Conquer Club

Anyways, pretty much all I know about Ron Paul is that he voted for tighter genetic discrimination. He was the only guy too.


So, what would happen if Ron Paul, by some bizzare, screwed up fashion, became the President of the U.S.?

I honestly don't know. The only reason I'm posting this -please excuse me for spamming your thread- is to commend you on your banning of DaGip from this thread.

you know he'll still come post in here?
Even more so since the title says he isn't allowed to.
He won't be able to resist posting.

wcaclimbing wrote:you know he'll still come post in here?
Even more so since the title says he isn't allowed to.
He won't be able to resist posting.

Too true. If you want him to not post, give the thread a title that he won't be interested in.

Nah, he's too busy in his most recent thread about McCain being unelectable

Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing. (More than Bush has, anyway) Aside from that, however, he would probably make a decent pres.

"Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the show?"

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing.

HapSmo19 wrote:

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing.

Do Americans even have a world standing anymore?

Seriously.

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing. (More than Bush has, anyway) Aside from that, however, he would probably make a decent pres.

You have to be kidding! If anything Ron Paul would SAVE our economy! It will collapse and all we will be able to say is, "Shouda voted in Ron Paul". World standing? Other nations loved Ron Paul!

Cut Spending
Bring our troops home (save butt loads of $$$$$ and lives)
Smaller government intrusion in our lives.
Abolish the IRS,DHS,Federal Reserve.

I mean come on, what's NOT to like? oh yeah, the government has you believing terrorists are out to get us

jay_a2j wrote:

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing. (More than Bush has, anyway) Aside from that, however, he would probably make a decent pres.

You have to be kidding! If anything Ron Paul would SAVE our economy! It will collapse and all we will be able to say is, "Shouda voted in Ron Paul". World standing? Other nations loved Ron Paul!

Cut Spending
Bring our troops home (save butt loads of $$$$$ and lives)
Smaller government intrusion in our lives.
Abolish the IRS,DHS,Federal Reserve.

I mean come on, what's NOT to like? oh yeah, the government has you believing terrorists are out to get us

You're a fool.

Hope to of been of service.

Skittles! wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing. (More than Bush has, anyway) Aside from that, however, he would probably make a decent pres.

You have to be kidding! If anything Ron Paul would SAVE our economy! It will collapse and all we will be able to say is, "Shouda voted in Ron Paul". World standing? Other nations loved Ron Paul!

Cut Spending
Bring our troops home (save butt loads of $$$$$ and lives)
Smaller government intrusion in our lives.
Abolish the IRS,DHS,Federal Reserve.

I mean come on, what's NOT to like? oh yeah, the government has you believing terrorists are out to get us

You're a fool.

Hope to of been of service.

Captain obvious- serving since 2006

Skittles! wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing. (More than Bush has, anyway) Aside from that, however, he would probably make a decent pres.

You have to be kidding! If anything Ron Paul would SAVE our economy! It will collapse and all we will be able to say is, "Shouda voted in Ron Paul". World standing? Other nations loved Ron Paul!

Cut Spending
Bring our troops home (save butt loads of $$$$$ and lives)
Smaller government intrusion in our lives.
Abolish the IRS,DHS,Federal Reserve.

I mean come on, what's NOT to like? oh yeah, the government has you believing terrorists are out to get us

You're a fool.

Hope to of been of service.

Because you say so? Oh ok, I didn't know you had it like that. Ya gotta love people who post off of emotion and zero intelligence. In the future, you may want to put some thought into your posts, or not post at all.

demon7896 wrote:Anyways, pretty much all I know about Ron Paul is that he voted for tighter genetic discrimination. He was the only guy too.


So, what would happen if Ron Paul, by some bizzare, screwed up fashion, became the President of the U.S.?

When did you become a Mod?
You can't ban someone form posting in a public forum, unless you are a Mod you...*flame*
GO DAGIP!
I can't stand most of the stuff he posts -but, really, who cares what I, or YOU, think about other people's posts?
GFY.

suggs wrote:GFY

Love it! Suggs is great.

Can we please get back on the topic? Where do you think you are, the Chatter Box?

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

So, how exactly would Ron Paul destroy the economy? In fact how exactly would Ron Paul do anything? I mean it's not like he would be so loved by congress that they would simply rubber stamp any idea he had off of the top of his head. Republicans and Democrats would probably unite to create veto proof votes. The Fed chairman typically lingers a few years after the previous president so he can't really screw up Fed Reserve policy. So how do you think he would "absolutely destroy" it?

tzor wrote:Can we please get back on the topic? Where do you think you are, the Chatter Box?

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

So, how exactly would Ron Paul destroy the economy? In fact how exactly would Ron Paul do anything? I mean it's not like he would be so loved by congress that they would simply rubber stamp any idea he had off of the top of his head. Republicans and Democrats would probably unite to create veto proof votes. The Fed chairman typically lingers a few years after the previous president so he can't really screw up Fed Reserve policy. So how do you think he would "absolutely destroy" it?

Well, if Ron Paul was elected by some odd happening, it would follow that at least half the country would want more isolationism, etc. So you'd probably see a simultaneous shift in power at Congress. You'd probably suddenly have a lot more libertarians in Congress. And suddenly he might have a shot at returning to the gold standard, banning the IRS, etc.

Of course, if this scenario includes Ron Paul exclusively getting elected, shall we say in a vacuum, you're right -- he would probably be pretty powerless. At best, he'd be a pretty forgettable and weak President in that scenario. But I don't see him doing any good then, except I guess for withdrawing from Iraq (something, I should mention, Obama will also do).

This is all well and good, but Ron Paul isn't going to be President. There is no chance.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

suggs wrote:GFY

Love it! Suggs is great.

A strong argument.

Skittles! wrote:

HapSmo19 wrote:

Hologram wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

No kidding. Along with completely destroying our world standing.

Do Americans even have a world standing anymore?

Seriously.

We have enough to not be completely shunned by every European power. I mean we've still got Britain... kinda.... sorta.....

InkL0sed wrote:

tzor wrote:Can we please get back on the topic? Where do you think you are, the Chatter Box?

InkL0sed wrote:Ron Paul would absolutely destroy our economy, no joke.

So, how exactly would Ron Paul destroy the economy? In fact how exactly would Ron Paul do anything? I mean it's not like he would be so loved by congress that they would simply rubber stamp any idea he had off of the top of his head. Republicans and Democrats would probably unite to create veto proof votes. The Fed chairman typically lingers a few years after the previous president so he can't really screw up Fed Reserve policy. So how do you think he would "absolutely destroy" it?

Well, if Ron Paul was elected by some odd happening, it would follow that at least half the country would want more isolationism, etc. So you'd probably see a simultaneous shift in power at Congress. You'd probably suddenly have a lot more libertarians in Congress. And suddenly he might have a shot at returning to the gold standard, banning the IRS, etc.

Of course, if this scenario includes Ron Paul exclusively getting elected, shall we say in a vacuum, you're right -- he would probably be pretty powerless. At best, he'd be a pretty forgettable and weak President in that scenario. But I don't see him doing any good then, except I guess for withdrawing from Iraq (something, I should mention, Obama will also do).

Well, that, and after Iraq, he would continue in dismantling the foreign military bases and slicing both the size and the budget of the military (the only good thing for the economy he would do).

But yes, the gold standard and banning of the IRS would be stupid. Extremely stupid. And his whole idea on banning the IRS is simply to destroy the government's cash flow so that it would be forced to be smaller, except the only problem with that would be that the deficit would still need to be paid off, and with no income you can't do that, even slowly.

So anyway, good points, such as small government and lower taxes, but bad ways to go about them.

InkL0sed wrote:Well, if Ron Paul was elected by some odd happening, it would follow that at least half the country would want more isolationism, etc. So you'd probably see a simultaneous shift in power at Congress.

Well not really. Because even if the people wanted something (which is doubtful) there are no Ron Paul party members waiting in the wings to run for congress or the senate. Even if there were it is no guarentee that the vote for Ron Paul would be enough to vote against the favorite encumbent of the area. Even then it woud take several years to flush the senate and the senate would remain enough of a minority that even a super majority elected would be powerless for several years.

This is the real problem with Ron Paul, just as it was with Ross Perot. Change doesn't come top down. It comes bottom up, first at the local & state level, then it spreads across the states until it is in enough locations where it impacts the federal level. Only then can you then think about a presidential candidate.

tzor wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Well, if Ron Paul was elected by some odd happening, it would follow that at least half the country would want more isolationism, etc. So you'd probably see a simultaneous shift in power at Congress.

Well not really. Because even if the people wanted something (which is doubtful) there are no Ron Paul party members waiting in the wings to run for congress or the senate. Even if there were it is no guarentee that the vote for Ron Paul would be enough to vote against the favorite encumbent of the area. Even then it woud take several years to flush the senate and the senate would remain enough of a minority that even a super majority elected would be powerless for several years.

This is the real problem with Ron Paul, just as it was with Ross Perot. Change doesn't come top down. It comes bottom up, first at the local & state level, then it spreads across the states until it is in enough locations where it impacts the federal level. Only then can you then think about a presidential candidate.

Exactly what I've been trying to explain to Gip. I wish we had a more libertarian government, I really do. But it's not going to be a sudden shift and people simply aren't ready for such a dramatic change as Paul has outlined.

tzor wrote:This is the real problem with Ron Paul, just as it was with Ross Perot. Change doesn't come top down. It comes bottom up, first at the local & state level, then it spreads across the states until it is in enough locations where it impacts the federal level. Only then can you then think about a presidential candidate.

Hologram wrote:Exactly what I've been trying to explain to Gip. I wish we had a more libertarian government, I really do. But it's not going to be a sudden shift and people simply aren't ready for such a dramatic change as Paul has outlined.

Yesa!-to the first part, Ok fine then--to the second.