Where Should Ron Paul Fit in at the GOP Convention?

by Fef Posted 2012/08/08 21:00:00

Related Topics: 2012 Election, Ron Paul, Republican Convention, GOP Convention, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul

1,205 votes
Read all 1,337 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	He should be featured	422 votes	35%
	He should be acknowledged	342 votes	28%
	He should be ignored	441 votes	37%

“I can tell you that both Ron and Rand will have an important role in the convention and their supporters and ideals will be well represented,” said Jesse Benton, who managed Ron Paul’s presidential campaign.

WASHINGTONPOST.COM reports:
An initial list of GOP convention speakers doesn’t include either Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) or his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

include rep ron paul r-texas son sen rand paul r-ky

+34

Add a comment above

DDogbreath 2012/08/08 21:24:35

He should be featured

+38
First of all you are wrong!

I took a screen shot of the headline I answered

(click to enlarge)

Ron Paul is not a "Former Candidate" unless you are referring to the Republican party's grave mistake of election 2008.

Ron Paul is currently a presidential candidate for election 2012. The only problem we have as a country is letting the main stream media elect our leaders for us.

Why did they "black out" the "Campaign for Liberty" when they were clearly gaining more support than douche bag Romney?

You didn't see this on TV did you?

You didn't see this either.

I hope Ron Paul pulls off a coup at the convention. Romney and Obama are both puppets of the NWO and the bankers, they offer no solutions to the problems we face as a country, they are both BS artists.

Ron Paul tells you the truth and has the solutions. He can "lead by example" and wants America to do the same.

>> See Replies

More polls by Fef

gary to gary 2012/08/13 23:20:52

Fool us once GOP, fool us twice you will never fool us again GOP.

reply
SunShine to gary 2012/08/14 03:25:50

where did I say that Ron Paul is nuts?? If you are that radical then I see why you are saying the things you are.. you sound just like a liberal.. exaggerating and twisting everything..

reply
SunShine to gary 2012/08/27 04:50:56

I did NOT say anything like that.. where do you see that??

reply
Buffalo... to SunShine 2012/08/15 15:11:01 (edited)

yeah.. you are right--- that isn't "presidential material" ....

like you said--- he is a nice guy, with principles and is honest.

...oh... and not a bankster loving nwo puppet like choice A or B on the ballot this election.

reply
BlackSouth to SunShine 2012/08/21 07:19:42

He is still on the ticket. he just said he will not be actively campaigning and he is still winning delegates.

reply
BlackSouth to SunShine 2012/08/21 07:18:24

That means you will probably be dead by the time Romney's plan will balance the budget since it may be around 2040 if it balances at all.

reply
Buffalo... to SunShine 2012/08/15 15:06:18 (edited)
SunShine to Buffalo... 2012/08/15 15:18:38

yes it does make a difference.. Romney will give us the chance (time) to make changes.. I think some of those puppets are in for a big surprise..

reply
BlackSouth to SunShine 2012/08/21 07:15:09
Striker to joe ram... 2012/08/13 17:25:53

yeah right, we must continue with more-of-the-same. Liberty is obsolete, right?

reply
KG 2012/08/10 21:31:40

He should be featured

+5
As no one else before him or after. A truth teller on stage! God Bless Ron Paul.

reply
dekecds 2012/08/10 20:46:05

He should be featured

+5
What he really should be is President! I think that Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul would be a Dynamic duo!

reply
TheBadOne to dekecds 2012/08/10 23:17:23 (edited)

+4
That mash-up is so mixed up that it would probably be more effective than the leadership we've had in office for the last 35 years!

reply
JeanLou... to dekecds 2012/08/11 12:49:19

+1
They don't have the charisma needed to be elected in our media driven,star studded land.
Obama's smile is like high beams and his voters are deer caught in the headlights.
GOD Bless America..we need help.We have to fall in love with our candidtes.How dumb!!

reply
SunShine to dekecds 2012/08/13 07:31:10

really?? Dennis Kucinich is a commie.. member for a long time of the Socialist party of America..

reply
dekecds to SunShine 2012/08/13 12:35:57

+2
Why, if you don't mind me asking, do you think that he is a commie? I consider my political preferences to be well researched, but I am also not without fault. Please elaborate, and I promise not to shoot back with rhetoric and name calling, like so many other soda heads do. You could send me a message if you wish to refrain from unncecessary trolls in the open forum here. I uphold that it is better to be well informed about a candidate than it is to be well armed in his defense.

reply
NOT14U2 to dekecds 2012/08/13 17:35:44

+1
I can Imagine that you've received no message because substance is missing from their argument.

reply
SunShine to NOT14U2 2012/08/13 22:53:00

excuse me?? are you calling me a liar?? There is nothing missing from my FACTS.. Kucinich is actually a Vice Chairman of the party..

reply
SunShine to dekecds 2012/08/13 22:49:17

He is a registered member of the party.. ??

The Socialist Party of America announced in their October 2009 newsletter that 70 Congressional democrats currently belong to their caucus. This admission was recently posted on Scribd.com:

American Socialist Voter–

Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy

Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez, Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez. [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].

Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07) Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

reply
dekecds to SunShine 2012/08/14 03:19:54

I have seen the agenda of this party and while I don't agree with everything, I do think that a lot of what they are aiming at is further from socialist than the standard democratic party agenda. They are very similar in their pursuit to libertarians in many cases.
Currently, I will take the lesser of three evils when faced with the Communist actions of Obama and his Democratic party and the panty waisted pseudo-conservative agenda of any of the recent GOP candidates.
Ultimately, I think that Kucinich's views and "put-your-foot-down" leadership coupled with Ron Paul's policy suggestions and economic views would complement each other quite well.
I will grant you that calling yourself socialist is like signing your own resignation with the conservatives in this country, but I have given up on the conservatives as anything but a convenient escape from the destructive democratic national convention's ideas.
I still don't see what you are basing your "Commie" label on. I was hoping that you would cite some actual policies upheld or supported by Kucinich that pointed to a communist ideal, rather than membership in a club that has little actual influence on American policy.
If your only counter to this view poit is that some others in this club have done " such-and-such" , then I see...

I have seen the agenda of this party and while I don't agree with everything, I do think that a lot of what they are aiming at is further from socialist than the standard democratic party agenda. They are very similar in their pursuit to libertarians in many cases.
Currently, I will take the lesser of three evils when faced with the Communist actions of Obama and his Democratic party and the panty waisted pseudo-conservative agenda of any of the recent GOP candidates.
Ultimately, I think that Kucinich's views and "put-your-foot-down" leadership coupled with Ron Paul's policy suggestions and economic views would complement each other quite well.
I will grant you that calling yourself socialist is like signing your own resignation with the conservatives in this country, but I have given up on the conservatives as anything but a convenient escape from the destructive democratic national convention's ideas.
I still don't see what you are basing your "Commie" label on. I was hoping that you would cite some actual policies upheld or supported by Kucinich that pointed to a communist ideal, rather than membership in a club that has little actual influence on American policy.
If your only counter to this view poit is that some others in this club have done " such-and-such" , then I see that you have missed my point.
For Example:
I was once a member of the BSA (Boy Scouts of America), and just because several members of the same organization (which does foster relationships between men and young boys) decided that it was ok to practice pedophilic tendencies in their line of duty, does not mean that I condone that.
(more)

reply
SunShine to dekecds 2012/08/21 14:45:16

there are none so blind as those who will not see..

reply
dekecds to SunShine 2012/08/22 16:40:59

Good maxim. Don't forget, also, that there are none so ignorant as those who have no knowledge of what they post about.

Cite your references...

reply
SunShine to dekecds 2012/08/22 20:10:35

go to the web site for the socialist party of America

reply
dekecds to SunShine 2012/08/23 11:35:18

stop being lazy....

reply
SunShine to dekecds 2012/08/23 13:20:27

lol.. me lazy?? I'm 70 yrs old and I work hard about 10 hours a day and then I look after my home and cooking..and I get a few minutes here in the evening and early am..

reply
Scott 2012/08/10 20:01:47

He should be acknowledged

+2
Ron should at least be acknowledged - perhaps featured. He was a viable candidate until the media dismissed him. People hardly got to hear him speak in the debates. I like his domestic policies - a lot! (foreign policies - not so much)

But the thing is, he still has many, fervent supporters. I've bumped into many of them here. They're damn near militant about voting for Ron Paul. The convention is the perfect place to bury the hatchet, let Ron Paul speak in a prominent place of the convention. If he spoke about domestic stuff, he and Romney would basically be on the same page, and the stuff Romney hasn't addressed, maybe Paul could light a fire under his ass. If he were allowed to something like this, really fully endorse Romney, I think it would be a really good thing for the campaign. It would also serve as yet another wake up call to the republican 'establishment' that it's NOT business as usual.

reply
Buffalo... to Scott 2012/08/11 08:20:52

+3
I like your idea... but the hatchet cant be buried--- imo one is a patriot, the other a puppet.

Big money, the media, and banksters wanted Romney, so they got him...

People who have a grasp on what it was going to take to get our country back from the brink of collapse wanted Paul, hence the reasoning behind the fervent, damn near militant supporters.. unfortunately there are too many sheep on this farm.

reply
Scott to Buffalo... 2012/08/13 14:52:46

+1
All the more reason to have Paul participate. If Paul supporters blow their opportunity to support Romney, let's face it, they are basically tossing their vote Obama's way, and all that patriotic fervor and principles to save the country will be for naught.

I understand your point of view - I really do. But, for what ever reason Paul did not win the candidacy. There's two options as I see it.

Option 1 - Accept Romney at this point as a better alternative to Obama. It certainly buys you some time. Then prepare a better, stronger campaign for the next time around.

Option 2 - Revolution - It's not the way to go as long as there are other alternatives in my opinion. If Obama wins in November, please ask me again.

reply
Buffalo... to Scott 2012/08/15 15:26:40 (edited)

I agree--but the only solution is to have Romney the "face" and Paul 100% the brains, which isnt going to happen because the media has already convinced the sheeple majority that Paul and his words are irrelevant. Maybe taking Ron Paul as VP would've been the answer there but he didnt even do that because it would've been more of a risk than taking Paul Ryan..we all know the TV should decide the election anyway--because we are all so busy working hard to pay back our debt to pay attention and decide for ourselves whats best for the country--so we let paid media professionals (paid by who?) call the shots.

So, insane as Option#2 is----- with around of 90% of your country being nothing but lifetime slaves to their personal debt and interest--and to the 16 trillion in federal debt (more like 60 trillion), the majority of which is owed NOT to China as they would like you to believe, but to the federal reserve along with its European bankster backers at this point... the same suckers who tried to take us back in the 1800's that Andrew Jackson stopped-- are going to finally get what they wanted so long ago...

"You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning." --Andrew Jackson, 1828

so in retrospect, either way-----I think you are going to get choice #2.

reply
Scott to Buffalo... 2012/08/15 15:48:12

I think I'll give Option #1 a try first.

reply
Buffalo... to Scott 2012/08/15 15:49:20 (edited)

I suppose thats only logical.

reply
Scott to Buffalo... 2012/08/15 15:58:25

+1
That's kind of what I was thinking too.

reply
Denny 2012/08/10 19:45:52

He should be featured

+2
He can always stand at the door passing out programs. Perhaps helping people to their seats.

reply
Redneck Gal 2012/08/10 19:44:45

He should be featured

+3
He should have been the feature attraction as the nominee. I would have voted for Ron Paul but since they put Romney up there instead, my vote will go to President Obama. Ron Paul would have made an excellent President.

reply
Marek to Redneck... 2012/08/11 02:08:56

+4
That is not a good endorsement for Ron Paul if you consider him only slightly better than obama.

reply
Redneck... to Marek 2012/08/11 16:42:20

+2
Where did you read "slightly" better than President Obama in there? Better re-read it again.

reply
natwebb to Redneck... 2012/08/11 05:29:09

+2
That makes no sense. I would prefer Ron Paul over Romney, but just because I don't get to have my way on that does not mean I switch from the candidate who honors the constitution to Obama, who sees is as in the way of hope and change.

reply
Redneck... to natwebb 2012/08/11 16:48:08

+2
You really need to look at the written word....it's quite clear, I like Ron Paul but don't like Romney. Republican's aren't nominating Ron Paul therefore, I will vote for President Obama because he is more honorable than Romney. My opinion, my vote. Very simple!

reply
Marek to Redneck... 2012/08/11 17:29:33

Obama is more honorable? You don't care for Ron Paul, he is merely an excuse for you to vote for mister obama and then hypocritically claim that you had no choice because republicans did not nominate Paul.

reply
Redneck... to Marek 2012/08/11 19:47:44

+2
You presume to know what I care about? LMAO You don't even know me. If you did, you'd know that I am more a Libertarian than Democrat or Republican. Therefore, Ron Paul would naturally be my first choice. Simply because Republicans did not nominate Ron Paul, I do have a choice...Romney or Obama. I will go with Obama. Just because you may not like President Obama, there are others that do...this is the beauty of a Republic.

reply