Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well if his 'appeal is so broad' I guess he will start winning somewhere.I still don't follow the logic that the guy who hasn't won anywhere has more appeal than the one who has.
He has more support than anyone other than Romney. It is a 2 man race now. Romney vs Paul. The other guys don't have the money, the ground game, or enthusiasm to last much longer.
And considering Santorum, Perry, and Gingrich can't even figure out how to get on the ballot in Virginia, I don't think even they expect to be around much longer.
Romney needs a campaign slogan: I MAY NOT BE ALL YOU WANT BUT I AM ALL YOU GOT. The fact is that, while he may not be perfect in the eyes of the dedicated right, he is 1000 times better than what we have now.
How so? They are both big government,they are both pro war,they both like raising the debt. I see no difference and he will never get my support. Ron Paul or nothing!
He has more support than anyone other than Romney. It is a 2 man race now. Romney vs Paul. The other guys don't have the money, the ground game, or enthusiasm to last much longer.
And considering Santorum, Perry, and Gingrich can't even figure out how to get on the ballot in Virginia, I don't think even they expect to be around much longer.
Yes...and the poster I was responding to stated that Pauls appeal was broader than Romneys...so we agree
In virginia we can see how Romney and Paul do without the others in the mix and I think by super tuesday at least two out of three candidates you posted above will have already dropped out......so we pretty much agree there too
How so? They are both big government,they are both pro war,they both like raising the debt. I see no difference and he will never get my support. Ron Paul or nothing!
oh for heavens sake, neither is pro war, where are you getting that information: being pro, support our country and troops is not pro-war.
oh for heavens sake, neither is pro war, where are you getting that information: being pro, support our country and troops is not pro-war.
Nita
There is a very warhawk faction within the GOP that has driven US war policy for years. The results we have seen have been the instituting of radical Islamic states where none existed before we interfered going back to the Clinton administration.
At this point, given the warhawks record of creating radical Islamic states, non-interventionism make logical sense to many. Obviously, YMMV.
What no one except Paul seems to be addressing is that if we do not get our monetary system straightened out the US will not have a military left and we may even leave troops stranded abroad unable to bring them home.
Romney winning the nomination will be good for Democratic House and Senate candidates. A Romney win will sap enthusiasm among conservatives. Also a Romney win will give Gary Johnson an opening to go after conservative votes.
Actually, Winter Sucks, enthusiasm will not be high amongst Dems in 2012. Its not historic, the economy has stunk, they hate our involvement in 2 wars for what they view as too long, they wanted a far bigger NHC. So quite frankly if some Repubs have their hissy fit and stay home, they may simply offset those doing it on the other side.
I don't believe it. I'm suppose to take stock in what some unknown fat guy sitting behind a desk with headphones on says?
According to the polling organizations, the order is 1. Romney, 2. Gingrich, 3. Santorum, and 4. Paul.
lol...of course you are!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.