Does Ron Paul realistically stand a chance at winning the Republican Nomination? Probably not.

And is there in fact an overwhelming internet based grass roots movement who support him? Undoubtedly.

And does this result in severe spamming? Unfortunately yes.

But let’s get back to the basics here, OK?

Things here in the USA right now are almost as bad as they could possibly get. Everyone is frustrated. The only thing we know for sure is that the US Public is fed up with the status quo, they want change – real change.

And what does Ron Paul offer? Real change.

That is why there is so much enthusiasm about him.

and Darrel,

“Paul is in favor of the destruction of modern life as we know it. A realist would expect something like that to be a tough sell.”

I respectfully must disagree with your conclusion here.

In case you haven’t noticed lately, “modern life as we know it” sucks. Big time. It’s begging for “destruction” IMO.

Tom

P.S. Paul is in favor of the destruction of modern life as we know it. A realist would expect something like that to be a tough sell.

LOL. My, my, how a post about Ron Paul has brought out the kooks in the Republican party. BTW, “fletch”, excepting voter fraud in Ohio, the election was won by Kerry.

I actually voted for Ron Paul back in my first presidential election in 1988. I couldn’t stomach either Bush pere or Mike Dukakis. But in those days, Paul was much closer to the libertarian philosophy that I agreed with.

Today, despite his anti-war plank, his platform reads like typical conservative kookiness: pro-life, pro-death penalty (the conundrums), pro-war on drugs, and pro-build a fence.

Sorry, but he ain’t no libertarian. Not by a long shot.

“I voted Badnarik”

Go figure… Really. I never would have guessed.

Unfortunately I don’t always have the time to engage in discussion or debate, because I also run a business. And again, I’ve made it clear what my perception is of Paul, it’s not likely any one will change my mind.

Except, your “candidate” was a mendacious, traitorous, two-faced, self-involved gigolo- who wasn’t even smart enough to beat GWB.

(I’m just saying… I voted Badnarik.)

Why blog if you’re not going to engage in reasoned debate when your blog posts are challenged? Why even have a comments section if you’re so disinclined to discuss?

What is at issue is that you Ron Paul supporters would like bloggers and journalists to agree with you and there are bloggers and journalists that won’t. Now honestly having been involved with political blogging for over 4 years, I understand your passion for a your chosen candidate. In the last election, I had a chosen candidate that I was passionate about and I defended him on the internet. But I didn’t force my opinion all over the web, asd Ron Paul supporters seem to do.

The only actually personal opinion I made here was I don’t think Paul has a chance. Other than that I quoted a news piece and I am not obligated to quote something that Ron Paul supporters say I should.

Got it?