Printable View
With the electoral college system the best candidate never gets elected. The GOP will decide who there next candidate will be.The most we can hope for is Paul gets a lot more media attention and pressure is put on the GOP to make him the candidate.If the GOP doesn't the next president will be a democrat and there ain't much of choice there.
If Ron Paul does not get the republican nomination, there is a good chance that he will be nominated by several of the smaller parties to run as their candidate. Hmmmmm... I wonder if that would give him multiple listings on the ballot????
I heard on the radio today that al-Sadr shook hands and made nice with one of his most bitter enemies (if al-Sadr is Shiite, this guy was Suni, or vice versa). Quite honestly I think all the anti-war publicity will do as much to make the Iraqi's get their shit together as any military action could. Those barbarians will fight us forever, but, if they think we might just up and leave, they know full well the consequences and don't want to face them.
JMO
PC :smokin:
Ron Paul was a Libertarian candidate last election ... he can't appear on a ballot more than once, he has to declare ... :smokin:
What he basically stated the other night that if he isn't the candidate he wouldn't be endorsing ANYONE from the Republican party. This just leaves a Libertarian endorsement.
Since his base is actually the younger Democrats this will hurt the Dems more than the Republicans in the upcoming elections.
Have a good one!:s4:
I haven't seen a presidential ballot since 2004, but aren't the candidates listed first by party then by name? As I recall, each qualified party is listed along with their candidate. So, if there are three minor parties, each with Ron Paul as their candidate, wouldn't that mean that his name would appear three times? (This is a hypothetical question - the odds of this actually happening are irrelevant.)
In any event, there has been discussion among the leadership, as well as the rank and file, of the minor parties, that Ron Paul should be their candidate.
As far as hurting the democrats more, nothing could make me happier. In the choice between the lesser of two evils, I usally go with the evil republican. I just don't think I/we should be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. I think we should be able to choose between the better of two very good people.
In any event, the best thing I can see coming from the next election is a complete stalemate in DC. That's about the only thing that will protect us from the globalists oligarchs on both sides of the aisle.
PC :smokin:
90%I think you are wrong. The only way Paul would hurt the democrats is if he actually became the nominee, If that rat Juliani gets the nod, 90%, the dems will revert to democrats as they know Juliani is a fooking disaster, (Bush on steroids).Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
They few things I learned from the debate, or whatever: Yes Ron Paul made sense when he was pointing out the psychology behind the current government getting us in a war-like mind set. Because I do think war with like Iraq now, then Iran type of mindset. Weird but true. A gearing up for war mindset.
Romney is a businessman, let's sell, sell, sell. And he seems a little to scripted. Yep, the alpha male, brood of seven young bucks. Big business have to love him.
McCain: I kind of like the new John McCain for some unknown reason. Social security and medicare is going broke, needs to be fixed-straight talk.
Guliani-never made much of an impact to me, but he makes some good points.
Thompson-not the savior but like to hear more of what he has to say.
Huckabee-made some sense, bur having a name like huckagee might be more bad than good. (some voters are like that.)
that's about it for now-i'dt be nice if someone whose really into this political race shit could put something down about what each candidate stands for (over all). Things that the average american doesn't see about the candidates (of both parties)