Of 2nd quarter donations to GOP candidates from soldiers, half went to Ron Paul

[Joe Republic]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Obvious reply but has to be said:

"Why do the Troops hate the Troops?"

[TheresNoMoney]

That is one of the most interesting statistics I've seen in awhile.

I'll repeat Gully's statement: Why do the troops hate the troops?

[Conan]

I'd like to see the dems contributions.

[Person Man]

Soldiers aren't allowed to be democrats.

[Likely Voter]

Obvious reply but has to be said:

"Why do the Troops hate the Troops?"

well played sir

when you zoom out to all candidates it looks like 2/3s of all contributions went to anti-war candidates....and Hillary got 3 times as much as Rudy! We are through the looking glass people

[Eraserhead]

Awesome. Go Paul!

How did Obama and Edwards do compared to Clinton?

[SPC]

Well, they're mad because they are fighting and their buddies are dying in a "war" that was never declared and in unconstitutional.

[Person Man]

From what I understand almost all the soldiers support the war. I think most of them volunteered as ground grunts of Bush's neoconservative ideology.

[Reluctant Republican]

From what I understand almost all the soldiers support the war. I think most of them volunteered as ground grunts of Bush's neoconservative ideology.

I don't really believe that's true at all. For one, what about the solders who signed up before Iraq started? And, perhaps like the general populace at hand, maybe the solders at first supported the war but have since become disillusioned with it? I don't want to speak for the solders, but I suspect that there is a significant debate going on within the miltary over Iraq and indeed, our whole foreign policy. These contributions sort of give evidence to that end. 

[MaC]

Obvious reply but has to be said:

"Why do the Troops hate the Troops?"

LOL

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What fraction of total donations to Presidential candidates were to ones against the war? It's got to be at least 70%.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obvious reply but has to be said:

"Why do the Troops hate the Troops?"

LOL

The troops have hated the troops for a while.

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php

[The Duke]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

[Reluctant Republican]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

So, do you think the troops want to continue the policy we have now in Iraq?

Maybe they don't like all of Paul's ideas, but maybe the solders giving to him are loyal Republicans who like that he's one of the few guys on our side who wants to end the war and change our foreign policy. Maybe the solders are trying to make a statement.

However, that being said, I doubt Paul really leads among donations among the troops, overall. And I doubt that most troops agree with most of what he says.  But I think he's doing better then alot of people think he is, being that he's the only one on the GOP side that opposes this war.

[MaC]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

It's one thing to say "oh my god he's extreme".  That's really lame and I expected better for one with your intelligence.
However, could you please explain to the rest of the class why it would be bad to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

The man has political savvy, he's not going to campaign on it.

[MaC]

Obvious reply but has to be said:

"Why do the Troops hate the Troops?"

LOL

The troops have hated the troops for a while.

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php

and you know how to kill a moment don't you?

[Gabu]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

Don't you think it's interesting, nonetheless?  As far as I can tell, this is all military donations... not just from web users.

[Trilobyte]

Half of those who did donate support Paul, but most soldiers probably just can't find a pro-war GOP candidate they like and therefore donated to no one.

[The Duke]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

Don't you think it's interesting, nonetheless?  As far as I can tell, this is all military donations... not just from web users.

Is it interesting?  A little.

Does it tell me anything about the state of the race? That Paul supporters are energetic.  That's it.

Does it represent the view of military voters?  No.

[The Duke]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

It's one thing to say "oh my god he's extreme".  That's really lame and I expected better for one with your intelligence.
However, could you please explain to the rest of the class why it would be bad to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

The man has political savvy, he's not going to campaign on it.

Okay, I feel I owe you a reply.

Joe said, "Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?" and I think it was pretty clear he meant that this statistic shows most troops want out of Iraq.  But he was a little coy about it, he did it by implication, so I made a little joke that perhaps troops were sending us a signal about monetary policy.  I knew that Joe was talking about the war but wasn't he saying so outright, so I poked a little fun at his coyness.

I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers, I didn't mean to.

If you'd like to know why I do disagree with Paul on the Gold Standard, its that it limits our flexibility when making monetary policy.  Fiat money allows us to inject liquidity when we need to and rein it in when we need to in a way that money backed by a precious metal at Fort Knox won't.  The counter argument is that we'll inject too much liquidity, but I don't worry much about that in the modern age because free trade is keeping inflation down and allows us to have more liquidity without the adverse consequences that might have existed before globalization.

My disagreement on social security is centered on the 44 million elderly who depend on social security for some (and in many cases, all) of their income.  If we end social security, they'll have a hard time making ends meet.

[jimrtex]

So did anyone notice that the total of all military contributions to all Republican candidates was about $50,000?

How many thought the number in brackets was the number of contributors?

[MaC]

Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?


Source

Source's source


49.4% Ron Paul
34.6% John McCain
7.0% Mitt Romney
4.5% Rudolph Giuliani
1.9% Duncan Hunter
2.3% Others

I assume you mean that our soldiers want to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

As you can see here, Paul actually leads not only Republicans, but also all Democrats in number of donations:

http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/17/ron-paul-leads-all-08-candidates-with-one-third-of-military-contributions-for-q2/

Is there actually anyone who still confuses Ron Paul's fundraising to actual public support?  His fundraising is taking in money by tapping into a highly motivated cadre of young web users sympathetic to his crackpot ideas whose energy is far greater than their actual numbers and are much more likely than the average person to give $20 over the web.

Can we please stop the Ron Paul nonsense already?

It's one thing to say "oh my god he's extreme".  That's really lame and I expected better for one with your intelligence.
However, could you please explain to the rest of the class why it would be bad to bring back the gold standard and abolish social security?

The man has political savvy, he's not going to campaign on it.

Okay, I feel I owe you a reply.

Joe said, "Does anybody else think that the troops might be trying to tell us something?" and I think it was pretty clear he meant that this statistic shows most troops want out of Iraq.  But he was a little coy about it, he did it by implication, so I made a little joke that perhaps troops were sending us a signal about monetary policy.  I knew that Joe was talking about the war but wasn't he saying so outright, so I poked a little fun at his coyness.

I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers, I didn't mean to.

If you'd like to know why I do disagree with Paul on the Gold Standard, its that it limits our flexibility when making monetary policy.  Fiat money allows us to inject liquidity when we need to and rein it in when we need to in a way that money backed by a precious metal at Fort Knox won't.  The counter argument is that we'll inject too much liquidity, but I don't worry much about that in the modern age because free trade is keeping inflation down and allows us to have more liquidity without the adverse consequences that might have existed before globalization.

My disagreement on social security is centered on the 44 million elderly who depend on social security for some (and in many cases, all) of their income.  If we end social security, they'll have a hard time making ends meet.

Well sir, I do have a high amount of respect for you when you answered this.  Most people on this board will just tout "he's too extreme" kinda like an anhominum or other type fallacy that doesn't even look at veiws, it just outright denounces the opinions, so kudos for addressing the issues.

As far as monetary policy, I would think that we need some kinda of precious metal backing our money.  With fiat money we only have a supply based upon what arbitrary decisions those who make the policy decide.  Because there are also arbitrary decisions made upon policy in as far as taxing, spending and so forth, I think it'd be a good idea to limit the absolute fluidity so that we don't go into recession or worse.  I think that in a competing system with other economies such as the EU and Japan, we should have a metallic standard attached to the money so that we don't get driven down.  I would like to say I don't think gold is the answer-yet....  I think a silver standard would be better.  Silver is more fluid than gold and it would be better to put our economy on to transition it from fiat money.  Gold would be too rigid to do at this point.  Anything less than gold or silver would be a bad idea, and bimetalism is a bad idea also.

As far as social security goes, we obviously can't end it completely right now for the reasons you stated.  However, an optimal proposal would not put new workers on the roll, let people under 30 opt out, and the 30-50 age bracket would have their benefits reduced, and give anyone over 50 the same care as they've been getting.  Not the best system, but a scaled-system would be a work towards fairness.  When social security started out, 1 person collected for 16 that paid into it.  That ratio is now one person for three people working.  People complain about reforms, but they are vital so that the system does not crash and hurt more people later on.  Sell off government annuities to help fund the system for what is left. 

[King]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why aren't the working men supporting the guy who is fighting for them?

[nlm]

I'd like to see the dems contributions.

Military contributions for Q2

Ron Paul 26.23%
Barack Obama 24.02%
John McCain 18.31%
Hillary Clinton 11.08%
Bill Richardson 5.59%
Mitt Romney 4.05%
John Edwards 2.63%
Rudy Giuliani 2.44%
Mike Huckabee 1.84%
Tom Tancredo 1.63%
Duncan Hunter 1.05%
Joe Biden 0.84%
Mike Gravel 0.16%
Sam Brownback 0.07%
Dennis Kucinich 0.05%
Tommy Thompson 0%
Chris Dodd 0%
Jim Gilmore 0%
John Cox 0%