At 1 day ago, The-Great-One wrote:
Obama is a good debater.
Debates are one of the few places where substance always wins. One candidate bullshits around, and the other candidate can immediately call him out on it. One candidate says something legitimate, and the other candidate looks like a dumbass formulating and excuse to disagree. Style and charm still have a major impact, but only when all candidates are essentially equal in substantive quality do they become the dominant influences.
Obama was able to look good in 2008 debates because he didn't have a record. But now he does, and it's a really, really bad one. Any glob of mud BO could throw at Mitt, Rick, Newt or Ron, he'd get ten globs of mud thrown right back at him. So anyone with basic public speaking skills and a decent report card could be a decisive winner against Barack today.
That's all I wanted to say.
Ron Paul is the only one who could actually give Obama a run for his money
I get close to really, REALLY liking Ron Paul. Much of the things that he says excite me into a bubbly twitch. But there are two gripes I am constantly bumping into when analyzing him, and yes you probably know exactly what they are.
One: I am not yet informed on the whole 'backlash' thing that Paul runs on. Here's the ad I keep seeing on Youtube that I believe briefly explains it all: http://youtu.be/vF3K2JvFcJA
This video was put out by the Ron Paul campaign, so I assume it's what he believes in. If it's all true, then that sucks and it sucks harder that even the best conservatives in the media and in Washington lie so blatantly. If it's not, then that completely disqualifies Ron Paul as a candidate.
I have not yet looked into this 'blowback' issue nearly enough to have a conclusive understanding of it one way or another, so I'd like to know what you may have to say about it.
You know what I find really funny, though? Is that 9/11 truthers seem to almost exclusively support Paul. Why? It can't be because he believes in what they believe; they say America blew up those buildings deliberately and covered the conspiracy up. Ron Paul's people, on the other hand, say that while 9/11 is America's fault, it was accidental, even if it was reckless and stupid.
So from the perspective of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, even though Ron Paul claims something different, he's ultimately just another puppet in the government cover-up, right?
Two: His ability as a politician. What was the number? Four? Yeah, four bills he ever supported out of thousands ever passed. I know this is often a groan-inducing criticism, but politics does require an ability to work with other people. As far as I know, Paul is almost completely isolated from both parties.
I know people criticize Rick Santorum for having compromised on his ideals and morals multiple times in congress by voting for legislation that wasn't conservative nor Christian (going so far one time as to vote to give more federal money to Planned Parenthood).
But how Rick has always responded is that compromise is required to get anything done. That politics is a team sport; that you've got to give the other side some of what they want to get some of what you want; that not being able to do whatever you want is the whole point of a republic and the separation of powers. And that sounds perfectly logical and rational to me. What Rick also says, however, is that it's also about how good you are at negotiating and maneuvering yourself around diplomatically.
Ron Paul, on the other hand, has seemingly not bent his pen at all, ever; has done little diplomatic work or connections as a representative; he just appears to be all alone, voting for or against stuff. Is this all wrong? I don't know for sure, but I know that Ron never mentions anything he's done in Washington other than how he voted.
So my point is that, if he were elected president, I question how good he would be as a politician and how effective he would be as a leader.
But please, Ron Paul supporters, I am very eager to hear what you have to say in response to this post, because I really want to like him.