Democrats: Would you temporarily register Republican to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries?

October 14 is the drop dead date for a lot of primary states to register to vote. Most of my friends have been extremely disappointed with Obama and his shift on foreign policy, shift on guantanamo bay, shift on marijuana, corporate alliance to wall street, etc... Half of them said they would switch from D to R just to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries, however they don't live in a primary state. Made me wonder if there's anyone else out there that feels the same way.

The Executive branch has 100% control over those Federal issues and the President would not need to ask Congress to bring our troops home, close guantanamo bay, stop federally procecuting drug users, etc... in other words, this is something a President should be able to do immediately.

Ron Paul would do those things immediately. He also has a 30 year history that demonstrates that he's not all talk and it would actually happen. On a side note, there isn't a single bank or corporation that is trying to buy influence from Ron Paul with campaign contributions like Romney, Perry, and Obama....example, Ron Paul raised $8 million last quarter with over 100,000 small donations from average people. Perry raised $17 million from only 22,000 large donations from not so average people. That shows Ron Paul has more support, but the media reports this as Paul not being electable.

Just for fun: a short clip from 2008 of Ron Paul predicting Obama offering no change. [youtu.be]

So, is anyone going to switch to try and push Paul into the general election?

I am a Democrat that is changing my voter registration to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries

liberals will vote for Ron Paul..... however he won't stand any chance against his GOP/Republican voters...

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/polit...ond-place/

He always wins the polls but when it comes down to picking a nominee, he is always dead last..

Obvious either their are PTBs behind the scene that is more powerful then the president and calling the shots, or the republicans party really do not care for freedom or the constitution and keep nominating someone worst then what the democrats come up with... Hence why Herman "the FED/Prohibitionist" Cain is a good second...

not a dem or repub , but will be voting for ron paul in primary

Quote from yjeep93 : Most of my friends have been extremely disappointed with Obama and his shift on foreign policy, shift on guantanamo bay, shift on marijuana, corporate alliance to wall street, etc.

How about Ron Paul's flip flop on abortion? I don't really care about the issue of abortion, but libertarianism is an absolutist ideology. The minute you start carving out exceptions (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion) it becomes no different than right-wing conservatism (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion...and national security...and going after file sharers...and the drug war...and...).

poll flawed, not enough choices

Quote from gunnerusa : How about Ron Paul's flip flop on abortion? I don't really care about the issue of abortion, but libertarianism is an absolutist ideology. The minute you start carving out exceptions (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion) it becomes no different than right-wing conservatism (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion...and national security...and going after file sharers...and the drug war...and...).

In some peoples minds the right of an innocent to live, trumps ones right to not be inconvenienced by a pregnancy.

Quote from OhNoItsDEVO : In some peoples minds the right of an innocent to live, trumps ones right to not be inconvenienced by a pregnancy.

But in some people's minds, the right of a society to defend its innocent children against drug abuse trumps the adults' right to put anything they want into their body.

Slippery slope.

Ron Paul is the Ross Perot of the 21st century. There is a zero chance of him ever becoming President of the United States.

Quote from Ryu-bom : liberals will vote for Ron Paul..... however he won't stand any chance against his GOP/Republican voters...

You mean libertarians. RP would trash SS and Medicare.

If I switched to vote RP, it'd be cause he's a weak candidate.

He's much too extreme to get elected.

I would but all of these new local Republicans legislation requiring new forms of IDs are discouraging me from being able to vote.

Quote from gunnerusa : How about Ron Paul's flip flop on abortion? I don't really care about the issue of abortion, but libertarianism is an absolutist ideology. The minute you start carving out exceptions (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion) it becomes no different than right-wing conservatism (I'm for minimal gov't...except in the case of abortion...and national security...and going after file sharers...and the drug war...and...).

I don't think Ron Paul has ever flip flopped on abortion. He's quite clear that he's a constitutionalist. That means the Federal government should have absolutely ZERO say in the issue. If a woman has an abortion, the Federal government should not get involved, period. Federally elected representatives, senators, presidents, and judges take an oath to the constitution. Paul doesn't take that oath lightly since he is a Federally elected Congressman.

However, Ron Paul personally does not believe that abortion is good and he does not support abortion in his own personal life. That does not mean he is flip flopping. The constitution still trumps when it comes to the Federal government's involvement in telling us how to live our lives. It's okay to have your own personal beliefs on ideas, but the question is - do you want to force/cram your beliefs down the throats of others and make them live according to your ideals (this is the typical republican and democrat way). Ron Paul is conservative here (pro-life) but takes the libertarian approach by saying the federal government needs to stay out of our lives on this issue because the constitution doesn't allow it.

Now, this topic gets a little more complicated....Ron Paul personally believes abortion is harming an innocent life. One example he uses in a book he wrote is to ask a pro-choice person at what point it is okay to abort an unborn baby....how a couple days before the due date? It's possible that even pro-choice people would gasp at such an idea. Which then brings the question, well who decides when it's okay to abort a baby and when it's not okay? By who's moral standards do we abide by? Paul is honest enough to know that even if abortion were illegal, that it would still take place because it's a personal morality thing.

Here's a quote from Paul's Liberty Defined book:
"In the 1960s when abortion was still illegal, I witnessed, as an OB/GYN resident, the abortion of a fetus that weighed approximately 2 pounds. It was placed in a bucket, crying and struggling to breathe, and the medical personnel pretended not to notice. Soon the crying stopped. This harrowing event forced me to think more seriously about this important issue. That same day in the OB suite, an early delivery occurred and the infant boy was only slightly larger than the one that was just aborted. But in this room everybody did everything conceivable to save this child's life. My conclusion that day was that we were overstepping the bounds of morality by picking and choosing who should live and who should die. There was no consistent moral basis to the value of life under these circumstances. Some people believe that being pro-choice is being on the side of freedom. I've never understood how killing a human being, albeit a small one in a special place, is portrayed as a precious right."

Here's a quote from Paul's Revolution a Manifesto book:
"A popular academic argument for abortion demands that we think of the child in the womb as a parasite; but the same argument justifies infanticide, since it applies just as well to an infant outside the womb, newborns require even more attention & care.
People ask an expectant mother how her baby is doing. They do not ask how her fetus is doing, or her blob of tissue, or her parasite. But that is what her baby becomes as soon as the child is declared to be unwanted."

Quote from 124nic8 : You mean libertarians. RP would trash SS and Medicare. If I switched to vote RP, it'd be cause he's a weak candidate. He's much too extreme to get elected.

The reason Paul has so much support among young people is they know the promise of SS and Medicare is a joke. Just like these young people don't trust the government leaders regarding our $2 trillion offensive foreign policy, they also don't trust these SAME politicians regarding the promises of SS and Medicare. Ron Paul has said many many many times that for the people the government has promised to take care of....the government MUST take care of them, the government has the moral obligation to do so. However, for the young people of this country, they should have a choice to opt out of the system if they want to. Ron Paul would pay for the remaining dependant people by brining home our troops, ending the madness of our foreign policy and return that money to the people who the government promised it to at home.

Quote from OhNoItsDEVO : In some peoples minds the right of an innocent to live, trumps ones right to not be inconvenienced by a pregnancy.

And for others the government has no right to bodily enslave one person in service of another person or potential person. .