The Right Scoop
ADD......... JESSE VENTURA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously, Trump is one of the lowest? The only real businessman here who has a set of balls. Vote for Trump people.
Why don't you add candidates, such as Paul Ryan, 2Rick Perry and Jeb Bush. Make it a choice.
Explain? Paul is the only candidate that wants to go to the source of the problem, the money supply. I think you ignorance by the whoever you listen to is making you seem even more less intelligent than you actually are... Ron Paul was the only candidate that predicted all the crisis happening now and he has been consistent since he has stepped into congress.
I don't get it?
Why not take a look at a candidate already filed whom noone knows but who ran a serious race in 2008 and WAS NOT a vanity candidate. Myself. http://www.voteforvern.com No vanity candidate doing it for ego or to impress his friends would trudge through snow and ice for much of the 100 days I did visiting 6,000 businesses in 242 towns in Iowa and New Hampshire. I spent a total of $36,000 from an equity loan on my home. I have two degrees am a CPA and have had the practical experience of running a business I founded 35 years ago. I STRONGLY believe that non wealthy non celebrities can do a better job than those elected who are. Unless you have awakened in the middle of the night worried about paying your mortgage at least once in your life you do not understand the average American who has. Particularly as of late. If anyone sees my stand on issues they will know I fit the times. Please help by letting others know who I am. Thanks.
Why not take a look at a candidate already filed whom noone knows but who ran a serious race in 2008 and WAS NOT a vanity candidate. Myself. http://www.voteforvern.com No vanity candidate doing it for ego or to impress his friends would trudge through snow and ice for much of the 100 days I did visiting 6,000 businesses in 242 towns in Iowa and New Hampshire. I spent a total of $36,000 from an equity loan on my home. I have two degrees am a CPA and have had the practical experience of running a business I founded 35 years ago. I STRONGLY believe that non wealthy non celebrities can do a better job than those elected who are. Unless you have awakened in the middle of the night worried about paying your mortgage at least once in your life you do not understand the average American who has. Particularly as of late. If anyone sees my stand on issues they will know I fit the times. Please help by letting others know who I am. Thanks.
The only reason you don't put Ron Paul on this poll is because you know he will win. How can you call Ron Paul supporters hijackers when are doing merly the same as you by supporting our candidate. You people need to wake up and quit voting for the same neocon with a different name. There is no real difference between any of these candidates on this list. They all have the same ideas. Lame poll.
I am finding that Ron and Rand are definitely not two peas in a pod politically. They admit it, but don't harp on it. I would probably put Rand in the neo-con tea party category.
Ron isn't perfect, but he is bold, and consistent. He knows the fundamental reasons for why our country is going down. Compared to anyone on the mainstream republican list, he is a champion of freedom.
He crosses the threshold of people that I would vote for.
I guess I don't get why Tea Party types can hear what he says, and have a big problem with him. People think that we are taxed enough already, but think that we should still spend $1T a year on foreign interventionism. Or keep the drug war going, and start new bureaucracies left and right like DHS and the like.
If you don't want to be taxed to death, your only other option is destroy your currency and go into a deep depression.
Disclaimer: A 100% tax on all income would not solve our budget problems. Therefor we will collapse financially either way.
Yet this is still how tea party people talk.
It was fairly obvious when Iran recently offered to put its nuclear material in the hands of other people to regulate and control it, and they were turned down. Then the rhetoric on their nuclear capability just continued.
I didn't know many of the other details you listed, but knew the general scheme that we have been playing.
It would be nice if the majority of Americans started acting like they are polled. Like they don't trust our government.
...and this is how you define that? Practice what you preach there little camper.
not jus' messin with ya'
I was waiting for one of you left-wing pigs to come out of your sty and use the race card.....if I'm sickening because of a tag before a name , then you must HATE liberals because that is the norm for them.....oh , wait ....I forgot......it's OKAY for YOU to do it........sorry.......It's not what I'M saying that should bother you....it's what the LIBERALS are doing to our country that should disturb you.....oops , sorry again....! You're ONE of them..............oink ! oink !
Well ,said , MLCBLOG....the left knows that she's smart and won't back down....and that FRIGHTENS them.....the repubs look at her as a woman.....where is it written that a woman can't run this country ?
Part 2 .........
Mitt Romney - stiff and unable to make any flip-flop case against Obam because he is one himself. Plus Romneycare=Obamacare (and don't think the who-better-me-to-know-why-Obamacare-should-be-repealed strategy can work n a national scale. It won't. Aside from that, he's trying hard to be presidential but he just ain't got it. He'd go down in flames against Obam.
Huckabee - in some ways the best of the lot RIGHT NOW. Well-liked, seen as honest, has a record, few gaffes, speaks well. Something tells me he might gain steam but will fall short, plus there are countless people who never elect a minister as POTUS. And the media - they'd milk that angle for all it's worth. Still though a very likeable guy.
Newt Gingrich - brilliant thinker. Best for policy and strategy. Won't be POTUS as the media and many others would be turned off by his personal life and skewer him; and as much as I admire his mind, he doesn't have that elusive charisma of the leader we need NOW.
So, I apologize for being so depressing. I wait and pray, believe me. I would do more if I knew what to o and where and how to do it.
Feel free to save this and prove me wrong in 20 months, but I don't think I'll have to eat any of my words.
Thank you for readings, ladies and gentlemen.
My dear friends,
On the one hand, I am hopeful because of the energy and passion out there that desires to start this country on a path back to greatness.
On the other hand, I am distressed at the lack of true and ready (properly prepared, seasoned) leaders who ALSO have the command of oratory, charisma, faith, and non-problematic backgrounds to win next year and lead this truly great republic.
Many have written about the same choices again and again, so allow me to comment on those. I know this hurt some of you. I do not mean to do that but rather speak openly now rather than have our cause be defeated later.
Sarah Palin - when I first read about her a month before McCain picked her, I was excited and curious. Good start with convention speech, but frankly downhill after that. Yes she held her own in the debate with the Biden guy, but ... I see her eyes glaze over when she can't answer a simple question, either because she has no clue of the answer or is thinking of what is the "right" thing to say. That's not a leader. Don't believe me? Look at her interviews starting with that softball India intervie she did recently ... Could not even intelligently answer where she had visited. ... She has a penchant to rely on the folksy BS when she simply doesn't know. Not good, and Hugely unpresidential, and btw, it is not charming after five minutes and wears thin. ... Experience. PLEASE do not compare her to Reagan - no comparison on the experience scale. Check your facts. She was governor 2 years! This is one of many reasons Obam is not acceptable - scant experience. Let's not be hypocrites.
Donald Trump - I'm in NYC, so I know all about him. Gets things done when it's in HIS interest to do so, no doubt. And was not above bribing various people to get zoning laws ignored or changed so that he could crowd the city further with his buildings all emblazoned with his name in huge letters. And that's the tip of the iceberg. He's dangerous. God only knows what he would do if he were in the Oval office. Shudder.
Ron Paul - interesting guy, nearly brilliant. But unfortunately doesn't stand a chance for various reasons. It would be played mercilessly by the MSM. Picture a defeat on the order of McGovern in 72.
Michele Bachmann - no way. Not POTUS material (Obam isn't either, I know, but two wrongs don't make a right). I like her outspokenness ... Only if she had the brains and gravitas of, say, Elizabeth Dole.
Herman Cain - intelligent, somewhat possible but MUCH needs to be known about him. Simply too early to throw support for POTUS, and concerned about his lack of experience in this monstrosity that government has become (in order to better and more efficiently root out the corruption).
Speaking of which ...
Rudy Giuliani - I can tell you as a native that what he did, pretty much single-handedly, in NYC was nothing short of miraculous. He fought decades-long embedded corruption and mostly won where others had been complicit. But the media told endless lies and distorted his motives (which will haunt him), plus too much personal baggage.
Who knows, if we were not getting in the way, we might witness Islam's own "War of the Reformation". It would certainly keep them out of everyone elses hair for awhile would it not?
I think what we may be witness to (to put it plainly) are the first faltering steps in a new direction, but,like you, I am still unsure in which direction we will end up heading when the dust settles. To borrow a quote from Frank Herbert, "The Sleeper has awakened" but just who the "sleeper" is remains to be seen.
If these straw poll threads are any indication this election will be a political "bloodbath".
A bit of "Cowboy" wisdom is in order here,
1. Never interfere with something that ain’t bothering you none.
2. Any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you got.
3. Never drop your gun to hug a grizzly bear.
Kool-aid is flowing heavily tonight! Small government people worshipping at the altars of POLITICIANS? Oh the irony...you should be ashamed of yourselves. Grow up!
You Paul and Palin (and West, to a lesser extent) supporters act like you're picking the next American Idol winner, just like the idiotarian Obamabots!
I was just wondering if I could get a uniform and become a nationalist middle east internment camp worker. What kind of benefits would I get out of that deal. Maybe free college, health care, food stamps, and much much more.
Oh wait. That's our military.
You post too many facts. You put them together in a way that makes our government look bad. That isn't very patronizing.........I mean patriotic.
For months now, I have been wondering who is next. Now I know. Yet, there are more to be had. What about Syria? Do you think they are on the list eventually? I guess they still haven't made it into Iran. That seems to be the holy grail right now. Maybe they haven't made it yet because of Russia and China. They have deals brokered with Iran and might not like us invading.
Just a general question to all the Paul supporters. Has Ron Paul announced his intention to run or form an exploratory committee? I've yet to hear that he has, the only sites seem to be "fan" sites or sites from his congressional campaign. The "grassroots" petition site that is trying to get 100,000 signatures asking him to run has only managed 30,691 signatures so far. That doesn't hold out much hope that he will declare based on that level of support. I'd be willing to bet the Palin supporters could do that within a week's time, if they were to choose to do so.
Many of the potential candidates have announced officially that they are running. According to the Seattle Times "Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul says he hasn't ruled out running for president again but he's not on the verge of making a decision." Rand also said "there's a 50-50 chance one of them will run for president." Sounds like a lot of other candidates at this time - hasn't made a decision yet. However, Ron Paul was just in Iowa like a lot of other potential candidates.
I think that if the support was there like you say she would have already announced her running...I do think she is trying to weigh if she really has that kind of support and if she can win over the independents and the conservatives that don't view her as a viable candidate!
It isn't just the far left that doesn't agree with you. You don't seem to understand that there are a lot of people that don't view her as a viable option for a variety of reasons. If all you had to worry about was the far left then she would be a shoe in and we wouldn't be having this conversation! Now, if she were the candidate for the Republican party I am certain a lot of people would get behind her and vote for her just to get O out of office-but I don't know if those that have their reasons for not liking her and the independents would come around and vote for her because they wanted to get rid of O. I think with SP you either love her or hate her (for the office that is!)
Palin is the next POTUS if she wants it.
How they treated Reagan.
Time Magazine – March 31, 1980
“National opinion polls continue to show Carter leading Reagan by an apparently comfortable margin of about 25%. They also show that more moderate Republicans like Ford would run better against the President. This suggests that Reagan is not the strongest G.O.P. choice for the November election and that he clearly faces an uphill battle.”
“Party operatives are plainly unhappy with his selection. In Massachusetts, where both Bush and Anderson defeated Reagan, party leaders are not yet reconciled to the Reagan candidacy. Says one: “There’s a vacuum of leadership at the national level; and what appears to be the Republican Party’s response? A 69-year-old man who has done virtually nothing for years”
“Reagan has a history of committing rhetorical blunders that drive away voters. His quest in 1976 was damaged when he suggested vaguely, without proper research and consideration, that $90 billion in federal programs should be turned back to the states. He then spent months explaining that the affected programs would not be eliminated, only transferred. As Governor, Reagan was outraged by student unrest and once proclaimed: “The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity.”
“Worse perhaps than the verbal gaffe is Reagan’s relentlessly simple-minded discussion of complex problems. He is aware that he is charged with this failing, and in his 1967 inaugural address on becoming Governor of California, he asserted: “We have been told there are no simple answers to complex problems. Well, the truth is there are simple answers, just not easy ones.”
1980 Presidential Election Results:
Reagan:43,903,230
Carter:35,480,115
Electoral Votes:
Reagan:489
Carter:49
States carried
Reagan: 44
Carter: 6 + DC
This is what happens when the Republican Party nominates an old fool who hasn’t done anything in years, is a stupid actor, doesn’t have the confidence of the Party Elite/Intellectuals, and polls show 25 percent behind a sitting President 8 months before the election.
Troll? And how is that, douche? Why say that? What does it prove? Does it further the conversation in any fashion whatsoever?
Your poll is a joke. You only place the candiates that you would like. Ron Paul has the ground troops and the ability to raise funds that most on your list do not have. He has been in Iowa and New Hampshire the last week and is seriously considering another run. We need a true constitutional conservative in office. Not a retread or a neo-con that wants to kill more people in far off exotic places.
You Paul supporters are almost as annoying as the "Palingaters", the vast majority of you that have descended on this site have never bothered to comment on this site. All I have seen out of the vast majority of you is name calling and whining, no statements of Paul's positions or why you think he would be a viable candidate. What do you just sit around running searches for references to his name so you can swamp the site with your whining? If you don't like the poll go elsewhere and find a poll to descend on or better yet start your own site and you can make your own poll and populate how ever you like.
I come to this site daily & support Ron Paul 100%. Where do you come up with this stuff? I've stated several times why he is a viable candidate - his message is the TRUE tea party message. In fact, everyone after him is only parroting what's he's been saying for over 20 years. Go back and listen to him talk about the issues years ago. It seems MANY republicans saw how powerful his message was in the '08 presidential campaign and copied it. Whether they are genuine or not, I don't know. Without Ron Paul, there is NO tea party. I'm not whining, I just wonder how conservatives have been duped into believing what certain media has done to marginalize him. Again, I have to wonder if it has to do with the FED. Did you watch what G. Edward Griffin (author of "The creature from Jekyll Island") had to say about how the reaches of the FED are bought politicians and media who never go against the FED? Who is the ONE candidate who has wanted to End the Fed or just Audit the Fed? Well....I think there is a strong, clear connection in which even FoxNews has been party to marginalizing Ron Paul due to that fact. They are fine with all candidates who will 'tow the line' (stay within their boundaries), but those who actually want to fix our country are ostracized. When are conservatives going to wake up?
I would like to see him run just to get people informed through debates and speeches. He embarrassed the likes of Romney, McCain, Guiliani, and even Huckabee. He got standing ovations at these events while doing it. He actually got me worked up and gave me hope for a little while. An emotional response, I know, but it was good for a while.
You are absolutely right. Ron Paul recently said as much. He isn't lacking a realistic outlook, just knows that it is the fight that he has to fight.
I have been around long enough to know that congress is never going to audit or end the Fed. The call for this has been going on longer than Ron Paul has been in congress. I'm pretty sure I remember Goldwater calling for the same thing, it didn't happen for him,it won't happen for Paul.
Communicating change? Doesn't sound any different than what we heard from the candidate that won the election last time around and look what that has gotten us. You assume a great deal, I've heard what he has to say and as I have said I agree with much of what he has said which much of it is the standard Libertarian fare. However if he cannot muster his fellow congressmen and women and motivate them to move in that direction just what would he achieve as President,if he could get the parties nomination,which I will state here and now as clearly for you as I can, a snowball in hell has a better chance of staying frozen than Ron Paul has of winning the GOP's nomination. That is not being mean or nasty purely a statement of fact. He is just too far towards a Libertarian to win over the Republicans.
Where have you been? It reveals where members of congress really are when he gets support to Audit the FED, then those same people won't vote for it (all of the sudden). Ron Paul is the real deal and he's spent 20+ years consistently proving it. NO ONE ELSE HAS HIS RECORD. The problem is that too many politicians will not go against the FED and I think that shows their hand!
Then, you haven't listened to Ron Paul, because he has said AS president, he would communicate to the American people AND congress the NEED for certain changes in government and getting everyone on board to make some of these things happen. OF course, he can't do it alone. It seems to me you know very little about what he actually believes and what he has actually said.
That is precisely what he should be doing aside from building a coalition of other members of congress that support the idea.
Griffin also said what it would take to end the Fed, and a President cannot do it, it will take an act of congress as it was an act of congress that created it.
I come up with this "stuff" as you call it by monitoring threads on this site,reading the comments and noting those who post them. Perhaps you should reread what I posted carefully and if it does not apply to you then do not worry about it. However I still disagree that Ron Paul is a viable candidate, his past performances in the elections have shown that to be true,sorry if you don't see it that way,but this is the GOP nomination we are talking about not the Libertarian Party nomination. Rep. Paul may have an R behind his name officially but in reality an L would be more appropriate, not that their is anything wrong with being a Libertarian but Paul just can not garner the support in the GOP to win the nomination.
G. Edward Griffin even talked about Ronald Reagan trying to go against the FED. It's just not done because they have the power to put the country in ruins plus it looks like these private bankers stole America's gold. I guess we aren't concerned about that?
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.