I'm not trying to start any arguments or agitated debates.

I'm just curious to see what the other locals of the area think about this guy.

And please, be respectful of everyone elses' views and simply express your own.

This is off topic. Ron Paul does not represent Fairfax County. As for his support, there are appoximately 45 million mentally ill people in this country (depending on who you ask). He is a great candidate for those people.

Off Topic? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is off topic. Ron Paul does not represent
> Fairfax County. As for his support, there are
> appoximately 45 million mentally ill people in
> this country (depending on who you ask). He is a
> great candidate for those people.


So he does represent you, then.

The Clock,

No, I don't live in TX. The only people he "represents" are those in the 14th district of TX. Perhaps you meant to say that I support him. You'd be wrong, again. I suppose I can add that his support also comes from morons that fail to comprehend sentences and then cannot formulate a thought.

Sounds like a pretty 'mentally ill' point of view, if you ask me.

Which you didn't.

But still.

I consider myself a Ron Paul supporter, though I don't agree with 100% of what he says. I also wouldn't consider myself "mentally ill." Sadly, to appreciate Ron Paul's political stance you need to have a solid understanding of economics and a respect for liberty and property rights-- things which most Americans know little about. Paul can't win, though, because Democracy, for all its merits, will always fail the smaller, smarter segment of the voting public who would vote for a return to the days of smaller government and more personal responsibility.

Also, Ron Paul is the only reason I'm voting next year.

Fairfax1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I consider myself a Ron Paul supporter, though I
> don't agree with 100% of what he says. I also
> wouldn't consider myself "mentally ill." Sadly,
> to appreciate Ron Paul's political stance you need
> to have a solid understanding of economics and a
> respect for liberty and property rights-- things
> which most Americans know little about. Paul
> can't win, though, because Democracy, for all its
> merits, will always fail the smaller, smarter
> segment of the voting public who would vote for a
> return to the days of smaller government and more
> personal responsibility.
>
> Also, Ron Paul is the only reason I'm voting next
> year.

You don't give the American masses enough credit.

Guys like 'Off Topic?' who considers politics to be like rooting for their favorite football team through times good and bad, may be the most vocal, but they are not the majority.

I think most Americans can see through the hustle that current republican front runners are pulling by posing as conservatives. They go on and on about smaller/spend-less govt, but outsourcing everything to private corporations is a phony way to do it, because it leads to more spending, instead to less.

We're spending more than ever these days after 2 Bush terms, with blackwater soldiers costing 6 times more than true soldiers, halliburton overcharging 61 mill for gas.

I'm voting for Ron Paul, because like most people, I don't agree with all his quirky ideas, but at least the spending party will end because he's not in any corporation's pockets.
The same cannot be said about Guiliani/Hillary/Romney/Obama...


Off topic FYI:
U.S.private health care costs 3000-7000 per person/per year(depending on the state), But public healthcare in japan/france costs 2000-3000 in taxes per person/per year.

I don't agree 100% with what Ron Paul says or would do, but those are subjects that he knows a lot more about than I do. He's the only honest guy there is, and we desperately need to unfuck this country. I'm truly baffled that Clinton and Rudy are leading in the polls. This is the stupidest country in the world, and if we go from Bush to either of them, I think we should have our collective voting rights revoked.

Thoughts on Ron Paul? He's a fag who won't get the nomination. Why even bother discussing?

WashingToneLocian, you further prove the stereotype about the 'dumb masses'.
And we feel like discussing him, because true Americans stand up for the Democratic method, and believe there's hope, even if we have to fight against the odds... thus what made our country what it is, and made us a country.

I, too, am baffled as to how Clinton and Juliani are leading the polls... it seems that these days, one or two big names are assigned to be the recognised ones of a party, and people will vote for them simply on the basis that those people support the party they do.

Personally, I think it's time for a change. People know how many laws the current cabinet has broken, and how far down the drain it's taken this country, and I honestly hope that they can see that a new hope won't be found in the current poll leaders.

They say Ron Paul's internet base is huge, but hasn't shown that in the polls. I hope that he's a call to arms for all the nerds and internetists out there, and that they all turn up come election day.

Even if I'm not comfortable voting for anyone due to lack of education on their standpoints, I know I'll show up to at least vote for Ron Paul. I'm not a republican (moderate), but I feel that Ron Paul's Constitutionalist beliefs can pull this country in the right direction. I never thought that I'd admit that the most Republican candidate I've ever seen is the one I've most adamently supported, but here I am.

By the way, have you all registered to vote yet?

Finch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, have you all registered to vote yet?


I'm registered to vote and I vote in every election.

As for the "dumb masses" those are the people who think Ron Paul has a chance.

Every election cycle there is a populist cry for people like Paul, Nader, Ross Perot, Howard Dean, Paul Tsongas, Gary Hart, etc. In the end, none of these people get the nomination because they are not "institutional candidates." In other words, these people - idealistic and all - haven't done the actual grunt-work necessary to win (basically get the base of party to support you by being non-committal to anything).

Ron Paul isn't going to get elected and it doesn't matter if Hillary, Giuliani, Obama, McCain, etc, end up as President. None of them will stop the cash-cow that is the War in Iraq.

WashingToneLocian, if Ron Paul sucks so much, who is your guy or gal?

Ron Paul kicked ass in the last debate and he won

Whatever happened to him?