Ron Paul is running second in the overall popular vote in the GOP primaries, and second in the delegate count. Why are you writing him off, but talking up Santorum - who has no support outside the Christian fundamentalist wing of the Republican party (which is completely irrelevant in most of the country)?

The GOP trotting out Santorum as VP nominee would be suicidal. The man is a complete and utter bigot, they would be better off with Palin as running mate again.

If Iowa were relevant, this discussion might be relevant...but it's one small state.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/polls-south-carolina-primary-tightening-hours-before-crucial-debate/

Newt is done? Funny...he's running 30% in South Carolina and gaining fast on Romney. That WHACK-JOB Ron Paul is at 11%, and Santorum is at 10%...before Perry dropped out.

And it will be different still in the next state.

Not sure what country you people live in that you actually believe one or two states will decide the election.

I still can't rap my head around the blatant hatred for Ron Paul. He's the only non-Neoconservative, non-warmongering choice we have. Every other candidate is ready to sell out for Corporate America so the war profiteers can cash in.

I don't know shit about economics and I will admit I'm not quite sure the implications of RP's economic policies, but the wealth is aggregating in this country at a phenomenal rate and it's going to the people who are manipulating the market in the first place (the banksters/wallstreeters/lobbyists/corps.) ...and those same people work to keep that structure in place.

Anyways, on my original point... isn't HATE a bit of a strong word for a man who lives his life fighting for peoples rights?

"Why are you writing him off, but talking up Santorum - who has no support outside the Christian fundamentalist wing of the Republican party (which is completely irrelevant in most of the country)?"

I'm taking Santorum as the VP candidate on Romney's ticket.

Romney is the Businessman GOP Member, Santorum the Religious GOP Member...

Romney/Santorum as a ticket makes sense.

Ron Paul IS still #2 in the polls, but I don't see him ousting Romney at this point, and I can't see him accepting a VP offer, especially by Romney...

So Santorum's not isn't a knock at Ron Paul's popularity, but rather, recognizing which two GOP candidates might make the most sense together and which might make the strongest GOP ticket.

Moneybags will probably pick Chris "Something's Going Down, Sweetie" Christie. Hilarious DNC ads will commence.

And LOL apparently Iowa Repugs now say Assjuice won Iowa.

I don't get it, I heard Herman Cain was at 5% and rising in polls, will he make a come-back? That's a way more interesting topic than finding out which soft landing home Santorum will have.

there's no way santorum would be vp, he lost in pennsylvania by twenty points in 2006 and even establishment Republicans would regard putting him on the ticket as a horrible idea. he's a neocon, socon holdover from the bush years, and independents seem to hate his type of politician most of all; rubio, mcdonnel, maybe christie, maybe jindal, maybe even ryan are the likely choices.

"And LOL apparently Iowa Repugs now say Assjuice won Iowa."

Very hard to try and see you as an intelligent person to have a conversation with when you resort to childish name-calling, Putin...and not even clever name-calling...

I hate Ron Paul...but I at least refer to him by name...

"there's no way santorum would be vp, he lost in pennsylvania by twenty points in 2006 and even establishment Republicans would regard putting him on the ticket as a horrible idea. he's a neocon, socon holdover from the bush years, and independents seem to hate his type of politician most of all;"

But he's now won/tied two states, and represents the appeal to the Far-Right that Romney doesn't...that's why I think he works as a VP the same way Biden was made VP, ie, to show experience and appeal to the Left...Obama in 2008 and Romney in 2012 are left to try and grab independents themselves (though truth be told, it's more of an Obama vs. Paul showdown for indies if Paul keeps running, Romney as a candidate appeals to older voters, and most indies are younger.)

I think many actual, non-evangelical/non-Religious Right conservatives do not like santorum, and they already do not like romney, and thus this would be a ticket that would really turn off the majority of the GOP electorate. I believe Romney will make a play for a more conservative vp to placate the base.

"but I at least refer to him by name..."

I'll call him by name when he ceases to be a hateful, nasty, bloodthirsty, gay hating little bigot.

"But he's now won/tied two states"

Huh? What was the other state? You're just making stuff up.

"that's why I think he works as a VP the same way Biden was made VP, ie, to show experience and appeal to the Left."

Uh, Biden didn't appeal to the left. I almost didn't vote for Obama in 2008 because he picked that clown as VP. Biden is a warmongering thug with the IQ of Dan Quayle who is an embarrassment to the party.

Obi, he is referring to this: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=santorum

I'm an outsider, so I may not know as much as you people, but to me it looks like that the GOP is falling apart. You have the evangelicals, the Teabaggers, those who aren't so crazy, Paulites, etc.

Largeham is perceptive. The destruction of the GOP began in 2008 with the nomination of McCain. The tea party is the dying gasp of the Reagan revolution. The nomination of Romney will be the end of conservatism as an ideological trend as the crazies beat the GOP into a dozen pieces.

"I hate Ron Paul..."

Anyone who puts the American people ahead of Israel's government is no one worthy of hate.

^
1. I'm not saying a candidate should do that

2. Ummm...so does that mean that if I were a KKK member and truly felt I was putting America (White America, of course) ahead of Israel, *I* Wouldn't be worthy of hate?

I see a problem with this logic...

please reread my statement...

I read it just fine the first time, thanks.

FIRST, I didn't say a candidate should put another nation ahead of Aemrica...

SECOND, doing waht he's supposed to do, ie, putting Aemrica first, doesn't wow me with Paul...sort of like giving an award to a fifth grader just for getting a "C" and not beating the other kids up...sorry, that's what you're supposed to do MINIMUM as a CITIZEN...that doesn't make you a great Presidential candidate, and

THIRD, as far as the "hate" factor goes...again, your premise, "Anyone who puts America over Israel isn't worthy of hate," seems to be, in the first place, rather USA-centric and egoistical in that sense, and in the second, again, faulty logic:

I can be a HORRIBLE person, morally, and still put my nation's needs ahead of the needs of others for any number of reasons...

explains Darwyns love for stormfront and the neo-nazi movement in general

Neo-Nazis and Libertarians go together like peas & carrots.

A majority of the under-30 GOP crowd went libertarian. War's over, we win. Libertarian vs Progressive for the next generation of politics... looking forward to it.

Also, Paul's got enough national support and money to stay in the race for a while, not sure how he's being written off.

I always find it highly amusing that an enthusiastic admirer of some of the greatest (and most recent) mass murderers of human history constantly feels the need to make damning moral judgments and unfavorable comparisons about the character of others (whom he has never met) in an internet forum.

I think we're looking at Romney as the nominee, Christie as the running mate.

"Mass murderers". Yeah, well, I would say that too if my family fought for the fascists in WWII. Especially if I had a habit of rewriting history in their favor (ahem, Rothbard & Harry Elmer Barnes) and making apologies for the fact that the Mises Institute and the Ron Paul "movement" is replete with Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Please never lecture anyone on moral compasses ever again.

"A majority of the under-30 GOP crowd went libertarian"

According to the Cato Institute only 2% of Americans identify as Libertarian. Keep dreaming.

Those stats don't exactly overlap, dear. First we have to cut it in half, approximately, 'cause the country seems to split more or less 50-50 (maybe a little bit more in favor of the Dems). Then you take the under-30 crowd, which is seriously outnumbered by the over-30 crowd. We're not there yet, but we'll get there.

Yeah we've dealt with all of these. The first is particularly gauling considering more Soviet women were raped and the Germans spent most of their time killing Soviet POWs while a quite high percentage of German POWs lived. Soviets had to look at German perfectly kept up houses after the Germans went on a genocidal binge in which whole villages were wiped off the map and Jewish cadre were shot on sight by the Einsatzgruppen.

Ukrainian leaders and historians don't even acknowledge that the "Holodomor" happened, so good luck with blaming a natural disaster on Soviet leadership.

Nice try, PE. Why don't you speak out against libs hanging out with neo-Nazis and stop with your trite anti-communism?

What about the Great Purge, putin?