Reason's Not to Vote for Ron Paul

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

It's ok Juliette. You'll get it someday. And I forgive you for calling me a loser.

And I will TRY to forgive you for all the rude things you had said to me.

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

The fact remains that Juliette and Bob both are not accurately able to defend Romney nor bring a good case against Paul.

Most of Juliette's posts are simply articles that she copies and pastes.

Bob repeats the same incorrect rhetoric.

Ask either of them to be truthful and respond to legitimate questions is just a waste of time.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

The fact remains that Juliette and Bob both are not accurately able to defend Romney nor bring a good case against Paul.

Most of Juliette's posts are simply articles that she copies and pastes.

Bob repeats the same incorrect rhetoric.

Ask either of them to be truthful and respond to legitimate questions is just a waste of time.

DRAT!! All this time, I thought, you thought, that I thought all these things up in my little brain. I think you're on to something AG!






Whats that old saying " No ##%% Sherlock"!

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

It's ok Juliette. You'll get it someday. And I forgive you for calling me a loser.

And I will TRY to forgive you for all the rude things you had said to me.

Sorry. I don't usually have the patience for people who knowingly refuse to vote for the person who is more qualified, but would rather vote for the most popular person with the best chance to win. Did you read my "Juliette in 1844" post?

You will thank me someday.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

It's ok Juliette. You'll get it someday. And I forgive you for calling me a loser.

And I will TRY to forgive you for all the rude things you had said to me.

Sorry. I don't usually have the patience for people who knowingly refuse to vote for the person who is more qualified, but would rather vote for the most popular person with the best chance to win. Did you read my "Juliette in 1844" post?

You will thank me someday.

I didn't read it because I felt you were degrading me.

In a devotional address given at BYU on March 13, 2001, Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve addressed the role of women

Elder Ballard cites James E. Talmage, author of Jesus the Christ, who stated that Christ was "the world's greatest champion of woman and womanhood." He notes various scriptural accounts that back this up: Jesus first acknowledged himself as Christ to the Samaritan woman. To Martha, He proclaimed "I am the resurrection and the life." He reached out to His mother from the agony of the cross. And, though Elder Ballard doesn't cite it, the Savior first appeared after His death to women. "Of this you may be certain," Elder Ballard emphatically states, "The Lord especially loves righteous women."

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

The point was to point out how ridiculous you are being. You don't need to be so defensive. If you were hypothetically transported back to 1844, would you vote for Joseph Smith Jr who had no chance of winning the election but knew that he was the best candidate, or would you vote for the most popular candidate with the best chance of kicking out the incumbent president?

From what you have demonstrated so far with your posts, would it be safe to say that you would not vote on principle in 1844?

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

The point was to point out how ridiculous you are being. You don't need to be so defensive. If you were hypothetically transported back to 1844, would you vote for Joseph Smith Jr who had no chance of winning the election but knew that he was the best candidate, or would you vote for the most popular candidate with the best chance of kicking out the incumbent president?

From what you have demonstrated so far with your posts, would it be safe to say that you would not vote on principle in 1844?

And THAT my friend, is a ridiculous question. Do you really have the audacity to compare Ron Paul to Joseph Smith?

[Islam Convertcaptain of 50]

And THAT my friend, is a ridiculous question. Do you really have the audacity to compare Ron Paul to Joseph Smith?

You steppin on my turf, TT Sister?

[Teancumcaptain of 100]

The point was to point out how ridiculous you are being. You don't need to be so defensive. If you were hypothetically transported back to 1844, would you vote for Joseph Smith Jr who had no chance of winning the election but knew that he was the best candidate, or would you vote for the most popular candidate with the best chance of kicking out the incumbent president?

From what you have demonstrated so far with your posts, would it be safe to say that you would not vote on principle in 1844?

And THAT my friend, is a ridiculous question. Do you really have the audacity to compare Ron Paul to Joseph Smith?

I don't see anyone saying that Ron Paul is the next Joseph Smith but I do hear how many members believe Mitt is the next Joseph Smith, called by God to save America (yet he supported abortion and immoral gay pride events).

InfoWarrior is simply comparing voting on principle in this election (Romney or Ron Paul) to voting on principle in the 1844 election (Joseph vs the Democrats--Polk, Van Buren-- and Whigs--Clay). Leave religion out of it for this thought experiment Juliette. Joseph was running as an independent, a voice for those who felt both parties were corrupt. Ron Paul is basically in the same position: an opposition vote to both parties today (except he did choose to run through the Republican party unlike has past attempts). We are choosing to vote on principle, not on popularity or winnability, just as many did in supporting Joseph Smith.

So please drop the ridiculous assertion that we are making the next prophet out of Ron Paul, because in reality that is what many on your side are doing with MItt Romney.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

Bottom line, I have followed Ron Paul's career for 20 years (was not aware of him when he ran for Prez as a Libertarian in '88). I have many times felt the spirit as I either listened to his speeches on the House floor or read his newsletters. And this all goes back to him just being a congressman from Texas, not in the presidential picture at all. Through all of that time I have felt, and the spirit has confirmed, that he was one of the few honorable and decent men who truly was cast in the mold of the founding fathers.

When I heard in May of 2007 that he was running for president, I realized that it was next to impossible that he would win, but it was a dream come true to have someone, finally, that I could enthusiastically support, rather than looking at the two, pre-packaged establishment picks and asking myself "Is this really the best that America has to offer as leadership?"

Now, granted, Legion and Semp have raised some valid issues regarding this or that society that are associated with Austrian economics and that Ron Paul ascribes to, and yes, it is troubling that they are funded by Rockefellers. But Legion in particular is boviously on the warpath and feels betrayed because camp[aign funds from '08 were used to fund Campaign for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty (and I agree it is a legitimate complaint) but all of that notwithstanding I still feel the spirit telling me that Ron Paul is a decent and God fearing man, that he sincerely is trying to return the nation to the Constitution. I hear Mitt talk, and as much as I would love to support a fellow LDS (in fact, back during the Olympics I thought he was great and when I first heard he was running back in '08 I was pretty excited) but when I hear him talk I get nothing from the spirit, I feel that he would and does say anything to get a vote, that he has largely made his fortune through ill-gotten (i.e. Gadianton/Babylon principles) gains rather than honest hard work. The bottom line is the spirit has directed me that I am NOT to support him, as much as I would like to. If the spirit has told you otherwise, then one of two things - one of us is being tested, or we are listening to different spirits.

I do take my vote very seriously, even though I know in Utah that all delegates will go to Mitt, and my vote won;t change that, I still consider that voting is a sacred duty and one of the few times when we make a "rubber meets the road" decision that I feel is recorded both on earth and in heaven. To me it is a serious, sacred matter. I know that it would be much more popular in my neighborhood to put an 8'x4' Mitt Romney sign in my front yard instead of the Ron Paul sign that I had out in '08. But I won't/can't do it.

For those of you that truly feel Mitt is the man - more power to you, and lucky (?) you. I just hope that if Mitt is elected that he delivers - and I hope that if he doesn't that you will not make excuses for him the way Obama's supporters do.

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

The point was to point out how ridiculous you are being. You don't need to be so defensive. If you were hypothetically transported back to 1844, would you vote for Joseph Smith Jr who had no chance of winning the election but knew that he was the best candidate, or would you vote for the most popular candidate with the best chance of kicking out the incumbent president?

From what you have demonstrated so far with your posts, would it be safe to say that you would not vote on principle in 1844?

And THAT my friend, is a ridiculous question. Do you really have the audacity to compare Ron Paul to Joseph Smith?

I don't see anyone saying that Ron Paul is the next Joseph Smith but I do hear how many members believe Mitt is the next Joseph Smith, called by God to save America (yet he supported abortion and immoral gay pride events).

InfoWarrior is simply comparing voting on principle in this election (Romney or Ron Paul) to voting on principle in the 1844 election (Joseph vs the Democrats--Polk, Van Buren-- and Whigs--Clay). Leave religion out of it for this thought experiment Juliette. Joseph was running as an independent, a voice for those who felt both parties were corrupt. Ron Paul is basically in the same position: an opposition vote to both parties today (except he did choose to run through the Republican party unlike has past attempts). We are choosing to vote on principle, not on popularity or winnability, just as many did in supporting Joseph Smith.

So please drop the ridiculous assertion that we are making the next prophet out of Ron Paul, because in reality that is what many on your side are doing with MItt Romney.

Thank you Teancum! This is EXACTLY it!


Juliette?

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

Bottom line, I have followed Ron Paul's career for 20 years (was not aware of him when he ran for Prez as a Libertarian in '88). I have many times felt the spirit as I either listened to his speeches on the House floor or read his newsletters. And this all goes back to him just being a congressman from Texas, not in the presidential picture at all. Through all of that time I have felt, and the spirit has confirmed, that he was one of the few honorable and decent men who truly was cast in the mold of the founding fathers.

When I heard in May of 2007 that he was running for president, I realized that it was next to impossible that he would win, but it was a dream come true to have someone, finally, that I could enthusiastically support, rather than looking at the two, pre-packaged establishment picks and asking myself "Is this really the best that America has to offer as leadership?"

Now, granted, Legion and Semp have raised some valid issues regarding this or that society that are associated with Austrian economics and that Ron Paul ascribes to, and yes, it is troubling that they are funded by Rockefellers. But Legion in particular is boviously on the warpath and feels betrayed because camp[aign funds from '08 were used to fund Campaign for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty (and I agree it is a legitimate complaint) but all of that notwithstanding I still feel the spirit telling me that Ron Paul is a decent and God fearing man, that he sincerely is trying to return the nation to the Constitution. I hear Mitt talk, and as much as I would love to support a fellow LDS (in fact, back during the Olympics I thought he was great and when I first heard he was running back in '08 I was pretty excited) but when I hear him talk I get nothing from the spirit, I feel that he would and does say anything to get a vote, that he has largely made his fortune through ill-gotten (i.e. Gadianton/Babylon principles) gains rather than honest hard work. The bottom line is the spirit has directed me that I am NOT to support him, as much as I would like to. If the spirit has told you otherwise, then one of two things - one of us is being tested, or we are listening to different spirits.

I do take my vote very seriously, even though I know in Utah that all delegates will go to Mitt, and my vote won;t change that, I still consider that voting is a sacred duty and one of the few times when we make a "rubber meets the road" decision that I feel is recorded both on earth and in heaven. To me it is a serious, sacred matter. I know that it would be much more popular in my neighborhood to put an 8'x4' Mitt Romney sign in my front yard instead of the Ron Paul sign that I had out in '08. But I won't/can't do it.

For those of you that truly feel Mitt is the man - more power to you, and lucky (?) you. I just hope that if Mitt is elected that he delivers - and I hope that if he doesn't that you will not make excuses for him the way Obama's supporters do.

Original_Intent, I think we are long lost twins.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

Bottom line, I have followed Ron Paul's career for 20 years (was not aware of him when he ran for Prez as a Libertarian in '88). I have many times felt the spirit as I either listened to his speeches on the House floor or read his newsletters. And this all goes back to him just being a congressman from Texas, not in the presidential picture at all. Through all of that time I have felt, and the spirit has confirmed, that he was one of the few honorable and decent men who truly was cast in the mold of the founding fathers.

When I heard in May of 2007 that he was running for president, I realized that it was next to impossible that he would win, but it was a dream come true to have someone, finally, that I could enthusiastically support, rather than looking at the two, pre-packaged establishment picks and asking myself "Is this really the best that America has to offer as leadership?"

Now, granted, Legion and Semp have raised some valid issues regarding this or that society that are associated with Austrian economics and that Ron Paul ascribes to, and yes, it is troubling that they are funded by Rockefellers. But Legion in particular is boviously on the warpath and feels betrayed because camp[aign funds from '08 were used to fund Campaign for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty (and I agree it is a legitimate complaint) but all of that notwithstanding I still feel the spirit telling me that Ron Paul is a decent and God fearing man, that he sincerely is trying to return the nation to the Constitution. I hear Mitt talk, and as much as I would love to support a fellow LDS (in fact, back during the Olympics I thought he was great and when I first heard he was running back in '08 I was pretty excited) but when I hear him talk I get nothing from the spirit, I feel that he would and does say anything to get a vote, that he has largely made his fortune through ill-gotten (i.e. Gadianton/Babylon principles) gains rather than honest hard work. The bottom line is the spirit has directed me that I am NOT to support him, as much as I would like to. If the spirit has told you otherwise, then one of two things - one of us is being tested, or we are listening to different spirits.

I do take my vote very seriously, even though I know in Utah that all delegates will go to Mitt, and my vote won;t change that, I still consider that voting is a sacred duty and one of the few times when we make a "rubber meets the road" decision that I feel is recorded both on earth and in heaven. To me it is a serious, sacred matter. I know that it would be much more popular in my neighborhood to put an 8'x4' Mitt Romney sign in my front yard instead of the Ron Paul sign that I had out in '08. But I won't/can't do it.

For those of you that truly feel Mitt is the man - more power to you, and lucky (?) you. I just hope that if Mitt is elected that he delivers - and I hope that if he doesn't that you will not make excuses for him the way Obama's supporters do.

Original_Intent, I think we are long lost twins.

OH! I'm not touching this one!

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

I don't see anyone saying that Ron Paul is the next Joseph Smith but I do hear how many members believe Mitt is the next Joseph Smith, called by God to save America (yet he supported abortion and immoral gay pride events).

InfoWarrior is simply comparing voting on principle in this election (Romney or Ron Paul) to voting on principle in the 1844 election (Joseph vs the Democrats--Polk, Van Buren-- and Whigs--Clay). Leave religion out of it for this thought experiment Juliette. Joseph was running as an independent, a voice for those who felt both parties were corrupt. Ron Paul is basically in the same position: an opposition vote to both parties today (except he did choose to run through the Republican party unlike has past attempts). We are choosing to vote on principle, not on popularity or winnability, just as many did in supporting Joseph Smith.

So please drop the ridiculous assertion that we are making the next prophet out of Ron Paul, because in reality that is what many on your side are doing with MItt Romney.

Touch this one, Juliette.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Bottom line, I have followed Ron Paul's career for 20 years (was not aware of him when he ran for Prez as a Libertarian in '88). I have many times felt the spirit as I either listened to his speeches on the House floor or read his newsletters. And this all goes back to him just being a congressman from Texas, not in the presidential picture at all. Through all of that time I have felt, and the spirit has confirmed, that he was one of the few honorable and decent men who truly was cast in the mold of the founding fathers.

When I heard in May of 2007 that he was running for president, I realized that it was next to impossible that he would win, but it was a dream come true to have someone, finally, that I could enthusiastically support, rather than looking at the two, pre-packaged establishment picks and asking myself "Is this really the best that America has to offer as leadership?"

Now, granted, Legion and Semp have raised some valid issues regarding this or that society that are associated with Austrian economics and that Ron Paul ascribes to, and yes, it is troubling that they are funded by Rockefellers. But Legion in particular is boviously on the warpath and feels betrayed because camp[aign funds from '08 were used to fund Campaign for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty (and I agree it is a legitimate complaint) but all of that notwithstanding I still feel the spirit telling me that Ron Paul is a decent and God fearing man, that he sincerely is trying to return the nation to the Constitution. I hear Mitt talk, and as much as I would love to support a fellow LDS (in fact, back during the Olympics I thought he was great and when I first heard he was running back in '08 I was pretty excited) but when I hear him talk I get nothing from the spirit, I feel that he would and does say anything to get a vote, that he has largely made his fortune through ill-gotten (i.e. Gadianton/Babylon principles) gains rather than honest hard work. The bottom line is the spirit has directed me that I am NOT to support him, as much as I would like to. If the spirit has told you otherwise, then one of two things - one of us is being tested, or we are listening to different spirits.

I do take my vote very seriously, even though I know in Utah that all delegates will go to Mitt, and my vote won;t change that, I still consider that voting is a sacred duty and one of the few times when we make a "rubber meets the road" decision that I feel is recorded both on earth and in heaven. To me it is a serious, sacred matter. I know that it would be much more popular in my neighborhood to put an 8'x4' Mitt Romney sign in my front yard instead of the Ron Paul sign that I had out in '08. But I won't/can't do it.

For those of you that truly feel Mitt is the man - more power to you, and lucky (?) you. I just hope that if Mitt is elected that he delivers - and I hope that if he doesn't that you will not make excuses for him the way Obama's supporters do.

I felt inspired to put my money where my mouth was in 2008 and vote with my dollars in support of Ron Paul.

I don't feel the same way anymore (obviously). For far more important and numerous reasons than just where he spent his excess campaign funds from the last go around. I don't know why the big difference except that I have more knowledge this go-around and a different perspective as a result. Frankly I don't have warm fuzzies about any of the candidates. Simply hope and faith that Mitt is something different (lying to them in order to get elected and not to me). To each their own on it.

It doesn't do anyone any good to paint people on either side of it. I feel you are deceived and minimize the issues that have been brought up because you've invested 20 years into Ron Paul and can't stand to be wrong. Doesn't mean I go around saying you are on the Mitt Romney warpath and giving the pretense that I completely understand your position by saying that you feel betrayed because you share the same religion with him.

Does that do any good?

[Teancumcaptain of 100]

I don't see anyone saying that Ron Paul is the next Joseph Smith but I do hear how many members believe Mitt is the next Joseph Smith, called by God to save America (yet he supported abortion and immoral gay pride events).

InfoWarrior is simply comparing voting on principle in this election (Romney or Ron Paul) to voting on principle in the 1844 election (Joseph vs the Democrats--Polk, Van Buren-- and Whigs--Clay). Leave religion out of it for this thought experiment Juliette. Joseph was running as an independent, a voice for those who felt both parties were corrupt. Ron Paul is basically in the same position: an opposition vote to both parties today (except he did choose to run through the Republican party unlike has past attempts). We are choosing to vote on principle, not on popularity or winnability, just as many did in supporting Joseph Smith.

So please drop the ridiculous assertion that we are making the next prophet out of Ron Paul, because in reality that is what many on your side are doing with MItt Romney.

Touch this one, Juliette.

Don't keep you hopes up Warrior. Her record shows she will not touch real issues.

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

I don't see anyone saying that Ron Paul is the next Joseph Smith but I do hear how many members believe Mitt is the next Joseph Smith, called by God to save America (yet he supported abortion and immoral gay pride events).

InfoWarrior is simply comparing voting on principle in this election (Romney or Ron Paul) to voting on principle in the 1844 election (Joseph vs the Democrats--Polk, Van Buren-- and Whigs--Clay). Leave religion out of it for this thought experiment Juliette. Joseph was running as an independent, a voice for those who felt both parties were corrupt. Ron Paul is basically in the same position: an opposition vote to both parties today (except he did choose to run through the Republican party unlike has past attempts). We are choosing to vote on principle, not on popularity or winnability, just as many did in supporting Joseph Smith.

So please drop the ridiculous assertion that we are making the next prophet out of Ron Paul, because in reality that is what many on your side are doing with MItt Romney.

Touch this one, Juliette.

Don't keep you hopes up Warrior. Her record shows she will not touch real issues.

Deep down, I know you are right.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

Hey guys, I understand much more than you give me credit for. I feel that Ron Paul is on the right track concerning many things. I do believe you need a different candidate. Believe in the ideas, and perhaps a different person to present them. Come on! How many times do you donate your money to a cause that won't come to fruition?
So I don't understand real issues? Or do you mean, " She is so stubborn, she won't give up her beliefs and accept ours"?
Sorry, but you have the wrong girl. I am stubborn and I believe I am making the correct choice. So there!

[Teancumcaptain of 100]

She still won't touch the JS for presidency comparison Warrior, as you can see. I think if Juliette was living in 1844, she could never bring herself to vote on principle and support Joseph, using such lines as, "he has no chance of winning... Clay, the Great Compromiser, on the other hand, is presidential material who knows how to get things done."

Yes, Mitt will get things done alright. He will be a great compromiser as was Clay, compromising on true principles in order to "get things done." He has long since compromised on abortion, gay marriage, socialistic healthcare, supporting the bailout of banksters, etc. You can count on it: Mitt will definitely get things done!

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

I made the correct choice then, And I am making the correct choice now. I believe the Lord is placing Mitt Romney
right where he wants him.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

Hey guys, I understand much more than you give me credit for. I feel that Ron Paul is on the right track concerning many things. I do believe you need a different candidate. Believe in the ideas, and perhaps a different person to present them. Come on! How many times do you donate your money to a cause that won't come to fruition?
So I don't understand real issues? Or do you mean, " She is so stubborn, she won't give up her beliefs and accept ours"?
Sorry, but you have the wrong girl. I am stubborn and I believe I am making the correct choice. So there!

You understand so much that you run away from every attempt to engage you in a discussion of principles, and always revert to "my mind is made up, so there!" types of responses.

Someone with understanding would not be afraid to discuss principles, but would rather embrace such opportunities to enlighten others.