Tomorrow's Primariy Predictions: Mitt in Colorado, Newt in Missouri, Santorum on Minnesota
36 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;34577183]Sounds rather pretentious.[/QUOTE]
Well at least he isn't losing the point in trying to define it.
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34577011]Which is where our support for him begins.
Help us set up the chessboard, so that a great game may be played.[/QUOTE]
Supporting a candidate whose views you are vehemently opposed to isn't "setting up a chessboard", it's moving your opponent's pieces for them. I don't live in America but American political views tend to spread and mainstream support for Ron Paul would be detrimental to politics worldwide. We'd have pseudo-libertarians popping up everywhere.
Fine then. Let Romney barrel through the nomination.
But know this, I support Ron Paul more than ANY other Republican candidate still in the race. I believe Mitt Romney is from the same stock that got us in this economic mess in the first place. He's a flip-flopper who I am uncomfortable with trusting. One person said the risk vs. reward of Ron Paul being nominated is too great. What alternative do we have?! Mitt Romney has already said flat-out "corporations are people, my friend." I'd think the risk vs. reward of Romney being nominated would be an even higher risk for an even worse reward. Given the choice between Evil vs. Crazy, I'd pick [highlight]Crazy![/highlight]
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34578753]Fine then. Let Romney barrel through the nomination.
But know this, I support Ron Paul more than ANY other Republican candidate still in the race. I believe Mitt Romney is from the same stock that got us in this economic mess in the first place. He's a flip-flopper who I am uncomfortable with trusting. One person said the risk vs. reward of Ron Paul being nominated is too great. What alternative do we have?! Mitt Romney has already said flat-out "corporations are people, my friend." I'd think the risk vs. reward of Romney being nominated would be an even higher risk for an even worse reward. Given the choice between Evil vs. Crazy, I'd pick [highlight]Crazy![/highlight][/QUOTE]
I support Ron Paul more than any GOP candidate still in the race as well.
This doesn't mean I support Ron Paul though.
I miss Huntsman. He was the only sane one amongst them all. The only one I didn't hate.
When it comes to the three candidates left (Santorum and Paul are both half a candidate each), none is better in my eyes. Except Santorum, he's lower than the others.
Why do people think Ron Paul winning the nomination will do anything? Most people seem to think that in debates he's going to do something spectacular that's going to cause an intellectual firestorm or something.
[QUOTE] Why do people think Ron Paul winning the nomination will do anything? Most people seem to think that in debates he's going to do something spectacular that's going to cause an intellectual firestorm or something.[/QUOTE]
It's because he usually does. So far he's the only one left standing whose actually shown an aptitude for debating and defending his views while calling out his opponents.
Case in point: [video=youtube;ua4inlXnhhc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua4inlXnhhc[/video]
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;34579063]I miss Huntsman. He was the only sane one amongst them all. The only one I didn't hate.
When it comes to the three candidates left (Santorum and Paul are both half a candidate each), none is better in my eyes. Except Santorum, he's lower than the others.
Why do people think Ron Paul winning the nomination will do anything? Most people seem to think that in debates he's going to do something spectacular that's going to cause an intellectual firestorm or something.[/QUOTE]
Why do I think Ron Paul winning the nomination will do anything? Because I firmly believe that he'll isn't pocketed by lobbyists. It seems to me that he'd put up one hell of a debate against Obama.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.