English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I know people who agree with him on the issues but will never vote for him Why? I would think if you agree with a candidate you would support him. What am I missing

2007-07-18 07:51:26 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

Sexy computer nerd from New Jersey? lol I didnt know Los Angeles had moved to New Jersey. Sexy computer nerd huh someone has a librarian fantasy caught ya

2007-07-18 08:18:58 · update #1

PS thanks for the teenage part I wish

I am asking a serious question I lean Hunter Tancredo right now but I have observed anger toward Paul when his name is mentioned not on the issues though

2007-07-18 08:20:52 · update #2

18 answers

I think it is all related to the Giuliani "dustup" where people thought that he blamed America for the 9-11 attacks. I'm a Paul supporter, solidified as such after the FIRST debate, even though I, like you, was deciding among the same three candidates then. But in the 2nd debate his comments SEEMED to suggest that America caused the attack. Then, it was followed by Giuliani and the CNN guys SAYING that he HAD blamed America, so if you had any doubt, they confirmed it for you.

I don't think he worded his answer in the best way he could have, but if you listen to the answer, and also to his clarifications afterwards, he clearly did NOT blame America for anything. He simply explained that we shouldn't expect to fiddle around in foreign countries and not stir up some hornet's nests. Osama was one of the hornets that got stirred up, and the outcome is that he attacked us. The correct response to that attack is to go after Osama and al-Queda, but instead, we went for the Taliban and then when we were on the verge of getting Osama, we switched over to Saddam. I've always thought that was an odd choice, but apparently a lot of Americans have accepted it.

What it comes down to is this: if you've accepted that George Bush can do no wrong, then Ron Paul is offensive. I think Tom Tancredo is reaching that point. Because they simply don't agree with Bush much of the time. What's happening is that conservatives are having their assumptions challenged, and they don't have time to rethink everything. So, they're trying to hold on to the assumption that George Bush is a conservative, and that they didn't make a mistake by putting him into office. They're wrong, of course, but that's why Ron Paul is getting some "blowback" from his statements on foreign policy.

2007-07-18 09:33:42 · answer #1 · answered by skip742 6 · 1 1

I agree with him on a few issues, but some of his issues are so radical (for example his fiscal ideas) that if he COULD get them done, they would be as damaging as Hillary's socialism. His monetary policy is the very thing that caused the depression, and it would again.

Altough his surface, or hot button, issues are right on, look deeper, and he is a radical nut.

He also would not get anything done at all because he would piss everyone off.


skip...no matter how you try to whitewash it. Paul said that we were stirring up hornet's nests, and BECAUSE OF THAT we were attacked! Cause and effect...clearly!

2007-07-18 14:05:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I said once to my nephew, I would like to see IRS gone and we go back to the days before 1862, IRS was created to help pay for the Civil War, in 1895 Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional.

1913 it was brought back to life it has been there since.

Having said that now to your question: Ron Paul has all the right ideas but they seem fanatical to some and Fantasy to others that is the reason he has no chance of becoming our President.

2007-07-18 15:57:01 · answer #3 · answered by Thomas B 5 · 0 0

here is the deal. He the two is a racist and believes interior the articles printed by way of him and carrying his call which makes him unqualified to be the President of each and every of the persons. Or, he grow to be so inept and unprofessional at publishing a small time e-e book that he could no longer even get that perfect by using fact it printed racist articles decrease than his call whilst he says he's no longer a racist. that still makes him unqualified to be the President. For every physique with a strategies, it particularly is a lose-lose proposition for the Paul.

2016-10-09 00:21:16 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

None at all. The dude isn't on the radar screen.

Nice effort to try to stir up a hate thing. You Paulites are getting better.

Edit: The sexy Nichole J is a teenage computer nerd from Trenton, New Jersey.

2007-07-18 08:04:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

You are probably not watching fox and responding to their every move, Ron Paul is great, he is the only truth teller, he is a true American, everyone else is just brainwashed and waiting for the tv to let them decide who they are going to vote for. get on youtube and watch all his videos or videos on him, he has alot of grassroots supporters, join a meetup, get involved, you will see there are plenty that support him out there. don't forget about all the online polls that he wins.

2007-07-18 11:44:33 · answer #6 · answered by mom4peace 3 · 1 1

you are missing the point if you and a few hundred people vote for him you can split the party and get another Bush in office.
you should vote for one or the other parties .

It has been proved that people like Paul have not got a change to win so why waste your vote try and hook up with a valid candidate.

2007-07-18 08:07:32 · answer #7 · answered by sandyjean 4 · 1 4

Mainstream media highlights the fact that they can't win, and the way that group think works tends people to consciencely reject what they know to be true.

2007-07-18 07:59:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

he is right on many issues therefor he is threat to the uneducated and people who can't think for themselves aka the sheep or the right and left wing herds

2007-07-18 07:56:18 · answer #9 · answered by deezNutz 4 · 2 1

No hate here, just won't vote for him. I agree with his domestic policy, but he is totally wrong on foreign policy. He is too isolationist and that is bad policy in today's global economy.

2007-07-18 08:09:33 · answer #10 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers