Ron Paul Won't Endorse Romney, Sees "Essentially No Difference"
Source: new american
"No," he said, plainly and unequivocally, when asked about an endorsement. Neither the GOP challenger nor President Obama will change the course of fiscal and monetary policy that is leading to what has been called the "fiscal cliff," Paul said, because both are captive of special interests. And neither will act to stop the Federal Reserve from papering over the growing chasm of debt by inflating the money supply in a policy called "quantitative easing."
The elder Paul, a 77-year-old retired obstetrician, is leaving Congress at the end of this year, having decided not to run for another term. Though a Republican throughout his career, he bolted the GOP to run as the presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party in 1988, drawing less than one percent of the popular vote. In an interview on the Fox Business channel last week, he hinted he might vote this year for the Libertarian Party candidate for president, Gary Johnson, the former two-term governor of New Mexico.
"There are other people who are technically capable of winning because they're on a lot of ballots," Paul said about alternatives to Romney or Obama.
"Like Gary Johnson, for example," the interviewer suggested.
"Yeah," Paul replied, though he did not say whether he would endorse or vote for Johnson
Read more: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/13191-ron-paul-wont-endorse-romney-sees-essentially-no-difference
i remember during the primary Ron Paul at one point stopped attacking Romney and kept going after his opponents. i think Romney may have lied and said he would make Rand Paul his VP running mate. notice Rand Paul has started to go after romney now also when during the Primary he was more supportive.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)tarheelsunc
(2,117 posts)His endorsement alone could have turned thousands to Romney, now they'll probably go with Johnson instead.
Indpndnt
(2,391 posts)And vote for him in huge waves.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)But I'm talking about very blue So. Cal.
Indpndnt
(2,391 posts)SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)I just started seeing them about a week ago. There are a lot of Paul-bots in So. Cal. I'm guessing they had a meeting and passed out the stickers after bitching about how the Republicans screwed Paul at the Convention.
sweetloukillbot
(11,024 posts)They're blanketed in the same way Paultard signs were - I expect it's the work of the same people.
Joe Bacon
(5,165 posts)Johnson lawn signs are on the same houses that had Ron Paul signs up during the primary.
I've seen NO Romney lawn signs, and very few Romney bumper stickers.
But what I really see are a lot of NO on 32 signs all over the place, which makes me hopeful that the Koch Brothers and Rove get their asses kicked real good. 32 would stop unions from contributing to political campaigns.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Honestly Ron Paul fanatics scare the crap out of me. If they ever gain control kiss civil rights and women's rights goodbye. This country will become a fascist corporate monstrosity that sane people will flee.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)And a freeloading freak, that sucks money off of the thing he rails against all the time...government.
This loon job weirdo has been drinking at the Public Trough since around 1977.
GO away, Vulture.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)the whole nut thing is applied by the media at the behest of those who have purchased detrimental policy..That policy which is strangely part of both parties/candidates..there will never be needed dramatic, in fact revolutionary change as long as people keep eating from the spoon of these bandits.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)My sister is a huge Ron Paul fan. She will write him in. Curious as to why he held my sisters admiration I researched all I could about his past and his positions. He is fucking insane. A bigoted cynical bastard who profits off of spreading fear and hate. His policies would not bring a revolution they would hand power completely to corporations. Civil rights and womens rights would be a thing of the past. Ron Paul and his followers are dangerously insane. I think people who follow him are attracted by his statements about ending the wars, the war on drugs and investigating the fed (all good things) and don't look any deeper.
We don't need Ron Paul to end the wars or bring about economic justice. We don't need him to bring about change. It would be like making a deal with the devil, change would come but most would suffer if his policies were really enacted.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)eom
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)but it won't happen anyhow.
You know, sometimes I think Ron and Rand are tools of the Bush's as it seems everything they do helped the Bush's in an odd sort of way. He is going to help clear the deck for Jeb to attempt a coup in 2016 after Herr Mittens/Boy Glove are totally repudiated.
BTW-I am a major fan of LBJ.(who used his capital when he had it to do what no one did before with civil rights)...I see he is your avitar picture.
DallasNE
(7,403 posts)Paul only did well in States that didn't have an actual primary. I don't believe he ever got into double digits is any primary State. Unless a State is closer than 5,000 votes this won't make any difference.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)assisted Romney at all who has had to spend money and time to mount a state organization.
In Nevada Paul is on the ballot, albeit it is under the category "none of the above".
Republicans tried to get this Nevada tradition removed but lost.
Polls show the President ahead in Nevada by about 2 points.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nv/nevada_romney_vs_obama-1908.html
It is likely that if Paul had openly supported and campaigned for Romney in Nevada Romney could have won.
Romney needs every electoral vote he can get and losing Nevada with its high percentage of Mormon voters will push his chances even further out of reach.
nolabear
(41,984 posts)It's Obama against multiple raging cultists. No wonder Zombie Apocalypse stuff is so popular.
tavalon
(27,985 posts)Hmmm, bad vision.
cstanleytech
(26,293 posts)suffer from it and they refuse to place most of blame (about 99% of it) where it really belongs which is with the republican and tea party folks currently in office in congress.
D23MIURG23
(2,850 posts)I actually liked Paul at one point. Its been a sad process slowly learning that he is a senile lunatic with his head shoved up Ayn Rand's ass.
So as much as I hate the "no difference meme" hearing it from someone who doesn't support the civil rights act, and wants to go to the gold standard because that is what some character in "atlas shrugged" wanted, is actually kind of comforting. Goodbye Ron Paul and Good riddance.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)nxylas
(6,440 posts)He's potentially depressing Romney's turnout here.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Oh libertarians...a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)I believe Thom Hartmann said that...or was it Bill Maher?
johnlucas
(1,250 posts)I knew Mitt Romney would screw the Ron Paul fans at the convention & now he's paying the dividends.
You don't piss off the Ron Paul acolytes! Hahahahaha!
Ron Paul lied about his involvement with his racist newsletters but outside of that this guy IS pretty damn consistent.
He didn't like Romney in the primaries & he doesn't pretend to like him now.
Give the man credit for that much at least.
Ron Paul's very existence in this race is why I KNEW Obama would win in a Landslide.
John Lucas
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)Paul is one heinously anti-choice teapublican. How he squares that with Libertarian principles is beyond me.
johnlucas
(1,250 posts)At least he wasn't once for women controlling their bodies & changed later after the fact like Romney.
He may be consistently wrong but he IS consistent.
He's a paleo-conservative which is a nice way of calling him a fossil. (see? I made the connection between 'paleo' and nevermind)
The only thing he flip-flopped on was his authorship & approval of his racist newsletters.
THAT he flip-flopped on.
I'm not sure why given the base of supporters that follow him but that's the choice he made.
He might have gotten a bigger following & actually won some states that way.
Took some votes away from Romney & the other candidates.
Oh well, hindsight is 20/20.
John Lucas
Ter
(4,281 posts)However, nearly all oppose Roe vs. Wade.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Wow, sorry to hear that. Couldn't he try hearing the difference still? I'm sorry, but the differences between Obama and Romney should be obvious to anyone with either senses still intact. In fact, the smell test tells me that Romney stinks to high heaven, so make that three senses that should be able to tell the difference.
sendero
(28,552 posts).. on whether you are talking about Primary Romney or Debate Romney.
In the case of the latter, I more or less agree.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)RMoney is a hard sell for a lot of Repubs. I see Ron Paul and Gary Johnson getting more votes than you'd normally see.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)MurrayDelph
(5,299 posts)When you get someone who is only thinking one dimensionally, all you can tell is that the others are way over there.
alp227
(32,026 posts)Just so you know, and yes JBS still exists.
Captain_truthteller
(14 posts)I like him on foreign policy, but he knows nothing about the economy.
It was a good move not to endorse Romney, though.