I am a 70's guy. Who says I haven't ?

 

 

Well I hope you haven't. I have a family member who has ruined their life with the use of it.

 

That being said, if you have (), it was still illegal and the federal law failed to prevent it's use/trafficking.

Regardless of Paul's policies and how much people agree with him, he does not pass the "anchorman" test. In other words, he doesn't look good on camera and his presence before the media will cost him votes. He is that candidate that brings to mind the words, "yeah, but she has a great personality". In this day and age of media dominated elections, he would be hard pressed IMO to surpass Bob Dole's numbers in the general election.

In the 70's laws were made to be broken. In college I was known to give everything a try once. I've gotten wiser in over the past 30 years.

Regardless of Paul's policies and how much people agree with him, he does not pass the "anchorman" test. In other words, he doesn't look good on camera and his presence before the media will cost him votes. He is that candidate that brings to mind the words, "yeah, but she has a great personality". In this day and age of media dominated elections, he would be hard pressed IMO to surpass Bob Dole's numbers in the general election.

 

In my experience, those end up working out better. I hope you're not basing your conclusion on Dr. Paul's candidacy by saying he doesn't have the physical characteristics to follow the camera model.

Edited December 14, 201114 yr by Know It All
spelling er

In my experience, those end up working out better. I hope you're not basing your conclusion on Dr. Paul's candidacy by saying he doesn't have the physical characteristics to follow the camera model.

 

My comments are based on electability - how he will be viewed by the voting general public. We all know the majority of the electorate is more superficial than intelectual in deciding who to vote for. Sound bites win over policy statements. Sorry to say but it seems to be the way it is.

I like Ron Paul a lot but he has no chance at winning the GOP nomination. He is going strong in Iowa but everywhere else, his poll numbers aren't the best. I will say I think he will be one of the last candidates to withdraw from the race.

My comments are based on electability - how he will be viewed by the voting general public. We all know the majority of the electorate is more superficial than intelectual in deciding who to vote for. Sound bites win over policy statements. Sorry to say but it seems to be the way it is.

 

I agree with those who say don't pay attention to "electability". At one time, Barak Obama didn't seem "electable" over Hillary Clinton. He was labeled as "no experience", and "no knowledge of foreign policy". He had rumors of not being born in the US. Not to mention he had the middle name Hussein, in the wake of 9/11. If anyone was "unelectable" in comparison to Hillary Clinton, it was him. He did not have the most positive image and he had no "brand", but he got elected. Electability is bologna.

 

^From Triplesevens http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?228158-BGP-GOP-Poll

 

Newt was the same way before his surge, but I remember you saying he is just flavor of the month.

^From Triplesevens http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?228158-BGP-GOP-Poll

 

Newt was the same way before his surge, but I remember you saying he is just flavor of the month.

 

I still think Gingrich is flavor of the month. Anyone who thought Obama was not electable had not looked at him close enough. He is a very polished speaker with a strong sense of presence. Paul has neither of those IMO. Gingrich has those but he has baggage that make him unelectable IMO.

I still think Gingrich is flavor of the month. Anyone who thought Obama was not electable had not looked at him close enough. He is a very polished speaker with a strong sense of presence. Paul has neither of those IMO. Gingrich has those but he has baggage that make him unelectable IMO.

 

Not sure I agree with this. I feel as if he commands attention anytime he gets the spotlight in debates. He definitely has not gotten as much air time as some of the other candidates, but when he does he pretty much steals the show. A majority of the people I talk to notice this as well. Paul sounds extremely intelligent and honest when he speaks. If that's not electable, then I don't know what is.

 

Also, on this point you made:

 

My comments are based on electability - how he will be viewed by the voting general public. We all know the majority of the electorate is more superficial than intelectual in deciding who to vote for. Sound bites win over policy statements. Sorry to say but it seems to be the way it is.

 

I couldn't agree more about how superficial the general public is. IMO this is exactly why our nation is as screwed up as it is right now. Most people do not take politics seriously and it absolutely kills me.

I still think Gingrich is flavor of the month. Anyone who thought Obama was not electable had not looked at him close enough. He is a very polished speaker with a strong sense of presence. Paul has neither of those IMO. Gingrich has those but he has baggage that make him unelectable IMO.

 

Maybe the ones who think Dr. Paul are unelectable are not looking at him close enough, just saying. And just my opinion.

Know It All - Love all the points you've made so far. I wanted to respond similarly, but I just haven't had any time today at work. :thumb:

Know It All - Love all the points you've made so far. I wanted to respond similarly, but I just haven't had any time today at work. :thumb:

 

Sadly, I haven't had to work this week. So I have plenty of free time at the moment. Just pointing out what Paul believes!

Short answer no I don't think Paul can win the Republican nomination. If Gingrich wins Iowa this thing is over. N.H. will go to Romney and Gingrich will dominate in the southern states that vote early. If Gingrich wins 4 of the first 5 states to go the primary is over.

Short answer no I don't think Paul can win the Republican nomination. If Gingrich wins Iowa this thing is over. N.H. will go to Romney and Gingrich will dominate in the southern states that vote early. If Gingrich wins 4 of the first 5 states to go the primary is over.

What happens if Paul wins Iowa?

What happens if Paul wins Iowa?

 

Still would take a lot, his numbers are low in the South. Gingrich can really rack up the delegates in several of the first primaries. Also with Paul's recent surge in Iowa you have to wonder how loyal his new found supporters are. Key to Iowa is loyal supporters that won't waiver, caucuses can lead to weird results. I still think South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida give Gingrich such an edge early he's going to be almost impossible to knock off especially if he comes in first or second in Iowa and New Hampshire.