I've heard very little about him but he sounds like he would be good for our country. Why won't they let him debate?
2007-07-10 01:33:28 · 13 answers · asked by sheila g 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
They won't let him debate because he is pro-constitution and working for the good of the PEOPLE, as opposed to the others who are only concerned with themselves and the interests of big government.
Ron Paul is against the IRS, against the war and for the privacy and rights of the individual citizen.
The reason they won't let him debate is because they are trying to silence him. Despite this however, he has come top in many online polls.
This may sound like an exaggeration but he really COULD be the man to save America. If any if the other candidates get in, America (and the world) is in a lot of trouble, and you can certainly expect more wars, domestic spying and loss of individual rights.
Don't take my word for it - check him out for yourself.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/070507ronpaul.htm
http://www.ronpaul2008.com
2007-07-10 01:44:44 · answer #1 · answered by Ivor Hugh G.Rection 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
As much as I like him and would vote for him if he won the nomination, I don't think he has a realisic chance. He goes against everything present-day Washington is about.
As far as not letting him debate, he was included in the CNN debates last month and was in the FOX News debates two months ago (even though he was blasted for standing up to Rudy Giuliani).
2007-07-10 08:37:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
"He goes against everything present-day Washington is about."
That sums it up in a nutshell. And, according to some YA posters, the status quo(tons of embedded taxes, trampling the Constitution, etc.,) is just fine with them, as they have deemed Paul as a whacko(and I'm guessing a lot of them voted for AlGore, the whacko's whacko, in '00), without hearing anything he could bring to the debate, that isn't a quip about Edwards' haircut, or a thump-your-chest sound bite, about the war on terror. Complacency will kill this country before the terrorists do.
2007-07-10 09:47:49 · answer #3 · answered by liberalus_destructus 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul? is he related to RUE PAUL? don't know of this person. perhaps he is not considered a real candidate by anyone obviously including the press... the guy from the ancient movie called billy jack ( tom laughlin) paid to run for president once in the 1970s so did Archie bunker, as well as one of the patients at a state max security psyche hospital I worked at during my 1st 4 yrs of college, all you have to do is get some signatures and pay the fees.... that does not give credibility or any tangible value to a wannabe candidate... remember that idiot from Texas named Ross Perot I rem his famous quote , well almost a whole quote as he seemed confused and suffering from dementia.. his quote was life is like a peanut butter sandwich... OK so what was the rest of it ? as he never finished the thought...
2007-07-10 08:46:29 · answer #4 · answered by The Thinker 6 · 1⤊ 5⤋
There are too many big name front runners in the election for him to stand a chance of winning, I think.
2007-07-10 09:01:26 · answer #5 · answered by Kristina 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes. He is the worst possible candidate and I hope that people who supported Sanjaya will also support Ron Paul.
That would be great practical joke on America.
www.ronpaul2008.com
GO RON GO!
2007-07-10 09:34:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
I believe he does.
He has a great platform, one for the good of the country.
www.ronpaul.org. Check it out.
To The Thinker-How do you give yourself a name like than and then post what you did. Not too much thinking in that answer.
2007-07-10 09:51:22 · answer #7 · answered by davethenayber 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Because he doesn't have enough money, celebrity friends or corporations backing him...
but yes, he's an excellent choice.
He doesn't stand much of a chance, but that won't stop me from voting for him. What's the purpose of voting if I can't vote for who I want?
2007-07-10 08:35:43 · answer #8 · answered by guess 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋
oh, he's been to the debates. Hasn't done too bad, but his comment on believing the "truthers" hurt his credibility.
2007-07-10 08:50:46 · answer #9 · answered by Mark A 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Of course not. Don't let anyone tell you he has. The party heads will not support him because they realize he is not a winner.
2007-07-10 10:18:46 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 5⤋