The other "Top Tier" candidates have never once mentioned the Constitution UNTIL Ron Paul has gained momentum. Coincidence? Or reality that "We the people" want Ron Paul?
2007-10-23 14:46:49 · 13 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I noticed that a while back. A few have been talking about abolishing the IRS, and they do throw in the word "constitution" at times. I think they have been watching Dr Paul and know what "we" want. It doesn't work for me. I know who means it and who doesn't.
BTW, he didn't say bring the troops home "immediately"....... he did say "just come home" but that it couldn't happen overnight; that it will take time.
2007-10-23 15:42:33 · answer #1 · answered by Eyes 5 · 9⤊ 2⤋
Ron Paul has always been for the Constitution. His positions and votes in Congress show his consistency.
All of his interviews for the last 20 years also show no wavering on the issues. Not to mention he is the only candidate in either party that gives a straight answer, either past or present.
Finally, we are given the opportunity to vote for a politician that is really an option.
2007-10-24 00:26:16 · answer #2 · answered by Xenu 2 · 9⤊ 0⤋
No it's not coincidence. Even if the other candidates start sounding like Paul to gain popularity, common sense tells me they have no integrity and just want to win the seat in the White House even if they have to lie. I know for a fact that they don't care for the constitution.
2007-10-24 10:08:44 · answer #3 · answered by Jerry H 5 · 7⤊ 0⤋
They are begining to sound like him but just wait till they have to perform on their feet, without notes, without props, without mimeographic utterances of the constitution and actually have to PROVE they've done anything in their voting records to substantiate.
Huckabee, although not top tier, is very transparent, to those who've paid any attention. Within 2 or 3 debates he's begun to mimic the best (Paul) to put meat (substance) with his potato; and mimic the worst (Giuliani) in an attempt to sharpen his fork to finish the meal.
2007-10-24 11:24:05 · answer #4 · answered by anyusmoon1 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
There won't be any confusion when people go to the ballot box. Everybody can tell that Giuliani, Romney, McCain, and Thompson (not to mention those warmongers who pretend to be anti-war over at the Democratic Party) are fakes. Anybody who pays attention should be able to realize that Ron Paul is the only major anti-war candidate in either party.
2007-10-23 23:23:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
I don't know, but I do know I have no money to donate and don't live in a primary state so I think who gets chosen is out of my hands. I can only pray for the best - but expect the worst.
2007-10-24 11:41:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No one sounds like Paul! They have ideas that work. Paul doesn't!
What do you mean "other top tier" candidates? Are you implying that Paul is a top tier candidate when he consistently has 1% of the vote and ONLY $5 million of donations? If so, you're nuts! Paul is a meaningless candidate that is supported by a bunch of 20-somethings that do Internet and text messaging polls.
There is no momentum since he STILL has about 1% of the vote. WE THE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT RON PAUL AS PRESIDENT!
Remember 1% want him and 99% DON'T! That's reality!
2007-10-23 23:55:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 9⤋
I will vote for the Republican ticket because anything else would be foolish and would invite danger to the USA!
Ron Paul is NOT I repeat NOT a Republican, he is and always will be a Libertarian. Pretending to be a Republican so they he may run a one of the two major party's tickets does not make it so.
I am hopeful that both Rudy and Mitt fade into the woodwork soon. Both are unacceptable conservatives.
The current Iraq strategy is to fight until we are able to successfully turn it over to the Iraqi Military and leave as soon as possible after that.
To simply say quit begs the question, where does that leave Iraq? Doomed to the terrorists, Iran or any other country wanting to take their land?
I am sick and tired of the BS about the USA not getting involved in other countries problems. Wouldn't that be nice...than why do we spend so much on relief for disasters, and humanitarian needs? Why do our celebrities go to other countries to care for their children, when we have sick and dying right here at home?
Because we are a nation who cares and it applies to the military support as well as the relief and humanitarian support as well.
I think it is very hypocritical for liberals to want it one way for social programs and another for the military.
GREAT QUESTION!
2007-10-23 23:34:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 7⤋
With all due respect to you, I disagree. Paul is more a Libertarian who doesn't support amnesty for illegals, back door or otherwise. The Democrats do.
Also, he doesn't support NAFTA or CAFTA.
2007-10-23 22:16:12 · answer #9 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 11⤊ 1⤋
i want Ron Paul , I'm sick of the platitudes and dishonesty from the others
2007-10-23 23:08:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 1⤋