Supporter Cries Foul Over Ron Paul’s Exclusion from Yahoo! Games Candidate Recap

As GamePolitics has noted, Yahoo! Games issued a summary this week detailing its view of where the top three candidates from both parties stand on video game issues.

Left out of the Republican mix was Ron Paul. Yahoo! instead rated John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, who are, in fairness, the leading vote-getters at this point in the primary cycle.

The exclusion of Internet favorite Paul left a bad taste in the mouth of at least one Libertarian blogger. In a piece for Nolan Chart, "Big Louie" writes:

In a strange move to… Yahoo Feature article writer Ben Silverman doesn’t mention the one candidate who believes in freedom, especially for the digital world (Internet, video games, TV, etc).


What could have they have been thinking? Congressman Paul is the ONLY candidate we can depend on to NOT regulate the Internet and guarantee our First Amendment Rights.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Grombar ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Er, what date has Obama set on his “timetables to get us out of the war”?

    June 2009. Sounds reasonable.

    There’s no logistical way to get our troops out “now.” Do you know the process that goes into moving that many troops halfway around the world? Even if we started today, we’d still have men there a year from now.

    Terrible Tom said:

    I understand that his platform isn’t going to be one everyone will agree with but at least its honest and at least it isn’t promoting ideas that have been tried before and don’t work at all.

    Yes it is. He wants exactly the economy we had a hundred years ago, when factories had no regulations and workers slaved away on hazardous machines six-and-a-half days a week for chump change, which they used to rent ramshackle buildings (no building codes) and eat food that wasn’t fit for vermin (no FDA).

    Ron Paul says that, in a free market, everyone would treat each other fairly even if no one was there to make sure of it. But one look back at the Industrial Revolution is all it takes to prove him wrong.

  2. 0
    Prof. Stepelevich says:

    Father time — er, what date has Obama set on his “timetables to get us out of the war”? Maybe like “when things get better”? That’s Bush’s platform. Only one candidate in either party, Ron Paul, says it straight: NOW is the time. The other candidates seem intent upon focusing their attention on some vague date sometime in the future — perhaps even 100 years in the future. Iraq might well become another Korea, you know, the place where we have troops stationed for over a half-century to protect Japan. I’ll bet McCain would argue that our warranties on our Toyotas would be invalid if the North Koreans invaded and conquered Japan — wake up sleepy Sheepies.

  3. 0
    Father Time ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @James A.

    Let’s see Obama said he wouldn’t support censorship. He proposed timetables to get us out of the war. And he’s black. So there goes all your moronic ‘reasons’ to not vote democratic (and you act like any republican other than Ron Paul will get us out of the war, preposterous).

  4. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Every government has failed over time. Kingdoms come and go. Predicting a failure of a government without a timeframe is an easy prediction. Without a timeframe it’s an utterly worthless prediction.

    What backs gold?

    There is nothing more inherent in the value of gold than there is in the value of paper money. It’s just the perception that gold has value and nothing about the metal itself. Let’s face it, if you are going to hoard any metal for an upcoming war it should be steel. Easy to work, recycle and hard to dent. Steel, at the end of times, is going to be far more valuable than gold.


    That’s upsetting to think that the IRS would come in with AK-47’s and not good, American built M16’s. But it wouldn’t fit in with the whole commie pinko theme. But it’s nice to see the homophobia and anti-semitism in their too.

  5. 0
    Grombar ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Ron Paul has made all kinds of loony, inaccurate predictions over the years. Here’s one where he predicts that the new dollar bills they started printing in the 90s would be used to spy on people and destroy us all (and he charged people to tell them that):

    Let’s not forget how closely he works with Gary North, who sold books on how to survive the inevitable diaster of Y2K.

    Face it, the guy attracts so many loons because he is one.

  6. 0
    Terrible Tom ( User Karma: -1 ) says:

    The federal reserve is going to crush the economy. The free market must be working.

    How is just printing money out of thin air some how more acceptable than having some kind of asset to back all of your notes? He is sane, it is insane to think we can continue in this system for very much longer. It is a miracle it has lasted this long. He has always said EVENTUALLY IT WILL END. He isn’t saying it will in 10 years or 20 years, but eventually if we continue down this road we will have a great fall.

  7. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Yes, it’s wrong to agree with a smart person because they are smart. They have to have some special expertise in the field in quesiton otherwise it’s called an appeal to authority. If you support Ron Paul do so because you believe his issue are right and not because you think smart people support him. Nuts also support him. Which is not all that odd since you can find a nut supporting anyone. You can find smart people supporting anyone too. The problem is that Ron Paul has more than his fair share of nuts if you want to use his “judge a man by his friends”. Given his racist newsletter that his friends wrote for him, or so he says now, that’s not really a wise policy.

    Ron Paul has been predicting that the US will hit bottom for years. In the 80’s, 90’s and now well into the 2000’s. He will be doing it til he gets elected and then, assuming he can get his reforms passed, will make it happen. The gold standard will flat out crush the economy, make most people homeless, throw the world into a depression and thus start who knows how many wars. Judge Ron Paul by what he says, the racist, homophobic and xenophobic stuff that bears his name, and the economic policy he puts forth.

    What Ron Paul does show is that there is room for a more libertarian (don’t tax, don’t spend) GOP than the current tax and spend Republicans. And that is a good thing. You get someone who is, well, sane, and you might have a winner.

  8. 0
    Jason says:

    If you can judge a man by his friends, why can’t you judge a candidate by his supporters? In my case, a very informed, knowledgeable friend of mine turned me on to Ron Paul. In sifting through the crazies (because any moron with a keyboard or camera can post something, as this site proves), I found some very smart people, who are passionate and willing to share it. Same thing with Obama. Some very smart people backing him. Is it wrong to agree with with a smart person?

  9. 0
    Terrible Tom ( User Karma: -1 ) says:

    Democrats generally support bigger government which implies reduced amount of civil liberty. Unfortunately, the neo-conservative republicans are pretty much going to also give you a bigger government with less civil liberty. They are just going in slightly different directions.

    James A., I hope you are not implying that the Civil War was actually about slavery. Anyone who knows their history will understand that it was about state rights. Slavery was part of the issue but the reason the war started was because the federal government wanted to take rights away from states. I have no idea why Abe Lincoln is celebrated as a hero, he didn’t free the slaves. It is a totally preposterous notion and nearly everyone believes it to be true.

    -Jes- Actually the rest of the world would vote for Ron Paul. Do a bit of research and you’ll find that to be absolutely true.

    Fact of the matter is, regardless of how Democrats and Neo-conservative Republicans are similar due to their desire to expand government and reduce civil liberty, Democrats take a LOT more special interest money. They are not going to represent the average citizens, you and I. Democrats are going to serve the people who have given them all that money to win the election. Ron Paul is literally the only candidate that doesn’t take special interest money but rather just has a bunch of supporters that organize their own fund raising efforts for him. These million dollar days the Ron Paul supporters are responsible for are from multiple small donations. These are average people giving him what they can, when they can. He’ll probably get 2 million today from the people of this country as today is another mini-money bomb day and the 3rd will also be one, because he needs more money to spend for feb 5th.

    Ron Paul is unique. He is the only candidate that actually stands out and boy does he stand out. His ideas seem radical and crazy but if you really do some research you’ll understand it is much better than the road we are currently traveling. I understand that his platform isn’t going to be one everyone will agree with but at least its honest and at least it isn’t promoting ideas that have been tried before and don’t work at all. You can’t just throw money at problems and expect them to go away(Democrats), you can’t continue fighting illegal undeclared wars and not expect it to bite you in the ass later(Republicans), you can’t solve illegal immigration with amnesty or by building a wall(Democrats/Republicans), and you can’t continue to allow the fed print money out of thin air(Democrats/Republicans). When things finally hit bottom, Ron Paul probably won’t be around to say “I told you so!”. But hopefully his son, Rand Paul, will. The Iraq war will come back to haunt us and we will have a major economic problem(as if we don’t already). Just wait and see.

  10. 0
    James A. says:

    mogbert Says:

    “While soliciting opinions on the different candidates from others in my office, everyone had the same thing to say about Ron Paul; “Who?””

    Why do you suppose that is, mogbert? Why do you think your little flatass office buddies don’t know who Ron Paul is? Is it his fault? Is it his supporters’ fault? Why do you think people don’t know who Ron Paul is?

    Do YOU even know anything about Ron Paul? Actually, better question: do you even vote, or just like to have an opinion?

  11. 0
    Phoenix, Filmmaker says:

    @ DCOW

    If you’re Canadian…why does this concern you anyways? I believe you have just admitted that your opinion doesn’t matter in this debate.

  12. 0
    Phoenix, Filmmaker says:

    @ DCOW

    Perhaps you don’t mind if your first amendment rights are taken away, but I’ll take that “snowballs chance in hell” of keeping mine.

    @ Eric

    Actually, that was Huckabee.

  13. 0
    ZippyDSMlee ( User Karma: -1 ) says:

    The whole system is broken, when a candidate that is still pounding the pavement dose not get fair and equal time. its a god damn insult to the nation and the electoral process.

  14. 0
    kurisu7885 says:


    Or, sorry, I didn’t know. I guess that is nore directed atthose supporters who either blindly support or whien about any tiem he wasn’t in an article.

  15. 0
    Terrible Tom ( User Karma: -1 ) says:

    Just so you guys know, the USA isn’t a democracy. It never was and wasn’t even intended to be. Maybe it has a democratic process in which we elect our representatives. But by definition we are a Constitutional Republic.

  16. 0
    Terrible Tom ( User Karma: -1 ) says:

    Anyone who claims to know the outcome or a good prediction of the outcome of any election has lost any credibility to me. Sorry, you have a guess but you DO NOT KNOW. No matter what reasons you state, what polls you cite you do not have a clue. Its hard to give people respect that have this mindset. Its just stupid, there is no other way around it.

    Honestly, it is people in this mindset, along with people that claim not voting for republican/democrat is a wasted vote, that are a HUGE part of the problem in terms of America’s unreliable election process. It has gotten out of hand. Who is left that actually votes for who they think will be the best person for the job rather than the person who is better than the worst choice. Why pick whats better than wrong over what you believe is right? American voters have lost all of their common sense, all of their values and all of their credibility because of this foolish and shameful mindset. It is frightening how much America would rather vote to make sure someone else doesn’t win rather than just voting for who they believe in.

    Disgusting. He is left out but really why shouldn’t GP cover this?

    I’d much rather read articles on RP rather than JT. Honestly, I just don’t read the JT articles anymore. JT sues A for because of X. A = Person/Company X = Bullshit reason. Its really boring and predictable. Its like playing Pac Man after you’ve memorized all the patterns.

  17. 0
    DCOW ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    hah. your such a joke.

    same goes for john reading.

    I actually am your average GP poster, and I have been for quite a while. I’ve been here since before this site was in wordpress form.

    @nathaniel Edwards

    amen man. a-f–king-men.

  18. 0
    Nathaniel Edwards ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Can we just agree not to run any more stories about Ron Paul so that we don’t get such rough debates in the comments? This story shouldn’t even be a story. Ron Paul supporters get mad every time he gets left out of something, so it’s not news that they did so this time as well.

  19. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    From –

    He has “no idea” who wrote, in his newsletter “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.”

    He has “no idea”? If he can’t find out who said what in such a small office that was his newsletter then either he is incompetent or he is lying. Everyone else knows who wrote it. Ron Paul is responsible for everything that came from his newsletter with his name on it. He now is trying to deny responsibility for it.

    Reason Magazine shares the general Libertarian ideals as Ron Paul and they can’t stand him. This isn’t a hit piece by the “MSM” because nobody could call Reason Magazine main stream media. I’m sure there will be some vast conspiracy that will be raised to explain why this is an issue but he doesn’t deny that such things were said in his newsletter just that he isn’t responsible for it.

    Ron Paul puts riders in bills that send pork barrel projects to his state and then votes against it to say that he votes against bills that spend (they pass over his no vote) despite the fact that his pen wrote the spending. So yes, lets judge him by his hypocritical voting.

  20. 0
    chadachada(123) ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @John Reading

    Continuing with what you’re saying, many Americans today only vote for what the media portrays as the front runner, which for Republicans is Romney. DCOW clearly isn’t your average GP poster, and probably wouldn’t mind if his rights were taken away if the media portrayed it as “ok.” We gotta watch out for his type, and try to educate him a bit…

  21. 0
    Elizabeth says:

    DCOW… (hmmm)… anyway, every candidate has odd acting supporters. Some people are more passionate then others. You should be worried more about the ambivalent then those that are ardent. You’ll always have a few that go too far. Look at the Hillary supporter who wanted to get health care so held up her office. Maybe growing up and looking at the issues and the true condition of our country then comparing those to the candidates stances might prove a better way to pick a candidate then by what you think of an ardent or even several ardent supporters.

  22. 0
    Eric J. Greif ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Ron Paul certainly looks attractive as a candidate that will protect the first amendment, but in the past, Paul has stated some things that are horribly racist in his newsletter. Additionally, it has been shown that he has accepted funds from, a white supremacy organization. Despite his appearance of championing first amendment rights, he is likely to ruin civil rights in our nation.

  23. 0
    L.Step says:

    Perhaps right, Paul might not have a snowball’s chance in Hell to be either nominated or elected — but we can assured that if such as McCain and his good old Zionist pal Lieberman are elected Iran will be invaded, that there will be more body bags, and the last of our money will vanish into that damned stinkng religious cesspool in and about Israel

  24. 0
    Father Time ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    You should judge a candidate on what he believes not what his supporters act like (since the more extreme supporters are usually more vocal).

    Here’s my view on Ron Paul.

    I would not want him as president but I think he’d be perfect as a supreme court judge.

  25. 0
    DCOW ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I love the people that are obviously first time posters that are trying to make ron paul seem better than he is.

    I judge a politician by the kind of supporters he has. and ron paul’s supporters definately fail.

  26. 0
    Jeff says:

    I can’t believe American citizens have become so ignorant not to notice what is happening during these debates.

    There is no doubt that if “Ron Paul” is NOT a threat to monied interests in this country (in receiving their tax sponsored corporate welfare…..why would they decide to exclude him?

    Obviously he is a threat to their free money & ability to then spend it with lobbyists to pass even more legistlation that benefits them directly.

    If Ron Paul has such a low amount of support, why did the mainstream media have no problem pushing someone with no support (Guiliani was supposedly a wrapup for the Republican nomination !)

    Democrats are exactly the same as most republicans these days. Bought & paid for.

  27. 0
    BmK ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It’s really too bad there is no candidate with a social/civil libertarian view and a moderate economic/fiscal view. Laze Fair Capitalism is extreme and i disagree with libertarians on that point but i do agree with the libertarians on the social/civil views.
    There has to be some form of taxes and social programs and limits put on big greedy corporations. On the other hand i do believe in private property and debt reduction, and i am against wasteful spending.

  28. 0
    TheTrueMrJack says:

    “The MSM is scarred that they will have to pay more attention to him now that the fairweather candidates have fallen off. Ron Paul has raised more money from more supporters than any other candidate in history.

    But hey what do facts matter in a fantasy world”

    And you’d expect him to be in first place because of this, but he isn’t. In fact, he’s last amongs the republicans (not 100% sure but I HAVE to be close).

  29. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The marketplace of ideas have rejected those of Ron Paul and yet the exclusion in debates on forums not owned by Ron Paul results in wild conspiricy statements and a fundamental attack against free speech. Fox is well within their free speech rights to hold a debate and exclude Ron Paul and something that Ron Paul supporters should defend.

  30. 0
    chadachada(123) ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Um…what are we saying that is so whiny? I for one am a Ron Paul supporter (or rather, highly dislike Romney, Hillary and Edwards) and would like to hear your reasons for why/how we are being so annoying that you feel the need to tell us to grow up.

  31. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Ron Paul is to the Republicans as Lyndon LaRouche is to the Democrats.

    While Ron Paul might have the right idea on games his economic policy will ensure that nobody will be able to afford them or even afford to make them.

  32. 0
    JustChris says:

    People don’t vote Ron Paul even if they like him or his ideas. Because our electoral system is flawed, we only get one choice and voting for Paul is like throwing your vote. If we had a system that used something like instant runoff voting, we would not have this “throwing your vote” problem.

  33. 0
    AJ says:

    Recognize that Ron Paul had beaten the crap out of Guliani in all states but Florida and Guliani was a “front runner”. He has made serious headway and while his chance to win is very unlikely he is a serious candidate. More media exposure could put him in the race. Not to mention the online grassroots base and millions of dollars raised on his behalf by third parties. He even beat all but Romney in Nevada. A second place win is nothing to scoff at.

  34. 0
    Cheeselikescereal says:

    First off Gravel is better than Paul (just wanted to clear up that issue). Secondly it is a shame that yahoo did not include all the canidates, but what do you expect from an arm of a conglamerate. (The arms sole porpous it to make money for the parent comapny.)

  35. 0
    John says:

    Paul is interesting to a discussion of Gaming positions because he is so unabashadley different from the other candidates. He clearly would not mess with gamers or games, as his position on things like the First Ammendment are pretty much as commited as you get. It is of interest to gamers that there is a candidate who is exactly what we are looking for (in terms of positions on video games, at least).

  36. 0
    broken scope ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Negative responses? Many of us are not single issue voters.

    Ron Paul has some good ideas, I don’t believe he is the end all be all some people believe he is.

    My main issue with him. All the things he wants to do can’t be done right in only 8 years, but that won’t stop him from trying.

  37. 0
    chadachada(123) ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Ron Paul has my support, because he wants true American values. He wants to protect the first amendment, the 2nd, all of them. He’s never voted to increase Congressional salary, voted AGAINST the Patriot act, supports gamers and the internetz, and wants to distance ourselves from the rest of the world (because frankly, whenever we try to stick our noses in other countries’ problems, it turns out bad for everyone). I’m truly surprised at how few conservatives support him, especially when the “main” guy (according to the media) is Romney.

  38. 0
    Nathaniel Edwards ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The entire sidebar of that site, Nolan Chart, is for the most visited stories. It should be pointed out that nearly every single one of them has Paul in the title, and the rest just have to do with him. His internet popularity is crazy for what he is.

  39. 0
    Phoenix, Filmmaker says:

    You know, between Bush calling the Constitution a “damn piece of paper” and Hillary Clinton (no example needed), I’d say Ron Paul is the best candidate for gamer’s issues, or for anyone who wants this country to stay true to the Constituton. Honestly, I haven’t done enough research on Obama to form an informed opinion, but I have done enough on Ron Paul to say he has my support. Considering this is a blog about games and politics, I’m surprised how many negative comments I’m seeing here towards these kind of issues. Did we get an infestation from Kotaku and Joystiq while I’ve been gone?

  40. 0
    broken scope ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The 2 party is the result of incredible apathy and a large number of people who don’t pay attention to politics except during the lead up to the presidential election. Even when they are paying attention, its only so they can make some extra noise, even then they still do the same thing, he is a republican/democrat hes th only one for me.

  41. 0
    Neeneko ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Well no, the US is NOT a democracy and never was. It is a representational republic where you have two parties that have their own internal quasi-democratic systems for determining who will run for them.

    Unfortunatly a two party system (with minimal votes going to independents) is a natural consequence of the way voting is set up. Even if you rebooted the entire system today with no parties it would quickly resolve into a two party system again within a few decades. The media knows that unless an independent canidate has some gimick or resources behind them then they have basicly no chance and thus are not worth covering.

  42. 0
    broken scope ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The candidates only drop out when they want to.

    If they want to they can continue running as an independent. Quite Frankly we can’t force the media to cover a candidate.

    Now if there was enough outrage and enough people were angry that they were being force fed a specific candidate, then we wouldn’t need to force the media to cover all of them.

    To bad we can’t get enough people outraged enough.

  43. 0
    Calviin ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    “Big Louie” lost every bit of credit he could have had when he linked to Loose Change. I can’t believe there are people out there that still but that B.S.

  44. 0
    mogbert ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Actually I saw my first Ron Paul supporter yesterday. Actually, it was a Ron Paul sign stuck in the front yard of someone in my neiborhood. Next to the for sale sign for the house. I’m not sure they are actually living in that house right now. But that means that at least one person in my state supports him!

    While soliciting opinions on the different candidates from others in my office, everyone had the same thing to say about Ron Paul; “Who?”

    There is a difference between being vocal and being a majority.

  45. 0
    kansan says:

    The level of uninformed blather is abundant here.

    Ron Paul is also the only candidate you can depend on to completely misunderstand the purpose of the Supreme Court or even the Constitution

    Really, why has he voted to defend it at every turn for 20 years, why has he stood up for American liberties when congress have surrendered total control to the Executive branch.

    The MSM is scarred that they will have to pay more attention to him now that the fairweather candidates have fallen off. Ron Paul has raised more money from more supporters than any other candidate in history.

    But hey what do facts matter in a fantasy world

  46. 0
    Simon Roberts ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Ron Paul is also the only candidate you can depend on to completely misunderstand the purpose of the Supreme Court or even the Constitution and attempt to wrangle even more power into the executive branch than Bush and Cheney did. (But what do I know? I’m Canadian, so all of your candidates seem like crazy right-wingers to me.)

  47. 0
    BmK ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Other then Obama, Ron Paul is the only other candidate i like. Just pray to God that both Mitt Romney and Clinton don’t get nominations for their party. Otherwise vote for a Third party candidate or kiss your First Amendment rights goodbye and say hello to the nanny-state.

  48. 0
    Marlowe says:

    They also didn’t include Gravel for the Democrats, who probably has the same stance on video games as Paul, and frankly would be a much better president.

  49. 0
    nightwng2000 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I still think ALL candidates should receive equal attention in the media and let the VOTERS decide who they do or don’t want for president. Let’s face it, there are a great many candidates running, but the only ones the media give attention to at all (even beyond paid advertisements) are the democrats and republicans, with just barely a little attention to a couple of super rich independants and no unaffiliateds.

    This isn’t really a democracy. Quite frankly, I’m not sure WHAT to call it.

    NW2K Software

  50. 0
    JQuilty ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ EZK: Because in many cases, it was simply for no reason. Faux News’ debate in New Hampsire had Fred Thompson, who was nationally doing worse than Paul.

    Plus, Huckabee has not been doing well since Iowa. So I don’t think it’d be fair call him a top candidate, either.

  51. 0
    E. Zachary Knight ( User Karma: 2 ) says:

    But Ron Paul also has a snow ball’s chance in Hell of getting the Republican nomination. (but with the recent freeze there shortly after John Bruce supported Mass Effect, it could be possible)

    But why are people upset when Ron Paul is excluded from articles discussing the top candidates. They are discussing the ones who have garnered enough Primary votes to matter in the end. Now that the Republicans are down to 4 candidates, he is still in fourth place.

    Now if Huckabee dropped out, then Ron Paul would be discussed in top three articles. But until then, he is still not in the top three and most likely will never make it there.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  52. 0
    James A. says:

    All these people on here supporting the democrats. How ignorant.

    Do you have ANY idea what the democrats want to do with your games? Do you think it is the Republicans that have been attacking the gaming industry?

    It’s like how the blacks support overwhelmingly democrats. WTF!? The democrats were the pro-slavery party! The democrats were the ones fighting AGAINST civil rights in the 60s. Check your history books, folks.

    There is simply no excuse for being so ignorant. You attribute things to the democratic party that THEY do not support themselves. Like getting us out of Iraq and not starting a war with Iran. DO YOU SERIOUSLY believe any of the democrats, besides Gravel are going to get us out of Iraq? They have never even said they would. YOU just keep thinking they will and they are simply letting you believe it. Not one of them besides Gravel has said they would.

    Pure ignorance.

  53. 0

    […] Look at this recent story as reported over at As GamePolitics has noted, Yahoo! Games issued a summary this week detailing its view of where the top three candidates from both parties stand on video game issues. Left out of the Republican mix was Ron Paul. Yahoo! instead rated John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, who are, in fairness, the leading vote-getters at this point in the primary cycle. […]

  54. 0
    John Reading says:

    DCOW (above) confesses:

    “I judge a politician by the kind of supporters he has, and Ron Paul’s supporters definately fail. “

    There it is folks: ignorance on stilts and bragging about it. Certainly NOT a Ron Paul supporter. They judge candidates by the quality of the candidates ideas and the integrity of his voting record. That’s why they are Ron Paul supporters.

Leave a Reply