|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 20, 2011 21:23:58 GMT -5
They hate Paul more than Obama. Paul is seen as an extremist within his own party. They'd rather deal with disagreements in domestic affairs than give up their precious wars and bombings. Not about that. It's about asking Republicans to vote for a Libertarian candidate. |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 20, 2011 21:50:20 GMT -5
They'd rather deal with disagreements in domestic affairs than give up their precious wars and bombings. Not about that. It's about asking Republicans to vote for a Libertarian candidate. It's exactly about what I said. Libertarians don't like or want to wage war. Paul would not go to war without a declaration of war. Republicans and now Democrats it seem are ok without the declaration and are ok with us just bombing and killing whoever we please if we don't like them. Of course they don't want to give that up. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 20, 2011 23:23:07 GMT -5
Not just wars, but the empire in general is what Republicans/Democrats don't want to give up. Of course, politicians usually don't want to admit that...or else you're an "isolationist".
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 0:06:17 GMT -5
Wouldn't matter. Obama would win. Paul is a Libertarian masquerading as a Republican. The base won't support him. Why do the polls disagree with you? |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 21, 2011 0:10:01 GMT -5
Wouldn't matter. Obama would win. Paul is a Libertarian masquerading as a Republican. The base won't support him. Why do the polls disagree with you? Paul is polling nationally roughly where John McCain was at this point in 2007/2008. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 0:44:14 GMT -5
I'm not even talking about that, though.
I'm talking about the fact that Paul sits "favorably" with more Republicans than any other candidate.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 1:49:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2011 1:23:32 GMT -5
I really really hope Paul wins. I am not much of a political guy, but from what I've seen I like this guy a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 21, 2011 9:36:09 GMT -5
I'm not even talking about that, though. I'm talking about the fact that Paul sits "favorably" with more Republicans than any other candidate. Because he's an unknown to a lot of people at this point. There's not a chance in hell he wins the nomination. People will realize he's really a Libertarian and not a Republican and will turn on him. He's got his band of loyal supporters who will follow him through hell, but that's it. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 11:30:57 GMT -5
Because he's an unknown to a lot of people at this point. There's not a chance in hell he wins the nomination. People will realize he's really a Libertarian and not a Republican and will turn on him. He's got his band of loyal supporters who will follow him through hell, but that's it. Or they will realize that he is in-line with what they actually believe and fits what they are looking for more than any of the Republicans. Paul's support has steadily grown, while other candidates' growth have gone up and down like yo-yo's. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 11:39:05 GMT -5
I actually believe this one is an error, but it's still hilarious.   |
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 21, 2011 12:27:54 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for a Judge Napolitano rant.
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 21, 2011 13:08:55 GMT -5
Kliquid, that CBS poll actually means "someone else"...19% want someone entirely different than who's currently running. I don't mean to stand up for CBS; they haven't reported the latest Iowa polls at all, are still acting like Newt Gingrich is in first place in Iowa, and have basically moved on to New Hampshire already, but I just wanted to clarify.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 13:13:32 GMT -5
Kliquid, that CBS poll actually means "someone else"...19% want someone entirely different than who's currently running. I don't mean to stand up for CBS; they haven't reported the latest Iowa polls at all, are still acting like Newt Gingrich is in first place in Iowa, and have basically moved on to New Hampshire already, but I just wanted to clarify. If that's true, then the numbers don't add up very well. 41% of people apparently back no one. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 13:17:33 GMT -5
"A Ron Paul win ends up being a de facto benefit for Mitt Romney."
LoL.
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 21, 2011 13:22:42 GMT -5
Kliquid, that CBS poll actually means "someone else"...19% want someone entirely different than who's currently running. I don't mean to stand up for CBS; they haven't reported the latest Iowa polls at all, are still acting like Newt Gingrich is in first place in Iowa, and have basically moved on to New Hampshire already, but I just wanted to clarify. If that's true, then the numbers don't add up very well. 41% of people apparently back no one. Well, I watched the CBS Evening News that night, and that is indeed what they said. I too thought at first that the "someone else" was Paul until they explained. I have no clue if the poll is actually accurate, just reporting what I heard. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 13:24:03 GMT -5
So they're saying 41% of Republicans are undecided?
Yeah, that's not right at all.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 1:49:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2011 13:26:37 GMT -5
Anyone other than Mitt Romney plz
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 21, 2011 13:30:12 GMT -5
So they're saying 41% of Republicans are undecided? Yeah, that's not right at all. Ah, sorry if I mispoke, I was saying that the they indeed said that the "someone else" was just "someone else", not anything about 41% undecided. Where do you get 41% from? |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 21, 2011 13:36:23 GMT -5
So they're saying 41% of Republicans are undecided? Yeah, that's not right at all. Ah, sorry if I mispoke, I was saying that the they indeed said that the "someone else" was just "someone else", not anything about 41% undecided. Where do you get 41% from? If "someone else" means anyone other than Romney/Gingrich then that means only 59% of people support a candidate. 20 + 20 + 19 = 59% Leaving 41% of people who apparently support no one. |
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 21, 2011 13:41:49 GMT -5
Ah, sorry if I mispoke, I was saying that the they indeed said that the "someone else" was just "someone else", not anything about 41% undecided. Where do you get 41% from? If "someone else" means anyone other than Romney/Gingrich then that means only 59% of people support a candidate. 20 + 20 + 19 = 59% Leaving 41% of people who apparently support no one. Well, I'm sure that wasn't the entire poll. All of the other candidates have their supporters, so it would be ridiculous to think that they wouldn't be in the poll at all. Again, the "someone else" means someone not currently running. |
|
