Finally, Ron Paul says he is done

[RLENT]

There you go again with these delusional posts.

Yup - every time you make one, I'll be pointing it out ....

You know there is therapy for that.

Yes indeed - I believe it commonly known as "reading comprehension" and "remedial arithmetic" ..... you might want to avail yourself ....

Not a source I personally would use

Dude .... you did use it .... repeatedly ....

ROTFLMAO ....

but YOUR provided link is showing different math. But we will try one more time.

Next time you "try", try actually using punctuation to indicate what is a quote and what are your own words .... otherwise it makes it look as though you going a little frothy in a desperate attempt to reply and refute what has been (accurately) stated ....

Soooo...using my math and theirs.....15M looks to be around 40 percent of 37M

The problem is you were loose and sloppy with your words as you attempted (but failed) to portray facts: you didn't say that Dr. Paul's campaign had spent 40% of what it had taken in ..... on communications and TV ads ....

You clearly stated that the campaign had only spent 40% of what it had taken in .... and intimated that they had kept the rest:

"Have to give him credit though, he raised 36M and spent roughly 40 percent of it. Looks like it was a profitable run."

Which, of course, is clearly untrue .... and is a lie.

That you could or would do so - when the actual facts were provided to you on a silver platter - would appear to indicate some problems in one of the following areas: 1. reading comprehension, 2. arithmetical ability, 3. defective reasoning, 4. pure laziness, or 5. personal integrity ....

I really have no idea which it actually is, but as you can see based on my original posits, I'm inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt as to your personal character ....

 

[davekc]

Been a rough couple of days for the Paul supporters. That is a comical piece but expected.
Be careful though, your withdrawal symptoms are starting to appear.

 

[xiggi]

One of the biggest deterrents that kept me from possibly becoming a Ron Paul supporter was Ron Paul supporters.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

 

[davekc]

One of the biggest deterrents that kept me from possibly becoming a Ron Paul supporter was Ron Paul supporters.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

Excellent observation shared by many.
Looks like the Paul folks are trying to get some of their idiots to behave. Even having chats with the Romney crowd. Who would have guessed? Just too funny actually if this piece is true.
Ron Paul: I can’t win the nomination, but I’m not dropping out - The Washington Post

 

[RLENT]

Been a rough couple of days for the Paul supporters.

It's been a far rougher few days for Mitt Romney and the GOP overall I'd say ....

Two conventions (AZ and OK) where things went totally "off script" .... and off the rails entirely ....

Multiple instances of (so-called) Romney supporters physically attacking the good Doctors supporter in both locations .... convention chaos with complete and repeated violations of the GOP's own rules and Robert's Rules of Order .... not by the supporters of Dr. Paul .... but by the establishment GOP ....

That is a comical piece but expected.

What is comical is your repeated efforts to "spin" what you said into .... something different than what you actually said ....

I'm gathering since it appears at this point that you are no longer trying to "spin it" you are, de facto, conceding on the merits ....

To do otherwise would be entirely foolish of course, so you do at least deserve some credit in that regard .... best to retreat after defeat .... with at least some modicum of credibility left ....

You said what you said - it's there in black and white - and there is no changing that .... short of going back and editing your posts after the fact which would be entirely obvious ....

Be careful though, your withdrawal symptoms are starting to appear.

Ummm .... don't think so sport ....

You might want to have a look at:

The Real 2012 Delegate Count for the Republican Primaries & Caucuses

Now, to test your memory - and see if you were really paying attention the first time around, a pop quiz:

..... what has changed ?

..... who's up .... and who's down ?

(Hint: when something is removed from "Column A" and is instead placed in "Column B", the number in "Column A" goes down ....)

 

[davekc]

It is a little late for any of that "sport". I'll refer you to Xiggi's post. Maybe Rand in 2016?

 

[RLENT]

It is a little late for any of that "sport". I'll refer you to Xiggi's post. Maybe Rand in 2016?

I'm glad to see you are coming to terms with what will happen in November if Romney is nominated ....

You are correct in at least this: there will not be a first term for Romney .... let alone a second ....

So yeah - after another 4 years of Obama, Rand would likely be a lock in 2016 ....

Expect the revolution to continue .... just don't expect Faux News to cover it ....

 

[chefdennis]

One of the biggest deterrents that kept me from possibly becoming a Ron Paul supporter was Ron Paul supporters.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

I have supported RP since the previous run..but this post is really easy to understand....

 

[layoutshooter]

Well, if Obama is reelected there will be no election, other than a Soviet style sham, in 2016. Not that it would matter, Rand is less qualified, other than constitutional MINIMUMS, than his father is.

The courts will be stacked if Obama is reelected. There will be no more Constitution. Pelosi will be back in as speaker. It would be over.

 

[Lawrence]

There's a saying that says "if you like what you're getting - keep doing what you're doing". If you like living in the debt system - well, you have lot's of options. Want to really deal with the crisis? Mr. Ron Paul is the answer.

 

[layoutshooter]

There's a saying that says "if you like what you're getting - keep doing what you're doing". If you like living in the debt system - well, you have lot's of options. Want to really deal with the crisis? Mr. Ron Paul is the answer.

Well Lawrence, I will put it this way: If you met Constitutional requirements to be president, I would back you. Ron Paul is not nearly as qualified, other than he meets Constitutional muster.

 

[RLENT]

I have supported RP since the previous run ... but this post is really easy to understand....

Yes - it is ....

What it essentially means is this:

"Because I dislike or have a problem with some portion of a candidate's supporters, I am going to allow that - rather than the candidates philosophy, track record, and what they stand for - to influence my judgement as to whether or not the candidate as an individual merits my support ...."

Such a position, of course, certainly says something about those professing to hold it ....

I'm really curious though - in terms of the comment that you quoted, which of the Ron Paul supporters that I know, the comment's originator has a problem with ?

Yourself ?

Amonger ?

Hawk ?

Turtle ?

Witness ?

Lawrence ?

garyatk ?

Easytrader ?

cheri ?

(Apologies to anyone I missed .... or mischaracterized in terms of your support)

Or is it other supporters of Dr. Paul - not on EO - that he has encountered and personally interacted with ?

.... inquiring minds want to know ....

 

[davekc]

In all fairness, Ron Paul does have some good ideas but is the wrong guy to carry the flag for them. As for Romney, don't think many are too excited either. He is basically the better alternative to Obama with money. Obama is clearly in the drivers seat at this point. The reality is you have more takers than do'ers, a crazy MSM and that gives him a clear edge over any challenger.
Lot of people want those Obamabucks.
The bad news is whomever runs (Including Rand) will have that same issue only worse in 2016 if things don't half collapse before that. Don't think for a second we couldn't look like Europe does at that point. The takers will always vote for anyone giving out the free stuff.

 

[Pilgrim]

It is a little late for any of that "sport". I'll refer you to Xiggi's post. Maybe Rand in 2016?

Sometimes numbers provide a picture of reality that transcends words:

State	Date	Delegates		Romney	Santorum	Gingrich	Paul	Delegate Allocation	Open/Closed
RCP Total	-	2,286		970	263	141	101	-	-

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Republican Delegate Count

Facts are stubborn things.
The Paul column once again offers a glaring definition of "insignificant", just as he was four years ago - same old story. Just a fringe candidate with a few good ideas and theories, but no broad appeal.

 

[RLENT]

LOL .... was wondering where you had scampered off to ....

Sometimes numbers provide a picture of reality that transcends words .... Facts are stubborn things.

Yes, they are - and given that Romney's RCP "Total" includes roughly 600+ delegates that are yet to be determined (at State conventions), what you cite doesn't come anywhere close to approaching "facts" ....

Shoot .... RCP is still reporting Paul as only having one delegate in IA .... he already has 13 .... with another 12 delegates to be determined at the State GOP convention in June ....

Given who is in control of the IA GOP at this point, wanna lay odds on how that will go ?

But hey I understand about the telling of lies though .... when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail ....

The Paul column once again offers a glaring definition of "insignificant", just as he was four years ago - same old story.

Tell that to the newly elected members of the State GOP in NV, IA, and AK ....

(You may expect similar results in ME, LA, MA, and possibly CA and TX .... for starters ....)

And after you're done with that head on over the RedState (or as it is more accurately known "RedHate") and observe how long time contributors such as "Cold Warrior" and others bemoan how (so-called) "conservatives" are unable to generate enthusiasm and mobilize anywhere close to the same degree as the Paulian legions ....

You actually have absolutely no idea whatsoever what C4L has been up to over the last 4 years, do you .... ?

Just a fringe candidate with a few good ideas and theories, but no broad appeal.

FWIW, freedom, personal liberty, the rule of law, and strict Constitutionalism has a very broad appeal .... although I do understand that some diehards in the Neocon™ camp aren't all that big of fans of the Founders and strict adherence to the Constitution ....

 

[aristotle]

Former President Gerald Ford offers words of comfort to Americans upon learning of Ron Paul's political exit:

video: Our long national nightmare - YouTube

 

[xiggi]

Sometimes reality is a hard thing for people to accept. Ron Paul never had a chance at being elected and never will. I understand some will refuse to accept that fact but bashing your head against the wall causes headaches but the person with that headache still does it.

Of course RLent once again wants to suggest anyone who does not support his canidate.is stupid, short sighted and.influenced by things they cant possibly understand is telling them lies.because they have not seen the light.

Someone once said "your only as good as those you surround yourself with" and Ron Paul is surrounded with people who are fast to make personal attacks on anyone who is not lockstep with there beliefs. To suggest one is wrong because supports are one reason they will not support a canidate only furthers my argument. Many Paul supporters rather than look within themselves.and who they become win confronted with the fact again shout blame and ignorance on the opponets part.

I would venture to say many.more people would have entered into a qaulity debate on the canidates.merits but were put off because as soon as they spoke if not in lockstep they would have been ridiculed and demeaned by those.leading the pack.

Romney is not a changing choice but he is electable however we know many will stomp their feet and hold their breath until they pickup the ball and say it is mine and I'm going home. We do not always get our way in life but some will always refuse to believe that and go home mad because they feel cheated. They will never accept the fact that their annointed ones supposed appeal might not be what they thought it was.

I am so freaking tired of the whole Ron Paul thing it you cannot imagine. I have said my piece and I am done with the subject. Now go ahead and find my bad puncuation, mis-spelled words and tell me how ignorant I am because.you assume you know who fills my head with such wrong information!!!

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

 

[RLENT]

In all fairness, Ron Paul does have some good ideas but is the wrong guy to carry the flag for them.

Given what he has inspired, I'd say not ....

The future of the GOP has, and will continue have, "Ron Paul" stamped all over it ....

The movement is bigger than the man ....

As for Romney, don't think many are too excited either.

That's been rather obvious .... given that he can't even get his "supporters" to turn out and successfully participate in the process to win delegates where he has already won the popular vote in straw-poll beauty contests.

That's about as unenthusiastic as it gets ....

He is basically the better alternative to Obama with money.

I wish it were actually true Dave .... I really do ....

Obama is clearly in the drivers seat at this point.

Yes, he is ....

The reality is you have more takers than do'ers, a crazy MSM and that gives him a clear edge over any challenger. Lot of people want those Obamabucks.

Nice meme .... but unfortunately the reality encompasses far more than just Obamabucks ....

For some candidates, there's GOPbucks to dispense as well ....

The bad news is whomever runs (Including Rand) will have that same issue only worse in 2016 if things don't half collapse before that. Don't think for a second we couldn't look like Europe does at that point.

You are - at best - an optimist ....

The takers will always vote for anyone giving out the free stuff.

And the funders will always fund those that they are assured will reciprocate, - quid pro quo - in one way or another ....

The real question is: what are they looking for ?

There's a very good reason why the 12 employers of the top contributors to Romney looks like this:

Goldman Sachs ($564,580),

JPMorgan Chase & Co ($400,675),

Bank of America ($364,850),

Morgan Stanley ($363,550)

Credit Suisse Group ($316,160),

Citigroup Inc ($286,015),

Kirkland & Ellis ($235,802),

Barclays ($229,650),

PricewaterhouseCoopers ($208,750),

HIG Capital ($191,000),

Wells Fargo ($183,100),

UBS AG ($182,500)

The "takers" exist in many forms and guises .... for those discerning enough to see it ....

 

[xiggi]

Do you really think if the skies parted and RP became the front runner his doner list wouldnt look much the same?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

 

[RLENT]

Xig,

Ya almost had me convinced (that you were really done )

Do you really think if the skies parted and RP became the front runner his doner list wouldnt look much the same?

I think the more interesting question is:

Given Dr. Paul's stances on the Federal Reserve, banking, and crony-capitalism - and his long record of not being for sale at any price - do you really think that it would look much the same .... and if so why ?

I suppose you could make some kind of case why people employed by big banking interests have suddenly become enamored with supporting strict adherence to the Constitution and dramatically downsizing the Federal government ..... but I'm unaware of any real evidence to actually support that premise ....