Active Users:483 Time:17/04/2025 08:56:08 PM
I didn't say no one agreed with just not enough to get him nominated so he is irrelevant random thoughts Send a noteboard - 18/08/2011 11:14:50 PM
If me are you agree with him isn't the point, and for the record I agree with him on some points but far from all. The question is is he a viable candidate and the answer is no. His ideas are to radical and he could never get enough votes to win the nomination forget the general election. It isn't like this is first time, he has done this before and he always scores well in events were enthusiasm wins the day and he does piss poor in events where broad support are required. Sarah Palin has more chance of setting the Oval Office than he does I would give myself better odds than I would give Palin.
Reply to message
Ron Paul - 18/08/2011 01:58:37 AM 594 Views
Mostly defense - 18/08/2011 02:28:39 AM 556 Views
Ron Paul got 10% of Iowa last time and 8% of NH last time - 18/08/2011 02:39:41 AM 419 Views
FWIW, I think most of it is the first part of what Isaac said. - 18/08/2011 03:21:44 AM 527 Views
Well, this ought to get him at least a little attention: - 18/08/2011 08:30:47 AM 593 Views
Mostly because he's anti war. - 18/08/2011 03:26:33 PM 397 Views
the media ignores him because he is irrelevant - 18/08/2011 03:39:40 PM 488 Views
Or they're threatened by his changing the game which they make a living pretending to be experts on. - 18/08/2011 10:19:06 PM 552 Views
I didn't say no one agreed with just not enough to get him nominated so he is irrelevant - 18/08/2011 11:14:50 PM 479 Views
I hit submit twice - 18/08/2011 03:39:40 PM 551 Views
Because he's not bought and paid for - 18/08/2011 03:55:49 PM 580 Views
Because libertarianism doesn't rely on religion. - 19/08/2011 04:26:56 PM 435 Views
I was being a smartass but not sarcaastic, I do think Paul is a fanatic *NM* - 20/08/2011 11:41:40 PM 173 Views

Reply to Message