Willard Mitt Romney

Gary Johnson

Jill Stein

Virgil Goode

Other

None of the Above

Really, was the Hussein necessary? Do Gary Johnson, Jill Stein or Virgil Goode, not have middle names?
At least you listed all four of None Above's names.

I expect they do have middle names, but I don't know what they are offhand and I'm too lazy to look them up.

And what's wrong with the name 'Hussein' anyway? Are you an Umayyad or Kharijite or something?

Hey now, have you ever seen "Willard"? It's an old movie but that name carries baggage too! "I was good to you Ben!"

I'm curious as to what distinguishes "other" from "none of the above" as seperate categories.

Well, since "other" is above "none of the above", that would indicate that "none of the above" means you aren't picking anyone. You are abstaining. Could be that you are an anarchist. Or could be that you don't feel well enough informed to pick.

That's my interpretation in any case.

"I'm curious as to what distinguishes "other" from "none of the above" as seperate categories."

Those probably should've been combined. My mistake.

The problem is that people who call him Barrack Hussein Obama are doing so almost exclusively to call attention to his heritage in order to manipulate the subconscious racist biases people have, and to the idea that people believe Obama to be a Muslim (and thus unfit for public office). So yeah you also gave Mitt Romney's full name, but the fact is, neither "Willard" nor "Mitt" sound particularly scary and foreign and Muslim to white Americans.

Wow...two for Gary Johnson?

And, as much as I despise the man and just about his entire platform...

Why the lack of Ron Paul in the voting? I mean, he won't win, and I suppose putting his name is almost an instant invitation to a 200+ flame war back and forth between the Ronpaullites and Anti-Paulians, but still...

Mafia, as someone who is frequently accused of being a Secret Muslim myself, I don't find BHO's middle name or his heritage at all objectionable. Names like "Willard" and "Mitt" make Romney sound like an out-of-touch country club elitist, though.

"Why the lack of Ron Paul in the voting?"

Ron Paul has announced himself out of the running this year.

Simple fact:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

I thought "other" would mean a write in.

I was mistaken on this too, but Ron Paul is still running; he just doesn't have the funds to continue campaigning.

Also, Mitt Romney has been lying to us about his first name! Actually i don't really care, and while generally people who say Obama's full name do want to point the Hussein part out, it shouldn't have to be that way. We should be able to live in a world it won't matter if we say his middle name; the only way that kind of thing happens, is if we aren't afraid to say it.. If people don't like him because of his middle name, then so be it; they probably already didn't like him. That's my idealistic/Harry Potter side talking.

You're referring to his first announcement, wherein he said he would not campaign in upcoming primary states, which was followed by a hasty clarification that he was not dropping out. Subsequent announcements have said that he wouldn't pour resources into upcoming caucuses and conventions, either, and that the campaign is essentially over but that he still wanted all his delegates to make their appearance in Tampa (so long as they are "polite" and "respectful" to the people that have been actively screwing them over all year) even though he acknowledges that Romney has the nomination locked up.

All the announcements have been big let-downs to the Paulistas, and coupled with Rand's endorsement of Willard, have taken a lot of wind out of the sails of the r3VOLution unfortunately.

^*Reads the above, puts on his best Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka impression*--

"No...stop...come back..."

;)

Well, the wind will be back in the next time there's an open GOP presidential primary race, or Romney wins this year but screws up disastrously. There are two types of people who support Ron Paul and lay claim to the libertarian title. First, the looking-glass version of the left's professional protesters, screaming End the Fed and other such nonsense instead of End the War and other such nonsense. The second group consists of libertarian Republicans, who believe in economic liberty and don't think the government should be setting social policy. The Culture Warriors are dying, and libertarians will do the GOP what the conservatives did to the party in the 1970s. It's just a matter of time. Bet that Rand Paul will be somewhere on the ticket in 2016 or 2020.

Invictus, if it weren't for Ron Paul's "looking-glass" meaningless 434-1 stands and tirades against the Forever Wars and the Fed on the House floor, no one would know or care about him now, and he would be retiring as just another anonymous Republican congressman. There would have been no Revolution, and the Beltwaytarians at Cato and elsewhere who scoff at Dr. Paul would be as meaningless and irrelevant as... they remain today.

...why is Obama the top here?

I guess you can't read. I was talking about his supporters.

Paul was always in love with Romney. His whole campaign was about running interference for Romney.

"I guess you can't read. I was talking about his supporters."

I'm wondering why you think there's some huge separation between the two.

"Paul was always in love with Romney. His whole campaign was about running interference for Romney."

No, Romney was simply the only Republican running smart enough to realize it was not a good idea to tick off hundreds of thousands of very politically motivated Ron Paul supporters, and Dr. Paul was nice enough to show some respect and courtesy to someone who had shown him the same. Probably not what I would've been done had I been in his shoes, but I'm not going to fault Dr. Paul for being a decent human being and treating others as they have treated him.

@ Tolstoy - Good for you. But just because you may not have been intending to play off people's racist baises, that doesn't mean the things you say don't have that effect.

That's not to say that Barack Obama's middle name should NEVER be mentioned or anything, but in a question designed as an opinion poll, calling attention to his middle name could be construed as you attempting to skew the result, whether that is your intent or not. And in the question "Who do you prefer for president?", "Barack Obama" or even just "Obama" would suffice.

@urallLESBIANS - "If people don't like him because of his middle name, then so be it; they probably already didn't like him." Ummm people who consciously decided they hated him because of his middle name, yes. But even adamant anti-racists still score high in experiments that test for unconscious racial bias.

Errr that makes it sound like all adamant anti-racists score high in these experiments. That's not what I meant to say and will almost certainly be misconstrued, despite this clarification. A more accurate way of phrasing that would be to say even some people who consider themselves opposed to racism score high in these experiments.

Bumperoni.

Middle names are stupid.

Ul. Y. Tau

You might have just solved a great mystery of Czechoslovakian film.

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

Or rather not.