/20~ p@\/1 and talk radio
This morning, the local talk radio was running a poll on presidential candidates. /20~ p@\/1 was leading the pack by a huge margin. Then, the host said something like these /20~ p@\/1 people must be out texting and emailing and getting the word out about this poll. Then /20~ p@\/1 supporters called to tell the host that, no, that’s not what happened.
My thoughts are that supporters of /20~ p@\/1 are very likely politically active and aware. As such, they’re probably just more likely to listen to those types of radio shows.
And if Fred Thompson doesn’t get his shit together soon, I may be forced to vote for /20~ p@\/1.
December 17th, 2007 at 10:37 am
I’m hoping that Fred! is simply waiting for all the other candidates to experience the withering heat of the spotlight. Think about it. Rudy was “guaranteed”. Then, after a bit of scrutiny Romney took over the “inevitable” spot. Upon closer inspection, he fizzled. Now it’s the Huckster’s turn.
I’m thinking he’s waiting to be last in line for a reason. At least I hope so. At this moment, he’s the only one I’d vote for (Paul will not get the nomination and will run as an Independent. Guaranteed).
If it’s not Thompson, then let the GOP waste another election – /20~ can have my vote.
December 17th, 2007 at 11:19 am
doesn’t it feel good to support an honest man Uncle?
December 17th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
I’m supporting Paul as he’s the most staunch advocate of liberty, period. Hell, look again at those gun-control quotes.
December 17th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Let’s not get carried away here. I haven’t selected a candidate to back yet and won’t until I see what the actual party platforms are going to say.
Picking a candidate now, on the basis of supposed firm support for the 2A, makes no more sense than the feminist POV of picking only candidates who support abortion rights.
Let’s not fall into the hypocrite’s trap here, people. Our selection for President must be carefully cast for someone who can do the WHOLE job of protecting the culture, so let’s widen our perspectives a bit.
December 17th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
I’m not a hypocrite, I just realize that someone who does not respect our Second Amendment rights will NOT do the WHOLE job of protecting the culture.
L. Neil Smith explained it here, in his essay “Why Did It Have to Be … Guns?”
December 17th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
There, fixed it for ya. 🙂
December 17th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
Nice straw man tgirsch! FAIL.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
I turn 18 just in time for this election. Personally, I would love a Thompson – p@\/1 ticket, especially if I could vote for them over Clinton and whatever (other) power-seeker she winds up running with. Unfortunately, it looks like neither big party will field an acceptable candidate.
In the nearer term, I need to decide whether to vote in the R or D primary. It would be good to vote for Fred, but it is awfully tempting to register D to get their mail and vote against Hillary.
December 18th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
You can say it’s an unfair criticism (you’d be wrong), but I don’t see how you can call it a “straw man.”
In any case, in case I wasn’t clear, I was merely putting out there that p@\/1 is a racist, not that LibertyPlease (or anyone else here) supports him for that reason…