Take a good look at Chuck Baldwin's article here, and ask yourself why Ron Paul is being ignored.
I would definitely vote for Dr. Paul. He's a true conservative--NOT a neo-con--and he adheres to the Constitution. He opposes the Iraq war, he's against the Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act, and he's pro-life.
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin350.htm
2007-02-26 23:43:22 · 4 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Ron Paul espouses may of the Libertarian philosopies and was a past Libertarian candidate for President. However, like most Libertarians that puts him in the position of being an economic and political conservative while being socially liberal. Evangelicals most likely take exception to his philosophy that adults should be able to do what they please without infringing upon others.
2007-02-26 23:54:20 · answer #1 · answered by Jester 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think the elections have become way too much about name recognition. For instance Bill Richardson has great qualifications to be president, but doesn't have much of a chance against Hillary and Obama. It is the same type deal with Ron Paul. he is going to have trouble making headway against Guliani. Too many people vote based on who seems to be the frontrunner and not on their beliefs.
2007-02-27 02:31:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think I would vote for him. In the past, I have voted for the person who has a value set closest to mine and is most likely to be elected, but I think I'm tired of compromising. We need a true conservative and he sounds like a great choice. If my vote will cause the republicans to lose the election, then so be it. They should learn to stop compromising and present us with a true conservative to vote for. I'm tired of voting for compromised people.
2007-02-28 08:24:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Assholes always ignore honest and decent people.
2007-02-27 02:04:34 · answer #4 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋