He wasn't included because he has absolutely, positively, NO CHANCE IN HELL of winning the nomination, let alone the presidency.

[...] Look at this recent story as reported over at gamepolitics.com: 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. [...]

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.

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.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

For Ron Paul supporters, "grass roots" has just become a euphemistic term for "thin skinned".

I'm sure all 20 of the Ron Paul supporters are upset.

@ BmK

That would be plausible if the state you're in would let thrid party candidates on the ballot.

In Oklahoma, we have some of the strictest laws governing thrid party ballot access in the US. In the last 10 elections, we have not had a third party o nthe ballot.

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

“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.

@Nightwing

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.

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?

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.

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.

It's because Yahoo HATES FREEDOM.

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.

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.

TO all Ron Paul supporters.

GROW UP YOU BABIES!!!!!

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.

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.

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.

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

Eric

Can you verify what you are saying? Answer, No. Before you spew any more garbage,provide the evidence.

Joe

@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...

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.

@ chada and John reading

I'm canadian. Deal with it. You can't take my rights even if you wanted to.

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.

nightwng2000
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.

@ 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.

Who cares. The REST OF THE WORLD would vote for Obama. :o

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.

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.

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):

http://www.tnr.com/downloads/solicitation.pdf

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.

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.

@Grombar

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.

@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).

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.