NY Times Projects Ron Paul As Clear Favorite To Win Iowa
 

Suck it,

Haters.

#Winning!

Flip a coin. 50/50 is now clear favorite. :1orglaugh

So, what does that mean? Huckabee won Iowa last time.

We're not talking about "last time," we're talking about the 2012 primaries and elections.

What does it mean? It means exactly what it says: that Ron Paul is the clear favorite to win Iowa.

glad to see you have seen beyond the left-right paradigm and are throwing your support behind a republican candidate.

He's technically a Libertarian who is running as a Republican because to get anywhere in this corrupt political system of ours you need to be on one of the two sides. He consistently criticizes both Republicans and Democrats.

He explains this in the first chapter of his book which I posted in a thread yesterday. I'll bump it to the top for you.

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1050701

uh-huh sure dude.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

If you read the thread it will help you understand his point of view. But since you refuse to read his writings then why do you even get involved in discussions about Ron Paul?

i understand what you are trying to say but i think you are deluding yourself.

I don't want you to understand what I'm saying, I want you to understand what Ron Paul says, but even when part of his book is right there for you to read you refuse to read it.

If you think government is gridlocked now, just wait and see what happens if Ron Paul gets in the White House.

Yeah, We shouldn't have gridlock. We should let the dopes pass all the laws restricting our freedoms as fast as possible:Oh crap....WAKE UP!

Most of these idiots want bigger government and bigger laws passed. They are the types that will eventually let the government put video cameras in their living rooms.

They already listen to us on our computers, cells and mics...
Ever talk about someone or email someone or txt someone and then a few days later you get a spam message with that person's name in the subject?

So what? You said he will be dead first.

You never read the AUP to your gmail, did you?

I said: He is "76 years old and about to die soon"

Soon is kind of a vague word. Did I say he would be dead before the primary elections? lol, no... maybe he will live to 79, maybe he will live to be 84. The point is he's old, and Americans frown on that when it comes to their president for some reason.

You keep saying "So what?" No one ever said in this thread that him being a clear favorite to win Iowa according to NY Times means or implies anything other than just that. That is "what."

So, why can you NEVER offer ANY suggestions on who you think would be a good running mate for him or who we should vote into congress so he can get anything done.

It is because you have NO CLUE, NO ANSWERS and are nothing but a talking puppet.

Really? Is that why? lol, sounds like you've got it all figured out.

I have you figured out, that was easy.

could not have said it any better myself LOL -

suck it haters

He's going to have to wait until the Alex Jones/Jeff Rense types suggests one.

making iowa more irrelevant than ever.

I came up with a formula that says there's a 97% chance Elvis Presley will win Iowa. Scientific polls are overrated, but I used a couple in my formula anyway so that the Elivsbots can pretend it's legitimate and spread my name all over the internet.

Posted from your iphone on top of someones roof. LOL

ouch!
who are you again?
have someone point me out at Xbiz (anyone) and we can both see who we're talking to.
I'm sure I won't be surprized.:1orglaugh

Ad Hominem attack. Lame. :winkwink:

Looks like someone's superior intellect is failing them