Posted on 01/19/2008 4:39:28 PM PST by Checkers
It's more like irrational whining than spin. Some of 'em need to take a step back, grab a drink, and chill.
“Wow, that is amazing that Ronald Reagan was the only true conservative. RR was sympatheitc to homosexuals and he was for abortion before he was against it.”
Calling you stupid would be an insult to stupid people.
I have been watching a variety of channels and I have not heard ONE of the stations mention Ron Paul even though he beat McCain in Nevada. No one even mentioned his name! They skipped right over him! He was SECOND!
Now, we may all think that (like on FR) no one in the media takes him seriously, but I think it is very interesting that there were enough people who did take him seriously that he beat all those other “serious candidates”.
Grieving Duncan Hunter’s dropping out... although no surprise.
Are you saying I am lying? These are facts and are never disputed by anyone. RR was a great conservative but do you think he was conservative his whole life while living in Hollywood and having HW pals? Read some books for crying out loud and I will try not to intimidate you next time. Welcome to FR
You make a great point. Our media system is so seriously flawed and that goes for Fox as well. This is why people dream of regulating the media and that is not an option.
The Fred people love to complain about how he is ignored. But if you want to see real professional “ignoring”, check out www.msn.com.
On the entire page, Romney’s name is never mentioned. He WON the Nevada caucus, and his name isn’t given.
Instead, it says “Nevada muddle”, and in the story it claims that the only two races of interest were the Republican SC race and the democrats Nevada race.
How can you offer a news web page and not even mention the guy who WON one of the 50 states?
sick
Mormons make up about 7.5% of Nevada.
But if picking Romney can get us 95% of the Mormon vote, I say that’s a good thing, not a bad thing.
If the winner is the guy with the most money, that’s just another reason to pick Romney.
:-)
Well, unless Fred can figure out how to get more than 20% of the GOP to vote for him, we can’t possibly win with him either.
Unless you really believe that a guy who can’t beat Ron Paul in New Hampshire, get 5% in Michigan, or get 20% in a “next-to-home” state, would somehow be able to get a majority vote in a general electon.
The point of primaries is to find out who can actually GET PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR THEM.
self bump
You’ve just proven that you have no integrity.
Amazing that you are so proud of being able to buy elections, and then you mention the name of the guy who has rec’d more in donations than any other candidate.
We see where your values lie.
FRed can’t, and won’t even try to, compete financially with myth or Paul.
Don’t though, I have it on good authority the truth about Myth is about to show it’s ugly face to the Nation.
No, I was pointing out that if you could actually by the presidency, it’s a good thing that the candidate I like has the most money.
Of course, you and I both know you can’t buy a presidency. I was just pointing out that if you could, it works out much better if your candidate has the most money.
I can guarantee you that if they could, the Fred supporters would have made sure Fred Thompson had the most money. They certainly didn’t run around telling people not to give their candidate money because it would be beneath them to spend money to get elected.
I was just trying to humor you.
As I mentioned in my other response, the Fred team is extremely happy to collect donations, and to brag about all the money they get. And they would be very happy if they could collect as much money as Romney and Paul.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.