Paul supporters, who is your second choice? It makes sense to me to get behind someone who is electable and comes closer than the rest in standing for the issues most important to you, instead of wasting time and votes on a non-electable candidate. Also, all you are likely to do is help someone you defintely do not want elected.
i have heard that Ron Paul won the polls after the debates, but that the results arent real that people think they want ron paul, but they really dont micheal savages's guest host is saying exactly that right now on the radio if paul's supporters actually wanted someone else, they'd say, 'I like paul, but someone else is actually better' paul is cutting through the bs on 911 and immigration - nobody else is (tancredo is ok on immigration) if that means you dont get a vote for your candidate that you dont deserve, that's your problem. nobody owes your candidate a vote - you need to get that
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. What I said is that Paul is un-electable and most looking at reality would admit that too. I suggested that it then makes sense to look at your next best option, in attempt to avoid your worst. Also, to give any significance to those text message polls is wishful thinking.
It's pretty obvious that Giuliani only cares about what Jews want. How else would a Mayor of New York behave? The idea of dumping Isra-hell and having nothing to do with the Middle East except to buy oil would probably make his head explode. (Hopefully we'll see that in the next debate.)
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sy4Eugc0Xls"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sy4Eugc0Xls" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
you don't get it, there is no one else to vote for, they are all corporate shills except for Paul. if we lose Paul as a candidate i for one would probably write in James Traficant.