"...Isn't it true that you allow your personal biases against Ron Paul to cloud you're judgment on his chance to be President...What Ross Perot almost did Ron Paul can do if gun owners stand up as a group for him..."
Regardless of my personal feelings, and since this IS my web log but of course MINE are the preeminent opinions that may be found here, let us dig to the bottom line.
In 1992, Ross Perot spent billions of his own dollars to garner less than 20% (18.9 and NO electoral wins) of the vote. William Jefferson Clinton snuck into office with 43.3% and George Bush 37.3%. For my money, that seems about what Hillary should get.
Ron Paul cannot raise enough money to deluge the media with campaign posters. Without said monies he cannot win. Take Ron Paul and give him Fred Thompson's posture, attitude and stentorian delivery and he'd stand a snowballs chance of equaling the percentage that Ross won over, but never, ever, with a million monkeys typing on a million keyboards does the morning after election day news tell of his victory.
When I stand at attention during the playing of the National Anthem, I must swallow the lump that threatens to block the old gullet, and for those who cannot understand why, words would not suffice to explain.
To those who actually and truthfully do not understand what is wrong with Ron Paul and why he stands absolutely no chance of winning the Presidency...
If you really have to ask then you'll never understand. Vote for whomever you so desire. But allow me to get snarky because thats what gives me pleasure. Some things are unexplainable to those lacking the requisite sophistication, so a 3000 word essay on the un-electability of Ron Paul is a total waste of everyones time.
For the umpteenth time: He can't win. Ever. And no, the moon isn't made of green cheese but I have no first person proof to come to THAT conclusion, either.
No comments:
Post a Comment