2007-09-07 01:27:59 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
possibly him or Fred Thompson
2007-09-07 01:36:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
No, Ron Paul is Hillary's George Bush. She will be running against him in Nov 08. He will be the Republican nomination and will already have won over most democrats as well as the Republican vote. It will be a landslide victory with 80% of the popular vote.
Hey. I can dream, right?
2007-09-07 09:56:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul has a very good chance of winning this election. He's a unique candidate whom I would refuse to compare with anyone else other than Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. Ron Paul is America's only hope.
2007-09-07 10:17:01 · answer #3 · answered by Ash'ari Maturidi 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I don't think you are correct, so please enlighten me!
Perot got 19,660,450 votes. The total turnout was more than 13 million higher than in 1988. So, even though Perot got a lot of votes, 13 million of those voters didn't vote in 1988. Clinton ran 3.1 million votes ahead of Dukakis, but Bush received 9.7 million fewer votes than four years earlier. The two party vote fell by 7 million.Perot only took 7 million votes from the two parties combined. If Perot had not been in the race, would those 7 million Perot voters who voted for Bush and Dukakis in 1988 have voted for Bush by a sufficient margin for him to overcome Clinton's 3.1 million vote lead. Those 7 million Perot voters would have had to favor Bush over Clinton by 5 to 2. Or, even if all 19.6 million Perot voters had voted for one of the major party candidates, they would have had to favor Bush by a 58% to 42% margin to overcome clinton's lead and tie the race. Was this likely in view of the fact that the other 84 million voters were favoring Clinton by 7%, 53.5% to Bush's 46.5%? Bush would have never have won with or without Perot!
2007-09-07 08:46:35 · answer #4 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
No, Ron Paul will fall by the road side in the not to distant future and he doesn't have the money Ross had to run on his own.
2007-09-07 08:36:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
If RP doesn't get the nomination, the GOP is done. At least for 4 years, if not more. This coming from a person that usually votes Republican.
2007-09-07 10:01:31 · answer #6 · answered by ThomasS 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
he isnt independent he is republican and more so than most of the candidates -the only difference is he doesnt support the war and he is probably the only candidate if he got to the primaries to be able to beat any dem with 70 percent of the country against the war
2007-09-07 09:05:41 · answer #7 · answered by rooster 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Ron Paul has stated that he plans to keep his seat in Congress if he does not win the Primary.
Ross Perot never held any political office before running for President.
No one expected him to win.
Among all candidates, Dr. Paul is now first in total donations from military personnel and veterans.
Obama and McCain were second and third in donations from military and veterans.
http://phreadom.blogspot.com/2007/07/ron-paul-is-most-financially-military.html
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/
1 Paul
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914/A_EMPLOYER_C00432914.html
2 Obama
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431445/A_EMPLOYER_C00431445.html
3 McCain
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00430470/A_EMPLOYER_C00430470.html
4 Clinton
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431569/A_EMPLOYER_C00431569.html
5 Richardson
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431577/A_EMPLOYER_C00431577.html
6 Romney
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431171/A_EMPLOYER_C00431171.html
7 Edwards
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431205/A_ELECTION_C00431205.html
8 Giuliani
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00430512/A_EMPLOYER_C00430512.html
He received more than 10 times as much in donations in the last week of June as he received in the first week of April.
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914/A_DATE_C00432914.html
Sportsbook.com rates both Paul and Romney at 8 to 1 odds which is approximately an 11 percent chance of becoming the next President.
http://205.134.167.60/lines/lines.cgi?device=browser&site=sbcom1&sport=754
Mitt Romney's campaign only had 35 percent more cash than Ron Paul after subtracting debts on 06/30/2007.
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80000748
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003353
Romney's contributions from individuals dropped by a third from the first quarter to the second quarter.
Paul's contributions almost quadrupled from Q1 to Q2.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/?nid=roll_08campaign
Ron Paul's $2.4 million in fundraising after the second quarter placed him:
4th in total receipts to date
3rd in total current assets (ahead of former front-runner John McCain, and just $800,000 behind Mitt Romney)
Thus far, 47% of the contributions made to Ron Paul's campaign are donations of under $200 from individuals (John McCain's 17% is the second-highest percentage).
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/articles/ron-paul-small-donors-love-him.html
This is a telling statistic, as it highlights the fact that most other candidates rely heavily upon donations from corporate interests and political action committees (PACs) (i.e. moneyed, influence-seeking sources who can readily afford to contribute large sums). Since Congressman Paul has always voted against special favors and privileges for anyone, special interests know they have nothing to gain by stuffing Ron Paul's campaign coffers. As one member of my local Meetup group put it on a home-made sign, "Ron Paul is thin because he won't let special interests buy him lunch."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/sutton1.html
2007-09-08 21:35:33 · answer #8 · answered by Eric Inri 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Democrats do not need any help this time around thanks be to George W Bush the man the republicans have followed into obscurity
2007-09-07 08:39:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋