Ron Paul is asking Progressives to follow him

[Monique1]

Poll question: Ron Paul is asking Progressives to follow him

[bigwillq]

1. No thank you (nt)

[Inspired]

2. Oh, hell no.

[JVS]

3. Ron Paul can go fuck himself.

[FSogol]

25. +1 n/t

[arbusto_baboso]

48. +1. In the ear. With a big rubber dick.

[Liberal Veteran]

4. He's marginally better than the rest of the rank and file repukes...

...but he's still a repuke in all the ways that count.

[FreakinDJ]

20. Didn't him and Ralph Nader just have a "Cozy" Interview together

In total agreement point after point

[NuclearDem]

5. He makes the occasional good point...

Like on the Patriot Act and Wikileaks...but it's nothing more than where libertarians and progressives typically agree anyway.

But hell no, definitely not better than Obama.

[ProSense]

6. Follow him

to that place where lunacy is spawned?

The question is why Ron Paul believes this is a valid request (and that any progressive would take him seriously)?

[Lyric]

7. He's against choice, marriage equality, and public assistance for the poor. That would be a NO.

Just because he's occasionally on the correct side of an issue doesn't mean that he'd be a good guy to put in charge of anything.

:puke:

[EFerrari]

23. Seriously.

He's against just about everything I've worked for my entire adult life. :puke:

[jillan]

8. No thanks - I like having roads to drive on, schools to send my children to, and doctors that are

willing to see my special needs child who receives medicaid.

[Dappleganger]

9. Why?

I'm guessing he's senile, too.

[LAGC]

10. We could definitely do worse for a Republican presidential nominee.

I'd rather see a quasi-libertarian like Paul win the Republican nomination than a neo-con or social conservative.

Not that I'd vote for him in the general, but it would be good to know we're not totally screwed if the Democrat loses.

At the very least we might end these bullshit foreign wars and end modern prohibition, Reagan's war on drugs. Maybe renegotiate our "free" trade agreements while we're at it.

[jmowreader]

17. You mean, we could get stuck with an electable Republican

Ron Paul is against the wars and squishy on drugs; no Republican would vote for him for president--and I think a teabagger could primary him and take his current seat.

But since he's an anti-abortion Libertarian, no sane Democrat would vote for him.

Basically, he's screwed all around.

[LAGC]

21. Yep.

But in a 5-way Republican primary, I could see enough of his die-hard followers carrying him to narrow victory in early races, so I wouldn't rule anything out.

I don't understand why he's so anti-abortion, with as much as he stresses personal liberty, because most Libertarians are pro-choice.

Guess that's probably why he still identifies as "Republican", and doesn't run as an independent.

[slackmaster]

11. He would ban abortion, and that alone is enough reason for me to never vote for him

Not for anything.

[musette_sf]

12. Progressives aren't racist, sexist homophobes.

So, good luck with that, misogynist OB/GYN.

[msongs]

13. even a stopped standard clock is right 2X a day lol nt

[MadMaddie]

14. I think he means only white Progressives

He is a racist.....and cares not for folks like me.

[grahamhgreen]

15. NO. But we could work with him,. End the wars and stop the war gluttons.

[Curmudgeoness]

16. Bwaaaahaaaahaaaaahaaaaa! Good try. Give him an A for balls.

:rofl:

[onehandle]

18. He's a fucking Republican. If he wants to be so 'independent,' he should quit the GOP. nt

[undeterred]

19. I would follow him out of a burning building if I had no other choice.

But thats about it.

[Puregonzo1188]

Is there a quote? Follow him where? In an election against Obama? Or is this a reference

to his idea that progressives in the Congress should work with him on a handful of issues they agree on--the War and auditing the Fed--that has been taken out of context on DU?

I can't vote in this poll I don't know what's being asked.

[AsahinaKimi]

22. No thanks Mr. Paul

eom.

[demmiblue]

24. Silly poll. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

26. he's a fascist.

[scarletwoman]

27. I'm not a follower. If he wants to open a dialogue w/ progressives, I could go along with that.

However, there's absolutely NO WAY I will give in on a woman's right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. Nor a state's right to terminate an unwanted governor.

[scarletwoman]

Ya know, I've been thinking some on this "state's rights" thing.

Wondering if it might be something that we could use to our advantage if we really starting pushing it.

I realize that there's plenty of inherent danger, yet at the same time, it seems like it could have some possibilities for some important good.

Pushing for a "state's rights" stance would have to be done very carefully and very intelligently -- and if so, I'm inclined to think that it could yield some positive outcomes.

It would involve a sophisticated degree of monkey-wrenching -- using the System to destroy the System.

A state's right to charter a corporation comes to mind...

[Jackpine Radical]

44. Keep thinking like that. You may be onto something.

[Countdown_3_2_1]

29. WARNING! Ron Paul is an Evil man.

Take a look at his main forum, it's a personality cult.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forum.php
Poke around and take a look at the utter intolerance for any viewpoint outside of his.

Look at the international forums and its 100% anti-Semitic hate.
And that no fluke, Ron Paul counts Stormfront racists among his followers. When confronted that he has hate groups funding his campaign, Paul just fluffed it off, and never returned the money.

Paul is not conservative, he is not progressive. He is a libertarian to a fault, a tyrant's fault.

His followers are thugs. We laughed when they called Shrub's people War Criminals. But thats not all they did. They intimidated other delegates in order to make them leave before they could vote in the straw poll. Paul's minions are serious brown-shirts.

Straw polls are fund raisers. You buy the votes. So Paul uses campaign cash to send his followers to every straw poll to pull a false impression that Paul is popular.

Paul has 20 years of racist statements in his newsletters. 20 years worth.

To give you an idea how toxic Paul is, the GOP refused to let him speak at the last convention. That is unheard of for a primary candidate.

Don't even play with the idea of cooperating with a narcissist like Paul. He will stab you in the back every time. His minions seriously worship him, that's how devoted these retards are.

The most foolish thing the GOP ever did was give this man power...and now he's going to oversee the FED?

Bottom line: you may find something in common with his anti-war stance, BUT DO NOT MAKE A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL!

[Kucinich Feingold]

47. BUT HE LOVES OUR FOUNDING FATHERS AND HATES WAR

:puke: :puke: I don't get the love for this guy, besides that he's honest.

[readmoreoften]

30. No thanks. This female queer pro-immigrant economic lefty passes. Anti-war is not enough.

Not nearly enough.

[katsy]

31. Hell no, but that's just me. I'm a progressive.

rp appeals to other people because he sincerely believes in his platform.

He's the real deal of real crazy. And very dangerous should he ever gain power.

[Ozymanithrax]

32. Libertarians and Liberals have a few things in common...

but the things we disagree on are too wide to support one.

[tabbycat31]

33. oh hell no

he can go fuck himself. And same goes to his crazy son.

[Toon Me Out]

34. Look--he can haz followerz

[Dappleganger]

35. I'd say no just because of those little turds.

They're quite insufferable.

[TBF]

36. He is only anti-war because he is in favor of very limited government -

the austerity will be just as bad with him. I'm not saying to support Mr. Obama (clearly most will realize I will say anything but that at this point), but look to someone progressive. Ron Paul is not a friend to workers.

[socialist_n_TN]

41. Well that the thing isn't it TBF? As we agreed .............

in another thread, it's easy to support libertarian positions RE: PERSONAL freedoms, but Paul's version of economics is 180 degrees away from what I believe. When it comes to economics, the greatest good for the greatest number HAS to be paramount. Otherwise, it's worse than the near slavery we have now.

[stillwaiting]

37. He says he's against the big corporations, but his ideas and policies, if implemented,

would be quite possibly the biggest boondoggle of all time.

Zero regulation. It would be a dream for Big Business.

I'll pass on Mr. Paul.

[rurallib]

38. Ron, fuck you and your evil spawn Randy

respectfully, rurallib

[WorseBeforeBetter]

39. Are these the responses you expected, Monique? (n/t)

[Renew Deal]

40. I've jumped on the bandwagon

:rofl:

[blondeatlast]

42. Hell. Fucking. No. is waaaaay too mild... nt

[Doremus]

43. WTF?

He's either high, senile or delusional. Maybe all 3?
Either way, I'm shaking my head in disbelief.

I would only follow Ron Paul long enough for him to hear me give him the raspberries.



ETA: THANK YOU to my secret admirer! I have Valentine heart now! :) :)

[Better Believe It]

45. He's reactionary on most issues.

[liberalhistorian]

46. A more conservative-leaning site I know of

refers to his followers as "Paultards." A rather accurate description of both the man and his followers, if ya ask me.

[LeftishBrit]

49. I would never support ANYONE who opposes all social safety-nets, even of the limited nature that

America has.

He's against the war. Good. So are the BNP - and frankly Paul is probably to the economic right of the BNP. Far-right xenophobic doctrinaire anti-welfare types are not progressive, even if they are against a couple of the right things.

Paul is progressive - compared to his son! In any other context, he's as disgustingly reactionary as they come.