User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 3:44:53 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Paul supporters support Paul. Nope, there's no denying that. I guess I'll just never understand such slavish devotion to politicians. I don't really like ANY politicians. Especially entitled politicians that are part of political families like the Clintons, Bushes, Kennedys, Pauls, etc. Nothing wrong with any of that. The thing I took issue towards was this "false image of support" language you were using. The support for RP was more loyal than the support for any other politician, there is no secret there. It could somewhat easily be argued that he was also the most different of any candidate (R or D). That's why some people love him, that's why some people hate him. I don't fault anyone who follows party rules to try to get their candidate elected. Nor would I call their support fake, aside from some aforementioned online polls where it was possible to vote more than once... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:08:17 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How is that a false image of support? Should the people you disagree with just sit at home and not be active in the nomination process? Would that be the "true" image of support? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You ARE kidding, right? I want to make sure we're talking about the same things. Post it up. Are you actually denying that Paul supporters have repeatedly engaged in organized actions to swarm GOP conventions and CPAC meetings and States' cauci and onlieg polls and phone in talk shows, etc, etc? How is that a false image of support? Should the people you disagree with just sit at home and not be active in the nomination process? Would that be the "true" image of support? It's a false image because it attempts to use passion as a substitute for popularity in events which attempt to determine popularity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:14:16 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a false image because it attempts to use passion as a substitute for popularity in events which attempt to determine popularity. So when supporters are dedicated enough to show up to these events, they should self regulate and tell themselves "no guys, we have too much support, go home"? Shouldn't the burden of countering the popularity and dedication of that support be the responsibility of the OTHER guy to show they have more support? What system would you propose, exactly? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:19:22 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nothing wrong with any of that. The thing I took issue towards was this "false image of support" language you were using. The support for RP was more loyal than the support for any other politician, there is no secret there. It could somewhat easily be argued that he was also the most different of any candidate (R or D). That's why some people love him, that's why some people hate him. I don't fault anyone who follows party rules to try to get their candidate elected. Nor would I call their support fake, aside from some aforementioned online polls where it was possible to vote more than once... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Paul supporters support Paul. Nope, there's no denying that. I guess I'll just never understand such slavish devotion to politicians. I don't really like ANY politicians. Especially entitled politicians that are part of political families like the Clintons, Bushes, Kennedys, Pauls, etc. Nothing wrong with any of that. The thing I took issue towards was this "false image of support" language you were using. The support for RP was more loyal than the support for any other politician, there is no secret there. It could somewhat easily be argued that he was also the most different of any candidate (R or D). That's why some people love him, that's why some people hate him. I don't fault anyone who follows party rules to try to get their candidate elected. Nor would I call their support fake, aside from some aforementioned online polls where it was possible to vote more than once... I'd call it false, if based on a handful of energized supporters at a tiny event like CPAC, people try to extrapolate such straw poll results to mean that the candidate is a national frontrunner. One person yelling louder than three people is not more relevant than three people, just perhaps more annoying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:19:33 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're always dismissing opinions not based in solid facts, so show me yours. I know of a few spammed, insignificant online polls that were spammed just like ARfcom firemissions for online gun control polls. But where's your proof of a significant event/poll that could be said to be "spammed" and made to show fake support? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The difference is, that when others spam polls and create false images of support, THEY don't believe their own false narratives. Hence the delusional complaints of Paul being "marginalized." Just like the complaints that his dad was marginalized and excluded from the debates. Delusions of grandeur. Where's your proof that polls were "spammed" and false images of support were created? And where is your proof that this was specific to Ron Paul's campaign?  
You're always dismissing opinions not based in solid facts, so show me yours. I know of a few spammed, insignificant online polls that were spammed just like ARfcom firemissions for online gun control polls. But where's your proof of a significant event/poll that could be said to be "spammed" and made to show fake support? "RON PAUL IS SURGING IN IOWA!!!!!!!!!!!" Remember that nonsense? We had a lengthy thread here with that as the title. 
There was no "surge"--in Iowa or elsewhere. It was . . . ""spammed" and made to show fake support." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:22:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<snip> What system would you propose, exactly? You didn't ask me but I would use something I call "primary elections." Color me crazy though. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:22:15 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd call it false, if based on a handful of energized supporters at a tiny event like CPAC, people try to extrapolate such straw poll results to mean that the candidate is a national frontrunner. One person yelling louder than three people is not more relevant than three people, just perhaps more annoying. I'd contend that it doesn't make the support false, just loud and annoying. Otherwise I agree with the rest of your statement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:22:27 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So when supporters are dedicated enough to show up to these events, they should self regulate and tell themselves "no guys, we have too much support, go home"? Shouldn't the burden of countering the popularity and dedication of that support be the responsibility of the OTHER guy to show they have more support? What system would you propose, exactly? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's a false image because it attempts to use passion as a substitute for popularity in events which attempt to determine popularity. So when supporters are dedicated enough to show up to these events, they should self regulate and tell themselves "no guys, we have too much support, go home"? Shouldn't the burden of countering the popularity and dedication of that support be the responsibility of the OTHER guy to show they have more support? What system would you propose, exactly? Yelling louder does not equal "more support." It's just equals more noise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:24:50 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yelling louder does not equal "more support." It's just equals more noise. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a false image because it attempts to use passion as a substitute for popularity in events which attempt to determine popularity. So when supporters are dedicated enough to show up to these events, they should self regulate and tell themselves "no guys, we have too much support, go home"? Shouldn't the burden of countering the popularity and dedication of that support be the responsibility of the OTHER guy to show they have more support? What system would you propose, exactly? Yelling louder does not equal "more support." It's just equals more noise. I agree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:25:49 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"RON PAUL IS SURGING IN IOWA!!!!!!!!!!!" Remember that nonsense? We had a lengthy thread here with that as the title.
There was no "surge"--in Iowa or elsewhere. It was . . . ""spammed" and made to show fake support." Paul did rather well in the Iowa caucus, only 3% behind the winner as it happened. What's interesting is we're still discussing the guy so long after he retired, the hate runs remarkably deep for a guy who's completely irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:26:08 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"RON PAUL IS SURGING IN IOWA!!!!!!!!!!!" Remember that nonsense? We had a lengthy thread here with that as the title.
There was no "surge"--in Iowa or elsewhere. It was . . . ""spammed" and made to show fake support." Quote HistoryQuoted:
"RON PAUL IS SURGING IN IOWA!!!!!!!!!!!" Remember that nonsense? We had a lengthy thread here with that as the title.
There was no "surge"--in Iowa or elsewhere. It was . . . ""spammed" and made to show fake support." Quoted:
Are you kidding me, TBK1? I can't even ask that question in a separate thread with a specific poll without you blocking it? Jesus christ. http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1724208_Does_Rand_Paul_have_a_real_chance_of_winning_the_GOP_nomination_.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 4:32:19 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's interesting is we're still discussing the guy so long after he retired, the hate runs remarkably deep for a guy who's completely irrelevant. Actually, we're discussing his supporters. Not having the desire to worship and adore politicians, in the manner of the Paul supporters, is not the same thing as "hating" said politicians. Though I must admit that I find hatred for politicians to be far more virtuous that to love politicians. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 5:44:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're always dismissing opinions not based in solid facts, so show me yours. I know of a few spammed, insignificant online polls that were spammed just like ARfcom firemissions for online gun control polls. But where's your proof of a significant event/poll that could be said to be "spammed" and made to show fake support? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Where's your proof that polls were "spammed" and false images of support were created? And where is your proof that this was specific to Ron Paul's campaign? You're always dismissing opinions not based in solid facts, so show me yours. I know of a few spammed, insignificant online polls that were spammed just like ARfcom firemissions for online gun control polls. But where's your proof of a significant event/poll that could be said to be "spammed" and made to show fake support? sheesh.... from the first page of this thread..... Quoted: lol CPAC 2015 Wrap Up: Three Observations from Day Threeby Charlie Spiering28 Feb 20151. The Straw Poll Few were surprised when Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul won the straw poll, as organized Paul supporters flooded the conference. Experienced CPAC attendees sometimes refer to the CPAC straw poll as the "Paul Family Poll.” Paul’s win can’t be attributed entirely to supporter organization — there are a lot of young people and college students here with more libertarian views. https://twitter.com/SenRandPaul/status/571796005416509441/photo/1 ....... http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/28/cpac-2015-wrap-up-three-observations-from-day-three/ the paul family poll..... http://www.ar15.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=1&f=5&t=1723622&r=52330261&page=1 can't admit the truth, so you take the lib tactics and attack the poster.  but then again, trying to get paul worshippers to admit that there are problems with pauls is like  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 5:55:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
im good with paul, cruz or walker. +1 I like your choices. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 5:56:41 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Polls will be fixed to yield the party favorite; not the choice of the people. +1 I agree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 5:56:52 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
/snip What? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 6:08:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Dispute your constant photoshops? There is no point trying to discuss anything with you. Your constant accusations of people be liberal because they are pro freedom of choices you disagree with. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: cm's programming is stuck on loop mode again. care to dispute rand paul said/supports those things? or are you going to continue with the lib tactics of personnal attacks and misdirection because you have nothing to argue with? There is no point trying to discuss anything with you. Your constant accusations of people be liberal because they are pro freedom of choices you disagree with. paul supporters and liberal-tarians not enough thinking ability to understand things when confronted with proving their support for pauls  but, by golly, they sure know what the pauls meant when the pauls say something ! edit - for the examples ron paul - support of treason against the U.S.A. with manning leaking classified materials - paulbots say he never said anything like that, he only supported whistleblowing! rand paul - supports pathway to citizenship and amnesty - paulbot jrs say he never said pathway to citizenship - he calls it reform. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 6:59:45 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
/snip What? I am also quite confused. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 7:21:25 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am also quite confused. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: /snip What? I am also quite confused. cpac attendee reporting on the fact that the pauls bring in people to stuff the ballot so the pauls win edit - you could have read the post at the url, but then again, the paul supporters like to edit/mis-edit quotes that other peoples post, then act like that was what the person posted to make them look stupid, so I suppose that that could be another option for why the quote is so confusing |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 8:11:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
cpac attendee reporting on the fact that the pauls bring in people to stuff the ballot so the pauls win edit - you could have read the post at the url, but then again, the paul supporters like to edit/mis-edit quotes that other peoples post, then act like that was what the person posted to make them look stupid, so I suppose that that could be another option for why the quote is so confusing Okay, I wasn't there so I can't argue with them. Doesn't mean I blindly believe them, either. But it doesn't really matter, the first time I followed CPAC I thought it was important. And the second time I didn't follow CPAC because I knew it wasn't important. Catch my drift? I just enjoy watching the "campaign" speeches. I enjoyed the debate between Judge Napolitano and the ex-NSA chief as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 9:50:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think Walker should stay in WI for at least a 3rd term, but if he runs, he's got my vote. Strangely though, he may not carry WI in a national vote by a very wide margin, even when people switch votes for the "hometown guy". Walker also won the Iowa straw poll by a good margin. He's a contender. Right now he's being demonized for his comment of comparing 100,000 protesters to ISIS (although that wasn't the intent, it's the way it's being interpreted by the left). Ben Carson is OUT. His stance on "some gun control" killed his chances. I'd love to see Cruz as a candidate. Rand will be demonized by left for his immunization comments, and it will hurt. He will also be marginalized by the GOP. He will not be a contender. Don't think so. He did excellent job crushing the CNBC anchor while ago. She apologized. Rubio is out, for his immigration policy. Bush will get pushed hard, but nobody wants him, except the left. Don't be surprised if warren becomes the democratic candidate, in spite of her saying she was not running. She'll be "pressured" or "encouraged" to run. Don't be surprised if there are darkhorse candidates to jump in the democrat ring either. They may be token, or may be serious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 9:53:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: paul supporters and liberal-tarians not enough thinking ability to understand things when confronted with proving their support for pauls but, by golly, they sure know what the pauls meant when the pauls say something ! edit - for the examples ron paul - support of treason against the U.S.A. with manning leaking classified materials - paulbots say he never said anything like that, he only supported whistleblowing! rand paul - supports pathway to citizenship and amnesty - paulbot jrs say he never said pathway to citizenship - he calls it reform. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: cm's programming is stuck on loop mode again. care to dispute rand paul said/supports those things? or are you going to continue with the lib tactics of personnal attacks and misdirection because you have nothing to argue with? There is no point trying to discuss anything with you. Your constant accusations of people be liberal because they are pro freedom of choices you disagree with. paul supporters and liberal-tarians not enough thinking ability to understand things when confronted with proving their support for pauls but, by golly, they sure know what the pauls meant when the pauls say something ! edit - for the examples ron paul - support of treason against the U.S.A. with manning leaking classified materials - paulbots say he never said anything like that, he only supported whistleblowing! rand paul - supports pathway to citizenship and amnesty - paulbot jrs say he never said pathway to citizenship - he calls it reform. I support whistleblowing and think Snowden is a hero. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 6:23:25 AM EDT
[#23]
Yes. Paul should come out publicly and pronounce Snowden a "hero."
That would be a great idea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 6:32:35 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. Paul should come out publicly and pronounce Snowden a "hero." That would be a great idea. He was just joshing when he said that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 8:56:33 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Paul does not support amnesty, he's not from Illinois. I support whistleblowing and think Snowden is a hero. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: cm's programming is stuck on loop mode again. care to dispute rand paul said/supports those things? or are you going to continue with the lib tactics of personnal attacks and misdirection because you have nothing to argue with? There is no point trying to discuss anything with you. Your constant accusations of people be liberal because they are pro freedom of choices you disagree with. paul supporters and liberal-tarians not enough thinking ability to understand things when confronted with proving their support for pauls but, by golly, they sure know what the pauls meant when the pauls say something ! edit - for the examples ron paul - support of treason against the U.S.A. with manning leaking classified materials - paulbots say he never said anything like that, he only supported whistleblowing! rand paul - supports pathway to citizenship and amnesty - paulbot jrs say he never said pathway to citizenship - he calls it reform. I support whistleblowing and think Snowden is a hero. again, another paul supporter misrepresenting rand paul's stance. I have posted links to rand paul's speech before the hispanic chamber of commerce and to articles afterward where he says he supports a pathway to citizenship, but wants people not to call it that, but call it reform. and in calling snowden a hero for releasing classified materials, this means that you support what snowden did, which would be treason against the U.S.A. since you approve and support treason against the U.S.A, why should you care what happens to this country, except that you may want to bring this country down further than what bho has done already? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 10:21:59 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
again, another paul supporter misrepresenting rand paul's stance. I have posted links to rand paul's speech before the hispanic chamber of commerce and to articles afterward where he says he supports a pathway to citizenship, but wants people not to call it that, but call it reform. and in calling snowden a hero for releasing classified materials, this means that you support what snowden did, which would be treason against the U.S.A. since you approve and support treason against the U.S.A, why should you care what happens to this country, except that you may want to bring this country down further than what bho has done already? That's a lie, you know it's a lie, yet you continue to post the same BS. I have read all of the nonsense that you have repeatedly posted. You have never once posted any evidence that Rand Paul supports making illegal immigrants citizens of the United States. Have you ruled Scott Walker out as a presidential candidate based on the fact that he actually did support a pathway to citizenship for illegals until about 2 weeks ago? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
