Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
-
08-09-2007, 06:23 PM #1
Why the Republican Party can’t possibly win without Ron Pa
Monday, August 6, 2007
Â*
Why the Republican Party can’t possibly win without Ron Paul Â*
Â*
It’s no question that Ron Paul is a lone voice in the Republican debates. While he shares some views in common with his fellow candidates, the biggest issue—the Iraq war—draws the most attention, and it is on this issue that he parts their company. Some in the Republican Party feel that he should be excluded because of his views on the war, but I couldn’t disagree more. For this and other reasons, it’s obvious to me that not only does the Republican Party need Ron Paul, but they also can’t win the 2008 election without him.
Â*
The American people are ready for a change. Democrats are already smug in their confidence of a 2008 victory because they know that America is weary of our Republican president’s policies. If you’ve heard Ron Paul speak, then you’ve no doubt heard him repeat over and over that 70% of the American people are frustrated with the war in Iraq. In an ABC News/Washington Post Poll conducted July 18-21, 2007, 63% said that the Iraq war was not worth fighting, 68% responded that they disapprove of the way Bush is handling the situation, 59% want the U.S. to withdraw forces now, and 55% indicated that they trust the Democrats in Congress to do a better job handling Iraq. If so, I really don’t know how Ron Paul’s Republican competitors expect to make it past the primaries. If the GOP doesn’t want to lose against an anti-war Democrat, then their only chance is to send Ron Paul to the 2008 election. The fact that Ron Paul was opposed to the war from the get-go and has consistently maintained his stance, while Clinton's and Obama's voting records have flip-flopped over time, gives him the edge he needs to defeat a Democratic opponent. Â*
Â*
Clearly Ron Paul’s views on the war are in-line with a victory in 2008, but the rest of the package only makes that victory all the more probable. Ron Paul has the values and voting record to appeal to the Republican base--he’s pro-life, in favor of protecting gun rights, dedicated to lower taxes, he loves the Constitution, and he’s a man of faith. Conservatives will rally strongly behind him as the Republican candidate, especially considering how most of them view Hilary Clinton. If Dr. Paul were to make it to the 2008 election, conservative Christian Americans and most Libertarians and Constitution Party members are guaranteed votes in his favor. It has also been interesting to see how many Ron Paul supporters have previously identified themselves as Democrats or independent liberal thinkers—changing parties to have the opportunity to vote for Ron Paul—myself included. Perhaps more impressively, Dr. Paul has brought new voters out of the woodwork in droves, both older Americans who had previously been uninterested in participating as well as young new voters many of whom will be voting in the 2008 election for the first time. I’m doubtful that any of the “front-runnersâ€
-
08-09-2007, 07:14 PM #2
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- florida
- Posts
- 1,726
With these fraudulent machines and fraudulent voter registry, the democrats and the republicans are counting on to win the election
-
08-09-2007, 07:26 PM #3
He just needs to firm up his stance on illegal immigration. I've been reading conflicting reports on his past voting on other sites.
-
08-10-2007, 02:45 PM #4Originally Posted by saveourcountry
I recently saw him on tour in Iowa on C-SPAN, and some Hispanic woman approached him and asked him questions about what he would do about the children of illegal aliens. He said there was no easy answer because by law, they are American citizens. It seemed that she was pressing him about this issue, hoping to get an answer that she liked. His final comment to her was that he doesn't feel that a child should automatically become a US citizen just because that person came over the border to have a baby. I don't think that sat too well with this woman! But I liked the fact that he answered her point blank, without hemming and hawing like a typical politician trying to answer a difficult question without really answering it!
-
08-10-2007, 04:24 PM #5
Chole,
Where did you hear that? I would love to see the article or a clip.I stay current on Americans for Legal Immigration PAC's fight to Secure Our Border and Send Illegals Home via E-mail Alerts (CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP)
-
08-10-2007, 08:31 PM #6Originally Posted by jp_48504
It was only about 24 min. long. It started out with him giving an outdoor speech, but they cut that part short. It was only like 5 min. long. Basically, cameras were following him around through the crowds as he met and spoke with different people. You had to really listen carefully as there was a lot of noise in the background. It was an extremely humid night, and the poor guy had to keep wiping the persperation from his face.
I don't know if you can get the transcript or a video from CSPAN, but here's the link anyway: http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/c ... 2053321285
Or just check the schedule. Maybe they will repeat it.
Good luck!
-
08-12-2007, 01:11 AM #7Why the Republican Party can’t possibly win without Ron Paul"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn
Michigan Republicans want to ban sanctuary cities after homicide
03-29-2024, 07:19 AM in illegal immigration News Stories & Reports