redblueamerica.com

Nice...You are an ass.
High school dropout here. However I did actually attend college.
For the record, I work and I pay taxes.

RON PAUL and all who love Liberty! Wake up America!!!

Hilary, Obama, and McCain are all going to stay the course of intervention into middle east with US military, or even worse, Blackwater mercenaries.

Ron Paul is the only one who will solve the core of the problem both internationally and domestically.

I vote none of the above until a peace and common sense candidate is offered.

In case you missed it, Ron Paul essentially out of the race. Oh, I know his website says he's still running and has "tentative plans" to campaign in Pennsylvania and Kentucky. But realistically? Come on, now.

But even if he were still in, note that the question said "Among the remaining major candidates." Ron Paul is a good man whose message was and remains worth hearing. He needs to be in Congress, for sure. But a major candidate for president? Nope.

because your vote doesn't matter, at all, never did.

put the tin foil back on.

Then who is the dealer?

...become president, it would be wasteful for me to vote for him. The American voting caste is two party by no accident. Candidates from the two major parties (D/R) stand a 50/50 chance of winning; if we had any more political parties each one would greatly reduce *everyones* chances of winning an election. (33/33/33, 25/25/etc) and it would allow for monumental upsets, and it seems Hillary is like an alligator who clamps down on a victim and won't let go, and she may very well ruin the democrats' chances of winning this election. Follow with me: she refuses to concede even after Obama wins the votes of super-delegates needed to win the D primary, and then enough people vote for her instead of Obama that she fractures her own party and McCain wins, enduring us for another 100 years of war with the middle east. He has said just as much in his own words, and frankly it is disgusting that she said publicly that McCain would be a better president than Obama. She basically deep-sixed her own party flinging poo at Obama.

I WILL be voting for Ron Paul in the PA primary, I'll write him in if i have to, but he's not going to win because of the way the D/R's have corrupted the election process in this country for decades, possibly over a century. (I'll be voting for him out of defiance, but it won't mean much except for the fact that even in the face of defeat, my vote goes for him over any of the other candidates.)

However, frankly, there's no way Ron Paul can win. So many delegates have already thrown their support behind Hillary/Obama/McCain that there simply aren't enough left for Paul to win the R nomination. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state primaries, write him in if you have to but accept the fact that he can't win the general election. Please vote for Obama in the general election, do not fracture the support between different candidates in the D party because the only affect that will have will be to hand the presidency to McCain.

For the general election I will be voting for Obama, for a lot of reasons. Hillary and McCain are both part of 'the system' which has screwed over Joe Q. America relentlessly for most of our country's existence. Hillary being elected would mean the past election winners: 1980, 1984: Reagan; 1988: G. H. W. Bush, 1992, 1996: B. Clinton, 2000, 2004: G. W. Bush (there is evidence and even books written about how both these elections were stolen but there's nothing we can do about it now) that electing Hillary in 2008 would mean at least 24 years of rule under either Bush or Clinton, possibly 28 years. And there is no doubt in my mind Hillary is just as crooked as any older male politician, and it really bothers me that so many women are voting for her simply because she's a woman and not realizing she's more of the same old system that constantly thinks of new ways to screw over Joe Q. America.

I think he may have ideas up his sleeve that he's not telling any one; considering how our own government propagandizes against all these drugs that grow quite naturally without any help from mankind (opium, 'marijuana' a.k.a. cannabis a.k.a. industrial hemp, 'shrooms (psychedelic mushrooms), etc) my biggest problem with this country is it's absurd 'war on (some) drugs,' which I have researched over the last 7 years and I've found that it's not a war on drugs, its a war on minorities. Check http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Hist... (short 20 min. read) and http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBR... (much longer, this is simply the table of contents)

Please help me make Obama our next president. Out of the three remaining candidates, he is the only one we can look forward to for any kind of progress.

I want you all to understand that it is everyday business for your own government to lie to you, repeatedly. Anyone who's ever smoked pot knows that it's nowhere near as dangerous as alcohol and you physically cannot overdose on cannabis yet it remains illegal, while alcohol kills @85,000 people a year (not including drunk driving accidents, where it is usually an innocent, sober driver who was in the wrong place at the wrong time) and remains legal, even though it's commonplace for people to overdose on alcohol and kill innocent people on the road; you're more likely to drive slower when you're high because you know you're impaired on weed and you're being extra cautious, but while drunk on alcohol you become clumsy and belligerent.

It is the lesson you all should have learned in grade school: remember studying alcohol prohibition in the 20s/30s? Not only did it not reduce alcohol use, it also led to murders and violence in the streets. This is the same effect the war on (some) drugs is having. Alcohol didn't create Al Capone, alcohol prohibition created him.

If the drug war ended tomorrow and these illegal drugs were made legal, it would solve tons of problems facing our country today: It would run drug dealers out of business, it would keep these (possibly dangerous, you are after all using mind-altering substances) out of the hands of children, the government would be forced to stop lying about the effects of these drugs (they ran similar smear tactics against alcohol when it was illegal), people could make informed decisions about whether or not to use these substances after studying the real affects of the drugs, they could pay off the national f*cking debt, I'm not making any excuses for anyone who gets violent while on drugs, but it is completely unconstitutional to arrest and incarcerate someone simply for having a 'controlled' substance in their possession. It also undermines public support for the government and makes police ripe for corruption, while ignoring the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights against unlawful search and seizure. They could cut the terrorists off at the knees, since their current claim is that using drugs contributes to terrorists' coffers, if they were made illegal our own government could be receiving the money instead of the black market.

This is, of course, only applicable if George W. Bush doesn't stage another false flag attack and indefinitely postpone elections and declare martial law and start filling all the security camps Halliburton/Kellogg, Brown & Root have been building in the midwest, that are fully stocked with security guards just waiting to be filled so they can continue to implement the New World Order.

I know this commentary may make some of you think I am a nutcase but I also bet that a lot of you blindly throwing your support behind Ron Paul, I bet you are young and full of hope but also naive to the American political process, and I am not some kook spouting off 'craziness,' read about the Gulf of Tonkin Incident for an example of our own country performing a false flag attack and then blaming the Koreans (so we could invade, when we had no business to do so) and realize that it was our own government that researched 'gay bombs,' fed LSD to unknowing citizens who ended up jumping off buildings under the belief they could fly, etc. Our greatest enemy is our own government. Our own government and the mainstream media work together to misinform the citizens so they can continue to stuff their own pockets while sending innocent American soldiers off to war so they can steal oil.

"Why isn't Ron Paul an option?" Because he has been otherwise occupied defending his seat in Congress? Because short of an improbable series of freak and/or cosmic accidents, he has absolutely no chance of winning?

Actually, because the question said "Among the remaining major candidates." Ron Paul is a good man. But he's not a major candidate.

If you want to see power hungry fascists look no further then our current president/regime....

Those folks who contend that people are dying because they are refused ER care may be misinformed. IF this is happening, it is most definitely in violation of a federal law called EMTALA or the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. The 1986 law prohibits hospitals from refusing to treat anyone in an unstable condition or active labor, whether or not they are insured or have the money to pay. It also requires hospitals to screen every patient who presents to the emergency room. The real problem is getting the insurance companies to PAY for these ER visits. I do believe that the original intent of the law was to prevent hospitals from rejecting patients, refusing to treat them, or transferring them to "charity hospitals" or "county hospitals" because they are unable to pay or are covered under the Medicare or Medicaid programs (this is known as "patient dumping.") The problem with EMTALA is that our health care delivery system is very different now than it was in 1986 and this very statute, designed to protect the uninsured/underinsured has become a "loophole" for the HMO/PPO's to refuse payment in the event the ER visit was not truly an emergency.

Socialistic medicine is a grand and lofty goal but will not work in a capitalistic society such as we have in the US. If you don't believe me, check out what Canadians and Europeans are saying about having to WAIT for treatment. No more calling the doctor with back pain and seeing him the same day for treatment and a prescription.

The insurance companies are making BILLION dollar profits. Why are they not being MADE to pay for what they are contracted for? I was FORCED to switch to the HMO and have to admit that in the beginning I thought it was pretty good. The problem is that the initial $2 co-pay soon became $5, then $10, then $15, $20, $25 and this year? It went to $50!!! I am also a cancer patient and it costs me $100 every time I see my oncologist (and I have 3 of them all with different specialties.) Guess who will not be seeing the oncologist as she should?? And don't even get me started about the increase in premiums......

PS I am a RN who has devoted her entire working life to caring for others and serving in the healthcare system that is now unaffordable to me.

** throwbacks **

first problem: Hobson's choice refers to exactly one choice and no other. "Either this or none." Hobson would rent his horses out only in strict rotation. That is, no choice at all. Now, the three major candidates do not represent a Hobson's choice.

second problem: TR? Why? We've been so fortunate as to have a long-lived William McKinley at 1600 Penn Av for the last seven years.

How could one forget the trumped up war against Spain -- the shock and awe of just over a century ago. Militarism and capitalism with a "good" conscience.

The "wars" across the Pacific from Hawaii to the Philippines between 1898-1907 are no different from Bush's colonial invasion and occupation exactly 100 years later. Why we even have our "great white fleet" stationed along the most vital trade route in the present era.

The US simply reverts to form.

"If any of those people could actually get enough delegates to win, I think they might have included them."

Yeah. Note the wording of the question: "Among the remaining major candidates..." There is an implicit acknowledgment of other candidates. Note, as well, the option to select "none of the above."

But, hey, how great is it to be able to vote for a candidate like Paul or Gravel or the other hopeless also-rans? It's a bit like relieving yourself in a dark wool suit: it might give you a nice, warm feeling, but nobody really notices. Or cares.

I would just like to point out to the owners/whoever maintains this site that Ron Paul and Mike Gravel (and even Mike Huckabee) are still running for President. Don't you get tired of copying the spiel of what others have flagrantly [also] mis-represented?

Lame.

I am glad Nader is running. I HOPE he will take the presidency away from that radical liberal Obama.

no one but ron paul has earned the presidency so he will rightfully get it. vote ron paul our future depends on him

RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT

Dots

The ideas adhered to by anyone who truly believes in the freedon of the people are the ideas which, in my opinion, should be supported by Americans. Margaret Thatcher is mentioned because of the comment that many do not want a woman to be president. I suggest that if Hillary had the same qualifications as Margaret Thatcher I would most certainly vote for her.

As you may or may not know our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution state and support that our government was created of--or from The People and should consist for the people and be ruled by the people. When those goals are lost and our government becomes a government over the people it can and should be replaced.

I understood your reference to the fact that these people may make it through the primary election process in America and would basically be the choosen ones. But believe me that does not make it right. Please address the issue of how well educated is the average voter? No I'm not saying that voters should have a degree. I am saying that most voters get their assumed education from the television and their choosen reporter. Well, I don't know about you but I have noted that equal attention and time was not provided for the entire lot of candidates. The press chose the people they wanted to support for president, and for that matter any politican position, and provided time for the furtherance of that persons bid for office. they also provided little digs at person they believed did not fit their idea od a candidate. The press is and will continue to be bias in their choice of candidates. The citizens will not hear about the candidates the press has decided should be black balled.

So rather than believe what the press has to offer or says check out the records of these candidates. You will find that if you compare their stands to the requirements of our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence, none of them are worth a hill of beans. Informed voters are necessary for this Country to survive as an independant Nation. The bought off voter is not what we want or should support. The bought off voters are the ones who put these candidates at the top of the hill. They want and expect something for nothing at the expense of the working class. these candidates simply promised them more for nothing in return.

Anyway, Have a Nice Day
Be American Vote American
From: American Citizen

He is the only one on either side that has ever run a goverment. The state is just as complex if not more so than the federal gov because of limited funds. He did it with positive end results. Yes, there was strif. yes, there was tax issues. But he prevailed, was sucessfull in crossing party lines and joining them together not for political gain but for the betterment of the state. Also his stand on issues of ethics and morality that is the foundation of our country far out weigh any of the others running.

Donna:

Nobody has a clue. And Hillary Clinton either had power (and gained experience) as First Lady or not. I'm just saying that she had NOTHING to do with PPOs or HMOs. The Insurance industry's lobbiest's are pumping influence out of both sides of the aisle. If you know what my clueless self means.

That being said, your tone kind of hurts my feelings and makes me feel stupid. :>(

It sounds like to me you are just against a woman being president. For one thing, Bush's little war was supposed to be against Bin Laden. Isn't that why we went to war against Afghanistan??? He was supposed to hunt down Bin Laden.. did he? Seven years later and nothing. But, he could convince the US to go to war against a country that had NOTHING to do with 911 with his lies and greed for oil and riches. Get over yourself. It's apparent you are don't know anything. Do you homework. Go read. Learn then come back and praise Bush. At least with Clinton we had a balanced budget fo the first time in years. What an idiot.

Does Watergate scandle mean anything to you? Oh, I know, THe Clinton/whoever her name was affair. Oh, and what else, um PPO/HMO Insurance nightmare that Hilary Clinton created. Lets' see, I know of some many people/babies where denied medical treatment and they DIED because the medical facility they went to was not in their NETWORK as they say. She has no morals nor did she realize what damage she done to this country w/insurance let alone her racist husband. I formost did not vote for neither Clinton and will not. If the race ends up with just Obama whatever, or Clinton I will not vote nor alot of others I'm sure vote at all. Hilary has only been in the house seats through her entire career. She has NO HANDS ON experience with war, she has only Heard and DELT with it with Bill Clinton. He started this mess in the beginning he was too busy with his female affair to pay attention to what was stewing over in Iraq and what Bin Laden was cooking up years BEFORE BUSH! to know. He dumped it all on Our New president of the United State in 2001. How could Bush mess anything up in 2001 when the attack on 9/11 happened and he just got into office in 2001. He must have been one fast dude huh?
You don't have a clue. As I recall every president we have ever had since I been in the world, there is going to be some folks that don't like Demo's and some folks don't like Republicans, it's not new, so don't blame someone else's mess on someone that hasn't been in the chair for a few months. It took 2 terms of office for Bill Clinton to screw up along with his other half, I say that's more than enough time for someone to blink and wakeup.
Besides, Bush said he was gonna find the people and clan responsible for 9/11 and we have made some progress. But, some people are too worried about less important things. The President of the United States should not be a woman after all who will be the first LADY? Bill? Ha Ha, A woman running for president. Abraham Lincoln would roll over in his grave wouldn't he? BUsh is the Brave one, I can't think of anyone else that that can win this war except a Republican. A republican finishes what they started. A Democrate only runs way from it.
How can you trust yet another Clinton?

He stand for Change and I'm with that, and you should too!

Ok so I've come to the conclusion that I'm a republican but i can't find any good sites that will tell me anything about what the candidates believe in. I hate/love politics but like any voter I want to know what the person stands for before i vote for them and I haven't learned much.

Ralph Nader??? He lost his mind not too long after writing the book, "Unsafe at Any Speed". At one time he was a TRUE consumer advocate, now he's just a whack job who's stuck on himself. He became so off the wall in recent times that if his "platform" were adopted by our government, the U.N. would be ruling this country out of New York and American industry would be shut down completely. Of course, that's probably what the majority of Nader supporters would love to see anyway! Get a life. Go out and hug a tree... drink some Kool-Aide!

It's insulting that you didn't include Ralph Nader! I know he hasn't formally announced yet but I believe in my heart of hearts that he has as much a chance at winning the Presidency as McCain or Obama. Nader is truely a force of nature and I wreken that this year he is going to win over conservatives and liberals alike.