Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We've been conditioned not to vote for 'losers' (like 3rd party candidates) and candidates like "won't win/can't win" Paul and that doing so is comparable to voting for the opposing party candidate.
IF everybody that is for Ron Paul could be convinced to ignore all that and actually voted for him, how then would you see his chance to win the primary ( and then the election)?
We've been conditioned not to vote for 'losers' (like 3rd party candidates) and candidates like "won't win/can't win" Paul and that doing so is comparable to voting for the opposing party candidate.
IF everybody that is for Ron Paul could be convinced to ignore all that and actually voted for him, how then would you see his chance to win the primary ( and then the election)?
It is pretty much the same group voting for Paul this time as in the past and he will get a similar % (maybe slightly more) the one thing many of us forget, those on CD are pretty much political junkies to some degree and we represent a very small part of the voting public.
I am not saying he is a good choice or bad, nor am I voicing my opinion of his views, but to answer your question? No, he will not be the nominee and he is likely not going to win a single primary.
It is pretty much the same group voting for Paul this time as in the past and he will get a similar % (maybe slightly more) the one thing many of us forget, those on CD are pretty much political junkies to some degree and we represent a very small part of the voting public.
I am not saying he is a good choice or bad, nor am I voicing my opinion of his views, but to answer your question? No, he will not be the nominee and he is likely not going to win a single primary.
Nita
Yes and so many of the others won't even know who he is or that he's running since they seldom see him on mainstream media
Realistically, he needs non-stop coverage on MSM like all the other candidates get.
However, if the other Republican candidates continue to make fools of themselves maybe Americans will wake up.
Realistically, he needs non-stop coverage on MSM like all the other candidates get.
However, if the other Republican candidates continue to make fools of themselves maybe Americans will wake up.
Realistically, he needs non-stop coverage on MSM like all the other candidates get.
However, if the other Republican candidates continue to make fools of themselves maybe Americans will wake up.
Realistically, he needs non-stop coverage on MSM like all the other candidates get.
Nonsense.
You honestly think most Americans could pick candidates like Huntsman or Santorum out of a lineup? They aren't getting non-stop coverage either, with same reason: not front runners.
We've been conditioned not to vote for 'losers' (like 3rd party candidates) and candidates like "won't win/can't win" Paul and that doing so is comparable to voting for the opposing party candidate.
IF everybody that is for Ron Paul could be convinced to ignore all that and actually voted for him, how then would you see his chance to win the primary ( and then the election)?
Getting nomination won't be a problem. Winning, would be impossible, however.
Getting nomination won't be a problem. Winning, would be impossible, however.
Very few things are impossible...especially when it is just a competition between one or more people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.