Why Ron Paul Won the Repub Debate

[TM7]

According to msnbc and other polls Rep. Ron Paul won the recent Repub candidate debate hands down. Only strange problem is no major news outlet is reporting this fact. Here's why he dominated the group with plain talk....here are his responses to questions on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hfa7vT02lA

.....TM7

[magooch]

Ron Paul could win every debate between now and the end of time, but he will never be the Republican nominee for President.  Actually, I didn't think he won the debate any more than that Gravell character won the Dumbycrat debate. 

First of all, it wasn't a debate.  It was just another example of the elitist media types trying to shape the agenda.  Could they have picked a dumber questioner than Chris Mathews?  I know the questions were supposed to have come from the audience, but someone had to choose which questions to use.

Regardless of what MSNBC's ridiculous poll might indicate, I believe that Mitt Romney did himself more good than anyone else on that stage.  But I have my doubts that even he has a fighting chance against those who are trying to force their picks down our throats.

[nomosendero]

Ron Paul could win every debate between now and the end of time, but he will never be the Republican nominee for President.  Actually, I didn't think he won the debate any more than that Gravell character won the Dumbycrat debate. 

First of all, it wasn't a debate.  It was just another example of the elitist media types trying to shape the agenda.  Could they have picked a dumber questioner than Chris Mathews?  I know the questions were supposed to have come from the audience, but someone had to choose which questions to use.

Regardless of what MSNBC's ridiculous poll might indicate, I believe that Mitt Romney did himself more good than anyone else on that stage.  But I have my doubts that even he has a fighting chance against those who are trying to force their picks down our throats.

Yep to all of that! The Lib media clowns like MSNBC would of course say that Mr. Paul won. Who with half a brain would think any differently, his views concerning the war was most agreeable to the Libs, that was enough by itself. The debate will be forgotten long before the nomination.

[dukkillr]

Ron Paul could win every debate between now and the end of time, but he will never be the Republican nominee for President.  Actually, I didn't think he won the debate any more than that Gravell character won the Dumbycrat debate. 

First of all, it wasn't a debate.  It was just another example of the elitist media types trying to shape the agenda.  Could they have picked a dumber questioner than Chris Mathews?  I know the questions were supposed to have come from the audience, but someone had to choose which questions to use.

Regardless of what MSNBC's ridiculous poll might indicate, I believe that Mitt Romney did himself more good than anyone else on that stage.  But I have my doubts that even he has a fighting chance against those who are trying to force their picks down our throats.

Yep to all of that! The Lib media clowns like MSNBC would of course say that Mr. Paul won. Who with half a brain would think any differently, his views concerning the war was most agreeable to the Libs, that was enough by itself. The debate will be forgotten long before the nomination.

Forgotten?  No one even watched it...  You can't forget what you never even knew.

[jh45gun]

Never heard of the guy with out some name recognition he will not go far. Further more whats with this cable only coverage? I refuse to suscribe to cable because it is a rip off. I cannot get satelite at my apt building as they have an agreement with cable Plus they said they do not want dishes all over the place not even the small ones. I still say if he would run Fred Thompson would be our best bet.

[magooch]

TM7, I didn't say that Dr. Paul wouldn't make a great candidate, nor that he isn't a true conservative.  Heck, I'd probably vote for him if he were to get the nomination.  What I said was that he has no chance of getting the nomination--for a lot of reasons.  There is no point going into the reasons and I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

[nomosendero]

Magooch,,,around 90,000 citizens responded to the post debate MSNBC poll.  That would be 'CITIZENS' and of course that would be meaningless!  McCain, Guiliani, Romney and the others were masquarading as conservatives---apparently a fact that many viewers polled saw thru.... I find this heartening, but unfortunately, most here can't or won't see this fact. Dr. Paul truely expresses the views of true conservatives and Country. Hopefully gunowners and others thinking that they are conservatives might come to see this.
Rev. Chuck Baldwin points this out here and a worthwhile read:
Which leads to another question: Are the media elite watching the same debate that the rest of us are watching or are they looking at something else? I think they are looking at something else. And that something else is money.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin367.htm

NomoS....his views of the war are exactly as founding fathers would view things,,,separation of business and state, no foreign entanglements. Many no longer support Bush's administration of the war--now including prominent republicans, military brass, etc., etc. and not just so-called liberals. Warfare includes much more than just military encounters and killing enemy---there are a whole bunch of forces brought to bare in real wars,,, a lesson that current neocon's refuse to acknowledge or incapable of doing.

...TM7

You missed my point. It was not all the groups that disagree with the War which are many, but only stating why MSNBC said he won, which was the subject.

[nomosendero]

Ron Paul could win every debate between now and the end of time, but he will never be the Republican nominee for President.  Actually, I didn't think he won the debate any more than that Gravell character won the Dumbycrat debate. 

First of all, it wasn't a debate.  It was just another example of the elitist media types trying to shape the agenda.  Could they have picked a dumber questioner than Chris Mathews?  I know the questions were supposed to have come from the audience, but someone had to choose which questions to use.

Regardless of what MSNBC's ridiculous poll might indicate, I believe that Mitt Romney did himself more good than anyone else on that stage.  But I have my doubts that even he has a fighting chance against those who are trying to force their picks down our throats.

Yep to all of that! The Lib media clowns like MSNBC would of course say that Mr. Paul won. Who with half a brain would think any differently, his views concerning the war was most agreeable to the Libs, that was enough by itself. The debate will be forgotten long before the nomination.

Forgotten?  No one even watched it...  You can't forget what you never even knew.

Of course I was speaking of those that did.

[Fazak]

Interesting

http://www.freedomworks.org/strawpoll/

[nomosendero]

Interesting

http://www.freedomworks.org/strawpoll/

I like Dick Armey at least.

[Fazak]

The military likes Ron Paul also.

http://controlcongress.com/2008-election/ron-paul-leads-all-%E2%80%9808-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2

Ron Paul leads ALL ‘08 candidates with one-third of military contributions for Q2

[jh45gun]

Don't be talking a 3rd party put a conservative in there that has enough to split the Republicans and your gonna put hillary in there for sure. 

[Fazak]

Third party?

Ron Paul is a Republican candidate.

[nomosendero]

Yes, Ron Paul is good ole time Republican. Most all the others are as far away from the principles of Jefferson and Madison as can be, and are acting as 'republicans'.  Dr. Paul's record displays extreme adherance to the principles of the Constitution and the oath of office he swore to.

The current Republican stance on gun ownership is rather stealthy.  It indicates indifference to the 2nd and American's choice to their firearm's rights:
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Many have long argued that Republicans value the Second Amendment more than Democrats. So far, Bush’s policy has fallen in line with the Republican and NRA doctrine on gun control: the right to bear arms is an inalienable right, and instead of passing unconstitutional gun laws, the government should enforce more strictly the 20,000 unconstitutional laws already on the books. In effect, Republicans oppose government undermining the choices of Americans, but so long as government is in the business of doing so, its programs should be fully funded and carried out by Republicans with strict adherence to the letter of the law, resulting in punishments as severe as possible.

Ashcroft’s Justice Department has indeed turned up the heat on enforcing unconstitutional gun laws, boasting: "Under the President’s Project Safe Neighborhoods program, federal gun crime prosecutions have increased by 68 percent over the last three years. Last year, the Department set a new record of charging 23 percent more individuals for violating federal firearms laws." The Bush administration has asked for a $95 million increase in spending on gun control programs for 2005. He has also expressed willingness to renew the Assault Weapons Ban.

Moreover, although Bush signed the law passed by Congress that allowed airline pilots to carry guns on planes – one of the few security measures after 9/11 that might have actually prevented the terrorist attack – his administration initially refused to implement it. Bush acquiesced only after Congress and the Senate reconvened and voted, by a supermajority, to force Bush to put guns in the hands of pilots.

In spite of what Republicans in the NRA and Democrats in the Violence Policy Center might say, Bush has hassled gun owners more than any recent president, and has shown only contempt for any moderation in the War on the Second Amendment.

proceed with caution......TM7

By a supermajority when the Rep. were in control, did you forget that?

I don't like Pres. Bush mainly because of the border situation, but to say he has hassled people more on gun issues than Dems. is a goofy statement,
sorry. He hasn't hassled me or anyone I know, but the Dems are always trying to pass new & more radical laws & you know it. Please don't p***
down my back & tell me it's raining. Can you say 1022, well no you can't & you know that MOST DEMS want to take ALL guns & that we did not have that particular problem when the Reps were in power. And, remember Bush let the CLINTON BAN fade. Republicans bother me alot elsewhere
but again, please don't p*** down my back & tell me it's raining!!!!!!!   

[nomosendero]

NS,,,don't p**$ on yourself and tell me I did it.  Info shows denials and delays are up with the NICs checks. Funding is way up for enforcement of 20,000 odd gun laws. Importation bans in the era of free trade haven't been lightened. Federal charges on firearm violations is way up. Insider Walmart is getting out of gun marketing. Allowing pilots to carry firearms was apparently was fought hard against by the administration. So, in the area of getting votes the repubs/Bush group are apparently doing well in regard to gun rights--- but in the area of reality---actual right to bare arms there is a disconnect. And that is all I'm saying my friend,,,, usual political rigamarole.

Since, this thread is about Ron Paul, I would wager that he is the only totally RTBA candidate without strings attached, and proven by his voting record.

....TM7

I didn't say you actually did, I would wager I could stop that fast & I feel I am fairly physically gifted, but not enough to pee on my own back!   

So those actual behind the scenes moves affected me how?

And thanks for the Rep. Congress at the time to help the pilots, forgot again I see.

We all know when we have to focus on gun control & that is when the Dems are in power, you know it & so do I, so no need for your BS.
It doesn't matter about Ron Paul, he won't get the hearing he deserves. There is no record of Fred Thompson being a threat on gun control in any way, and some of the others as well. I think Fred is MAYBE weak on the border & other things & I likely will vote 3rd party. Rudy is another matter on gun control, as any North East Lib would be. BTW, Hillary used to be on the board at Walmart. It is silly for anyone to believe that Gun Control matters won't rachet up with the Dems, my 6 yr. old grandson knows that. 

Gonna let you keep moaning like a closet Dem now, not saying you are one, but the feeble argument you propose is the same. This is too silly & no need to look at this thread any longer. Bye Bye. 

[jh45gun]

 Fazak I brought up 3rd party because TM7 Mentioned it. I think all third parties do is give a spoiler vote and is a waste of a vote a feel good I do not like the dims and Rep parties candidates so I am going to vote for joe blow. A Total Waste or you put in some schmuk like our Governor that got in because of a 3 way race that the 3rd party candidate had no chance of winning but got enough votes to put in this anti gun Dimwit.  At this point in time with them 3rd parties so weak all you do is give a spoiler vote for some one or waste your vote. 3rd party might work for some state elections and local but for Presidential they just do not have the power or the votes not at this time anyway.

[jh45gun]

Well to be honest the only one I trust on the right to bear arms is ME. Still the Dims want our guns more then the Republicans do I do not care what any one says.

[Fazak]

Some interesting news:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman3.html

The conversation continued. She wanted to know why she should vote for a person who has no chance. The obvious answer was because Ron Paul offered her everything she wanted. The second not so obvious answer was that he is actually doing much better than anyone knows because the press hides all of his successes. What most people do not know, because the mainstream press is doing its best to manipulate support away from Dr. Paul, is that he won the first debate, he came in second in the second debate, and he came in first in the third debate. In the most recent straw polls Dr. Paul placed second in the Georgetown SC straw poll, he placed second in the Cob County straw poll and he won the Coalition for New Hampshire Taxpayers straw poll at their annual picnic. As of this writing Ron Paul has placed number one in the PajamasMedia straw poll with 70.8% of the votes! Yet, over and over we are subjected to articles that say he has no chance. (This is an oft-used tactic to sway voters away from a candidate because people do not like to "waste" a vote. As if voting for what you want is a waste.)

The mainstream media call his supporters "spammers," attempting to claim that all his Internet support is really just a few folks pressing a lot of buttons. Nonetheless, his "non-existent" support is growing by leaps and bounds. Oh, the big guys may have the big money, but Ron Paul has the people. In one month alone, his Meetup supporters have grown from 16,184 to 25,101 with 4,192 more waiting to join in the fun. He has 643 separate groups. (These figures tend to rise daily; they were accurate at the time this article was written.) These are undeniable signs that the snowball is rolling. When people get through the gauntlet of media attempts to control their thoughts and votes and actually HEAR Ron Paul speak (see videos on YouTube like this one) or read what he has written they become ardent supporters.

[Dee]

If one does not believe that the Republican has infringed on our RTKBA, then one has not read the Patriot Act, and noticed the escalation of BATF activitiy in the last 6 or 7 years. The Patriot Act in it's entireity ONLY AFFECTs Americans.

[magooch]

Of course it would be great to have a Republican candidate who is a 100%, no questions asked defender of the Second Amendment and if that's all it took to be elected, well maybe Ron Paul would be the guy.  I think that in most peoples minds, the right to bear arms is a side issue and not as all important as we do.

In any case, I'll take my chances with the Republican candidate concerning the Second Amendment, any time, over the Dumbycratics.  And in the end, Jim is right; any third party candidate is just a spoiler.

[Dee]

Joe Liberman might prove that THEORY to be wrong. A I recall the last election his Democratic party dropped him, he ran "independent" AND WON! Spoiler? I think not. By voting for the lessor of two evils one is taking the lazy way out, and voting the lemming ticket EITHER WAY THEY VOTE, and are still getting evil. Agreed there are no PERFECT candidates, BUT, there certainly ARE some better ones offered by the Libertarian and Constitutional Parties. One must just read, research, and vote for what's right instead of taking the easy way out, and voting two party. The entire populace is guilty for the most part of this, and that is precisely why we are where we are today. JMO

[jh45gun]

Joe Liberman might prove that THEORY to be wrong. A I recall the last election his Democratic party dropped him, he ran "independent" AND WON! Spoiler? I think not. By voting for the lessor of two evils one is taking the lazy way out, and voting the lemming ticket EITHER WAY THEY VOTE, and are still getting evil. Agreed there are no PERFECT candidates, BUT, there certainly ARE some better ones offered by the Libertarian and Constitutional Parties. One must just read, research, and vote for what's right instead of taking the easy way out, and voting two party. The entire populace is guilty for the most part of this, and that is precisely why we are where we are today. JMO

Dee If your read my post I said that it may work in State and Local elections but for a national race a third party is still a spoiler vote. Yea Jessie won in MN before Joe Liberman did and a popular figure in any state or local race could do that but they do not have the power or the clout yet for a national race. If the third parties could get some one that could then they would stand a chance. So far they have not and most third parties the public think the candidates they have run  are kinda goofy that has been the norm in the past.

[Dee]

Well the truth be know some third party candidates are kinda goofy, but Hillary and Kerry are reeeaaal goofy, and Hillary might just win. The legitimate third party candidate will be looked at as a spoiler for as long as some people REFUSE to vote for the best candidate, but until people start stepping up and supporting a GOOD third party candidate, then the politicians will continue to get what they want. Like it or not, when a third party candidate is a good SOLID candidate, and in fact the BEST candidate, then people of sound mind should vote for the BEST candidate, as ANYTHING LESS is irresponsible.

[Fazak]

True Conservative Republican Ron Paul knocks ABC poll out of the park!

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/popup?id=3436820&POLL299=1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[billy_56081]

Who's Ron Paul?

[Fazak]

Who's Ron Paul?

He's the candidate you've been waiting for.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul73.html

Restore the Second Amendment
by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

Ron Paul in the US House of Representatives, January 9, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I rise to restore the right the founding fathers saw as the guarantee of every other right by introducing the Second Amendment Protection Act. This legislation reverses the steady erosion of the right to keep and bear arms by repealing unconstitutional laws that allow power-hungry federal bureaucrats to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Specifically, my legislation repeals the five-day waiting period and the "instant" background check, which enables the federal government to compile a database of every gun owner in America. My legislation also repeals the misnamed ban on "semi-automatic" weapons, which bans entire class of firearms for no conceivable reason beside the desire of demagogic politicians to appear tough on crime. Finally, my bill amends the Gun Control Act of 1968 by deleting the "sporting purposes" test, which allows the Treasury Secretary to infringe on second amendment rights by classifying a firearm (handgun, rifle, shotgun) as a "destructive device" simply because the Secretary believes the gun to be "non-sporting."

Thomas Jefferson said "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." Jefferson, and all of the Founders, would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans from exercising their right and duty to keep and bear arms. I hope my colleagues will join me in upholding the Founders' vision for a free society by cosponsoring the Second Amendment Restoration Act.

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

[Dee]

There you go. He is a Republican, and certainly isn't a spoiler, and he is as honest about the Constitution and Bill of Rights as it gets. Check his voting record. You can support him or not, but if one TRULY wants to RESTORE the Constitution and Bill of Rights, he will vote RESPONSIBLY for the ONE MAN whom supports BOTH with his VOICE, AND HIS LEGISLATION, AND HIS VOTE. Anything LESS is being a lemming.

[Matt]

Well I like the guy, his track record is good he has many of the same views as I do and should be given a real look by people.

You Choose '08 Spotlight: Ron Paul on the Second Amendment
[yt=450,350]xdxTg9x3Mbg[/yt]

You Choose '08 Spotlight: Ron Paul on Entitlements
[yt=450,350]X9JIwxhRfug[/yt]

You Choose '08 Spotlight: Ron Paul on Civil Liberties
[yt=450,350]6se9_wCZ2z0[/yt]

You Choose '08 Spotlight: Ron Paul, the Internet's BFF
[yt=450,350]YRAcLPmq5M4[/yt]

Ron Paul Courageously Speaks the Truth
[yt=450,350]G7d_e9lrcZ8[/yt]

[popgun]

ABC didn't even mention Ron Paul's name this morning when talking about the "debate".

[Dee]

Why in the world would they. He (PAUL) is what he says he is, and his voting record proves it. ABC and all the rest are liberal. Fox news is nothing more than a pro bush administration. GW could take a crap on the kitchen table and Fox would justify it.
It's kinda like the drug companies. Invent a cure, and you know longer need their drugs.
They not mentioning him is business as usual. What the American people NEED, and SHOULD DO, is get up off their butts, pay attention to congressional voting, and back the FEW honest reps we have, and TURN OFF THE TV.JMO