[POLL] IF Ron Paul looses out in the Primaries, Who would be the next best candidate?

I find both are true. The thing you have to realize is that most Americans, at least at this point in the election cycle, do NOT care. They might have a favorite or dislike somebody, but it's a fact: 90% of them or more will not be voting starting with Iowa in just a few days. I find that name recognition for Paul is starting to improve, but the ultimate test is going to be who gets people who care enough to vote out to the polls.

 

I disagree with this, my friend.
How can you see equality if blacks are not allowed to attend some schools???? Whether or not they were bussed in, do you think that one should NOT be allowed to attend a school because of their ethnicity or race???
Affirmative action is giving special preferences to a certain race in order to raise a quota.
Those blacks just wanted to attend those "white" schools as you call them (probably to get a better education or a better future) and they were NOT allowed to. That's not affirmative action, my friend!

I am a Ron Paul supporter but I don't agree with 100% of his views and we should be careful about some of his utopian libertarian ideas. People are stupid and racist and you can't always trust them to make the right decisions.
Also, just because you support a candidate should not make you a sheep that follows blindly what he says. Let's not be like the Bush sheeps who follow blindly his misguided policies.

 

Wait for it...

If it is a private school, yes. If it is a public school, no.

Bingo!

No, they did not want to. They were FORCED to integrate, and bussed to other school districts. There was no choice involved. In many situations, the kids had to be bussed further away from home, to another school, just so racial quotas could be met.

 

Easy to say when you are not in the minority.

We are talking about public schools here. So, you saying that private schools should be able to discriminate based on race????

Sure, they wanted to. Do you think that those blacks were dragged to integrate those "white" schools against their will??? That's utter nonsense. I am sorry to see that you don't know much about the civil rights struggle in the South and how blacks fought against segregation.

 

I am a visible minority.

Yes. If they are privately funded, they should be allowed to establish their own criteria, based on age, sex, religion etc. If I homeschool my kid, and my neighbors kid, does the state have the right to make me homeschool other kids?

Liberals have absolutely no concept of private property rights.

Oh, so all black people think the same things right? They were just dying to send their kids to white schools, with police escorts because of all of the violence that broke out.

Some may have, but I doubt you can speak for all of them.

They didn't have a choice. And the white kids who were bussed to black schools didn't have a choice either. It was FORCED integration, whether they liked it or not.

I'll agree with that. It was utter nonsense.

Please do some research before you lecture me on this.

 

That's something I doubt.

Thanks God, you are not allowed to do this anymore in this country.

I am not a liberal. Try that with somebody else. If anything, I am more conservative than mainstream America.

Black folks in the South fought to end segregation and were willing to risk their life for it. I don't think you can comprehend how it is to be told that you can't go to a place solely because of your race.

Seriously, do you think that those black students were FORCED to attend the white schools???? That's so silly. Who would force those black students to risk their life to attend a school against their will???
Read about the Little Rock Nine
The Little Rock Nine were a group of African-American students who were enrolled in Little Rock Central High School in 1957. The ensuing Little Rock Crisis, in which the students were initially prevented from entering the racially segregated school by Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus, and then attended after the intervention of President Dwight Eisenhower, was an important event in the African-American Civil Rights Movement.

For your info, white kids were NOT bussed to black schools. Maybe that's how it is now but it was not like that then.

 

By the way, I am done discussing this topic with you.

 

Ok, now you are being insulting. After this response, you are going on my ignore list.

Well, if you aren't, you should be able to. It's a property rights issue, not in the public domain. This isn't socialist Russia and private schools are not common property of the people.

Then you're behaving like a neoconservative. Understanding civil liberties doesn't start and end at the "common good". You have to understand the rights of the individual, EVERY INDIVIDUAL. Those who want to integrate, and those who do not. The state is not supposed to determine morality for people, nor was it intended under the Constitution to determine morality based upon democracy.

I don't know about you, but I have a lot of personal experience with racism. Stories that would shock you. But I don't think of myself as a victim, and I don't want to be integrated with people who don't want to integrate with me. They can f**k off and I will find my own way.

The state would. Again, you have not done your research. There was a lot of FORCED integration and racial profiling. It wasn't opt-in, opt-out. If they picked your kid to go to another district, your kid was going to another district, even if it meant they were being bussed far from home.

You're not even addressing the obvious answer to the problem, which was to increase the quality of schooling in the Black public schools. That would have been logical.

Yes it was. Please do some research. They didn't dump black kids into white schools, and not send white kids to the black schools. That's so obtuse, it's almost funny.

See ya. You can PM me with a personal apology if you want off my ignore list.

 

I will not offer a personal apology. I don't think I have done anything wrong.

 

I did not mean to offend you. I just don't believe your claim to be a minority based on what you just wrote.

For example, you say that a private school should be allowed to discriminate based on race.
So should a private company refuse to hire people based on their race???
Should a private restaurant refuse to serve to black patrons????
Or where should this stop????

 

Ron will dig this guy up

 

Actually, he was asked about the VP nod by the Washington Post:

Do Tell: Ron Paul On Babies, Prostitution, Marijuana and Chocolate Chip Cookies

Walter Williams, Department of Economics, George Mason University

 

It's silly that the thread starter placed two liberal Democrats in the poll, as Paul is at least nominally a Republican. Therefore, Ron Paul supporters can naturally be expected to support the Republican nominee.

With Ron Paul losing badly in Iowa and New Hampshire, this topic is interesting in a slightly different way.

I have a slightly different question. Now that Ron Paul is obviously not going to win the Republican nomination -- who will you support for the Republican nomination?

 

i favor no man but Paul, there will be no second candidate for me.

 

Welcome back Will!

Only 32 delegates out of 2,000+ have been allocated so far. We have a long, long way to go.

Which candidate has a platform compatible in any sense?

None on foreign policy
None have a monetary policy
None on the Constitution
None on the welfare state
None on immigration
None on fiscal policy
None on economic policy
None on education

Where are "we" supposed to find another candidate?

It ain't over, until it's over.

 

Have a nice glass of Kool-Aide.

 

I have thought about this over and over, the one I would of supported at one time, the ones I will not support no matter what and I honestly am not sure I can put my support behind any of the others ATM.

Call it what you will, but I will not put support behind someone that doesn't even come close to what I believe.

 

I'm very confident you will have a candidate to vote for in the general election.

You mentioned a lack of a true 3rd party before. There just might be one this time, with a serious party behind a campaign. And it's important to vote for one, because it only takes (iirc) 10% in the general to guarantee matching funds and opportunities for the next cycle.

 

Guerilla, absolutely honest to god: I applaud your loyalty, and the tenacity I've seen here, and in the directed research catalyzed by conversations I've seen here, is something I've come to really admire. I haven't seen this kind of enthusiasm for a candidate in a long, long time - never, actually, since I reached majority, and the debate has certainly been enlightening. But respectfully, it's over. I don't see a chance in hell for him to gain the nomination.

It's to be a Democrat in the White House.

 

Well if nothing else, I am pleased that the debate has gained your attention. If anything, I have actually done the information spreading a disservice at times by getting caught up in debate.

I would admit, his chances are not very good. But I would never say never. And, this is not about one election. One cycle. It's about a lot of things. Like the 20+ candidates running as Ron Paul Republicans for the House. And the legion of young people getting exposed to constitutional ideas, freedom, liberty, sound money. These are the people who will vote for the next 40 years. These are the people joining the Republican party as Selectmen, Precinct Captains, Delegates etc.

There is a very, very good chance of that. And it will help the Revolution immensely. With the financial Tsunami coming, it might be better to be the guys who rescue the survivors, than the ones trying to bail out a sinking ship.

The Republican party needs a serious slap in the face, a cold shower. Neo-conservatism has totally eroded any traditional conservative ideals. Losing badly might just be the wakeup call they need to throw out the CFR globalists, and get back to being America's party.