Mitt Romney: Relative To President Obama, I Like Ron Paul

[ProSense]

Mitt Romney: Relative To President Obama, I Like Ron Paul

Newt Gingrich told CNN recently he wouldn’t vote for Ron Paul if Paul was the GOP nominee. Mitt Romney took the opposite tack when asked what he would do if Paul wins it all in the primary race, and accused Gingrich of flip-flopping.

“I’ve said, Speaker Gingrich has said, that anyone on the debate stage would be better than the incumbent,” Romney told reporters after an Iowa campaign stop. “I continue to say that.”

Romney noted he and Paul, the current frontrunner in Iowa polling, “disagree” on many topics. But Romney said that wouldn’t stop him from pulling the lever for Paul in a general election battle.

“Relative to President obama i like Ron Paul,” Romney said.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/3221

Ron Paul is a right wingers dream: An anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-civil rights, anti-voting rights, anti-Social Security, anti-government GOP candidate would be one step closer to moving the country to the far right.

Ron Paul? Really?

by delphine

<...>

Liberals are angry at President Obama because he didn't push for Single Payer health care.

Ron Paul says to the uninsured kid who finds out he has a major illness: Tough Shit, and stands by as the debate audience yells "Let him die!" He does not believe the federal government should play any role in the provision of health care. He does not believe that illegal aliens should be provided emergency health care.

Liberals are angry at President Obama because he delayed tighter clean air standards and is considering approving the Keystone pipeline.

Ron Paul doesn't believe in environmental protection . . . at all. He would rely on the market to protect the environment. He does not believe climate change is a major problem.

<...>

Liberals are angry that President Obama has "caved" on tax increases to the rich in order to get things passed.

Ron Paul does not believe the government has the right to institute an income tax on anyone. He has indicated he would support a flat 10% tax, or a national sales tax, both of which are regressive and would have a greater impact on the poor and middle class.

Liberals are angry that President Obama hasn't done enough to re-regulate and punish Wall Street.

Ron Paul opposes any government interference with the free market, especially any new regulations on Wall Street.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/28/1049410/-Ron-Paul-Really

[FSogol]

1. Mitt will like anyone if it gets him a vote. n/t

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. Or anything

Oh, and he will hate anybody or anything- if he thought that it would help get him a vote.

[roguevalley]

30. relative to romney, I like satan.

[MineralMan]

2. So, apparently, do some DUers.

Go figure...

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. Were you around for the last GOP primary cycle?

It was the same. RW trolls thinking they could tempt Liberals away with the mighty Ron Paul (aka. bigot-racist-misogynist-extraordinaire Paul), thus dividing our vote. A few members not aware of his full beliefs were praising him for his anti-war stance until they had the facts explained to them a couple of dozen different times. It was fun times, fun times indeed. Not.

This time around it's just another political repeat for me. A boring one I already know the ending to at that.

[Whisp]

21. yeh, thats got to be even nuttier than 'Obama is worse than Bush'.

go fig is right

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. You mean the RW trolls that inevitably find their way here?

Just saying.

Ron Paul is 20% sane and 80% insane... his son Rand is worst.

[Romulox]

3. This board has become OBSESSED with Ron Paul. Why? nt

[ProSense]

4. It's

"This board has become OBSESSED with Ron Paul. Why?"

...because Glenn Greenwald said Paul was being ignored. No more!

[Romulox]

5. That's not a very satisfying explanation. There's a level of...anxiety that's evident. nt

[FSogol]

10. I doubt it is anxiety, it is most likely frustration that DU is being used to promote Ron Paul.

Last edited Wed Dec 28, 2011, 05:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Paul cannot and will not get the Republican nomination, no matter how many of his sophomoric flannel-shirt wearing supporters show up on election day.

[ProSense]

12. Actually,

"I doubt it is anxiety, it is most frustration that DU is being used to promote Ron Paul."

...there are those who would love to keep the myth of Ron Paul alive. Next, they'll be trying to convince others that his spawn is the next civil liberties hero.

[ProSense]

11. It's

"That's not a very satisfying explanation. There's a level of...anxiety that's evident."

...typical of opposing the latest GOP fixation. Why is it that no one ever characterizes repeated posts about Romney and the rest as "anxiety" or "obsessed?

Ron Paul is a Republican, and we want him to lose, right?

[Romulox]

15. Um, Prosense? The Republicans are going to nominate *somebody*, no matter what.

Why would we on DU care whether it was Paul or Romney, unless we wanted one matchup over the other? Why play so coy here? Is not OK to talk political strategy here? Or what?

[ProSense]

16. Wait

"Why would we on DU care whether it was Paul or Romney, unless we wanted one matchup over the other? Why play so coy here? Is not OK to talk political strategy here? Or what?"

...what in that statement precludes anyone from pointing out the flaws in the GOP candidate?

Seriously, what's your point, and what's your objection to exposing Paul or any other Republican?

[Romulox]

17. Like I said...anxious. I am not objecting to you exposing anybody. Just wondered why so many

Paul threads.

[ProSense]

19. It's

"Just wondered why so many wondered why so many Paul threads. "

...because he's the flavor of the day. It's not new, think Palin, Cain or Trump. Still, get used to it.

[Romulox]

20. Right. YOUR flavor of the day, though. That was my point. I asked you "why", but you aren't going

to give a straight answer, I fear.

[ProSense]

22. Wait

"YOUR flavor of the day, though."

...I'm the only one posting about Paul? Does criticism of Paul touch a soft spot with you?

Here's a really good commentary: http://www.democraticunderground.com/100280691

[Romulox]

23. You

have several threads on the man on the front page. It's almost like you've developed an obsession. I think asking you why is a fair question.

[TBF]

24. He's ahead in Iowa and that has caused activity -

the most annoying activity I've seen on here are the Paul supporters who think they should sign up on a democratic message board (read the TOS people).

There are also going to be rebuttals from dems to illustrate why Paul is no better than any other Repub - and frankly from what I've seen here the past 2 weeks those are not only welcome but needed. The guy may be anti-war but he is not progressive.

[Romulox]

25. I've been here for years, TBF. What did Prosense mean when he asked me:

"Does criticism of Paul touch a soft spot with you?" He wasn't suggesting that I'm some Paul infiltrator--rather he's attempting to link certain ideas and people such that people holding those *ideas* can later be tarred with his Paul criticisms.

That's what *I* think!

[ProSense]

26. No

I've been here for years, TBF. What did Prosense mean when he asked me:

"Does criticism of Paul touch a soft spot with you?" He wasn't suggesting that I'm some Paul infiltrator--rather he's attempting to link certain ideas and people such that people holding those *ideas* can later be tarred with his Paul criticisms.

...I'm wondering why you seem bothered by the posts about Paul.

[TBF]

27. My suggestion

is to use ignore or let it go. Anyone with half a brain knows Paul is about a lot more than anti-war and pro MJ - he is a staunch conservative who would tear apart any remaining social nets as quickly as possible. So you're anti-war - so am I. A lot of us are. But that isn't going to fool us into voting for a libertarian.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Well, no. Glenn Greenwald said

that Paul was being ignored by the Republican establishment and he laid out the reasons why.

It is quite evident that the Republican Powers That Be are not uncomfortable with Paul's stances on abortion, gays, or minorities. They are uncomfortable with his populist ant-war, anti-drug war, anti-surveillance electioneering.

Please read my sig line as to what Greenwald thinks about those who mischaracterize his point about Paul.

[ProSense]

33. You know

"Please read my sig line as to what Greenwald thinks about those who mischaracterize his point about Paul."

"Election Season: where the simple-minded can't distinguish between "I agree with Candidate X's position on Y" and "I endorse Candidate X" - Glenn Greenwald"

...fuck Glenn Greenwald and his condescending bullshit.

Fact, he's a cowardly asshole who will abandon his positions when criticized: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=80125

Fact, Ron Paul is an anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-civil rights, anti-voting rights, anti-Social Security, anti-government despot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=78491

The fact that he bought into Paul's lie doesn't mean everyone else is "simple-minded."

[Luminous Animal]

34. Abandon his position? He tweeted that the headline wasn't his as soon as

the Guardian put it online and before the article made it into print. He didn't backtrack. He stated his position from the getgo.

His article was an analysis of the GOP primary and the actors engaged in it. It was not about the 2012 election. Anyone who actually read the entire article would know that.

[ProSense]

36. Hmmm?

Abandon his position? He tweeted that the headline wasn't his as soon as

the Guardian put it online and before the article made it into print. He didn't backtrack. He stated his position from the getgo.

His article was an analysis of the GOP primary and the actors engaged in it. It was not about the 2012 election. Anyone who actually read the entire article would know that.

Is there a reason he felt the need to tweet that the "headline wasn't his"?

Greenwald: Vote Obama – If You Want a Centrist Republican for US President
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/27-10

From the article

Because Obama has governed as a centrist Republican, these GOP candidates are able to attack him as a leftist radical only by moving so far to the right in their rhetoric and policy prescriptions that they fall over the cliff of mainstream acceptability, or even basic sanity...How do you scorn a president as a far-left socialist when he has stuffed his administration with Wall Street executives, had his last campaign funded by them, governed as a "centrist Republican", and presided over booming corporate profits even while the rest of the nation suffered economically?

Is he denying that he claimed the President was a "centrist Republican"?

He wrote it, he owns it.

As for his "reporting" on Paul, maybe it would be a good idea to stop hyping a despot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100278930

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100280691

[Luminous Animal]

40. He disavowed the headline because the article wasn't about who to vote for

and it wasn't about Obama. The article was about the Republican candidates and why they are so batshit crazy. He can't, like those on chat boards can, merely proclaim that they are batshit crazy and leave it at that. His job is to offer an analysis as to why he believes they are batshit crazy. And, it is his opinion that they wandered into batshit crazy land because has governed as a centrist Republican on many core Republican beliefs.

As for your mischaracterization of his hyping anyone, I suggest you reread my sig line.

No... rather I'll reprint it here: Election Season: where the simple-minded can't distinguish between "I agree with Candidate X's position on Y" and "I endorse Candidate X" - Glenn Greenwald

[ProSense]

41. Wait

"As for your mischaracterization of his hyping anyone, I suggest you reread my sig line."

...did you miss this comment: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=82374

[Luminous Animal]

42. I read it. It contains one blantant falsehood, one unsubstantiated assumption, and

an expression of the desire to fuck Glenn Greenwald.

[one_voice]

13. cuz they're like...

a pushy cult.

I think a small part is many liberals (myself included) feel that MJ should be legal and ,many are staunch anti-war (I'm anti war for the most part--but I understand that sometimes it has to be) so they think they can sway liberals to vote on these two issues alone.

Paul is anti choice and if I'm not mistaken against gay marriage--though I could be wrong on the latter.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Because of the few passers by who are actually fans of Dr. Paul

[Behind the Aegis]

8. BTA: Relative to an agonizing death by crocodiles, I like Mitt, but still despise Ron Paul

[Enrique]

9. fuck Ron Paul

fuck him with Mitt Romney.

[TheWraith]

14. And relative to Ron Paul, I like being dipped in giant vat of bees. nt

[BeyondGeography]

18. Mitt's time in France was really spent on the Rue St. Denis

[LeftishBrit]

28. Then Mitt Romney is a vile bastard.

Is he a descendant of the Vicar of Bray, by any chance?

[applegrove]

29. By constantly contrasting himself with Obama, usually by lying, Romney has managed

to break through the 25% support he was stuck at. Look to see more Obama bashing.

[maximusveritas]

32. Romney is kissing up to Paul so he won't run as a 3rd party candidate

So transparent.

[Luminous Animal]

35. Republican Gary Johnson is already ready running on the Libertarian ticket.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100281821

[maximusveritas]

37. Ron Paul would drain more support from Romney because of his conservative social views

And Johnson is not actually the Libertarian nominee yet. If Paul decided to contest him for it, he would win.

[MrSlayer]

43. Just because Paul is so much worse than Obama doesn't mean we can't be disappointed with him too.

It's like people who say, "You aren't poor by the world's standards. Be happy with what you have, it could be worse." Just because it could be worse than what we have doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for something better than we have.