Author Topic: Election 2012  (Read 231793 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #560 on: December 22, 2011, 09:02:56 AM »
Eh, is anyone really surprised by this? RP has a million skeletons in his closet, but because he was such a fringe candidate none of the big contenders saw it worth attacking him. Now that he's leading in Iowa they started to hone in on him, and he will go straight down. His racist stuff, his stance on Iran, his "destroy 5 state departments", that's all welcome canon fodder. It would also be a cinch to tie him to some really loopy Libertarian characters (think Jeremiah Wright).

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

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #561 on: December 22, 2011, 09:17:13 AM »
It's really a non-issue anyway because Ron Paul is never going to be nominated for president anyway. 

Online antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #562 on: December 22, 2011, 09:44:39 AM »
I just read an excellent article in The Atlantic about the racist newsletters and finding a "pure" candidate. It's pretty long but well-worth the read. There's an excerpt toward the end where the author does some intellectual grappling with himself on who to vote for that I found myself agreeing with. He's not an ardent Paul supporter or anything like that.

Quote
"How could you vote for someone who..."

Isn't that a thorny formulation? I'm sometimes drawn to it. And yet. We're all choosing among a deeply compromised pool of candidates, at least when the field is narrowed to folks who poll above 5 percent. Put it this way. How can you vote for someone who wages an undeclared drone war that kills scores of Pakistani children? Or someone who righteously insisted that indefinite detention is an illegitimate transgression against our civilizational values, and proceeded to support that very practice once he was elected? How can you vote for someone who has claimed to be deeply convicted about abortion on both sides of the issue, constantly misrepresents his record, and demagogues important matters of foreign policy at every opportunity?  Or someone who suggests a religious minority group should be discriminated against? Or who insists that even given the benefit of hindsight, the Iraq War was a just and prudent one?

And yet many of you, Republicans and Democrats, will do just that -- just as you and I have voted for a long line of past presidents who've deliberately pursued policies of questionable-at-best morality.

In voting for "the lesser of two evils," there is still evil there -- we're just better at ignoring certain kinds in this fallen world. A national security policy that results in the regular deaths of innocent foreigners in order to maybe make us marginally safer from terrorism is one evil we are very good at ignoring.

[...]

Figuring out what flaws to accept in a candidate is a brutal calculus. I wouldn't begrudge someone who, having pondered the matter, decided that as best as they could tell -- we're all guessing about character judgments -- the racist newsletters are reason enough to refrain from supporting Paul. In some ways, it would be easiest for me to reach that conclusion: to establish as a litmus test that I'll never vote for anyone even remotely associated with what is poisonous drivel.

What I find harder, but compulsory, by my code, is at least comparing candidates all of whom stand for something poisonous, immoral or idiotic. Should I stay home? Does that not make me complicit in a different way? These quandaries are inescapable in a large democracy, especially one that is a global hegemon. My tentative conclusion: among the candidates who could win, Paul is least complicit in needlessly killing innocents abroad; he is least likely to deprive innocent foreigners of their God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; he is most committed to civil liberties and drug legalization at home. The contrary policies, which I regard as abhorrent, are easily ignored by most voters, because they are the status quo.

It is easiest to evade the moral implications of policies already in place.

Should Paul continue to perform well in the polls, or even win the Iowa caucuses, national media attention is going to focus intensely on his newsletters as never before, and it won't represent a double-standard: published racism under any candidate's name would rightly attract press attention! Paul ought to stop acting aggrieved. He is not a victim here. Voters ought to do their best to understand the controversy, gauge Paul's character, and render judgment about his likely behavior were he elected to the presidency, relative to his competitors.

 

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #563 on: December 22, 2011, 10:09:29 AM »
Well, to me, as much as I hate myself that Obama backpeddled on quite a few things, I must still say that I feel I can get most of the good things Paul stands for (emphasis on diplomacy, upholding the rule of law, drug legalization) without the loopy bits (destruction of 5 state departments) by plain reelecting Obama.
In fact, I find it rather hilarious that a lot of this bruhaha about Ron Paul's stances is really just him having Democrat values on certain things.

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

Online antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #564 on: December 22, 2011, 10:20:16 AM »
I must still say that I feel I can get most of the good things Paul stands for (emphasis on diplomacy, upholding the rule of law, drug legalization) without the loopy bits (destruction of 5 state departments) by plain reelecting Obama.

rumborak

In what world does Obama stand for upholding the rule of law and drug legalization?

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #565 on: December 22, 2011, 12:55:44 PM »
Eh, is anyone really surprised by this? RP has a million skeletons in his closet, but because he was such a fringe candidate none of the big contenders saw it worth attacking him. Now that he's leading in Iowa they started to hone in on him, and he will go straight down. His racist stuff, his stance on Iran, his "destroy 5 state departments", that's all welcome canon fodder. It would also be a cinch to tie him to some really loopy Libertarian characters (think Jeremiah Wright).

rumborak

Don't forget the monster truck ad, and the debate against the Obama imposter.

Online antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #566 on: December 22, 2011, 12:57:37 PM »
I think we're all trying to forget that :lol

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #567 on: December 22, 2011, 01:01:29 PM »
I must still say that I feel I can get most of the good things Paul stands for (emphasis on diplomacy, upholding the rule of law, drug legalization) without the loopy bits (destruction of 5 state departments) by plain reelecting Obama.

rumborak

In what world does Obama stand for upholding the rule of law and drug legalization?

I (obviously) can't speak for rumborak, but I think the operative word in his post was "most"

Online antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #568 on: December 22, 2011, 01:08:54 PM »
Right, and then he put some stances in parentheses that I figured he was ascribing to both people. I disagree either way.

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8521
  • Gender: Male
  • Bryce & Kylie's Grandpa
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #569 on: December 22, 2011, 01:29:10 PM »
Right, and then he put some stances in parentheses that I figured he was ascribing to both people. I disagree either way.

So, to be clear, you prefer Ron Paul over Obama?  Just curious.

Online antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #570 on: December 22, 2011, 01:49:23 PM »
I suppose so.

Online chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3746
  • Gender: Female
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #571 on: December 22, 2011, 02:16:16 PM »
It could be interesting to have polls as mock DTF elections to see who would win. One of Obama vs Paul, Obama vs Romney, etc.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30570
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #572 on: December 22, 2011, 02:24:17 PM »
I suppose so.
I have to agree.  My only concern would be judicial appointments,  and I don't think that'll get much worse.  If it looks like Obama will get bounced,  and he won't,  then Ginsburg and possibly Kennedy would announce their retirements so he'd be the one to replace them.  Thomas will be the first to retire from the right,  but he won't do that until there's a Republican to replace him; much like O'Connor.  With a President Paul,  that might happen sooner than later,  and it's not like Paul would find somebody as equally obtuse.  I wouldn't be too terribly surprised if Roberts were to drop dead one morning,  but it's certainly not something I'd bet on. 

The federal appeals courts are already a hodgepodge of ideologies,  so I don't see RP screwing that up too badly.   

As for everything else,  I think Paul would be a much better choice than Chimpy Jr.  While Paul might swing the court a bit more to the right,  but probably not,  he'd at least stand up for civil liberties, lessening the damage that gets done.  Obama's fucking us all,  and the court's already in place to back up him.  Paul would fuck us less,  so the court wouldn't be such an issue.


edit:
It could be interesting to have polls as mock DTF elections to see who would win. One of Obama vs Paul, Obama vs Romney, etc.
Obama would beat any of the GOP whackjobs handily,  and Paul would beat Obama by a similar margin. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3746
  • Gender: Female
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #573 on: December 22, 2011, 02:29:58 PM »

edit:
It could be interesting to have polls as mock DTF elections to see who would win. One of Obama vs Paul, Obama vs Romney, etc.
Obama would beat any of the GOP whackjobs handily,  and Paul would beat Obama by a similar margin.

You think its that obvious? I guess I don't have that much of a feel of everyone's political leanings towards all the candidates.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #574 on: December 22, 2011, 02:44:48 PM »
Somebody start that thread, I'm lazy. My guess would be Obama.

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #575 on: December 22, 2011, 02:46:26 PM »
Here's a better question to all of you calling Paul a racist: What can he do to save himself in your eyes?

Ah well, I guess this video is just going to prove your point about Paul actually being a racist, I mean - it's in his rhetoric: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdGGx7fj9j0

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #576 on: December 22, 2011, 02:47:52 PM »

edit:
It could be interesting to have polls as mock DTF elections to see who would win. One of Obama vs Paul, Obama vs Romney, etc.
Obama would beat any of the GOP whackjobs handily,  and Paul would beat Obama by a similar margin.

You think its that obvious? I guess I don't have that much of a feel of everyone's political leanings towards all the candidates.

I agree Obama's got the GOP pretty much covered at this point. However, I don't think Paul would win. People like their Medicare and their Social Security, so either Paul would really have to moderate his tone (that is, agree to a compromise), or he's going to basically have nothing left but young people who don't think they need health insurance. He'd have half of what the American people like regarding "Wallstreet," but until we know his position on Citizens United, that could be another very damming position.

Those two issues alone would mean Obama beats Paul. The "99%" movement hasn't gone away, it's effecting Republican politics, and Paul will find himself in a hard battle against Obama regarding these issues.

Besides, it's all going to depend upon Congress anyways. Obama or Paul alone means jack shit if you still have the current Republicans controlling the Senate and the House. Ron Paul with a Democratic Majority in the House and a Supermajority in the Senate would be a very interesting result, maybe more interesting than Obama.


Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #577 on: December 22, 2011, 02:52:22 PM »
Eh, is anyone really surprised by this? RP has a million skeletons in his closet, but because he was such a fringe candidate none of the big contenders saw it worth attacking him. Now that he's leading in Iowa they started to hone in on him, and he will go straight down. His racist stuff, his stance on Iran, his "destroy 5 state departments", that's all welcome canon fodder. It would also be a cinch to tie him to some really loopy Libertarian characters (think Jeremiah Wright).

rumborak

Don't forget the monster truck ad, and the debate against the Obama imposter.
Dude. Do you even know the story about that Obama imposter? It was on Stossel, and the context is important. It wasn't MEANT to be an actual Obama, it was a joke debate that Paul participated in: https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/04/ron-paul-debates-obama-impersonator-on-fox.html

They say after the interview after who the actor was an everything.

I'm sick of this taken out context.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #578 on: December 22, 2011, 02:55:18 PM »
Here's a better question to all of you calling Paul a racist: What can he do to save himself in your eyes?

Ah well, I guess this video is just going to prove your point about Paul actually being a racist, I mean - it's in his rhetoric: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdGGx7fj9j0

Err, that made him look particularly non-racist actually.

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #579 on: December 22, 2011, 02:57:40 PM »
Exactly. Because his actual views are represented in that video. Especially as a matter of public policy, he's the best choice for all races.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #580 on: December 22, 2011, 02:58:08 PM »

Ah well, I guess this video is just going to prove your point about Paul actually being a racist, I mean - it's in his rhetoric: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdGGx7fj9j0

Explain how that is racist? Or is it sarcasm? Cause I really hope the video title is satire, otherwise I'm more inclined to think that whoever made the video is a racist, and not Paul.

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #581 on: December 22, 2011, 03:05:35 PM »
It was sarcasm, and the person who made it wanted a troll title apparently.

Here's RP's portfolio, (hmm I wonder what he invests in?): https://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/check-out-ron-pauls-stock-portfolio-2011-12-22/A1CBC8F3-0424-41B8-BCD4-C07F90A587F1?dist=afterbell#!A1CBC8F3-0424-41B8-BCD4-C07F90A587F1

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #582 on: December 22, 2011, 04:24:56 PM »
So, I guess it comes down to his racist ghost writer, but is that better though?

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

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #583 on: December 22, 2011, 05:19:26 PM »
That allegedly racist newsletter is never late.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #584 on: December 22, 2011, 06:55:15 PM »
That allegedly racist newsletter is never late.

There is nothing "alleged" about the racism contained in the newsletters (note: plural).

Exactly. Because his actual views are represented in that video. Especially as a matter of public policy, he's the best choice for all races.

Yes. And no-one is saying Paul's a racist now. The point is, he's done a horrible job owning up to those newsletters which have always haunted him,  ironic considering he seems to think he's adequately explained for them even though the majority of people outside of his supporters know that's not true. Furthermore, I'm sorry, but Ron Paul is a 76 year old rich white dude who's spent a lifetime in public opposition to the Civil Rights Act. His views on race have likely tamed over time, but is it really that wild to suggest that maybe the race-rhetoric he found appropriate 20 years ago wouldn't exactly hold-up by today's standards?

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #585 on: December 23, 2011, 05:18:28 AM »
Yes. And no-one is saying Paul's a racist now.
Except tons of pundits on TV discrediting his entire run for the presidency.

So, I guess it comes down to his racist ghost writer, but is that better though?
No. But if this person were to come out and apologize it himself would be better
I don't know how the public would perceive it if:
a) Ron Paul threw Fred Reed or whoever wrote it under the bus, saying it's most likely him. It raises the question about why he suddenly knows it was that person etc. And what if Fred Reed didn't actually write them and goes out and denies he ever wrote them? That would just stockpile this entire thing.
b) Fred Reed goes out himself and says he wrote them, the best case scenario. Ron Paul can distance himself from it better.

Some people might never forgive him, he was the publisher after all. The best thing he can do is to go out and debunk the statements in the newsletters one by one, explaining how they are not his views. Plus, one of those statements in the newsletters are incorrect, because the person writes in Paul's name saying "As a congressman I voted against every attempt to commemorate MLK" or someting like that, but in actuality, he has voted FOR commemorating MLK.

Well. Enough of me defending this guy. He does have some owning up to do.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #586 on: December 23, 2011, 02:24:02 PM »
So, given that I kinda got late into the game because of my trip, I am somewhat surprised to see this:

www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

and combine that with the notion that Paul at some point led the polls. According to that site Paul doesn't even have half of the leaders percentages, and never had. So, what gives?

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #587 on: December 23, 2011, 03:38:08 PM »
This is national average, which includes states other than Iowa/NH where Paul is doing well.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #588 on: December 23, 2011, 03:52:03 PM »
Ah, I see. I just looked at the Iowa one and indeed he is the leader in that one.
I have a hard time believing that though. Mysteriously Iowa likes Paul, whereas the national average doesn't care about him. And neither do the NH or SC polls. Something is very off, we all saw the same debates.

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #589 on: December 23, 2011, 03:57:03 PM »
Last three NH polls have RP @ 21%, 21%, 19%.

Debates have less effect than ground game: phone from home, door to door, super brochures, etc. That's the reason he's doing better in Iowa and NH imo.

That last Florida poll from early in the month has Gingrich @ 44%, I very hardly think he would poll that well now.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #590 on: December 23, 2011, 04:02:00 PM »
Yeah, but Romney has 10% more. While that could be explained by the proximity to Massachusetts, in SC people care even less about Paul.

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #591 on: December 23, 2011, 04:07:47 PM »
True, but his poll numbers are consistently rising. Time will only tell how the Iowa results are going to play out in the polls subsequent.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 03:08:09 AM by jsem »

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #592 on: December 23, 2011, 11:21:33 PM »
A friend of mine recently likened Ron Paul to a court jester, and I thought that hit it on the nail right there. His "job" is to show the folly of the ruling class, but he never really is electable himself.

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

Offline jsem

  • Posts: 4912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #593 on: December 24, 2011, 03:09:58 AM »
Mitt vs Paul in Virginia.

Both Newt and Perry failed to get on the ballot with the 10K signatures needed. With all the hate Mitt has, this is maybe what Paul needs.

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: Election 2012
« Reply #594 on: December 24, 2011, 03:12:47 AM »
I hope so.

If he can pull a victory out of this, this could be a setup for something that could grow into a real streak for the guy.