RON PAUL - Why is he being ignored?

[GILSAN]

As a foreigner I've always been interested in American politics because it affects the rest of the world. I've always looked up to American's strong belief in freedom but in the last 10-15 years I notice that the American Mainstream Media (MSM) have taken control of the majority of the population's minds and have decided who should win the candidacy both for the Democrats and Republicans.

And this brainwashing seems to get worse all the time. Three years ago the MSM decided that Obama should be the winner and so they where very biased against Hilary Clinton. Result; The media and Obama won.

Now with the Republican nomination the Media is even worse as they seem to have already chosen Mitt Romney to win. What really amazes me is how the Media has totally ignored Ron Paul who appears to be the 2nd most popular candidate, despite the fact that he is being ignored. Just imagine if they (MSM) were to talk about him; He'd probably be the front runner.

Could this (ignoring Ron Paul) be due to to the fact that the MSM is controlled by Jews and they don't like the fact that Ron Paul has said the he would stop Foreign aid to Israel and the rest of the world. Or are they afraid that Ron Paul has the the best chance of beating Obama, therefore by choosing Romney, Obama will obviously have a better chance to win.

What amazes me is that the media is not even being discreet about ignoring RP. Whatever happened to the unbiased American media that the world so much admired?

 

[iowadawg]

*****Breaking News*****

We have our 3rd Candidate

Roseanne Barr has filed the official paperwork necessary to run for the Green Party nomination for president of the United States.


You go girl!!! no really go

Is Rosie O'Donnell going to be her running mate?
To balance it out?
(hahahahaha)

 

[RaiderGirl]

Why is Ron Paul being ignored?

I don't think he's being ignored, when your polling in last place you really cant expect the media to give you equal time to what they give the top contenders..

As much as I like Ron Paul, he's simply UN-Electable.

Aside from the racist piece he published, Libertarians have some pretty extreme positions, and it's those positions that will ultimately work against him in the general election should he be nominated.

Republicans and independents realize this election is far too important to risk nominating a lightning rod like Ron Paul who has the highest probability of re-electing Obama.. God forbid.

Even Ron Paul himself realizes he CANT win, he's in this race for the message and the message ONLY, I think that's quite clear.

 

[DU]

...

 

[Domainace]

I wish there were a non-crackpot saying some of the things Paul is saying about our out-of-control government. Unfortunately, we've only got 3 insiders to choose from, and I think Romney is the best roll of the dice. How leftist and pro-government can a Mormon be, after all?

 

[RaiderGirl]

Great to see you DomainAce!

I agree with the Paul statement, My problem with Romney is that he's bought and paid for by Wall Street, much the same way Obama is.

Aside from this, I just don't trust him... Whenever he speaks, I get the same feeling I had with Obama in 2008, NOT telling us what he honestly believes but rather what we want to hear.. With Newt or Rick, I don't get that at all. I think their far more sincere and they have the experience, conviction and determination to really turn this country around, much the same way Reagan did.

 

[Kate]

With all the scarecrows to the right, looks like Obama will get reelected.

 

[enlytend]

We have our 3rd Candidate

With all the scarecrows to the right, looks like Obama will get reelected.

Cain and Perry were just too dumb

Mitt Romney stuck his big mitten in his mouth

I think I know why we find any sane, intelligent, "normal" people to run for President: It's a s***ty job and nobody in their right mind wants it !!!

 

[RogueWriter]

I think I am going to write in John Galt.

 

[johname]

I think I am going to write in John Galt.

I would write in defaultuser in a second but I dont know if he was born in the USA

 

[DU]

...

 

[iowadawg]

Does anyone remember Pat Paulsen?
Well, if you do, this is for you:
Looks like Pat’s son, Monty Paulsen, is gearing up for a 2012 run for the White House. Here he hits the campaign trail to find the pulse of American voters.
http://www.paulsen.com/pat/

Then further back, there was the big write in campaign for Mickey Mouse.

The good old days of the 60's and 70's....

 

[ThemesPremier]

Ron Paul has one big problem- charisma.Its a problem you can't easily fix either if you don't naturally have it.

Yah you are right, charisma plays a huge role even though it is not important logically

 

[DU]

...

 

[GILSAN]

900 Dead people voted in South Carolina; Gingrch admits to 1500 acts of fraud in Virginia and now:
Voter Fraud in the Nevada Caucus. Is this for real? Wow! Sounds like Zimbabwe!

Paul camp cries fraud over Nevada Caucus results
http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-national/paul-camp-cries-fraud-over-nevada-caucus-results

The Election Results Are Rigged!!! Clark County Nevada
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7Ug1jdERZw&feature=related"]The Election Results Are Rigged!!! Clark County Nevada - YouTube[/ame]

There is no way Ron Paul can ever win. The MSM will make sure that Romney wins either by hook or by crook, thus ensuring that Obama will easily win.

You got to give the MSM some credit. They sure know how to fool a lot of people a lot of the time.

 

[RaiderGirl]

Nice day for Rick Santorum, Congrats!

Connecting with the people and selling himself on the issues that matter seems to be paying off.

This is what Romney doesn't do and this is why he lost in every state today... Failing to connect with voters and attacking your opponents isn't going to win the nomination, When you go after Santorum like you did Perry and Newt, it's going to backfire.. Voters what substance in this election, NOT your well funded under handed bullsh*t.

And I agree with other posters that Romney will likely LOSE against Obama if he's the nominee, When you look at both of them, theirs really not much contrast.

 

[JB Lions]

Santorum would lose by even a greater margin.

 

[RogueWriter]

I don't think you can say Santorum would lose big. Obama has been such a dismal failure, if he wins a second term at all, it will be by the slimmest of margins. In the end it will come down to how well the Republican candidate is able to remind the public just how many failures Obama has. On Obama's part, it will also come down to how well he can foist all of the economic troubles off on Bush.

Obama's strategy will be to imply that his actions have reduced the intensity of the recession, which is a vague point, something that is hard to prove or disprove. But, that's all he's got.

 

[JB Lions]

"On Obama's part, it will also come down to how well he can foist all of the economic troubles off on Bush."

That's actually getting better. I mean, he was handed the worst economy since the Great Depression. I had no expectations that was going to turn around overnight. All he had to do in this term is stop the slide and show some type of hope, which is happening now.

Stock market is looking good.

Misery Index, lowest it's been in almost a year - http://www.miseryindex.us/customindexbymonth.asp

Unemployment rate, going down - http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

Terrorism, we got the guy responsible. Haven't had any major attacks and so on.

Still lots of work to be done (the message for the second term) but I think we can all agree he did inherit a mess?

"I don't think you can say Santorum would lose big."

I'm just basing that on the current polls out, Obama vs. the other candidates. They all show Romney has the best shot. I think Santorum, out of the 4, is the farthest right. The idea is not who is the most Republican, it's picking somebody who has the best shot at beating Obama. It's not Santorum. Having said that, I think he has a better shot than Newt or Paul, the Obama Campaign would have a field day with either of those candidates.

 

[RogueWriter]

Eh, unemployment numbers are rigged to look better than they are, much like numbers relating to inflation and production.

Although I really do not like the idea of Newt being President ( mostly I just don't like his personality ) , I think I would actually enjoy watching a debate between Obama and Newt, that would be really feisty.

 

[JB Lions]

Eh, unemployment numbers are rigged to look better than they are, much like numbers relating to inflation and production.

Although I really do not like the idea of Newt being President ( mostly I just don't like his personality ) , I think I would actually enjoy watching a debate between Obama and Newt, that would be really feisty.

The whole the numbers are rigged is a joke. Were the numbers rigged when it was over 10% to make Obama look bad? See how what you said doesn't carry thru. If the numbers were going in the other direction, let's say 11% or 12% or more, you would be using that as a reason for Obama not to get reelected. But since they're going down, then they must be rigged. Can't have it both ways. You either think those numbers are accurate or not. Not just accurate if they reflect your views. If a Republican was President right now, instead of Obama, and the Unemployment Rate was going down, you would not be saying those numbers are rigged, let's be honest about it.

 

[GILSAN]

Eh, unemployment numbers are rigged to look better than they are, much like numbThree Official Lies About Jobs! Two Official Lies About Housing! Plus, the Hard, Factual Truth!ers relating to inflation and production.

Yes most governments like to twist the numbers to their advantage, especially when elections are getting closer. I have friends in the US that tell me that unemployment is worst than before.

Could this be the reason why the unemployment rate is getting better according to the Obama administration;
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/thre...out-housing-plus-the-hard-factual-truth-48918

Do you guys feel that unemployment is improving where you live?

 

[RogueWriter]

Didn't say I wanted it both ways. In fact I think I have made it pretty clear that I don't like any of the candidates, although Obama is a particularly bad President.

If you think the numbers our government presents to you are accurate, check out what they say the inflation rate is, then check on the cost of butter over the last four years. And gas. And meat. My city just announced a 57% increase in our sewer rate. Republican or Democrat I don't care, the ones in power will try to make themselves look good.

 

[JB Lions]

Yes most governments like to twist the numbers to their advantage, especially when elections are getting closer. I have friends in the US that tell me that unemployment is worst than before.

Could this be the reason why the unemployment rate is getting better according to the Obama administration;
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/thre...out-housing-plus-the-hard-factual-truth-48918

Do you guys feel that unemployment is improving where you live?

I just linked to the chart. It's not like Obama is in there, changing the numbers up or any other President. There is a way they come up with that number, a formula. Doesn't matter if you're Republican, Democrat, Election time, whatever.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Take that chart, expand the date. It's not for R or D. You'll see the rate dropping during Reagan, going up during Bush I, dropping under Clinton, under Bush Jr. going up, then down, then last year in office up almost 3 points when it was handed to Obama. Was still going up to over 10, now going down again. You can disagree on the numbers, talk about real unemployment rate, debate what's causing it, who's responsible, good or bad but those are the numbers used, using a specific formula, for everybody. And right now, those numbers are getting better.

 

[GILSAN]

I just linked to the chart. It's not like Obama is in there, changing the numbers up or any other President. There is a way they come up with that number, a formula. Doesn't matter if you're Republican, Democrat, Election time, whatever.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Take that chart, expand the date. It's not for R or D. You'll see the rate dropping during Reagan, going up during Bush I, dropping under Clinton, under Bush Jr. going up, then down, then last year in office up almost 3 points when it was handed to Obama. Was still going up to over 10, now going down again. You can disagree on the numbers, talk about real unemployment rate, debate what's causing it, who's responsible, good or bad but those are the numbers used, using a specific formula, for everybody. And right now, those numbers are getting better.

Link says: "The database is currently unavailable."
I never trust governments when they give us these kinds of data as they have specialized people to manipulate the numbers.

Where I live the government says that the unemployment figure is about 13%. Total bullshit. Most people know by instinct and simple maths that its probably closer to 20% and rising!

If Politicians were to be classified by rating agencies they would all be rated well below JUNK status.


Is George Carlin right on this video?:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q&feature=player_embedded"]George Carlin ~ The American Dream - YouTube[/ame]

This one is one of my favorites:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTayQhIkB58&feature=related"]George Carlin's Amazing Tonight Show Performance - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RaiderGirl]

I laugh at these polls that ask who would you vote for "Obama or Romney" or whoever... Most voters don't have a friggin clue who the candidates even are, Don't believe me? ask some of your friends or coworkers and see what the response is. It all comes down to name recognition, this is the reason Obama is polling higher than the Romney or anyone else.. Once the Republicans have their nominee, it's going to be a completely different ball game, As Obama will be forced to spend most of his time defending his dismal record of the last 3 years, when that happens, watch for Obama's poll numbers to dramatically decline.

As for Romney, I don't think people realize how weak a candidate he really is, He's a empty suit just like Obama, NO substance, just a lot of campaign rhetoric and promises he doesn't plan to keep.. This is a guy who LOST against the most Liberal man in the Senate "Ted Kennedy" in 1994, a coward and a murderer.

And as predicted, we now see Romney trashing Rick Santorum as a Washington insider when he himself could of been one if he had won Teddy's Senate seat.

And Romney LOSES again to John McCain of all people in 2008.. Some make the argument that Romney is electable because he was elected Governor of a very liberal state, But if you go back and research when Romney ran, then Democratic Governor "Jane Swift" was pummeled by the media of one scandal after another, so much that she decided NOT to seek re-election. When you throw the bums out, Democrat or Republican, voters will almost always vote for the opposing party, and Romney just happened to be IT.. Much like Corzine and Chris Christie in New Jersey.