General Discussion

LeftishBrit

(41,205 posts)

19. Depends what it's common ground with.

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 08:20 PM

Jan 2012

Common ground with far-right-wingers is never a good thing.

This doesn't make it right to use guilt by association, and accuse people of having common ground with Ron Paul, if they haven't (if that has been happening). But nothing can alter the fact that Ron Paul, just like all the other Republican candidates, is a poisonous snake.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anyone else think the approach of linking everyone you dislike with devil de jour, Ron Paul [View all] whatchamacallit Jan 2012 OP

I haven't a single clue what this means ... Trajan Jan 2012 #1

Lots of stuff like whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #3

Thanks for reminding me that I had not yet put that poster on Ignore. ChadwickHenryWard Jan 2012 #6

:) whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #7

ya limpyhobbler Jan 2012 #2

Yes, in terms of the McCarthy like attempts to do so quinnox Jan 2012 #4

Well, I hear Ron is quite popular over at Stormfront. Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #9

there ya go quinnox Jan 2012 #13

I compare Ron Paul to Santorum, Gingrich, Romney, etc. LeftishBrit Jan 2012 #15

Also an approach that can apply to many good people. Paul sits elected in Congress Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #5

Yep. whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #11

True, regarding all the Democrats in Congress who have worked with him sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #16

It's hilarious. Robb Jan 2012 #8

Common Ground whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #10

Depends what it's common ground with. LeftishBrit Jan 2012 #19

Our President has made "bi-partisanship" the centerpiece of his administration. By definition, he Romulox Jan 2012 #20

Actually I meant common ground with Robb whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #25

Well, the Ron Paul, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, Pat Buchannon conspiracy makes sense to me. Puregonzo1188 Jan 2012 #12

It's an excellent method to drive some people away from the Democratic party cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #14

+1 whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #17

Anyone else think the approach of saying Ron Paul's ideas desperately need to be heard.. joshcryer Jan 2012 #18

When did antiwar/pro civil liberties stances become Ron Paul's ideas? whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #24

When liberals attributed those ideas to him. joshcryer Jan 2012 #26

I know this is beyond your comprehension whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #27

I have never contended that any progressives support Ron Paul. joshcryer Jan 2012 #28

Really? whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #29

Do you know what "implicit" means? joshcryer Jan 2012 #30

Yes, do you? whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #31

In this context is basically renders the support non-existant on a web-forum. joshcryer Jan 2012 #33

That's easy! cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #32

Meanwhile, I'm not convinced implicit supporters of Ron Paul are... joshcryer Jan 2012 #34

Another definitional problem, and a much harder one. cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #35

Thanks cthuman! whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #36

Well said... SidDithers Jan 2012 #37

Well at least I post an occasional OP whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #38

Just following your lead. When in Rome...nt SidDithers Jan 2012 #39

Uh huh... whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #40

Your concern is noted. great white snark Jan 2012 #21

Maybe you can explain it to me whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #22

Yup nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #23

It's Ron Paul tourettes lumberjack_jeff Jan 2012 #41

"Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste..." Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #42

I don't care enough about Ron Paul to get all worked up whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #43

I didn't write the OP. I responded. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #44

You're quite simply whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #45

Touched a nerve, I see. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #46

Lol. Work it! whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #47

I don't think the two have much to do with eachother. Rex Jan 2012 #48

It IS counter productive. bvar22 Jan 2012 #49