He certainly understands the game.  Attach expenditures and earmarks for your district, and then vote against the bill!   :lol

What I really do appreciate about him is something I read a while back from a former Republican Whip,  who said that there was a general understanding that you could crack any heads necessary to get a bill to pass,  but leave RP the hell alone.  Nothing you're going to do will persuade him,  so spend your efforts elsewhere.  I wish there were 500 more people like that in Congress.

Just a note on earmarks.  He supports them because his interpretation of the constitution is that only the Congress has the power to appropriate funds.  If earmarks weren't in place, the President could spend the money however he/she saw fit. I hear you on the ideological front, many people like the idea of a Paul-Nader, Paul-Sanders, or vice-versa ticket, to add some balance.

On another note, it's nice to see you are still on here El Barto. 

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30562
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #476 on: December 12, 2011, 10:10:33 PM »
I'm kind of torn on Ron Paul.  I agree with a lot of what he says,  but he suffers from the same delusions that many Libertarians do, which is that political ideology has to be pure to work.  Hell,  Republicans and Democrats both occasionally get things right. 

I do think he has integrity.  I also think it's worth noticing that it's an easy thing to have when you know there aren't any consequences.  He can vote against spending bills because his general philosophy says to,  but he also knows that they'll pass anyway.  He certainly understands the game.  Attach expenditures and earmarks for your district, and then vote against the bill!   :lol

What I really do appreciate about him is something I read a while back from a former Republican Whip,  who said that there was a general understanding that you could crack any heads necessary to get a bill to pass,  but leave RP the hell alone.  Nothing you're going to do will persuade him,  so spend your efforts elsewhere.  I wish there were 500 more people like that in Congress.

Just a note on earmarks.  He supports them because his interpretation of the constitution is that only the Congress has the power to appropriate funds.  If earmarks weren't in place, the President could spend the money however he/she saw fit. I hear you on the ideological front, many people like the idea of a Paul-Nader, Paul-Sanders, or vice-versa ticket, to add some balance.

On another note, it's nice to see you are still on here El Barto.
I think he's just playing the game well.   :lol 

And more power to him.  As long as he's voting his conscience,  and I think he is,  I have no problem with him hedging his bets for the benefit of his constituents.  Hell,  most of his colleagues are doing neither. 

And thanks.  I was happy to see you pop back up.  Been a while. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #477 on: December 12, 2011, 11:04:04 PM »

It's hard to imagine a more retarded argument than that. I guess he doesn't like the Great Depression as a data point, does he?


Many people don't. There's still plenty of debate over that to this day.

What I mean is, I think it's not exactly up to debate that people were piss-poor at the outcome of the Great Depression. The guy makes it sound as if banks are big silos of money, and once they explode everybody can just pick up dollar bills from the wreckage.

rumborak
"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #478 on: December 12, 2011, 11:10:35 PM »
Not if it's fractional reserve anyway :lol
« Last Edit: December 12, 2011, 11:16:27 PM by jsem »

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #479 on: December 13, 2011, 12:25:22 PM »
Regardless of that, my ENTIRE POINT was that as I have stated here, Ron Paul is a typical politician who will say whatever he needs to say in order to get elected. 

If this were true he'd say that gays are inhuman, drug prohibition is great, the patriot act is constitutional, and that we should bomb Iran.  The advertisement emphasizes a position he strongly believes in and fights for, which also concurs with the position of many voters.  This is certainly not the same as, "saying whatever he needs to say in order to get elected."


Wrong.  He doesn't have to say those things and you've missed my point.   But thanks for playing  :corn

Your argument wasn't missed, it's simply nonsensical.  Your claim is almost laughable considering that Paul is one of the most consistent politicians of our day.  Even those who disagree with him will admit he votes in accordance with what he says.

Right, he's never pandered to any political constituency.   He's Ron Paul.   ::)

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #480 on: December 13, 2011, 12:38:43 PM »
You tell me when he last pandered. Whenever he actually does something the crowd likes, at least he doesn't sacrifice his principles when doing it.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #481 on: December 13, 2011, 01:17:44 PM »
You tell me when he last pandered. Whenever he actually does something the crowd likes, at least he doesn't sacrifice his principles when doing it.

Well, let's make sure we have the definition of pandering (in the realm of politics) out here, because I know not everyone here is a native English speaker.

Now, with that out there, because he's Ron Paul, I know that many (maybe even most) who support him here are still going to refuse to acknowledge that -like every politician in office- he panders to whatever constituency he deems necessary to get him elected.  And he's never sacrificed his principles, except when he did.


Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #482 on: December 13, 2011, 01:33:36 PM »
I don't want to defend Paul to the grave, but I can't see how he sacrificed his principles there. He was going to vote against it anyway, so you might fill it up with grease to help your constituents. He at least represents his district well, compared to most other congressmen.


Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #483 on: December 13, 2011, 01:57:00 PM »
You tell me when he last pandered. Whenever he actually does something the crowd likes, at least he doesn't sacrifice his principles when doing it.

Well, let's make sure we have the definition of pandering (in the realm of politics) out here, because I know not everyone here is a native English speaker.

Now, with that out there, because he's Ron Paul, I know that many (maybe even most) who support him here are still going to refuse to acknowledge that -like every politician in office- he panders to whatever constituency he deems necessary to get him elected.  And he's never sacrificed his principles, except when he did.

That doesn't seem to being pandering so much as pragmatic to me.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #484 on: December 13, 2011, 02:18:08 PM »
Pandering to your current audience is very pragmatic.  They all do it.  And it's easy to see why.    Some do it more than others, and some do it in direct conflict with their stated political positions.  Paul is not someone who does it very often, and for that I give him credit.  But it just triggers my  ::) reaction when Paulbots claim he's like the second coming of Jesus and can do no wrong.  You don't stay in congress as long as Ron Paul has stayed in congress without making some sausage.

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #485 on: December 13, 2011, 02:46:55 PM »
Well, he does some sausage to his district, but that's as far as it goes. As pointed out, he's giving his constituents back their tax money :).

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #486 on: December 13, 2011, 02:49:10 PM »
Well, he does some sausage to his district, but that's as far as it goes. As pointed out, he's giving his constituents back their tax money :) .

Right, and he does that out of one side of his mouth while condemning the very same practice out of the other side.

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #487 on: December 13, 2011, 03:08:44 PM »
PAUL: But — but, Neil — Neil, you're — you're missing the whole point.

The principle of the earmark is our responsibility. We're supposed to — it's like a — a tax credit. And I vote for all tax credits, no matter how silly they might seem. If I can give you any of you of your money back, I vote for it. So, if I can give my district any money back, I encourage that.




MAJOR EDIT:
Found this video with Ron Paul himself explaining this earmarks thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgvrXFehWok
« Last Edit: December 14, 2011, 01:11:19 PM by jsem »

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #488 on: December 15, 2011, 08:19:26 PM »
Iowa debate right now. https://live.foxnews.com/ Ron Paul doesn't talk as smoothly as others, he stutters a lot, but he answers the questions he's been asked.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #489 on: December 15, 2011, 09:15:21 PM »
Man, Megan Kelly would probably be able to convince me to become a Republican  :lol