PDA

View Full Version : Elections An important message for all Republicans:


wazu
11-04-2008, 07:35 PM
Ron Paul would have won.

irishjayhawk
11-04-2008, 07:36 PM
Your man crush in full swing?

Ultra Peanut
11-04-2008, 07:46 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Mh79iiGX8GI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Mh79iiGX8GI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

petegz28
11-04-2008, 07:51 PM
Ron Paul looks like a ferret

Mr. Flopnuts
11-04-2008, 07:53 PM
With the way the economy turned, I have no doubt that had it happened during the primaries, Dr. Paul would be winning the election tonight.

Iowanian
11-04-2008, 07:55 PM
ronpaul is a moonbat.

Just enough that he could have stolen a significant amount of Dem votes.

Pitt Gorilla
11-04-2008, 08:07 PM
Eh, I voted for him in the primary.

Velvet_Jones
11-04-2008, 08:08 PM
Ron Paul would have won.

BS - the blue blood republicans caused this with the sequencing of primarys.

Silock
11-04-2008, 08:09 PM
With the way the economy turned, I have no doubt that had it happened during the primaries, Dr. Paul would be winning the election tonight.

Yup.

KILLER_CLOWN
11-04-2008, 08:29 PM
Ron Paul would have won.

Yup, no doubt about it.

Taco John
11-04-2008, 08:31 PM
Listen in here to understand why this thread is true:

http://www.ronpaulaudio.com

SNR
11-04-2008, 08:56 PM
Ron Paul being a major party candidate during the bailout would have been huge. You have a majority of the country not supporting the bailout, but no presidential candidate for the next 4 years was talking about voting down the bill. Uniting the Republicans against the bailout would have been huge for the cause, which Ron Paul would have done admirably.

However, people are stupid and don't want to hear an honest answer like "do nothing, let the bad debt liquidate, and start fresh and new in a year or two." In this case they'd come running to someone like Obama who would still champion government as the answer and the loving mother who would take care of her children.

KILLER_CLOWN
11-04-2008, 08:58 PM
Ron Paul being a major party candidate during the bailout would have been huge. You have a majority of the country not supporting the bailout, but no presidential candidate for the next 4 years was talking about voting down the bill. Uniting the Republicans against the bailout would have been huge for the cause, which Ron Paul would have done admirably.

However, people are stupid and don't want to hear an honest answer like "do nothing, let the bad debt liquidate, and start fresh and new in a year or two." In this case they'd come running to someone like Obama who would still champion government as the answer and the loving mother who would take care of her children.

Beautifully stated and 100% true, REP! ;)

ClevelandBronco
11-04-2008, 08:58 PM
Ron Paul would have won.

Bullshit. I caucused for the man here.

There's no way on God's green earth he could have won.

oaklandhater
11-04-2008, 09:02 PM
I voted for obama but if ron paul was running my vote easily would have been ron paul.

jAZ
11-04-2008, 09:05 PM
ROFL

Taco John
11-04-2008, 09:10 PM
We have just witnessed a non-violent revolution.

The Republicans had a chance for one of their own, but were too married to war.