Who would you vote for???
2007-11-02 09:55:47 · 32 answers · asked by Nicole F 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ron Paul. But that is very unlikely.
What they don't tell you about Hillary's whopping lead is that she has on average something less than a third of the democrats polled at this point.
BUT
More than half of the people of all parties say they would never vote for her.
That statistic is not reported in the major media.
I have to assume that as other Democrats drop out of the running, we will see her percentage remain at under 30%. And somebody else will pass her going like a turkey through the corn. Probably either Obama or Edwards. Either combination of those two would win in a landslide.
2007-11-02 10:01:33 · answer #1 · answered by Gaspode 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Well personally I do not want to see another Republican in the White House. But if it came down between Ron Paul and Hillary, it would be a very difficult decision. Ron Paul is the only Republican that I would even consider voting for, and I was 100% for Hilliary before Tuesday's debate. So I guess I would probably go against myself and vote for Ron Paul.
2007-11-02 10:05:28 · answer #2 · answered by irish_indian_fantasy 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It wouldn't matter who I voted for. Clinton is guaranteed to carry my state, so gets all the electoral votes. My vote really is meaningless.
Normally, I'd throw a protest vote to the Libertarians, but, seeing as how Paul is practically a libertarian - and would likely be getting about the same 5% of the vote as libertarians normally pull down - I might just toss him the protest vote instead.
In any case, in that scenario, Hillary would be the first prez in a long time two sweep into office with 100% of the electoral college. A mandate she certainly doesn't deserve.
2007-11-02 10:03:58 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul. Anyone besides Hillary.
2007-11-02 09:58:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul
2007-11-02 09:58:38 · answer #5 · answered by bigbossmaya 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Neither. I would hope for Hillary but I could never vote for her. Almost anyone other than Ron Paul would be preferable
2007-11-02 10:25:53 · answer #6 · answered by Stone K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul
2007-11-02 09:58:28 · answer #7 · answered by Half-pint 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Ron Paul
2007-11-02 09:58:22 · answer #8 · answered by Bhaskar 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Without a doubt, Ron Paul
2007-11-02 10:13:34 · answer #9 · answered by acedelux 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The negatives in that matchup are too big. Hillary doesn't know what she wants to do besides win the election and Paul has lots of ideas that will tie Congress up in knots for four years. In either case we are looking at getting nothing helpful from our government over teh following four years.
Therefore, I wouldn't even vote (either result is useless) and I would start immediately on working for a better candidate (in either party) to run for 2012.
2007-11-02 10:01:44 · answer #10 · answered by Matt W 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋