He's not a whack job. He knows he has no chance of winning. He's just taking what he knows is a radical position so that he can make clear to the American public how far Government has strayed from its founding principles. Even if, by some bizarre set of circumstances, he actually won he knows that Congress would never approve his agenda. He just wants to make a valid point in as loud a voice as he possibly can.
i know what you mean, but i actually disagree. i think he has an honest chance. call me nuts... i think he does his positions aren't nearly as radical as his presentation sometimes comes across. most of his positions are popular, common sense positions
Most but not all of his positions. The ones that are not popular, common sense positions are the ones define him as a nut case.
he has the support to win already.... the big problem will come from "voter suppression." that is going to be a very difficult battle. Paul has said he has no intentions of running third party... i don't think he will have a say in it.
i don't have the patience for someone as ignorant as yourself. you remind me of the dumbasses i argued with about the real estate bubble a few years ago, or the pro-war idiots several years back. the past year has seen so many people wake up, it is hard to go back and argue with someone that has such little grasp of the current day's events.
If you go to the old rplies in 2005, guess who was the only guy spouting the RE top? Yeah, I was a year early. Look it up Einstein.
1. Called for a complete dismantling of all environmental laws. 2. Voted against Rosa Parks Medal (single no vote in congress, popular anyone?) 3. Voted against border security (4 times in past 6 years). And called for generosity for illegal immigrants. 4. Voted against line-item veto. 5. Voted against welfare reform. He is called Dr. No for a good reason - he sometimes votes unpopular "no" for reasons beyond common sense. Isn't that a definition of a "nut?"