Why Ron Paul can beat Obama: He converts Democrats on war & civil liberty

[rambone]

I agree with this. I might vote for Ron Paul in the primary for exactly that reason, even though I disagree with him on foreign policy. It would also depend on what the particular politics looked like at that moment.

At last! Can I mail you some buttons and campaign materials?

 

[88GT]

I used to think that. But what then, is the difference between conservatives and libertarians? If conservatives support liberty in all cases, then why don't the two groups agree on more things? Most of the heated debates on this website do not involve liberals whatsoever.

Should I go through my list of grievances again? I'm talking about mainline conservative stances that are totally anti-liberty. Is the conservative movement ready to admit that the War on Drugs is tyranny? Every conservative from Ronald Reagan to Rush Limbaugh supports it. Are those guys phony conservatives, or does their conservative platform actually contain beliefs that promote tyranny?

- Rambone, former conservative

You see what you want because you've identified the conservative as a bogeyman. And you have fallen for the self-proclamation fallacy. Again, just because one claims to be a conservative doesn't mean he is. If I claimed to the Christ returned, would you believe me? Then why do you believe someone is a conservative just because he claims to be?

Conservative isn't a stand-alone political philosophy anyway. It has no platform unique unto itself. It is a description of one's position relative to an historical political system. 18th Century conservatives in the colonies were loyalists and Tories. But they would hardly be conservatives by our definition today.

For modern Americans, conservatism is a position grounded in the Constitution. Libertarians have no fealty to the Constitution. And many conservatives find some of the foreign policy planks of libertarianism to be just a little too pie in the sky for the real world: Sounds great in theory, but it relies on every other man to behave according to the same principles. Conservatives are just a little more grounded in reality.

Conservative is not about liberty; it is about the Constitution and the limited government this nation is supposed to have.

 

[dross]

You see what you want because you've identified the conservative as a bogeyman. And you have fallen for the self-proclamation fallacy. Again, just because one claims to be a conservative doesn't mean he is. If I claimed to the Christ returned, would you believe me? Then why do you believe someone is a conservative just because he claims to be?

Conservative isn't a stand-alone political philosophy anyway. It has no platform unique unto itself. It is a description of one's position relative to an historical political system. 18th Century conservatives in the colonies were loyalists and Tories. But they would hardly be conservatives by our definition today.

For modern Americans, conservatism is a position grounded in the Constitution. Libertarians have no fealty to the Constitution. And many conservatives find some of the foreign policy planks of libertarianism to be just a little too pie in the sky for the real world: Sounds great in theory, but it relies on every other man to behave according to the same principles. Conservatives are just a little more grounded in reality.

Conservative is not about liberty; it is about the Constitution and the limited government this nation is supposed to have.

The terms, "Conservative," "Liberal," and "Progressive," have no established meaning anymore. I dislike all the terms. "Conservative" is especially difficult, because you can't tell at all what someone stands for when they label themselves "conservative."

For instance, there are social conservatives who believe in farm subsidies and unions and government interference in business, they are called conservatives. There are people who are mostly economicly conservative and kind of socially conservative, and they probably fit the definition the best. My leftie friends all call me a right wing wacko, though I believe in making same sex unions legal, legalization of drugs and prostitution, and I'm anti death penalty. But because I'm a free market guy and believe in the recent wars, I'm crazy right wing.

Also, thinking of parties as conservative or liberal leads to confusion.

I vote Republican. The Republican Party is made up of social conservatives who are anti-free market, libertarians, and everything in between.

The Democrats are made up of socialists, abortion rights advocates who agree with Republicans on most other things, people who believe in individual freedom but fear the social conservatives, and many other groups.

The parties will never be ideologically consistent because they are made up of too many disagreeing factions. To confuse Party with ideology leads to a lot of the silliness I read on this forum.

 

[Expat]

For modern Americans, conservatism is a position grounded in the Constitution. Libertarians have no fealty to the Constitution. And many conservatives find some of the foreign policy planks of libertarianism to be just a little too pie in the sky for the real world: Sounds great in theory, but it relies on every other man to behave according to the same principles. Conservatives are just a little more grounded in reality.

Conservative is not about liberty; it is about the Constitution and the limited government this nation is supposed to have.

Actually this is pretty well put. I do not buy into all the libertarian ideals. I think most of it, I could agree with and feel a swing in that direction would be beneficial. But I believe the Constitution should be the basis for our government and laws. I feel it is an exceptional document written by exceptional men.

 

[rambone]

Libertarians have no fealty to the Constitution.

Come on. Really?

Ron Paul has no qualms about citing the constitution as a reason for regularly voting against most things the Republicans and Democrats try to pass.

Conservative is not about liberty; it is about the Constitution and the limited government this nation is supposed to have.

Do you reject Social Conservatism as a part of Conservatism? Because that entire half of the platform definitely does not jive with limited government. Although it fits what you said about not supporting liberty.

Sounds great in theory, but it relies on every other man to behave according to the same principles. Conservatives are just a little more grounded in reality.

This is the excuse that real-life conservatives use to impose onerous regulations, permits, licensing, and Nanny State laws that I so strongly disagree with. Enter the Drug War... freedom is too dangerous when people don't all share the same principles.

 

[rambone]

Ron Paul leads by wide margins in New Hampshire!



Paul tops Romney in New Hampshire


Ron Paul - 39%
Rick Santorum - 12%
Michelle Bachman - 11%
Herman Cain - 11%
Mitt Romney - 9%
Tim Pawlenty - 8%
Gary Johnson - 7%

 

[Paco Bedejo]

Paul tops Romney in New Hampshire


Ron Paul - 39%
Rick Santorum - 12%
Michelle Bachman - 11%
Herman Cain - 11%
Mitt Romney - 9%
Tim Pawlenty - 8%
Gary Johnson - 7%

Must have been an internet straw poll. He's unelectable because he's libertarian & wants to shred the constitution.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UUNIeOB0whI

 

[teddy12b]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UUNIeOB0whI

I saw this yesterday. I absolutely loved this campaign ad. I love me some Ron Paul!

 

[chizzle]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UUNIeOB0whI

What a great ad!

 

[mrjarrell]

That was a well done ad. Certainly better than anything I've seen from his opponents and their supporters. Of course, he tends to stand on his principles and the others in his party can't even spell the word.

 

[teddy12b]

That was a well done ad. Certainly better than anything I've seen from his opponents and their supporters. Of course, he tends to stand on his principles and the others in his party can't even spell the word.

I'm starting to think that the best thing to happen to RP would be that he wouldn't take the republican nomination for that reason. The more he can show his difference to the republican party standard the better off he's going to be.

 

[rambone]

Check out this one!! I liked it even more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhyaiOZhpSg

 

[teddy12b]

Check out this one!! I liked it even more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhyaiOZhpSg

Awesome!

 

[WWIIIDefender]

Awesome!

Then you will love this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR4WYqabTxU

 

[rambone]

Converting Democrats to Blue Republicans

Related to my OP:

A Democrat says that there is only one candidate in 2012 who will bring peace and civil liberties, Ron Paul. And he says that the Democrat party barely even has a faction remaining who are interested in those things.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gecf3OaSB8


https://www.facebook.com/bluerepublican

 

[WWIIIDefender]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQEP-1Dt2_M&feature=feedf

 

[chizzle]

Ron Paul is having a "Moneybomb" today to raise money for his Iowa campaign. If you'd like to donate, go here:

Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

 

[teddy12b]

Ron Paul is having a "Moneybomb" today to raise money for his Iowa campaign. If you'd like to donate, go here:

Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

Gave you a positive rep for mentioning the moneybomb, but my not so smart phone changed the word moneybomb to mob.

 

[Lex Concord]

Who is Ron Paul?