Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentElections · 1 decade ago

Why didnt more people accept Ron Paul?

If you compare him to McCain and Obama, Dr Paul was the only one who;

Strictly followed our constitution

Had extensive knowledge on the economy and its inner workings

Voted against the war

Voted against the Patriot Act

Had a long record of telling the truth

Had a consistent voting record

Wanted to decrease the federal deficit

Was against the bailout

Would bring our troops home from many of the 140 countries that we have them in now to secure our own borders

Would have dismantled the Federal Reserve and established sound money with competing currencies

Preserved our liberties

Update:

Kringle: I did, until he dropped out

Update 2:

USA! : Surely youre referring to Obummer without a teleprompter right??

Update 3:

He didnt want to put us "on" the gold standard again. Thats impossible since we dont have enough gold on earth to do that. But he wanted sound money and competing currencies. nothing "lololol" about that

16 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The truth? His image.

    He's kind of frail looking, was very angry, did a lot of complaining, and he did that complaining in a rather whiny voice.

    Everything he complained about, he was right. But one can only take so much complaining in a voice like he has.

    And unfair though it may be, image does count for a lot. Ron Paul has the mind to be President, but not the personality. He will never make it.

    He definitely has what it takes to be a Chief of Staff for any President, and he would do that job immensely well. But he will never be President, he simply does not have the right image.

  • Witchy
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    I'm not against the war but I agreed with Ron Paul's ideology on most issues. The major reason that I didn't support him was because of his supporters. Being passionate is wonderful but being rude is another. 90% of the Ron Paul supporters that I met were mouthy and insulting. I didn't want to be identified with people like that.

    I know that every campaign has it's rowdy, rude fringe people and those are the ones who are shown by the media. I overlook that. But it was really hard to do with Ron Paul supporters because there were so many of them. If more of them had taken a logical approach in their campaign instead of rudeness, I probably would've joined. If he were to run again but without the rude supporters, I might join in and campaign for him.

    I know that not all Ron Paul supporters were like this. There was just too many that were. At least in Ohio there were.

  • 1 decade ago

    it is because right now, america only supports a two party system. The debates are only between the two parties and it is even harder to get onto ballots than it is to get air time.

    But i keep telling myself the same thing that someone else said. Really he had to lose / not run this election for him to win in 2012. Ron Paul / Jessie Ventura would be a killer combo for the 2012.

    If we want Ron Paul, we should start spreading the word. Hopefully you are spreading the word already, but we need to make sure everyone knows about it.

  • gehr
    Lv 4
    3 years ago

    whilst Ron Paul ultimately admits that he hasn't have been given a ghost of of project and publicizes the top of his candidacy (which is generally quickly after NH and Iowa primaries), i'm specific that a number of his cultist followers will say that the rationalization he lost is with the help of this incident. something human beings have frequently used all alongside that he replaced into on no account a extreme actual-worldwide contender. retaining that funds would have been a damaging strategic circulate if it meant something, yet we ought to continuously bear in mind that we are talking approximately Ron Paul here . . . .

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    That stuff is far too radical and conservatives would take issue with much on that list; especially the patriot act, and weakening our military position abroad.

    If you want to be taken seriously in an election, you need to do it through the traditional parties. And I think using Obomov's campaign as a model, Its pretty safe to say that substance doesnt matter; only a smooth talk and a democrat-caused financial crisis with republicans in office to blame it on.

  • 1 decade ago

    Obama supporters love to point out that they elected a Constitutional Scholar, yet Dr. Paul dances circles around him. I just don't get it.

    But anyways, Ron Paul is a good man. I supported him.

  • Alion
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Like it or not the U.S. political system is basically a two-party system.

    Non-Democrats and non-Republicans can never get the public and financial support to win,all they do is muddy the waters. I'm thankful

    that didn't happen this election.

  • 1 decade ago

    If he had ran as an independent, he would've gotten a ton of votes. He definitely wouldn't have won, but he could be partially responsible for putting a third party on the map. He most likely would've received my vote.

  • 1 decade ago

    So many have never heard of him. The other 2 had commercial after commercial and campagn after campagne. Ron Paul was not marketed enough.

  • J
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I love everything about Ron Paul except his foreign policy and that's a deal-breaker. Ron Paul would have been a real change candidate. Huckabee would have also been a real change candidate (with his plan to eliminate the IRS and institute the Fair Tax). I hope guys like these and others like Thaddeus McCotter are the future of the Republican Party.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.