36 votes

Romney losing delegates at the convention - NEW

Comment viewing options

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

I'll not be voting for any president.

The last thing I want is the repubs to say "we" helped Obama win OR the dems and repubs to think we caved if Romney wins. I just want both of them to blame each other for all the stuff that happens and I will sit back and watch the cat fight. And all the while the Ron paul revolution continues to open eyes.

Voting for GJ

is EXACTLY what the elites want us to do!!! Get out of the GOP and let the 1% take control over it so they can Spin the RP supporters for not being republicans at all as if we were alienating the party this whole election.

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

Voting for GJ does not

Voting for GJ does not preclude you from remaining a registered republican. Thankfully, we are not required to vote the party line (yet) like moronic imbeciles.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

No but voting third party

can be a vote for "The System". Remember when The Greens sold out to the Status Quo in Australia.

http://www.dailypaul.com/251819/why-the-gj-movement-disgusts...

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

Please do not lie with your headlines.That's for the other side

No lying !

http://www.nhinsider.com/pres

I will never vote for Gary Johnson.

He is intelligent. But if he refuses to see the value and importance of protecting the life of an unborn child, then I cannot expect him to truly understand the concept of liberty.

"He did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it." - John 3:17

"Well, you know it's like I always say 'it ain't government work if you don't have to do it twice.'" - Jerry Gergich

As a Christian

I would never support abortion, but that does not mean that my candidate has to be perfect on every issue.
Who has ever been like that ....until Ron Paul that is.

Who could you ever vote for that you agreed with on everything?

I want so badly to write Ron in, but in my state, that would not be counted or even noticed.
Ron will always be my president and his bumper sticker will always remain on my car to attest that.

If Ron cannot run for President, then I will be voting GJ.
I hate abortion, I hate wars, and I hate liars, and yes, I hate the fraudulent income tax!

The Lord knows my heart and everything that goes through my mind and so I will vote thusly.

Peace everyone

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

If that's the case then ...

what's the alternative?

Evidence

What has GJ done or said that indicates he refuses to see the value and importance of protecting the life of an unborn child?

The reason I ask, is because this is exactly what has been said about Dr. Paul, so I'm confused as to why you would support Dr. Paul.

Dr. Paul's position is that the President is not in charge of abortion. Murder is a state matter.

I, personally, think women do a better job of protecting the unborn than politicians in Congress will ever do, so, from a moral perspective, I'm fine putting the spiritual and moral consequences on the individuals involved, especially since the voters can't seem to come to a consensus as they have with murder, rape, theft, assault, and other crimes. If we each looked out for those around us, we could be saving lives.

I'm sure Gary knows enough about the Constitution to realize he doesn't have the power to legislate or judge people on this issue.

Abortion is the issue people bring up when they want to divide people, and when they do, they often exaggerate and twist the truth. I would be interested in some facts and logic. If your statement, above, were true, GJ would probably be in jail or other institution, already.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Thanks for asking this question, IMissLiberty

Because I will be totally honest with you, I have only read, from sources that I am really not all that familiar with, that GJ is pro-choice. I'm very thankful that you challenged me to think about my sources, because quite frankly, you're exactly right... if I don't rely on journalists to tell me what Ron Paul thinks, but instead simply follow what the man himself says, I really ought to treat GJ the same way. I never considered that GJ might be pro-choice in opinion, but would ultimately default to states rights on the issue.

Again, thanks for challenging me in this. I will look it up to find out where he himself says he stands on the issue, rather than assume the talking-heads are actually reporting accurately and fairly.

Officially, I retract my original post/opinion until it is validated with reasonable evidence. I pray that God keeps me from being a vessel that perpetuates the skewing of another mans opinion at the benefit of the establishment.

Thanks again, IMissLiberty. You didn't attack me, rather you assertively challenged me. :-)

"He did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it." - John 3:17

"Well, you know it's like I always say 'it ain't government work if you don't have to do it twice.'" - Jerry Gergich

Nicely said Jeff

You're a fine example of humility!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

#1, Reason is a Rag

They hate on Paul supporters and truthers all the time while espousing nothing more than Utopianism. Many of their writers are regulars on Fox News that basically giggle while giving us the finger.

#2 Funny how the Lib Party is up to their old games like with Bob Barr in '08.

Kokesh, GJ, and the rest are like annoying gnats that keep biting on Paul supporters. There's a reason Paul became legion and the Lib party can't even get traction.

LEAVE US ALONE ALREADY!

================================
Fight the Ron Paul blackout on the Daily Paul (now 'P AU L'), put his removed poster back as your avatar:
http://www.mediafire.com/?9ir62bp8nshv83m

Reason

Reason is a magazine, website, and organization, and as such, has no brain, no emotion, and can't "hate on Paul supporters."

Paul "became legion" with my help (I'm a member of the LP), and with the help of many libertarians (party members or not).

The Lib party can't get traction for all the same reasons Ron Paul hasn't been nominated by the GOP: media owned by the banks and the statists, collusion by the system to exclude and ignore our rights, and laws written by Democrats and Republicans to quash opposition to their authority, using dirty tricks and having no principles. You ought to understand that.

Ron Paul got traction within the LP. "We," the party, were the first to nominate him for president.

It's your imagination that has you think that Kokesh and GJ are coming after you like gnats, when it's obvious they're going after the statists and other powers-that-be.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

GJ

We KNOW that both parties are corrupt and neither Obama or Romney are fit to be President. I can't see how anybody with a semi-functioning brain could vote for either of them. Ron Paul would have won the nomination if it had been fair and he would beat Obama hands down. If Dr. Paul doesn't run third party I would have no choice but to vote for GJ.

Why consent to any President?

You are voting for the Office of President, whoever wins. You really want one that bad?

Free includes debt-free!

Although I have some strong

Although I have some strong differences with Johnson, I'll probably vote for the Libertarian candidate in 2012 for two reasons:

1. GJ won't be elected. I have a couple of large differences with GJ that I don't want to see this Libertarian candidate pursue. The Libertarian candidates would be WISE to relinquish their positions on seeking governmental support of homosexual marriage (private affair) and support for abortion.

2. An alternative to the Democratic and Republican candidates for POTUS needs inclusion in the presidential debates. The general election of 2012 is a very good opportunity to seek the inclusion of the Libertarian voice in the presidential debates in 2012.

I feel fairly safe in voting for GJ in 2012 since the probability of him winning is nearly nil and he has a fairly good chance of carrying 15% in a national poll & the general vote.

Governmental support for

Governmental support for homosexual marriage is bad, but governmental support for heterosexual marriage is ok? Way to alienate gays from our movement!

This is a state issue, not Federal (Governmental).

Let the states (people) decide. Let each of the 50 decide for themselves.

Did I say that governmental

Did I say that governmental support for heterosexual marriage is ok? ;)

As a Christian, I'm more than willing to leave the issue of marriage in PRIVATE hands. The involvement and sanctioning of the state in the issue of marriage is improper and largely a consequence of TAXATION.

I won't argue with you about who you choose to vote for.

But, I will say that we DO have other choices and many, including me, will not choose GJ.

what a mess--

these young people who are interviewed are very intelligent-appearing.

I think those who support Johnson should have their own site, though--

some of *us* can't support Johnson for personal reasons; I am very uneasy with how he divorced his wife, etc.

(She was not physically strong enough to keep up with him and his active lifestyle, but it was not learned until after her untimely heart attack that she had an undiagnosed heart disease)--

I can't see Dr. Paul approving of that either; when Carol was sick, he stood by her and got her well--

so--

it's a personal reason; not everything about a candidate is about policy/political stand--

I am also not convinced that he is anti-war. He may talk the talk, but he hasn't had enough time for his walk to be observed--

And then/now, after his wife's tragic, possibly preventable death . . . he has a 'companion'--

that's fine for the guy next door; it's not fine for the Commander and Chief--

it hasn't been fine for anyone else either--all the adulterers and perverted men who have filled the chair of POTUS have never had my approbation--

the one thing I can say about the hateful Romney is that he has had only one wife and been, apparently, faithful to her--

but Ron Paul has had a longer marriage!!!

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

The Daily Johnston

Just sounds wrong.

A question....

Do you have any documentation about Johnson's divorce? I have tried to research it and come up with no results. I would like to see proof that he divorced her because she couldn't keep up. It is my understanding her heart condition was undiagnosed.
Either way, I will still put my support behind Johnson as he will be the only candidate on the ballot that has been outstanding in public office.

Formerly rprevolutionist

it was a Johnson supporter on DP who told *me* . . .

(anyone who was reading) that that was why he divorced her--

The heart condition was not diagnosed, true.

I don't think the Johnson supporter said it in such a 'bald' way, but he/she made the point that his lifestyle was too arduous for her--

it is on here from a Johnson supporter that I got that--

from experiences in my own family and from friends I know that health problems in a spouse can cause serious stress to a marriage. It does matter how a spouse responds--

and in this case Johnson's choices are not just personal; his character in this situation can follow him to public office--

I don't have it anymore, but I did read an article about how he regretted her death--

since it occurred very shortly after the divorce--

to me it still matters--

and to many it may--

but if people think that Ron Paul doesn't have a chance . . . what chance does Gary Johnson have? He's a dark horse, a newcomer--

and his position on war and torture seems wobbly to me--

But, back to his wife, I know from experiences close to my family that often those with undiagnosed heart problems suffer from fatigue, anxiety, and depression, all things that cause serious strain on marriages--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Let GJ go through the trenches,

experience the ridicule of standing on principle, show the courage to stand in front of Congress and say "NO! I will not support invading sovereign nations", be ignored and mocked and called crazy -

let GJ do all of these things and NEVER COMPROMISE -

then maybe I'll consder him.

Now is not the time to consider replacing Ron Paul with someone who may have similar principles and ideas.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

his personal life is not exemplary--

I am not sure what reasons he gave for divorcing his wife (though one of his supporters on here a few weeks ago claimed that she did not have enough stamina to help him in his career)--

but she died not long after the divorce of an undiagnosed heart problem--

Unless he is thoroughly dishonest he probably has some regrets--

but the fact is that if his judgement (not asking himself if his wife needed help) was poor his "heart" certainly did not show courage or compassion towards his wife--

Gary Johnson supporters ignore this. One on DP claimed that a man/woman's personal life had no bearing on his public actions; I thought that was rather lame--

apparently, Johnson has a 'companion' now--

so, would she be the 'first companion'--

?

I don't believe the government should have any say in marriage, and I do know some people who have been "married" for decades in the 'common law' way--

but Gary Johnson actually did marry a wife and divorce her, before discovering the joys of a 'companion'--

I don't see how any of that would help him be a better president, and he certainly doesn't measure up to Ron Paul, or even the despised Mitt Romney--

it's sad, really--

and the fact that he appears to have no 'shame' about it--

if he were merely a private citizen and hadn't pushed himself forward, I have would NO business bringing it up--

but he thinks he can lead a nation when he did what he did?

I say "no"--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

You make me sick

hesickle doesn't measure up to MITT ROMNEY?! You will watch thousands be wrongly imprisoned, tortured, and killed because your unnatural and disgusting moral obligation to monogamy trumps human life and freedom!!!

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

and a question . . .

what or whom is 'hesickle'?

(your first word)

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

this is a clumsy attempt at a personal attack--

you obviously didn't read my entire post before you lost your temper.

I hate Mitt Romney, which is a strong word for me--

I do not trust him; I do not regard him; I will never vote for him. I have been voting for Ron Paul since 1988--

and I listened to him years before that--

I will not vote for Mitt Romney, because he has been married to only one wife--

I am telling the truth about Johnson; he disregarded the health of his wife--

that is not an 'unnatural and disgusting moral obligation to monogamy'--

that is my observation that his behavior with regards to his first wife shows poor judgement. I made it clear that in non-public life I have no prejudice towards/against those who do not marry, but how they treat their 'companion' does matter--

if a man disregards his wife, how can he care about the well-being of the smallest and weakest in the nation he leads.

It is obvious that you have already condemned me, and I hope your outburst helped you to release some negative emotion.

Peace--

All I said was that in the area of personal life, Mitt Romney showed greater fidelity; you can't refute that--

like Dr. Paul when his wife (Romney's) got sick, he got help for her--

that doesn't mean I will vote for Romney; I never will--

and once a man walks onto the public stage his personal life will be in plain view--

Most of the immoral presidents committed their most horrific acts of infidelity after becoming POTUS--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--