Activist: Progressives "Ought To" Back Paul in GOP Primary to Keep Important Issues at Fore

[LiberalJerseyman]

There's something called the Green Party.

[DeweyZinnChomskyFisk]

then*

[DeweyZinnChomskyFisk]

Ron Paul is: anti-Civil Rights Act anti-evolution anti-women's choice anti-social programs anti-immigrants anti-public education anti-environmental regulations anti-industry/banking regulations anti-federal safety standards anti-foreign aid anti-gun control/background checks before purchase anti-minimum wage pro-unaccountable, private corporate tyranny etc etc As a sane human being, I'd rather for for Obama no matter how right-wing he is because Ron Paul is much more radical right-wing

[jcharit1]

Unfortunately, Ron Paul will do little to support the vulnerable just as he will not activity exploit the vulnerable. I am not sure if that is a net gain. I think progressives mistakenly overlook what a Ron Paul government would mean for people who are not protected by socio-economic privilege. If you are a serious progressive, then read this essay by Tim Wise for the details "Of Broken Clocks, Presidential Candidates, and the Confusion of Certain White Liberals." Then tell me what you think.

[catbuffalo]

@jcharit1

Ron paul as president would have the authority to bring the troops home but not have too much control over the purse strings.

[jcharit1]

@catbuffalo I agree but couldn't he also veto the hell out of any new safety net legislation? Also (1) he could also have a lot of influence on regulation via the people he appoints and (2) There is one pending 77 and one 76 year old on the Supreme Court, what if he picks justices that want to knock down precedent that protected the economically socially vulnerable? Its very complicated

[Louielounge]

Nah. Forget Ron Paul. Progressives should back Gingrich, to reelect Obama, and throw the Republicans out of Congress! It's CONGRESS THAT'S THE PROBLEM!

[jcharit1]

@Louielounge I don't know. Gingrich might have a lot of vulnerabilities. But he is a very strategic and aggressive. He has away of using systematic condescendence, lies, and hypocracy to brush away attacks and belittle his opponent. Look at how he has dealt with Romney. That is how he would deal with Obama. You can't be polite with Newt, you have to be bold and assertive. I don't know if Obama's team can face him. I think Romney is easier to beat.

[Louielounge]

@jcharit1 Nope. Look at the polls of Obama v. Gingrich. Obama wins them all. Look at the polls of Obama v. Romney, it's a closer match. Gingrich is a self-exploding time bomb. South Carolina is a right-wing nirvana, that's why Gingrich won. I say, progressives should back Gingrich.

[Textynn]

@treez78 Big Oil, Wars R Us aka Wall STreet.

They will never let Ron Paul win. They will announce their choice regardless of votes. They've done that for decades. Even pretending to believe in the two party joke is just a waste of time.

[StunnedByStupidity]

@mistermassive1 Like I said YOU ARE A RETARD - and FUCK OFF MORON...

[StunnedByStupidity]

@mistermassive1 So ad hominem and NOTHING else except the denial of REALITY... READ BOOKS MORON... The last 30 years of fuck up is the LIBERTARIAN REVOLUTION you fucking RETARD... And to counter it you want EVEN MORE OF THE SAME... You fuckers will kill us all and the fucking planet with your stupidity...

[StunnedByStupidity]

@StunnedByStupidity BTW haven't I already told you to fuck off?

[jbevan70]

Gary Johnson is more progressive than Ron Paul or Obama.

[mjh012363]

I'd rather back a warmongering Progressive than a anti-war Libertarian. At least Progressives have positions worthy to go to war over.

[jbevan70]

@mjh012363 So you're okay with selling our your principles for partisan loyalty?

[mjh012363]

@jbevan70 I'm not selling anything out. You guys are selling out the last hundred years of progress just because Ron Paul says he would end the war. BTW Ron Paul even if elected wouldn't end the war in Afghanistan any faster than Obama plans to.

[Mastirshake]

OMG how could anyone re-elcet this guy? disatisfaction with the republicans??? untill they see its a cat and mouse game, and its all a play to make you think theres a good cop, bad cop.if the dems and blacks cant figure that out, i dont know what to say. Ron Paul. 2012

[TheeRawbee]

Ron Paul has some good ideas. But if you look at a few diamonds buried in a box of shit, you are only going to see a box of shit. There are too many poorly answered questions about his race and gender tolerance for me to take him seriously.

[Textynn]

Not voting for Obama. No way. Romney and Obama both work for Wall street, the REAL ENEMY of the people world wide. Pushing wars and takeovers on ever continent. Know your enemy,

[jenniferparvis]

This disenfranchised democrat that voted for oBOMBya is voting for Ron Paul in the primary and the general election when he wins the nomination. Ron Paul 2012!!!

[KEVLANEW80]

EXERCISE DUNMORE'S PROCLAMATION.

[spamllpitdept]

Ron Paul is:

Anti-War

Anti-Drug-War

Anti-NDAA

Anti-Patriot Act

etc etc

As a progressive, I'd rather vote for him than the neocon that neoconned us all in O-Bomber. Then again, my primary issues are the wars, drug wars, and civil liberties ... some progressives may care more about other issues (such as abortion, etc). So to each their own.

[Sylinic]

@spamllpitdept Ron Paul 2012:D

[MrTVintro]

@spamllpitdept It's a bit insane if you think about it, Ron Paul is being a better Democrat then Obama

[bluefootedpig]

@MrTVintro what you are seeing is Libertarian in action. Liberals and Libertarians agree on civil liberties, but will argue on role of government. John Stossel, also a libertarian explained once how liberal news outlets rarely interview libertarians, to which he claims is due that liberals would lose ranks of members as those more interested in civil liberties would change sides.

But lets remember, liberals and libertarians do agree on many topics.

[StunnedByStupidity]

@MrTVintro Paul is FAR FAR FAR right wing - protofascist - get a clue...

[DeweyZinnChomskyFisk]

@MrTVintro if that were true them he wouldn't be so strongly opposed to social programs, the Civil Rights Act, environmental regulations, industry/banking regulations, etc...

[stover954rr]

@MrTVintro

No, he is being a better American..... That is how he is able to make both Democrats and Republicans look like the shills they are.

[donnyforte2]

@spamllpitdept well, first of all, he voted for the AUMF, that authorized then President Bush to conduct war as he wished (and Congress has not voted for war since WW2). And he's not anti any of those things, he's anti-federal law (but ironically tried to push for an anti-abortion law at the federal level), he's fine with the state fucking over itself.

dandelionsalad.wordpress. com/2007/12/23/ noam-chomsky-on-ron-paul/

remove the 2 spaces.

[donnyforte2]

@donnyforte2 and when I say war "Congress has not voted for war since WW2", i'm talking about long-term presence, over the 60-90 days that the President has a "limit" to conduct operations (which he doesn't).

[StunnedByStupidity]

@spamllpitdept Ron Paul is also Anti working class, Anti Middle class, Anti sick people, Anti Environment, Anti Happiness Anti community, Anti Democracy Anti Worker rights, Anti American dream (social mobility), Pro Billionaire, corporation, fascism, teenage pregnancies, violent crime, wealth inequality, bullying in schools, guns, economic collapse, drug addict, depression, unemployment - on balance the ONLY people who should vote for this loon are the INSANE. Obama is crap Paul is APPALLING

[DeweyZinnChomskyFisk]

@spamllpitdept you support a radical right-wing corporate politician...

[jenniferparvis]

@Alpinex105 They didn't mention that nonsense in this video. lol