-132 votes

Rand supporters should be banned from forums

Despite previously supporting him, I think Rand Paul is a troll at this point.

Anyone else feel the same way?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

I Guess...

... nobody (including me) is with you. Sorry...

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

are we having a competition to see who can be the most

downvoted?

Seems like it.

Was it this or "Ron Paul is a racist"?

So RON PAUL Should Be Banned

from the dailypaul?

Very well thought out and intelligent thread. Good Job

Great thread.

.

Senator Peter Schiff 2016

Poop on you.

.

I completely disagree

but great comment! I love that word...poop. It has a nice ring to it.

how about

we just impose sanctions :-)

Silence that person I disagree with!

Not the way to handle it.

More speech is the answer, not censorship. Go write a post about how terrible Rand is if that's how you feel. This is the wrong place to suggest information control my friend.

- Grow Mushrooms at Home
http://subfarms.com

I AGREE - SOMETHING needs to be done about Rand Supporters

Compared to how many up-votes friendly Rand Paul articles receive, there are comparatively VERY FEW comments. The number 1 reason why I did not contribute financially to the DailyPaul is because I think it's being hijacked by fake Rand supporters - the neocons are starting to court libertarians again, and Rand is courting the neocons.

An attack on israel is an attack on the united states? (quote from Rand)

We used to be loved in the middle east. Syria wanted the United States Government to RUN THEIR COUNTRY after WW2. Now we teamed up with the little, insecure nerd who is lashing out when he shouldn't be (and WOULDN'T be if we weren't always right there to back up his inappropriate behavior).

This rand paul business is SUSPECT. He hasn't proven himself and during the whole campaign the dailypaul was crying out with 1 voice: SHOW US A RECORD! ONLY BACK THE CANDIDATE WITH A RECORD! STOP BELIEVING THEIR WORDS.

Now people support Rand using the same logic neocons support Romney: Well he COULD be worse.

That's the 'lesser of two evils' argument - no Ron Paul supporter would EVER use that logic.

Worst Post Award

ever goes to Invalid10 for "Ban Rand Supporters!"

skippy

before i scrolled down

i thought the same thing...~90 down votes in a day is a record i believe

Nope, look at Rand's

Nope, look at Rand's endorsement of Mitt Romney, that was the lowest ranked of all time.

No

We should ban those who ban or try to ban, or wish to be banned from banning or ban those who don't wish to ban any banning of banning.

Nobody cares what your opinion is about who should be allowed here. Feel free to ask Michael about it, but I have no doubt he will laugh and dismiss your request as more nonsense and collectivist idiocy.

Sorry, just being honest.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

BAN BAN BAN BAN BAN BAN -

I'm really starting to HATE that word more & more everyday. Now let's see what people want to ban tomorrow.

We too can be just like Boehner and Preibus!

Kick out opposing views from the movement.. just. like. the. ...RNC.

When I opened DP this morning, this post was 10 points up

When I logged in, it was 80 points down. Seems something is desperately wrong with the voting icon's ability to count.

To be honest invalid10, I don't understand why you would suggest banning anyone.

I stronly disagreed with those who supported GJ, but never suggested they be banned (I am not going to pander to MN, owner or not; I appreciate his tolerance of his old friend The Granger).

If there was an Obama group of supporters down voting my every post, I would not suggest they be banned. I don't get the banning of those who we don't agree with politicaly. I guess I just don't see the wisdom in banning people who one disagrees with. Now if someone was making violent threats.. ok, then I can see banning a someone who is provoking and terrorisng members and guests on DP. But if it's just because you don't like them.. I understand there is an ignor icon.. please, use it for The Granger.. please ignor me, and may PEACE and LOVE surround you and keep you feeling safe and good, HAPPY and joyful forever and ever.

I've said it once before, I will say it once again.

"I disagree on removing them

The reason is two-fold.

First and foremost is the simple fact that not every person here will agree with each other on every single issue. Nor does every single person here agree with even Ron Paul himself on every single issue. These people, so long as they genuinely believe in the foundations of liberty and aren't here only to shill for the status quo (I'm sure there's plenty of them; how small they must be to spend their time actively trying to denigrate this movement), are free to speak and act their conscience on issues. That's a primary component of what we believe in, isn't it? If there's some freedom thinker who's here to learn and they don't believe in legalizing freedom weed or gay marriage or not backing Israel or what-have-you, that's their prerogative.

This leads into the second reason. Instead of taking the easy way out and suggesting that these people leave or be forced to leave, do the hard thing and work to open their eyes. If we cannot convince those among us to get behind the few things they disagree with the majority here on, how in the hell are we to expect ourselves able to convince people who have no involvement what-so-ever? These people come here for a reason, and if that reason isn't to just piss in our cereal, I think we owe it to them and ourselves to teach them why something like legalizing marijuana is important to freedom."

I'll append this a little now. If you find that there's too many people you disagree with or that the mental calisthenics of talking to these people become too difficult, there's always the option of taking a break from the community. It's a healthy way to... readjust your range of reaction to others here, letting you not be so disappointed with those you don't agree with while simultaneously garnering a new appreciation for all the good that you come here for.

I should clarify that I posted this as a supplement to what you were saying Granger, in hopes that Invalid will read it. Please don't take it the wrong way.

.

ANYONE who thinks Rons and Rands agendas are not the EXACT SAME- is dead wrong.

They view the constitution the EXACT same.
and
they view the role of gvt the EXACT SAME.

The difference is that Rand will not pander to liberals like his father did, and Rand will climb into the swamp with the scum in our gvt- if need be~ Ron never would.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Not exactly the same..((((((1777free4all)))))))))

The are grossly the same, yet Rand's campaign will not be filled with, "Gosh I wish he would fight back!" I can't wait for the debates!!! We have a fighter for Liberty who has his priorities straight, so he is willing to make compromises based on priorities and restoring the republic is ACE. I LOVE IT! Notice my new sig (batting eyes)

.

I can tell you see clearly and always have! ;)

Their personas are night and day, their agendas and role of gvt the EXACT same!

Nice to see ya Granger.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

"Pander to

"Pander to liberals"......??

You are a troll.

That's his favorite word

According to 1777free4all, everyone who has ever disagreed with him on any issue is a "lib". It's his one and only response to facts and opinions he doesn't like.

He reminds me of how LL was during the "Daily Johnson" era. Nothing but insults and accusations to whoever doesn't jump on the bandwagon.

PS: 1777free4all, You keep using that word ("lib"). I don't think it means what you think it means. You come off like a stereotypical Fox viewer...it'd certainly explain a few things.

A signature used to be here!

.

not my fault the truth hurts.
I am not going to say "obama supporters" because that gives the libs here comfort to think they are different because they dont support obama.
Libs are looking for a home because of obama and they WONT FIND it in a Tea Party OR Rand Paul.
Period.
and im sorry if the truth hurts you.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

LOL...Really?

Let me get this straight: Because you don't agree with their opinions, you want them banned/silenced. You obviously don't understand much about Liberty, do you? Please reference the US Constitution, Ammendment #1 for further explanation.

------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

like we need more division round here.

isn't the motto "divide and rule"?

"A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself within" W. Durant

So...

You would ban me, a young Rand supporter? A Rand supporter that plans to be a delegate in 2016? Someone that wants to be involved heavily in the presidential process? Hmmm. Okay...

I would love nothing more than Dr. Paul to run. Though, realistically, can he win? No. The establishment will /not/ allow it. So why not elect someone that we know will uphold our liberties? Though Rand may vote for some questionable things, has he ever compromised on our rights? If he has, please tell me. I'd like to know.

Is the agenda of the Daily

Is the agenda of the Daily Paul to transfer loyalty automatically to Rand Paul as it seems want to do. There is no reason to endorse Rand Paul as the torch bearer for his father Ron Paul. They have different agendas and different philosophies concerning the direction US should be going. Loyal supporters of Ron Paul's legacy as has been demonstrated on this forum should not be taken for granted or villified for not transferring undeserved loyalty to the heir apparent, Rand Paul, whose politics are suspect to many. There are growing numbers of elected congress who do deserve highlighting and recognition for their political stands and fights and who are closer aligned to Ron Paul's legacy.

Whoaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

I absolutely have transfered my support from Ron to Rand.. It has "dissappointed" the owner of this site tremendously, who has repeatedly posted, THIS WILL NOT BE A RAND PAUL SITE.. THERE WILL BE NO CHIP IN.. NO MONEY BOMBS so to say that DP is moving to automatically get people to support Rand is absolutely wrong.

DP may wind up supporting Hillary Clinton or Biden or some Republican willing to wear a libertarian pin and speak like Ron Paul to marginalize voters of liberty again..

I think it's honorable that DP provides a forum for us to debate. I never thought I would support a Republican. I never thought I would be a republican. I never thought I would be an elected Republican, but here I am.. all because of Ron Paul. I didn't agree with Ron Paul 100%.. yet, the more I studied, the more I did.. and those studies are what opened me to Rand.. and now I like Rand very much. He is very exciting, and I'm learning a lot and proud of him.

I'm sorry you do not see it my way, but that's what makes DP interesting to me.

You're right. I keep thinking

You're right. I keep thinking the site belongs to the posters whom many have made it clear with their unbridled support of Rand Paul that this forum is incrementally trying to transfer to be a Rand Paul site. My apologies to the owner and its moderators if indeed this is not their agenda. I wonder why they took down the picture of Ron Paul.

.

I agree with you and have transferred my support to Rand in FULL as well.
I also find it quite bogus that the owner has come out in public and crucified certain innocent prorand supportes for their threads on Rand, and allows the threads written by LL, that are pro rand, to go untouched.
It shows a clear bias and something happened, but telling one group and calling them out in public while allowing another (the biggest troll here) to post the EXACT same type threads is completely bogus.
LL is no more a Rand supporter then I am a Hillary supporter, and they both KNOW IT.
Tell me theres not an obvious agenda here and I will tell you the hottest day in SE Texas is no more then 85 degrees.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016