Saturday, March 17, 2012

Ron Paul fanatics plan to vote for Obama

Like I have said before, most of them are one in the same. Many are former 2008 Obama voters flocking to the latest cult figure to salivate over, Ron Paul, and now after Ron Paul's utter failure, they plan to go back and vote for Obama. And some are just plain sore losers. Does this surprise anyone?

DailyPaul: Voting for Obama out of spite!

If Ron Paul is not on the ticket, I am voting for Obama out of spite. I would like to see a movement like this. Maybe a website, or face page, letting the "Establishment" know, two can play dirty! All we need are a few percent of passionate Ron Paul supporters to gain the attention of the media, and let the Establishment know if they keep suppressing individual freedom, they are coming down with us!!!!!!! I want Liberty!!!! This is WAR!

If anyone has taken Ron Paul and his cult following seriously before, they certainly aren't going to now! Good riddance. Maybe next time they will learn that spamming, online voting, and Youtube thumbs ups don't win elections, actual votes do. And Ron Paul, it is time to drop out of the race. C'mon.

15 comments:

Chris W said...

Hack

As a Paul supporter I find this statement idiotic and goes against everything that a pro-liberty persons would believe. You are exactly correct when you say they are "just plain sore losers."

What some people in the Paul camp can't do is separate the candidate from the message. They need to realize that it doesn't matter who the messenger is but rather it is the message of pro-liberty and Constitutional fidelity that is important.

As a voter it is important to vote your conscience and select the candidate that best represents your views. I use the 80% rule; if I agree with 80% of a given candidate's platform they will have earned my vote. In my case that candidate will be Gary Johnson should he get the LP nod.

You can make the argument that a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Barry, but I don't buy that.

I see Mitt, Santorum and Newt as the lesser of 2 evils and really don't represent much of a change from the current WH occupant. To vote for one of them goes against everything I believe in and would simply be an endorsement of the status quo.

Hack said...

Chris, great response! It is always refreshing to hear voices of reason in the Paul camp!

Charles said...

I'm one of these so called fanatics and no I didn't vote for Obama. Ron Paul has the answers the other candidates don't have. I'm really sad to see people like you posting generalizations about Ron Paul supporters. I went out advertised for him. I went out and voted for him because I believe in his principles. I cannot believe or trust Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney because both have flip flopped and don't even know what they believe. Newt has the upper hand when it comes to debating Obama but he's a progressive and cannot get the votes needed to beat Obama. Where do the Rick Santorum votes come from? Social Conservatives or liberals trying to make the worst candidate seem popular so Obama can barely win.

Hardly anyone participates in the Primary and Causcus season and of the small percentage of them that do a lot of them turn out to be democrats just trying to fuck shit up. 10 percent in michigan were democrats and half of them voted for Santorum. That's 5 percent boost just from michigan.

Newt doesn't have any organization and that's the end of that, he still have a decent chance of winning the nomination because it's probably gonna be a brokered convention so it's anyones game including Ron Pauls.

LibertyAtStake said...

100 anti-war fanatics voted Obama in '08. 80 anti-war fanatics became disenchanted and got behind Paul for '12. 40 of those go back to Obama out of spite and 40 stay home or throw away their vote on 3rd party Don Quixote out of spite. (Probably more like 20 / 60 given who they are).

I'll take that math.


d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

Truth 101 said...

Among the many things that "cost" Gore the presidency in 2008 were people voting for Ralph Nader because Gore wasn't liberal enough for them.

The electorate is pretty evenly divided. As a lefty I say everyone here should vote for either the Libertarian or stay home in protest. I'll thank you this November.

twoguys2012 said...

This ain't good for anyone involved.

Ron Paul supporters arrested at Missouri Caucus...

http://news.yahoo.com/police-intervene-arrest-ron-paul-backers-missouri-caucus-223928873--abc-news.html

Simply not good.

Teresa said...

To think that either Santorum or Newt wouldn't bring serious change to the WH in favor of pro-liberty policies is absurd. People who follow Paul are way too idealistic in my opinion.

Proof said...

"out of spite" Is this code for "Screw America"?

Eric Dondero said...

Gore's votes lost to Nader in 2000 were balanced out by Bush votes lost to the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party. Red herring.

Secondly, to say Ron Paul "supports the liberty agenda," is quite a stretch. Tell us when the last time you ever heard Paul opposing Islamo-Fascism? Liberty includes the rights of women not be forced to wear ugly black burkas from head to toe. Paul is just fine with aligning himself with Islamo-Fascists.

twoguys2012 said...

Eric,

You might want to rethink that logic.

You are implying that Ron Paul is a fake when it comes to Liberty since he doesn't speak out against women inn other nations besides The United States being forced to wear burkas.

Did you catch that? Other countries.

I could care less what other nations do religiously or culturally. I am only concerned with how we as Americans behave and interact with one another.

You're not talking about Liberty. You're talking about Westernizing other Nations because it's the right thing to do.

Not good, Eric. It won't do. Will you also say that Ron Paul isn't compassionate because he hasn't really mentioned starving children in third-world nations?

Ron Paul is kinda loopy, but I hardly think he doesn't have a grasp on Liberty. The only person on that stage who could even hope to debate him about The Constitution and our Founding Fathers would be Newt.

And no, Eric, I am not supporting Ron Paul. I simply find it silly to speak so vaguely about who and what you think Ron Paul is based on the notion of Liberty. Silly.

Hack said...

While specific Islamic practices in other countries may be irrelevant, I think we need a president who at least grasps the threat of radical Islam. Ron Paul actually defends Islamic radicals whenever he is asked about them. I agree on both sides here. As far as Ron Paul, there is a distinct difference between understanding your enemy, and completely siding with them. As long as he continues to sympathize with Hamas, Iran, and Al Qeada, he will never have my support.

twoguys2012 said...

Hack,

Could you provide me with quotes from Ron Paul defending Islamic radicals? I would be curious to see them.

(No, I am not seeking to challenge your integrity. I figure you might have them already in case someone asked you about them.)

One Guy 2012

Hack said...

TwoGuys,

By all means and no offense taken whatsoever! Lot's of links here...http://hackwilson.blogspot.com/2011/12/more-reasons-why-i-still-wont-support.html

The biggie that really gets me is Ron Paul's defense of Hamas on Iranian state TV here...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_Y3-Cn5vIk

Here is Paul wondering why it is so bad if the Iranian regime has a nuclear weapon...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDvaTqLlZlA

Above all, if you listen to what Ron Paul says, or rather, DOESN'T say, whenever asked a question about Islamic terrorism, it isn't difficult to gauge what side of the fence he is on. He has not once condemned Islamic terrorist actions. Instead he finds some way to blame the United States or Israel. I can understand the concept of blowback, but all I ask is for Ron Paul to condemn Islamic terrorists ONCE. That is all I ask. So far, he hasn't done it. In fact, he denies the threat even exists...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBXwfygRb9g

...and mocks those who do say it exists...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHlPSzoCp-I

This is the primary reason why I highly dislike Ron Paul. In fact, if Ron Paul were not so rabidly anti Israel, pro Islam, and blame America first, I think he would hands down be the GOP nominee. Shame.

O said...

Hack,

Thanks for the research material. Nicely done.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I will also vote for Obama. It's to show the GOP the same respect they've given Ron Paul in this election.

I'm not the only one. I used to believe in voting with my conscience, but, the system is a joke, so might as well treat it as such.