PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Rand is a Romney guy?


HonestChieffan
06-07-2012, 07:43 PM
So he said on Hannity tonight.

cosmo20002
06-07-2012, 07:51 PM
So he said on Hannity tonight.

BEP will explain how in Jeffersonian times, it all makes sense.

Bewbies
06-07-2012, 09:05 PM
Duh.....Rand is his VP.

BucEyedPea
06-07-2012, 10:00 PM
So he said on Hannity tonight.

This doesn't make him exactly a Romney guy. He said his first choice was his father but that the nomination process was over. He had to do this. Who would he support— Obama? Geez! This isn't rocket science.

I saw him on Hannity and he sounded resigned.

cosmo20002
06-07-2012, 10:06 PM
This doesn't make him exactly a Romney guy. He said his first choice was his father but that the nomination process was over. He had to do this. Who would he support— Obama? Geez! This isn't rocket science.



Gary Johnson

BucEyedPea
06-07-2012, 10:09 PM
Gary Johnson

Not as a Republican Senator who is not a libertarian. Even the libertarians on the most widely read Libertarian site criticize Johnson. That site promotes Ron Paul and not Johnson.

cosmo20002
06-07-2012, 10:13 PM
Not as a Republican Senator who is not a libertarian. Even the libertarians on the most widely read Libertarian site criticize Johnson. That site promotes Ron Paul and not Johnson.

And Rs criticize Romney. Surely someone like Paul (either of them) and their supporters would prefer Johnson over Romney.

La literatura
06-07-2012, 10:20 PM
This doesn't make him exactly a Romney guy. He said his first choice was his father but that the nomination process was over. He had to do this. Who would he support— Obama? Geez! This isn't rocket science.

I saw him on Hannity and he sounded resigned.

I guess we can consider you a Romney girl, then?

BucEyedPea
06-07-2012, 10:22 PM
And Rs criticize Romney. Surely someone like Paul (either of them) and their supporters would prefer Johnson over Romney.
I can't speak for him but Johnson's not an Austrian on economics. This and Rand being more a conservative wouldn't endear him to Johnson. It's not that I can't see your point but Rand does play ball more with the Republicans.


But Paul refused to endorse Johnson though...even though Johnson had endorsed Paul in 2008.


You have to understand that there's always been disagreements between the Reason/Cato Libertarians which Johnson hails from. He hasn't read Rothbard or Mises much and doesn't understand the boom/bust cycle as it relates to the Fed's stimulus activities. He was interviewed by the Austrian libertarians last week and asked questions and he's not in the same camp...but he actually didn't have a clue. These guys probably won't vote. Otherwise, Libertarianianism is a big tent.

cosmo20002
06-07-2012, 11:44 PM
You have to understand that there's always been disagreements between the Reason/Cato Libertarians which Johnson hails from. He hasn't read Rothbard or Mises much and doesn't understand the boom/bust cycle as it relates to the Fed's stimulus activities. He was interviewed by the Austrian libertarians last week and asked questions and he's not in the same camp.

I didn't realize about Rothbard or Mises, but now that you mention it, yeah.

You and your people have very, very specific requirements.

Chocolate Hog
06-08-2012, 08:53 AM
Good this will chase away the losers who really hurt ron pauls chances with their fucktard antics.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

Donger
06-08-2012, 08:54 AM
LMAO

qabbaan
06-08-2012, 08:55 AM
Good this will chase away the losers who really hurt ron pauls chances with their fucktard antics.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

What chances?

Donger
06-08-2012, 08:58 AM
It will be hilarious if/when Ron endorses Romney.

Donger
06-08-2012, 09:00 AM
What chances?

See, if only "the media" had given Paul a fair shake, everyone would have voted for him. Heck, I'm surprised that you even know who he is considering the media blackout about Ron Paul.

Donger
06-08-2012, 09:56 AM
LMAO

Here is some examples of the backlash from Rand Paul's Facebook page:

Eric Elledge: DISGUSTING. Right before Father's Day too. What a piece of garbage Rand turned out to be. One & Done Senator!

Jason Sauer: you have lost my support for being a TRATOR to your father

Mario Jimenez: Something is definitely not right. I have a feeling Rand was strong-armed by someone pulling the strings. But this just ain't right.

Mikey Indigo: Someone better have put a gun to your head, otherwise your father should disown you. Good luck sleeping at night knowing what you did to this country. I hope the price was worth it.

Richie Proffitt: I guess the 30 minute meeting with Mittens was actually a 12 hour lobotomy. Maybe the whole zombies thing is to get us to fall in line and vote status quo. Meh.

Matt Reibel: Notice that he made this announcement just a few days after the Bilderberg conference. The elite will stop at nothing to prevent liberty from reclaiming the White House and our government so I highly suspect the Bilderberg attendees did one of the following: 1) came up with an offer that Rand Paul could not refuse 2) they have some very serious dirt on Rand or someone close to him and threatened to release it if he didn't endorse Romney and sell out

Mark Elmo Ellis: Matt!!! Excellent point!!! Comes right on the heels of that meeting, doesn't it???

Sandi Begic: The Bilderberg group threatened Ron Pauls life, i think Rand did this to protect his father.

Richard Rogers: Romney stands for everything that Ron Paul fights to destroy. Rand"Benedict" Paul I guess this means you will be heading to the Bilderberg next year. Rand when you dance with the Devil you will get burned.

qabbaan
06-08-2012, 10:02 AM
So the Bilderbergs control Ron Paul and Rand Paul! Things are making a whole lot more sense now! (for these loons)

FD
06-08-2012, 10:04 AM
There was actually a discussion on Alex Jones' show yesterday about whether or not Ron Paul had been "compromised."

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:22 AM
There was actually a discussion on Alex Jones' show yesterday about whether or not Ron Paul had been "compromised."

He hasn't. He was asked to speak about party unity and balancing the budget. ( Cough! Cough! )Paul made it clear he was not going to play ball at the Ft. Worth Convention Center for Texas Republican State Convention on June 7th, Thursday.

Unity is important but what do we unify behind? No Child Left Behind? What about uniting around principle, around the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence?” ~ from Ron Paul's speech there


http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/looking-luke/2012/jun/8/will-ron-pauls-battle-transform-party/

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:26 AM
I didn't realize about Rothbard or Mises, but now that you mention it, yeah.

You and your people have very, very specific requirements.
Once again, I am not a libertarian—so you can't say they're my people exactly. But on the key requirements—yes! I'd say if one is to vote for the lesser of the evils it would be Gary Johnson over all the others. I am going to consider him myself, now that I like what he is saying on Iran. Although I will not decide until the last minute.

Bewbies
06-08-2012, 10:26 AM
He hasn't. He was asked to speak about party unity and balancing the budget. ( Cough! Cough! )Paul made it clear he was not going to play ball at the Ft. Worth Convention Center for Texas Republican State Convention on June 7th, Thursday.




http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/looking-luke/2012/jun/8/will-ron-pauls-battle-transform-party/

Apparantly Romney was what he was talking about unifying behind during the campaign...

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 10:28 AM
LMAO

Here is some examples of the backlash from Rand Paul's Facebook page:

Eric Elledge: DISGUSTING. Right before Father's Day too. What a piece of garbage Rand turned out to be. One & Done Senator!



Not a surprise, and he deserves it. Even people like me who think the Pauls are semi-dangerous nuts, at least can give them some credit for apparently having enough integrity to stick to their principles and not bend for politics. Embracing Romney, of all people, definitely tarnishes the Paul brand.

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 10:33 AM
Once again, I am not a libertarian—so you can't say they're my people exactly. But on the key requirements—yes! I'd say if one is to vote for the lesser of the evils it would be Gary Johnson over all the others. I am going to consider him myself, now that I like what he is saying on Iran. Although I will not decide until the last minute.

Who else would a not-libertarian, not-Repub vote for?

And so what are you anyway? And don't tell me Independent. Half the "Independents" definitely align with one party 99% of the time anyway, and the other half just picks who they think would be better to have a beer with.

Donger
06-08-2012, 10:35 AM
Not a surprise, and he deserves it. Even people like me who think the Pauls are semi-dangerous nuts, at least can give them some credit for apparently having enough integrity to stick to their principles and not bend for politics. Embracing Romney, of all people, definitely tarnishes the Paul brand.

So, just because his last name is Paul, he must be identical in his opinions and beliefs to his father?

That seems silly.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:36 AM
Who else would a not-libertarian, not-Repub vote for?
Why do you keep arguing this point with me?

And so what are you anyway? And don't tell me Independent. Half the "Independents" definitely align with one party 99% of the time anyway, and the other half just picks who they think would be better to have a beer with.

You can find out using the search. I've said it plenty of times.

FYI, this thread is not about how other demographics will vote.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:38 AM
Not a surprise, and he deserves it. Even people like me who think the Pauls are semi-dangerous nuts, at least can give them some credit for apparently having enough integrity to stick to their principles and not bend for politics. Embracing Romney, of all people, definitely tarnishes the Paul brand.

Except Rand is still doing a good job as a senator speaking out against Iraq, Iran, the TSA and the spending. Sorry, not everyone sees Rand as a traitor although some do and will. He's already started campaign for next time already.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:39 AM
Apparantly Romney was what he was talking about unifying behind during the campaign...

I'm gonna have to see a link for proof. This is like the speculation over Rand being VP. Anyone who thinks such, does not know Dr. Paul.
On the outside chance that Paul did, Rombama wouldn't necessarily get all the votes of Paul's anyway. At the Texas Convention Perry was soundly and loudly booed when he asked the crowd to get behind Romney. LMAO

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 10:42 AM
So, just because his last name is Paul, he must be identical in his opinions and beliefs to his father?

That seems silly.

Rand has certainly ridden Ron's coattails and embraced his philosophies. I think there is some expectation among the Paul lovers that Rand will take up his father's role. The Paul fans are die-hards. If Rand veers off course from what they expect, he is going to alienate of lot of them.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:44 AM
The crowd also booed Perry when he recommended another Establishment guy for Senate over a Tea Party type of guy.

Donger
06-08-2012, 10:44 AM
Rand has certainly ridden Ron's coattails and embraced his philosophies. I think there is some expectation among the Paul lovers that Rand will take up his father's role. The Paul fans are die-hards. If Rand veers off course from what they expect, he is going to alienate of lot of them.

Well, they are nuts, see.

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 10:44 AM
You can find out using the search. I've said it plenty of times.


JFC, you have 40,000 posts. I'm mildly curious what you call yourself, but I'm not that interested. What's with the drama?

Donger
06-08-2012, 10:45 AM
JFC, you have 40,000 posts. I'm mildly curious what you call yourself, but I'm not that interested. What's with the drama?

That's #3.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:45 AM
Rand has certainly ridden Ron's coattails and embraced his philosophies.

Not really—not in Kentucky. It would only be because he embraces the same ideas which are popular among conservatives. Don't forget I posted how many others similar to Paul were elected in 2010. There's more coming this time too.

I think there is some expectation among the Paul lovers that Rand will take up his father's role. The Paul fans are die-hards. If Rand veers off course from what they expect, he is going to alienate of lot of them.
You're not a member of the movement to know how everyone will feel...as if they all have one mind.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:47 AM
<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yCyw0azjm0s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 10:52 AM
JFC, you have 40,000 posts. I'm mildly curious what you call yourself, but I'm not that interested. What's with the drama?

There's no drama. I've said what I was many, many times, afterall. You simply have not paid attention and this thread is not about me.

qabbaan
06-08-2012, 10:57 AM
Rand didn't have to endorse anyone. No one would have blinked at that. Instead he has thrown his support behind Romney. He wants his supporters to follow suit.

This was not some default choice. Many people don't make endorsements when they don't like either candidate. He chose to support Romney.

Perhaps the cranks seeking to try to hijack the convention using legalese and loopholes could take a cue from him and come on in for the big win...?

BucEyedPea
06-08-2012, 11:05 AM
Rand didn't have to endorse anyone. No one would have blinked at that. Instead he has thrown his support behind Romney. He wants his supporters to follow suit.

This was not some default choice. Many people don't make endorsements when they don't like either candidate. He chose to support Romney.

Perhaps the cranks seeking to try to hijack the convention using legalese and loopholes could take a cue from him and come on in for the big win...?

Nope. It is a default choice. His father was his first choice but keep dreaming and making false accusations about "legalese and loopholes" being used to "hi-jack" when your guy's folks used physical assault, phoney delegate ballots ( some of whom will be going to jail on), setting up a new shadow party in Nevada to by pass the new Paul-leaning officials, or because you think a caucus functions like primary—when it wasn't even necessary for your candidate to win him the nomination. You are too easily prone to believe false reports, half-truths, lies and propaganda. You're as corrupt as the party leadership. You must be a WND reader where some of this trash has been printed.

Bewbies
06-08-2012, 11:15 AM
I'm gonna have to see a link for proof. This is like the speculation over Rand being VP. Anyone who thinks such, does not know Dr. Paul.
On the outside chance that Paul did, Rombama wouldn't necessarily get all the votes of Paul's anyway. At the Texas Convention Perry was soundly and loudly booed when he asked the crowd to get behind Romney. LMAO

We talked about this a few months ago. Clearly Paul and Romney had some kind of agreement worked out. I think it's for Rand at VP in exchange for Paul being Romneys attack dog. We will see if I am right.

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 11:21 AM
There's no drama. I've said what I was many, many times, afterall. You simply have not paid attention and this thread is not about me.

Or, instead of writing a couple of posts about how you've already said it somewhere else and that I apparently am supposed to monitor every single post for info about you, you could have just said it.

Geez, how did I go several weeks not knowing you are female? Drama

qabbaan
06-08-2012, 11:58 AM
We talked about this a few months ago. Clearly Paul and Romney had some kind of agreement worked out. I think it's for Rand at VP in exchange for Paul being Romneys attack dog. We will see if I am right.

It does seem clear there was some sort of deal.

I think it would be great though, provided the Senate seat could be retained.

In the election he would bring Paul supporters onto the Republican team, or at least divide the chunk who aren't going to be voting for Obama and bring enough of them in to mitigate whatever minor contingent of them voted for Bush / McCain and might this time stay home or vote out of the top two.

cosmo20002
06-08-2012, 12:04 PM
It does seem clear there was some sort of deal.

I think it would be great though, provided the Senate seat could be retained.

In the election he would bring Paul supporters onto the Republican team, or at least divide the chunk who aren't going to be voting for Obama and bring enough of them in to mitigate whatever minor contingent of them voted for Bush / McCain and might this time stay home or vote out of the top two.

There are always SOME differences between running mates, but it would certainly be interesting to see how someone so against govt interference that he's against the civil rights act goes all-out to support someone who embraced mandated health insurance.

Never going to happen.

Ace Gunner
06-08-2012, 12:13 PM
It will be hilarious if/when Ron endorses Romney.

Ah, but it will be more hilarious when mitt places second :D

Bewbies
06-08-2012, 03:20 PM
Ah, but it will be more hilarious when mitt places second :D

I don't think Johnson has a shot at winning.

Chocolate Hog
06-08-2012, 07:16 PM
What chances?
There's plenty of people in the republican party who are a fan of Pauls positions or his humility. I can see why people wouldn't vote for him because some supporters randomly shout ron paul when others are speaking. As for his son he'll be a successful candidate in 2016.


Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2