Debate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPaFWUaF-uA&mode=related&search= Hannity and Colmes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2fxzliDhSk CNN (Blitzer) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy4Eugc0Xls
Give it up. RP is toasted. I used to support him - but he simply cannot win. Unless he gets on the news with a huge rally and says everything he believes in from top to bottom - he will not win. McCain is the lesser evil of the rest who are running from any of the parties.
Actually you'd be surprised how much it does matter when it comes to Gulio, Morman-man, and McCain. Do you want a limp-dick coffin riding mayor? A genocidal insane flip-flopper? Or do you want a war hero?
McCain has been in Arizona's senate long enough to show he's not a nobody - he actually is the best choice in my view of all the rest. if RP hadn't committed suicide on air about blow back (although technically he is correct he used a tone that shouldn't have been used) I would still be rooting for him. Had he phrased it that instead of calling it "The Root Issue" he would have called it "An Important Factor" and thus also stated that the terrorist had no right to do what they did he'd have avoided disaster. Then again I am not his political adviser, so, he screwed the pooch.
He could have phrased it better - this was not the right time or place to do it. You don't speak out against the NAZI party at a rally. You wait for the right time and moment. He should have answered a different way, and in a different tone. People can screw themselves if they decide to sacrifice and martyr themselves before the majority.
Ah, so that explains why you are always being dishonest. Did Bigfoot tell you not to speak the truth?
I'm still curious how many of these "ron paul supporters" are even registered republican and can vote for him in the primaries. Multiple Choice A More than 50% B Between 49% and 20% C Between 19 and 2% D Less than 2% If your answer is D; you are probably correct. What's amazing is that if they support RP so much on the "small government" angle and not the truther angle; why are they registered as D. That common thread continues to bind.
So why don't all 300 candidates who run for president each year get in all the debates? I'd pare it down after every couple of debates. Remove the lowest polling candidate each time - whoever it is. If they are getting 2-3% (like tancredo and others), why bother? RP is a fringe candidate, at best. His support doesn't even come from republican voters.
In what way is he a fringe candidate? If Paul is not a Republican, I don't know who is. He believes in Republican form of government, conservative Republican foreign policy, and everything else that Republicans traditionally support. Recent contamination of Republican party by socialists certainly doesn't make Paul a fringe candidate. Does Bush believe in habeas corpus, separation of powers and non-interventionalism as much as Paul does?
How many times must it be said. While RP is fine on domestic issues; its his short sighted, naive foreign policy that is a problem. He's a truther. Or, at best, he's a truther enabler. He believes in the NAU conspiracy nonsense. He appears on fringe radio shows - Alex Jones and the like. He's a kooky candidate. He brings down everyone else who is on stage. And, as I said before, I think that is half the reason people want him to be there. Democrats love him on stage because he makes everyone look weird as well. Truthers want him on stage because it gives credibility to their disease. He's a lose-lose for the party. As I said, every 2 debates remove the lowest polling candidate from the platform. Taper it down until you have the top 4 or 5 guys and let them go at it.
If you watch the third video, you'll get the same advice Giuliani got: read the 9/11 Comission report.