35 votes

For the Mitt Trolls!

Most Ron Paul supporters are not disgruntled supporters of Obama from 2008. I started understanding what the Constitution was really about thanks to the good doctor in 2005 or 2006. I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 and will do so in 2012!

If you want to post your annoyances with the Mitt trolls, but can't on their forum/chat due to banning :), post it here.

Some other ones:
We are anarchists - This is unbelievable as we understand and wish to honor the Constitution more than any candidate, especially those like Mitt.

We are all young pot heads - Never smoked pot in my life.

They cry about the media being against Mitt - LOL! I don't even know what to say here. I could prove to anyone with 1+ hours of footage on how deviant and deceitful the media is against Ron Paul.

We are getting delegates illegally - It is because we understand the delegate process that we are getting so many delegates.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Totally get your point and have felt the same way about

site-games played for several months. But that said, do you see anyone in this thread frothing at the mouth about the trolls? No.

beardeus is clearly butthurt

beardeus is clearly butthurt about trolls, thats why he made a thread about them.

i'm also annoyed at the amount of attention and effort given to argue against every person who doesnt like RP on other websites.

I don't troll on the Romney

I don't troll on the Romney site. I tried to talked to them about actual issues. They wouldn't have it so they banned me.

The only hurt I experience is due to the amount of deception that exists and the amount of people who have been fooled by it. If you don't like this thread you don't have to post.

Where's user "Shazad" when you need him

Sure he'd have something of substance to add here. Saw post for Mitt trolls and it was the first thing I thought of lmao..

De criminalize Liberty!

He's probably hacking around RPF under another assumed name

trying to undermine the election fraud thread.

Same here

Vice President College Republicans in 1988, helped on Reagan campaign 2nd term In High School, don't smoke pot, but think you should if you want to. Voted Buchanan rather than Bush.

Anybody But Romney

I can't help but feel sorry for Mitt supporters

I mean, come on, RINO Mitt Romney? They don't even have any way of knowing what his position will be next week! It's pathetic! What do they like, his hairdo? His shifty way of fast talking like an infomercial pitchman?

They wont listen to this. The

They wont listen to this. The only way to get through to (some of)them is to have them in the frame of mind where you can have an honest conversation, one where they are willing to hear you out and you can listen to what they say.
Once someone is on the defensive or on the attack, it is very hard to get them to change how they are thinking.

All I have to say to anyone here is that you should look into what each candidate stands for and how they have acted in the past. If you know their background, are willing to support them, and know why you are willing to, you have my respect regardless of who it is. If you have given an honest look and made up your own mind, that is all anyone can ask you to do.

Obviously, there is always grounds for trying to change opinion though.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

A Romney supporter named Shazad and I...

... have been having what I would characterize as an honest conversation on another thread. If you are interested, it begins with his response to my post here:

http://www.dailypaul.com/226948/what-happened-wyoming#commen...

(The posts are often rather long -- especially mine -- and, unfortunately, are scattered throughout a rather lengthy thread. One must do quite a bit of jumping around to read the entire dialogue.) The most recent post in our ongoing dialogue is my post here from one hour ago, which is awaiting Shazad's response:

http://www.dailypaul.com/226948/what-happened-wyoming#commen...

Despite being a Romney supporter, Shazad is a smart guy who often has interesting things to say. I think our dialogue has been a good thing.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Perhaps

he would reconsider his support if he were aware of what his candidate is facing.

http://www.dailypaul.com/230618/it-is-time-to-expose-romney

"The problem is not those in power, the problem is right between your ears." ~Larken Rose

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5FNDRgPOLs&list=FL4wdZ0dK3HG...

What I would like to ask Shazad...

...is there a Mitt Romney forum in existence where they would be as gracious in having a respectful, in-depth discussion or debate with Andrew Jetton or any of us Ron Paul supporters, as the Daily Paul has been gracious in allowing you to posit your opinions and arguments such as in your threads with Andrew? Or are they all like MittRomneyCentral.com, where they ban you the moment you question Romney or even if you are honest but respectful about your support for Dr. Paul?

Where is the Romney forum that is open to discussion as you partake in here? Is that closed-mindedness/hostility indicative of the attitude of Romney supporters in general? If so, that alone does not make me want to rub shoulders with them or support the kind of candidate that draws that type of people together.

Truthbearer's picture

Not to worry...

...there is only an entire force of 12 mitney supporting romulans over there and they are paid pretty well to disenfranchise Ron Paul supporters. After Ron Paul wins the nomination, they will drop off like the closed minded ca-ca flies they are. Heck, a few of them might even come over to the Ron Paul side finally realizing they can now follow their heart, and not the almighty romney dollar god.

+

Email me

Email me and I can help you on that search for a place to discuss Ron Paul with Romney supporters.

As far as MittRomneyCentral, that site is really just a small chat room and there aren't a ton of people that participate. So when a wave of people links in from the Daily Paul, it interrupts their discussion of cookie recipes. I think they've just set up some automatic bans for people that go there directly linking from this site. I'm banned myself for the same reason, so don't take it personally.

I also hope everyone here understands why Romney supporters as a whole aren't interested in talking much about Ron Paul and his platform at this point. I hope people can accept this without getting mad. The reason is that Romney supporters believe that he has already won the nomination. They are well past the point of arguing about who to pick as the Republican nominee.

For a basketball analogy, while the Heat and the Bulls are playing each other for the Eastern Conference Finals, their fans might talk trash and tell each other why one is better than the other. Once the Heat beat the Bulls in the series, though, they lose interest in talking to the Chicago fans, and are now ready to talk about the NBA Finals and talk to the San Antonio fans that they're going to be battling. But even before the series is over, a win by one team can look so inevitable that people start to move on to the next series. That's what's going on here.

It is a fact that Mitt Romney has received about 4 times as many votes as Ron Paul has. It is a fact that he has a massive delegate lead, even if it isn't as large as CNN claims it to be. It is a fact that Romney is a heavy favorite in upcoming primary states. It is also a fact that in many of them, the delegates are chosen by the candidates or by state committees, and not in small caucuses and state conventions. It is a fact that in the states that have voted since Santorum left and in the national polls since that time, far more Santorum voters went toward Mitt Romney than went toward Ron Paul. Mitt Romney supporters feel like they're up 3-0 in the series and have a 15 point halftime lead in Game 4. They've moved on to the NBA Finals against Obama.

Now, Ron Paul supporters feel that they have a strategy to come back. But most Romney supporters aren't going to pay attention unless Paul starts winning some of these primaries. The delegate strategy isn't going to attract their attention by itself. That's actually to your advantage because you can use the element of surprise. But there are far too many states where the delegate strategy has no effect. In California, the delegates are chosen by the winning candidates. Romney is a heavy favorite to win those delegates, and there is no chance for stealth. Beat him there and you better believe he and his supporters will pay attention. If you don't beat him in any districts, he's going to get 172 delegates from that state. Some other states without a possibility of stealth delegates include New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maryland, Delaware, Illinois, West Virginia, Alabama, Tennessee, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico (I know that's not a state). In other states the strategy has not worked. In some it has. It will work in some upcoming states and not in others. Again, beat him in primaries and people will pay attention. Indiana, West Virginia, and North Carolina are coming up next Tuesday. Even one win by Ron Paul in one of those states will make people stop talking less about Romney-Obama and talk more about Romney-Paul.

With some major wins in the series, you could get more Romney supporters interested in talking again. One major flaw in the delegate strategy is that by continually losing primaries and not getting many bound delegates, people lose interest in your campaign. You can get that back, but only by winning primaries. Until then, don't be surprised that a lot of Romney supporters feel like this battle is complete and just want to talk about how to beat Obama.

I am sports illiterate but I think I get the point you're trying

to make regardless. ... Having said that, I think most RP supporters would agree w/ me that it doesn't matter one way or the other. I don't know if you've read the "Ron Paul Supporter's Creed" that somebody wrote but it's awesome. Bottom line: If you're right and Romney is the nominee, then Obama wins. It's that simple. You seem to be intelligent so you'll likely get my point. If Dr. Paul was the GOP nominee, would you vote for him, vote for Obama, or write in Romney? My guess is you'd vote for the GOP nominee (Ron Paul). And so would most (likely all) of the Romney supporters. The same can not be said for us in the opposite scenario. We're voting for Ron Paul whether Romney is on the ballot or not.

If Romney supporters truly want to beat Obama at all costs, they should actually be asking Romney to drop out and endorse Ron Paul. I'm not being a sarcastic dick here, I mean it. It's the only logical conclusion given what each side wants and is willing to do.

PS: +1 to your post for bravery. :)

I think you underestimate

how opposed many Republicans still are to many of Ron Paul's ideas. That is the very reason he hasn't been able to get over 15% in the Republican primary polls despite Santorum and Gingrich being awful candidates and despite people wanting an alternative to Romney. By and large, they don't consider Ron Paul a plausible alternative. I don't say that to offend, but that's what a lot of people feel like. The movement still has a ways to go. There is a huge swath of the voting population that still considers Ron Paul to be a fringe candidate and that doesn't view him to be even an option for President. That's certainly not just Republicans, who by default actually do support some of what he supports, but also Democrats, who by default disagree with most of what Ron Paul stands for. It would be incredibly easy in a general election for the media to paint Ron Paul as crazy and to paint Obama as a reasonable candidate, no matter how unfair that is.

Another factor is that if somehow Paul's delegate strategy were to magically work and he was able to hijack the convention and get the nomination despite losing all the upcoming primaries, I don't think anyone could possibly imagine the extent of the wrath that would come down against him from most conservatives. That would most definitely carry over into the general election. In the quest to turn people's hearts and minds toward Ron Paul, the stealth delegate strategy is just not the way to go, and I'm not sure why that isn't blatantly obvious. Again, I don't say that to be rude, but can't you guys see how such a strategy will be perceived if it's not accompanied by big wins in the upcoming primaries? On the flip side, if Ron Paul were to get 75% of the vote in all the upcoming states and the conservative population was to move massively in his favor, then sure, he'd have a chance in the general.

The Shazad

I appreciate your civility and you are indeed perceptive about many things. But I just want to respectfully clarify one thing that I believe you are mistaken about. I was a lifelong Democrat who voted Reagan, Bill Clinton and supported Hillary but voted Obama. I was never involved in politics so for the most part voted my familys base. But after voting Obama something seemed very wrong to me. It was by accident that I came across things that Obama was doing under the radar.

Looking for an alternative to Obama I have researched all candidates positions and records. Ron Paul stood out as the only candidate with a consistent and honest record and the more I learned about him, the more I found that my ideals were in line with his.

I didn't stop looking into the other candidates. What I did find was that all of the other candidates seemed to be the same; special interest, appeasing people with rhetoric, changing positions or outright lie. I then began researching those that I have voted for in the past both democrat and republican and found a disturbing trend. I thought somewhere in all of this that Paul would be the same. Digging for info I found that Paul was not only true to himself, but true to the people and also the republic. That's when I became fully enlightened about a great many things.

The area that I live in is hugely democrat, but the more I started talking politics the more I found others like myself. There are in fact many democrats and independents who are supporting Paul even though they refuse to change their lifelong party. I asked questions, why support Paul if you are democrat? I was pleasantly surprised to learn that many democrats do in fact hold the constitution in very high regard and Paul represents that above all others. I also learned that many democrats though they were born and raised, actually do have conservative values - they are just so molded that they will not change party, not even to independent or fear repercussion from friends and family. But ask anyone of them if they would ever support Romney or the others and the answer is a solid NO. Disgusted with Obama, those dems will support Paul in the general election.

Speaking for myself, I believe upholding the constitution is more important than any other issue, along with finding a candidate who believes the same and is deeply committed to upholding it for the sake of the greatest nation on Earth. That person is Ron Paul.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

you may be right

This wouldn't be the first, nor the last time, that I have been wrong. I don't doubt at all that there are many people in your shoes. My opinion is just that the number of people who wouldn't take Paul seriously as a presidential candidate is still rather massive, despite the impressive growth his movement has seen. Compound that with the massive amount of internal fighting and hostility toward Paul that would take place in the Republican party if he were to emerge as the nominee without actually winning the primaries (for example, showing up with 1000 stealth delegates at the convention), I don't see any chances of the Republican party coalescing behind him. As I said, though, if suddenly voting patterns shift, and Paul wins most of the remaining primaries, then that's a different story.

Dude..

maybe you should go make that dailyromney like someone mentioned..And go there..you're a loser troll, and it's blatantly obvious

De criminalize Liberty!

Can we please not do this?

I don't think that this person is a "loser troll", at least not from the few posts I've been reading to and replying to here. He seems to be politely relating to us his reasons for supporting Romney and why he thinks we should to. I'm fine w/ that. I try to do the same thing for the good doctor on other sites, comment sections on articles, etc.

The "loser troll" types are the ones who are purposefully being dicks. Clearly this gentlemen (or lady) is not. Actually, he or she seems to be quite intelligent so w/ a little luck we may just make a liberty supporter out of him/her yet. :)

Well the first rule of sales

Is to not ever force a sale..Shazad came here trying to sell Mitt Romney..I'm not buying..You can try and make him a supporter all you want, not gonna happen...And when I insult his intelligence, it's his political intelligence. He came here to make an argument for Romney, not to try and have and open mind about the FACT that Dr. Paul's campaign is doing quite well..Keep in mind that you're only able to see his most recent comments, not the ones he was puking when he first came here..How is it that I've been here a mere 6 months, but NEVER had ANY problem with ANY one individual? All due respect, but it's not me. I'd simply suggest not continuing to defend a Mitt Romney Troll in a Forum that had Mitt troll in the title.

De criminalize Liberty!

I think we're all hoping for a Warren G Harding where he came in

with 7% and after 10 votes left with the GOP nomination. :)

Valid point about some GOP not liking his policies (hey, we can't all love Freedom...) but I'd wager there are a lot more of us that would write in Ron Paul then there are of y'all that would write in Mitt Romney. How many of the "conservative" people out there hate gays enough, or want to bomb other countries enough, or continue a war on our own citizens through the DEA enough to actually write in Romney or even vote Obama if Paul were the nominee? Not that many I'd bet. But there are TONS of us that want freedom in all those categories and more that will absolutely write in Paul if he's not the nominee.

I get your points, I'm just pretty damn sure our resolve for freedom is stronger then y'alls resolve to prevent it. Not to mention, we'd get all the anti war votes, pro drug legalization votes, civil liberty votes, youth vote, etc etc that Obama had in 2008. Lots of folks realize they got shafted, and that Ron Paul is really the hope and change they voted for back then. So, end result: if Romney is the nominee, Obama wins. And we're back in 2016. :)

the youth vote will still go to Obama

almost by default. Paul can do exceptionally well in that demographic in the Republican party, but the default position for most young people these days seems to be liberal on economics and liberal on social issues. They'd go with Obama over Paul (partly because he's younger and cooler).

As for Warren Harding, he only had a chance because there was no true frontrunner (the leader had the modern equivalent of 650 delegates) and there were many candidates with similar delegate totals. No one at any point in that balloting was close to the nomination until after 10 rounds of deadlock between the leaders. For Paul, there is no other candidate who is going to force deadlock. If there is deadlock, it will be between Romney and Paul forces. And by analogy to Warren G Harding, someone else will be the one who sweeps in and wins because neither Romney supporters nor Paul supporters would budge. For a true Warren G Harding scenario, you guys needed Santorum to stay in and win a bunch of states in May.

The Obama Campaign

..is concerned because of the "apparent" loss of support from the youth vote...And as far as "Coolness" having a pre-requisite of needing to be young...
...How do you explain the worldwide, monumental popularity of:
...Leonard Cohen...??? (He is about the same age as Ron Paul),and
is immensely popular with young people.
But Cohen...like Paul has a fanbase that is diverse and encompasses many age groups.

Cohen and Paul...two rockstars.
Obama...as popular as Barry Manilow

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

I'll e-mail you...

...since I'm curious if there is such a forum, a 'Daily Romney' if you will.

Regarding the nomination, even if you're correct and Romney comes out on top at the convention, you're neglecting the fact that the overwhelming majority of supporters of Dr. Paul will not vote for Romney in the general unless he has some major, sincere 'road to Damascus' conversion and decides he's done being part of the status quo and actually embraces the values of the Liberty movement. For example, if he suddenly came out with a foreign policy speech and said, 'You know what? Our nation has indeed gone astray from the non-interventionist wisdom espoused by George Washington in his Farewell Address; Dr. Paul deserves credit because his foreign policy essentially IS the foreign policy of our great, first Commander-in-Chief; and I intend to restore those wise principles as well...' -- wouldn't happen in a million years; but if it did, THAT would get my attention.

But short of that, Romney will be defeated by Obama (or possibly an Independent Paul?) without OUR support; so that's precisely why you Romney supporters *should* care about having conversations with us, regardless of the GOP nomination outcome. To use the basketball analogy it's like you're getting ready to go into the NBA final and some of your key players are disillusioned with the corruption and mediocrity in the league in general, and decide to quit and instead become referees to try to enforce the rules of the game:, the Constitution, the natural law of Liberty. Without those things being the basis of the 'sport', there's not much point in playing for either team in the finals.

Ok -- I'm not much of a sports watcher, so cut me some slack on trying to use your analogy. ;)

if Romney came out in favor of the Liberty movement

would you call him a flip-flopper?

The thing about Paul supporters is that even though you are generally more passionate about your candidate than the average voter, you're not all that way. People who post on this site are some of the ones that are most adamant about Ron Paul and his movement. Ron Paul is on pace to have 2 million or so people vote for him in the primaries. But not anywhere close to all of them are as passionate as you with respect to your devotion to Ron Paul and aversion to other candidates. I know that most of you here probably won't vote Romney in a general election. But many Paul supporters will. I know many who are choosing to vote for Paul or another candidate now but would still vote Romney over Obama.

Maybe Romney supporters should talk to you guys more to convince you to support him. I don't get the sense that many here are open to that kind of discussion at this point because most still seem to think the race is completely up in the air. Maybe those discussions will become more frequent once it gets to a point that everyone agrees on who the nominee is.

Romney is certainly the underdog going into this general election race, but it's still winnable. There is zero chance that any independent candidate in this election, including Ron Paul, would win a single electoral vote, by the way.

You're such a

Romneytard,Mittbot,kook...stop being an isolationist..has anyone seen my flip flops?

De criminalize Liberty!

myajace...

... Dr. Paul does not talk this way to people, so why should you?

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Mr. Jetton..

Dr. Paul also would not move into a new house and then send his dog over to his neighbors house to take a sh*t, so what's your point?..maybe not the best analogy but..when "Shazad" made a conscience choice to create an account here, he did it with the understanding that this is the DailyPAUL...The day he opened his account he was Rude and Disrespectful. That hasn't changed one bit. I've said before, I'm All about going along to get along, but if someones wants my respect they've got to earn it. And I'm not here to debate people..That seems like something Shazad wanted to do, even though he started it by disrespecting Dr. Paul with baseless accusations and not in a debatable manner. Believe me, I've read through the conversations you two were having too and I couldn't believe you made it a point to post a comment somewhere basically suggesting that people should go talk to this person..I welcome any and all Romney supporters, Santorum supporters, Gingrich supporters, Obama supporters, etc. etc. etc....but what I don't personally welcome is ANYONE that creates an account somewhere to be rude and disrespectful..he made it very clear that the only reason he came to the dailypaul is to "figure out why we still think Dr. Paul can win"...Based on what shazad himself talks about, he doesn't even read any of the posts here except to try and get a reaction out of someone, otherwise he would already know all the answers to all the stupid sh*t he asks. So, you asked me why should I talk to someone like this...Well, he has disrespected me, he has disrespected Dr. Paul, and he has disrespected this website (in my opinion)..I understand people wanting to be civil, and I'm one of the most civil individuals you could meet..The way I talk should not be compared to Dr. Paul. I am not Dr. Paul nor do I represent him..your question is irrelevant..Let's also keep in mind that technically right now this is all being posted in the "Mitt Trolls" forum..Of all places for me to express my views about Shazad the Mitt Troll, this would probably be it.

De criminalize Liberty!

Lol... I already call the man a flip flopper cause, well, he is.

The simple fact is there is literally nothing Romney could say (at least that I can think of) that would make me trust him. That's the crazy thing about the internet: you can actually see video footage of what people have said in the past. I have 35 years of Ron Paul being consistently in favor of individual freedom and limited Constitutional government... and a good decade or more of Romney being on every side of every major issue, with whole hearted support and true, honest-to-God conversions back and forth.

Maybe if Romney got a full back tattoo of the Constitution, returned all his bankster money (as pointed out below), and then made a $100 Million donation to the Institute for Justice... I might actually believe him if he said he'd had a "liberty conversion." But... I'm not holding my breath.

I don't think Romney supporters really get it. To many of us, Romney truly is Obama. There's no substantial difference. If you haven't seen this video of the Obamney "debate" ... you really should: http://youtu.be/3lUs17azUFs

Libertarian American: The dialogue between Shazad and I...

... discusses the issues of Romney = Obama and Romney = Bush. If you are interested, please go here, and then read the followup responses:

http://www.dailypaul.com/226948/what-happened-wyoming#commen...

Please feel free to comment, of course. Thank you.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand