board77

I'm thinking the main issue might be: What are you going to do about Iraq?

If all of the candidates have the same plan, then it might come down to something else.

Seriously, I like Ron Paul the more I read from him. I guess he doesn't have a snowball's chance in heck, though?


Lali

He does indeed have a snowball's chance in the Norse netherworld.

For those who don't recall, it was a frozen wasteland.

Hal, you give a long list of good reasons but leave off one candidate.

What is your opinion of Ron Paul, halplm?

I was thinking the same thing, especially since he is very pro-life.


Lali

The only Republican candidate I don't consider a total nutjob is McCain. I have a great deal of respect for him, although I don't agree with his views.

He won't get the nom, though. He's too moderate and reasonable. Somehow, the Republicans have lost sight of reason and moderation.

Ron paul doesn't have a chance, thus, he's not really worth talking about.

Ron Paul getting 10% in Iowa surprised a lot of people, and it's not even one of his strongest states. He has the chance to build on that and stay in it for the long haul. His chances are slim, but he did raise more money than anyone else in the last quarter and was not that far from 3rd place. It's a pretty amazing success story given where he started.

halplm wrote:

Edwards is out because he's a moron and just a product of his money.

Edwards is not my top choice (I prefer Obama), but I do have to challenge this statement. I've followed Edwards' political career from the beginning, and he is far from a "moron." Think what you will about his stances, he is quite intelligent. Don't fall for the stereotype that a Southern accent means a lower IQ.

As for being a "product of his money": What do you mean by that? Is he a product of not having wealth as he was growing up? Or a product of being wealthy now because of his success in the courtroom?

Everyone is a product of the circumstances of their lives, combined with how they have reacted to those circumstances. He's been more self-indulgent with his money than I think is ideal, but he also has used it to pursue public service.

halplm wrote:

Ron paul doesn't have a chance, thus, he's not really worth talking about.

Since your premise is false, your conclusion is false. Therefore you can answer my question.

Therefore you can tell me what you think of him, his record, his platform, what kind of a president he would make.

Plus you can tell me who you would vote for in an Obama v Paul race.

For The Big Monster Thing in the Lake that Watches everyone....




I actually have one that is better but it is pretty disturbing. True but disturbing.

my opinion of Ron Paul is that he won't win the nomination. If he does, I'd vote for him over any of the democratic candidates, becuase I think they are far too far to the left.

Wampus, when I say he is a product of his money, I mean he looks at the world like other rich people look at the world. None of the other candidates feel that way to me.

And I think a lot of politicians are morons, so don't take the statement too seriously Plus, apparently all my premises are wrong in this thread anyway, so no worries.

If it quacks, swims, and flies, it's probably halplm's answer to my question.

I'm sorry I don't care about Ron Paul.

The truth comes out.

You do not like that Ron Paul is running, and you claim he has no chance because you don't want him to have a chance. You do not want him to win, so you insist he won't.

Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote:

The truth comes out.

You do not like that Ron Paul is running, and you claim he has no chance because you don't want him to have a chance. You do not want him to win, so you insist he won't.

What? I don't think that's what hal was saying at all. He said that he'd vote for Ron Paul over any of the Democratic candidates. Isn't that what you asked him?

For the record, I don't think Ron Paul has much of a chance either. Of course, I wouldn't vote for him even if he was the Republican nominee.

actually I said I don't CARE about him, I think he is irrelevant. I thought the same thing of Huckabee six months ago, even though I liked what he was saying.

If Ron Paul starts climbing in national polls, or wins a couple of primaries, I'll start to care.

First off, a question for Cenedril, since I HAVE not been following Ron Paul all that closely, he Honestly seems to be a sincere and dedicated guy, but not at all what I think we need right now. Why isn't he trying to take his campaign into the actual third candidate scenario right now? I can guess why so far this is not a viable option, but in the meantime, he is linking himself with people that I would think he has so little in common with, why make that a campaign issue? In the long run, he is only hurting himself by associating with such people, his real message will be obscured over Republican platitudes about "family values" and "homeland security".

Huckabee scares the shit out of me, I will be honest, the guy sounds like a moron, he has no clue about the state of current foreign affairs, and his reliance on his "faith" for me is a complete turnoff, I for one want an educated hard working next term president who will deal with what America wants to deal with, not some further Christian extremist pandering for votes about social issues which really do not matter and who is so ignorant about what DOES matter that he cannot ever get it right even now during his campaign. Eight more years of idiocy, anyone? Gah, I would sooner vote for Guiliani, whom I despise as well.

Ron Paul is about as likely to get the GOP nomination as Dennis Kucinich is to get the Dems. Seriously. Do you really think that, at the end of the day, the GOP is going to let someone who opposed the Patriot Act and the Iraq War run on their ticket? But it's the primary season. This is the time to follow your heart, vote for the guy (or gal) you like, and save the choice between bad and worse for the general elections in November.

So speaketh a Kucinich fan.

Ron Paul is much more likely to secure the GOP nomination than Kucinich is to secure the DEM nomination. Seriously. Those who try for equivalence between the odds of the two should go back to grade school mathematics and discover that different numbers have different values.

Elfshadow, I did correctly interpret halplm. He was quite willing to discuss the merits of the irrelevant Giuliani vis a vis the other GOP candidates, but is completely unwilling to discuss the much more relevant Paul. Sure, because if Paul wins he'd be running under the GOP brand name halplm will vote for Paul because he's got the brand name, and he'd vote for Giuliani if he had the brand name, and he'd vote for Thompson if he had the brand name, and he'd vote for a dead cat if it had the brand name and et cetera and et cetera if it had the brand name.

If the less relevant Giuliani is deserving of more discussion, than there is an issue other than relevance at play here, and halplm let slip his opinion of Paul vis a vis the other GOP candidates. He doesn't want him so badly he pretends complete disinterest.

TheWatcher, which people is he linking himself to? By not giving back donations from people who he has nothing in common with? And when you say "third candidate" do you mean "third party"? If so, the answer should be quite obvious, given the historic viablility of 3rd party and independent candidacies and Paul's desire to win this election.