-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Ron Paul walks out of CNN interview.
- Thread starter UncleMike
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
He needs the press to win in November. How he polls today among Republicans who plan to vote is one thing. How a left of center voter who is not paying attention to any of this today will see that clip in September does matter.
Advertising works. That will be a negative used against him while Obama spends $1 Billion to win. Frankly it is starting to look like The Republicans in general have no clue how to win.
It is neccessary to crap on Paul in an amount equal to the excessive addoration given him in order to keep things Fair and Balanced. Otherwise no one will have an open mind to the next new CAndIdate wheN he returns to the race.
He's doing well in Iowa. He's still running behind Newt and Romney nationally.
If he gets the nomination, things will only get worse from the media standpoint. In that sense UM is spot on. This have proven to be an Achilles Heel for Paul inasmuch as he can be portrayed as petulant and stand-offish.
Many are going to see this as Paul's inability or unwillingness to face seemingly hard questions. The rest of you may know that the questions are baseless, but the public may not. They will need to see that Paul can sit in the hot seat for a little while.
Truth doesn't matter in politics, unfortunately.
If anything Ron Paul is proof that you don't need media coverage to win. His message is beign spread through social media (facebook, twiiter, INGO) and the old fashioned way of word of mouth.
This video clip doesn't come as any big surprise as both sides of the media are parts of their own respective establishments. The only thing CNN managed to accomplish was to loose some credibility, if they had any.
He has never won anything outside of his own zip code. History is likely to repeat itself on this guy since he continues to use the same tactics for 30 years. The proof is only there if you want it to be.
What did that little train say? I think I can, I think I can, I think I can. Of course in the end he does. Even Disney shot one of the deer to keep it semi-real.
SemperFiUSMC
Master
- Jun 23, 2009
- 3,480
- 38
What exactly has he won?
What's the big deal many ask. He looked small and weak when he got beat up by a girl. What's he going to do when he faces the full gaggle? When he's sitting across the table from Putin is he going to throw a tantrum and go home?
Seems somewhere between ironic and hypocritic to complain about lack of media exposure then applaud him leaving an interview that he was clearly not in control of. Maybe it's just early in the morning.
The bottom line was that he wasn't presidential looking. The imagery of him leaving will stick.
Consider where he's come from since the last election in '08. Nobody wanted to hear his message, but now people are listening and for good reason. Consider how he's had fund and run a campaign without large donors or media backers. I consider the success he's had in the polls to date as a win, and I consider the straw polls to that he has taken to be small victories. Do either of those ultimately mean anything, not really because it's not a primary election, but it does show that he's gaining in popularity and his message is being heard by a broader audience.
I wish I had a crystal ball and could predict the future, but my best guess is that he's going to win Iowa, and continue to be ignored. I also predict that he'll ultimately loose the GOP nomination as a close second due to something shady happening. It's my hope that he'll then run as a third party anti establishment candidate and be the birth of a real third party.
I wish I had a crystal ball and could predict the future, but my best guess is that he's going to win Iowa, and continue to be ignored. I also predict that he'll ultimately loose the GOP nomination as a close second due to something shady happening. It's my hope that he'll then run as a third party anti establishment candidate and be the birth of a real third party.
+1Yup!!
SemperFiUSMC
Master
- Jun 23, 2009
- 3,480
- 38
What success in what polls? He's run for President twice previously and never won a state primary or caucus. How is that a win?
Even when he was head to head against McCain he never garnered more than 24% of the primary vote. He got 35 delegates, all in split delegate states.
Eight weeks ago Romney was in the lead. Seven weeks ago it was Bachmann. Six weeks ago Perry. Then folllowed Cain and Gingrich. Everyone get a turn at kickball, and it's Paul's turn. Does that mean Santorum is going to win? The only thing Paco and I will agree with this year is that the polls and straw polls are meaningless.
The broader audience has heard his message for 30 years. It's been rejected. It will be rejected again. That's what my crystal ball says.
I would love to see a true conservative with libertarian-leaning tendencies run for President. There are none in this race.
Cue Paco with the nay-saying diatribe.
What are the chances of a "third" party success in this country? Honestly. What's more likely to happen is that the "third" party becomes the new "second" party. That's assuming that the fact that a third party handing the majority to one of the two existing parties doesn't eliminate the "need" for parties altogether.
Two-party system isn't the problem. dross has covered this far better than I ever could. If you want to get rid of party politics, you need to get rid of parties, not add to the number.
Paco Bedejo
Master
No diatribe. You managed to make your point without presenting your opinion of future events as undeniable fact. I'm proud of you
I'm still undecided on the idea of a third party, but I'd certainly be game to see how one does if it could get the same public bankroll that the big-two get. Can't really do any worse than bipartisan support of NDAA & SOPA....
The question will be brought up over and over again, because many don't believe him. Ron Paul is easily one of the most intelligent, well read, and educated candidates in the field. His attention to detail puts others to shame. So when he states that he never read a newsletter printed in his name, it's incredibly hard to believe. His excuse that he was "still practicing medicine" at the time is a bunch of bunch. It's a newsletter people, not "War and Peace." He could have just as easily read it as a daily newspaper.
Further, anything printed in someone's name, will forever be associated with them. Whether one like it or not, the words of the "Ron Paul Newsletter" are going to be tacked on as that person's views. That's not rocket science to understand. One would have to be an idiot to allow some "random" writers to create a public image of themselves and NOT check up on it. And as stated earlier, Ron Paul is NOT an idiot.
And are we also to believe that such inflammatory words were printed, in the "Ron Paul Newsletter," and no one took notice at the time, and brought it to his attention advising "Uh Ron, there's something you probably need to take a look at."? If that didn't happened, then RP is surround by iffy people who probably agreed with the newsletter. If it did, then RP may have been, at the very least, complicit with it.
I means seriously MLK Jr made a pass at Ralph Abernathy? How the hell could that possibly be known? And no one expects flack after printing that crap? Yet, sure enough it appeared in the "Ron Paul Newsletter."
I used to support RP, but this newsletter issue has made me step back... his accepting donations from white supremacists made me step back further, him voting against Rosa Parks being awarded a Congressional medal (WTF) made me step back to the point that I am no longer seriously considering voting for him. He has some good views for govt, but apparently he very poor at paying attention.
No diatribe. You managed to make your point without presenting your opinion of future events as undeniable fact. I'm proud of you
I'm still undecided on the idea of a third party, but I'd certainly be game to see how one does if it could get the same public bankroll that the big-two get. Can't really do any worse than bipartisan support of NDAA & SOPA....
You do realize that you can now NEVER make a prediction without ten qualifiers iterating the fact that it's just your opinion, don't you?
And let's be honest: you don't care that predictions are stated as fact. You care that such opinions stated as fact don't reflect Paul in a positive light. You would have no problem if I said Romney will most definitely lose the election. Or Obama is going to stack SCOTUS with socialists. Would you?
Paco Bedejo
Master
Yep, better run to the guys whose records show they're highly likely to screw you over...just in case Ron Paul's consistency & integrity has just been an elaborate 3 decade ruse. I'd go with trustworthy Gingrich. Though...Romney does have great hair & likes socialized medicine.
Paco Bedejo
Master
You do realize that you can now NEVER make a prediction without ten qualifiers iterating the fact that it's just your opinion, don't you?
And let's be honest: you don't care that predictions are stated as fact. You care that such opinions stated as fact don't reflect Paul in a positive light. You would have no problem if I said Romney will most definitely lose the election. Or Obama is going to stack SCOTUS with socialists. Would you?
I'm usually pretty careful to not present my opinion as fact, especially when my opinion is a prediction of the future acts of millions of people. I have a problem any time someone presents predictions as though they're truth, about any subject. I'm more apt to respond to them when they're directed toward a presidential candidate I support.
Yep, better run to the guys you *know* will screw you over...just in case Ron Paul's consistency & integrity has just been an elaborate 3 decade ruse. I'd go with trustworthy Gingrich. Though...Romney does have great hair & likes socialized medicine.
Not found
He's no better than the rest. I'd respect him more if he simply owned up to his miscues. It's looking like Lil Ricky will be getting my vote.
