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.
But the sheeple were too stupid to see it. Obviously, any of the white male Republican candidates would have gotten basicly the same white vote that Romney got... Santorum, Perry, Gingrich. The anti-Obama vote was a givaway to any white male candidate. But the only candidate that could have pulled a sizable number of voters away from Obama was Ron Paul.
Last edited by KRAMERCAT; 11-13-2012 at 09:10 PM..
But the sheeple were too stupid to see it. Obviously, any of the white male Republican candidates would have gotten basicly the same white vote that Romney got... Santorum, Perry, Gingrich. The anti-Obama vote was a givaway to any white male candidate. But the only candidate that could have pulled a sizable number of voters away from Obama was Ron Paul.
I agree, but you should know better. Ron Paul has equal chance winning the Democrat nomination as the Republican nomination. He is that FAR from the Republican Party of today.
Ron Paul has a few good ideas but his bat sh** craziness cancels out whatever good idea he proposes...
Which idea was bat sh** crazy? The one that would have prevented our economic collapse because he rightfully proved Congress shouldn't manipulate the free market by way of the housing Industry?
Or was bat sh** crazy when he listened to the CIA and Dept of Defense reports which said we will be less safe as long as we continue to occupy holy lands, give undying support to Israel, and because our government is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by using military force and sanctions.
He promotes liberty and freedom. What cancels that out besides tyranny?
Ron Paul wants to take us back to the 19th century.
There's no way he could win a national election.
ron paul could have won---and he would have gotten a lot of votes from people who liked his social non-interference, his willingness to always put americans first (over other countries), his antiwar stance, his anti foreign aid stance, his no money for illegal immigrants stance, and his efforts to reign in the federal reserve, fully audit them, stop the insane printing, and dump "the bernanke".
ron paul could pull votes from BOTH sides who are fed up with all the waste in the system, all the corruption/flat out stealing, and all the cronyism.
i see very little not to like in his platform.
of course, it is possible that the country is too far gone for anybody to have beaten obama-since the economy is so much worse economically than it was, but now we will never know.
He would have gotten my vote. I do wonder if now the rebups are doing some "soul searching", trying to figure out how to win, will they possibly consider turning to a more libertarian view in order to attract more voters? Or will they double down on the Santorum wing of the party? Is it too early to start the Rand Paul bandwagon rolling?
He would have gotten my vote. I do wonder if now the rebups are doing some "soul searching", trying to figure out how to win, will they possibly consider turning to a more libertarian view in order to attract more voters? Or will they double down on the Santorum wing of the party? Is it too early to start the Rand Paul bandwagon rolling?
Fiscal conservatism and social tolerance is a large, and mostly untapped, political demographic. If the Republicans have any sense in their heads, this is the approach they'll adopt going forward.
If they keep pandering to the evangelicals, they'll never win anything.
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.