Now, I know I’m not going to change the minds of any of the True Believers…those who read all of Reverend Al’s sermons, and say things like, “You know, global warming can mean warmer OR colder, wetter OR drier, cloudier OR sunnier, windier OR calmer, …”. Can I get an ‘amen’??
No. Dedicated true conservatives (NOT neo-cons) will vote for him because chances are he will be the most conservative candidate,but the lumps lumped into the group of "undecided voters" that ironically enough decide the winner of all elections won't. They won't vote for him despite him being right on most of the issues because he has a whiny voice and zero charisma.
He doesn't even have "presidential hair" and nobody in the mainstream media is going to start ranting and raving about "how sexy he is". Instead they are going to push the party favorites because that's who spend the most advertising money.
BTW,I fully expect to end up casting a write in vote for him again this time.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
The Rockefeller republicans/bushbots are so afraid of conservative candidates, that they want hObama to win. Four more years of slamming the Kenyan is what they want, America be damned.
They figure that by 2016 folks will be so sick and tired of Democrat globalist liberal traitors, they'll be ready to elect a Republican one. It's always worked, so far.
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
The main thing I disagree with regarding this kooks kook is we can't afford another four years of Owe-bama.
The rest? Sheesh, yep his comments related to bin Laden, his view on schedule two drugs, there is a long list of kook based nonsense Ron Paul has spewed over the years.
His followers are cult like in their devoution, can't deny that. But sorry, this kook couldn't get elected dog catcher outside of his weird district. How many times does he have to get blown out in primaries for that simply, unarguable fact to sink in?
BTW,I fully expect to end up casting a write in vote for him again this time.
Me, too.
List of those unable to think: mcgowanjm, ferret mike, skippy, fartboy/yukko, white sands, bucky, lucys idiot mom, e_type_jackoff, go56, badlie, wreck, calCON, mininggold, war, Banjo Boris, Biff, Godwinson and meguro. If you're on the above list, you're too fucking stupid to hold a real conversation.
The main thing I disagree with regarding this kooks kook...
Terms like conspiracy theorist and domestic terrorists are invented to isolate political resistance and make the general public believe that questioning the government is an act of delusion and a crime. Calling political dissidents mentally ill and conspiracy theorists for questioning the policies and statements of the U.S. government is a trick that the Soviet Union also used against its own political dissidents. A good article to read on this subject is The Psychologisation of Dissent: The Global Warming Skepticism Mental Disorder by Brendan ONeill, the editor of Spiked Online. ONeill writes:
Psychologising dissent, and refusing to recognise, much less engage with, the substance of peoples disagreements their political objections, their rational criticisms, their desire to do things differently is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes.
Thank you for playing, Bad-Lie!
List of those unable to think: mcgowanjm, ferret mike, skippy, fartboy/yukko, white sands, bucky, lucys idiot mom, e_type_jackoff, go56, badlie, wreck, calCON, mininggold, war, Banjo Boris, Biff, Godwinson and meguro. If you're on the above list, you're too fucking stupid to hold a real conversation.
They won't vote for him despite him being right on most of the issues because he has a whiny voice and zero charisma.
He doesn't even have "presidential hair" and nobody in the mainstream media is going to start ranting and raving about "how sexy he is". Instead they are going to push the party favorites because that's who spend the most advertising money.
It's been the economy for years. We've been on a fast train to this very point for years. This isn't new.
How about a name? Romney perhaps?
Actually, it hasn't been.
2008 was 'beating Bush' even though he wasn't on the ticket. Thats how a clown with zero experience in the real world became POTUS on 'hope and change'.
2010 was about Owe-bama's nationalizing of healthcare, and tripling the annual deficit.
2012 will be ALL about the economy.
Romney...I think he could easily win the Presidential election cycle. I just don't know if he can win the GOP primaries. The 'experts' keep claiming if Romney wins the GOP nomination then 'Owe-bama's nationalization of healthcare is off the table' because of Romneycare in MA.
The election won't be about Owe-bama care. Thats a secondary issue now. An important one to be sure, but it won't be THE issue next year.
Record numbers of unemployed Americans, and Owe-bama the Foodstamp President will be. Toss in middle class Americans homeless due to another year of record foreclosures - the last four months of this year will stagger the country when the reviewing of robo signings gets done and that floodgate opens btw - will drive the election cycle way past anything the Left can possibly spin.
2008 was 'beating Bush' even though he wasn't on the ticket.
Ahhhh, I see. We're talking talk radio/ R v D talking points, not the real world.
I didn't ask for your analysis of the last 2 presidential elections and the last midterm, I asked who are you leaning toward supporting. It's a simple question but to answer it requires that you either type the name of a candidate or potential candidate or 'none of the above'.
Right now those I would 'lean towards' aren't in the race. I really like Paul Ryan. Gotta admit Herman Cain impressed me Sunday, and again last night on Hannity.
You made an assertion that wasn't factually accurate about the last POTUS election cycle in my view, I corrected it. Same for what drove the 2010 mid terms.
I'll get however I choose to get. Don't tell me you're one of those who dish but can't take?
I really like Paul Ryan.
I thought you were a conservative. Are you a 'free trade', pro patriot act, hate FISA warrants for Americans, "unbreakable U.S.-Israel bond", compassionate conservative and you want comprehensive immigration reform but of course oppose amnesty too?
And you have the nerve to laugh at others who support candidates who oppose all of those? Thanks, that is truly laughable.
Gotta admit Herman Cain impressed me Sunday, and again last night on Hannity.
Oh good Lord! We don't even need to get into that.
You made an assertion that wasn't factually accurate...
LOL!!!
But calling a candidate that I like, a CONSERVATIVE, a military man, doctor and 20 year Congressman a "kook's kook" is a factually accurate statement? Please. Now you're approaching ridiculous.