There is no more justification for him to stay in the race, although the liberal media (who has always pretended that his popularity was far greater than it actually is) seems to think otherwise.

Paul supporters always say that the media ignores Paul.

I think he has a lot of support, very vocal support. It's just not enough to ever win primaries or caucuses.

Paul supporters always say that the media ignores Paul.

I think he has a lot of support, very vocal support. It's just not enough to ever win primaries or caucuses.

According to Paul, his strongest precinct didn't even caucus because the Maine establishment didn't want a headline Romney loses. That fake Iowa win was important, and Santorum being crowned winner came too late. What would have been the effect if Romney lost Maine on top of last week's losses? That's why, according to Paul, his strongest county didn't caucus.

Paul, like Jesse Jackson, Pat Buchanan and every other candidate who was more about his issues than winning should of course stay in the race. Agree or disagree with Paul, but it is his anti-war stance that will tilt the republican party away from a war a day to keep the Ayatollah away philosophy. Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party who is anti-war and that is a voice that deserves to be heard from now til doomsday. And it is a disgrace he is the only anti-war candidate because he is a fringe nut on so many issues. He is the only candidate that will tell people the US overthrew the elected Iranian government in 1953 and set up a puppet dictatorship so of course when they had a revolution they would hate us. And he is the only candidate who will tell people "Iran wants nukes because we did not attack North Korea". His justification for staying in the race is because he has truth to say on many subjects.

(Ok, he is an Israel-hating, white supremacist and a whack job who would probably destroy the country as he shut down every piece of government he could find, but nobody's perfect)

Edited February 14, 201213 yr by quartermainefan

The fact that Obama will win MI in November is hardly something for the Democrats to brag about either, given that the state last voted for a GOP presidential nominee in 1988. The "common knowledge" that MI is a swing state is total bullshit; the only reason why it even has a Republican governor is because 2010 was a wave GOP year (and a Republican wasn't elected to the Senate since 1994).

Unfortunately, I do believe that Romney will be delusional and make a major play for MI in the general election; he'd even do so if he had zero ties to the state.

I agree. When it comes to presidential elections, we are a blue state, not a "swing state". And according to this article, Romney has one field office in Michigan and relying on tv/radio ads. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/down-in-michigan-polls-romney-needs-to-find-his-base/.

A Republican can't win in Michigan with strategy. A Democrat, probably, but not a Republican. Most of the population in Michigan is in the SE (Detroit, Flint, Lansing, Ann Arbor areas), which is also where most the Democrats & unions support is, so a Democrat can plaster the radio * tv air waves in the SE and hit most of their base, the Republican base isn't in the SE, it's most of the rest of the state, which is rural. To win you have to drive up the vote in those rural areas and to do that, you have to go to as many of small towns that have populations of 2-5k and knock on as many doors as possible.

And his new OPT ED in the Detroit News won't help either: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120214/OPINION01/202140336/Romney-op-ed-Taxpayers-should-get-GM-shares-proceeds?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

He can drink Vernors and Faygo pop till his teeth rot and talk about his dad being President of American Motors all he wants, Mr. Romney, you may have been born here, but you are no son of Detroit.

Here we go again. I don't even think this is political, it goes far beyond that, but...

Various superpowered religious organizations are going to push harder than ever for legislation that will let an employer deny any medical treatment if it goes against their religious liberty.

This is not too far off from having people die if they aren't the right kind of person, which already happens, and is probably fine with many out there.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-contraception-catholicstre81d219-20120214,0,5218603.story

Here we go again. I don't even think this is political, it goes far beyond that, but...

Various superpowered religious organizations are going to push harder than ever for legislation that will let an employer deny any medical treatment if it goes against their religious liberty.

This is not too far off from having people die if they aren't the right kind of person, which already happens, and is probably fine with many out there.

http://www.chicagotr...0,5218603.story

Absolutely unbelievable! I'm glad I live in a country where things like this aren't even an issue.

Big celebrity endorsement for Santorum.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/megadeth-frontman-mustaine-endorses-rick-santorum.php

Well, Kelly Clarkson's endorsement of Ron Paul was meaningless. (Although it did upset some of her liberal fans.)

Edited February 16, 201213 yr by Max

Speaking of Ron Paul, there is an increasing controversy in Maine about the legitimacy of the caucus.

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/f4086f9d33164f1cbdf2cc09fbf89f02/ME--Maine-Caucuses/

http://www.mpbn.net/Home/tabid/36/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3478/ItemId/20308/Default.aspx

Santorum's social issues...dear lawrd.......the guy is just ugh.....who are the stupid people supporting this guy?

I just heard this guy who backs santorum say on AM that women should put bayer aspirin in between their legs for birth control. I mean, is this who the people of this counry want to be their next POTUS?

It looks like it's time for Nikki Haley, Susanna Martinez, and other media stars to come out and tell us how much the GOP loves women. In one day, they are told to put aspirin between their legs, told they dress like whores, and are barred from speaking on a panel due to lack of experience.

http://2012.talkingp...day.php?ref=fpa

Edited February 17, 201213 yr by CarlD2

Santorum's social issues...dear lawrd.......the guy is just ugh.....who are the stupid people supporting this guy?

Romney is the same. Santorum is just more outspoken.

Romney is the same. Santorum is just more outspoken.

Oh I know they are one in the same...they are both awful.....Santorum reminds me of one of those geeks in school who got their underwear stolen in PE class...lol

Oh I know they are one in the same...they are both awful.....Santorum reminds me of one of those geeks in school who got their underwear stolen in PE class...lol

The whole primary has been a bad high school nightmare.

Oh I know they are one in the same...they are both awful.....Santorum reminds me of one of those geeks in school who got their underwear stolen in PE class...lol

LOL....and Gingrich was the chubby kid that everybody picked on, Romney was the cool kid who acted like the Fonzn (but no one ever took seriously), and Paul was the loner who was always on the outside looking in.