Ron Paul or president Obama ?

I'm pretty liberal, but I'd actually take Ron Paul in that choice.

I'm not exceptionally wild about some of the decisions that Obama has made. I don't think he's horrible, either. Still, he's completely liplocked on the standard Democrat rhetoric: tax the rich, extend jobless entitlements, and somehow those two things are going to produce jobs. And let's not forget that the economy isn't his fault. I personally don't think it is, but I could really stand to stop hearing about it.

I am A-OK with Libertarians as a whole. I like civil liberties, and I don't like excessive government spending. While every party is singing this songto some degree, the Libertarians mean it, and it's been the base of their views for as long as there have been Libertarians.

That said, I don't know as much as I should about Ron Paul's personal views. I do know about his tax plan, which I can plainly say isn't a plan at all. Get rid of all personal income taxes (about 40% of gov't revenues), and replace it with...nothing? I like where he's coming from, but that doesn't exactly seem to be a wise move in the face of our national debt crisis. Maybe trim the fat off of government first, and then we can look at knocking off some taxes.

I think a better plan is to abolish all current taxes (income, capital gain, corporate, etc.) and just stick a hefty national sales tax on every good and service. Something between 15 and 25 percent should do fine. That way, all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and people who don't report tips all pay their fair share. Imports should be taxed at a higher rate until the playing field is level, and countries like China don't have the advantage for having no environmental protections or worker's rights. Then, maybe our corporations will stop offshoring jobs and we can get back to business.

Ron Paul. And sorry to burst your bubble yet Osama has been lifeless because December of 2001. So Obama had some undesirable seem a-like actor murdered. Osama grow to be very ill with Marfan Syndrome on dialysis returned in 2001. all and sundry can inform you, human beings do no longer stay that long with Marfan Syndrome. So the only promise Obama has stored is his promise to bankrupt new coal flora, for this reason crippling the country's skill grid and for this reason committing treason. retaining Obama around could be suicide for us of a of america. Ron Paul a minimum of could supply us a struggling with hazard to stay to tell the story the deluge of corruption drowning the entire united states of america at present.

Ron Paul is what America needs. Obama just won because people wanted to show it isn't so racist as it was in the past, not because he was an outstanding or revolutionary candidate. He's a well spoken man, but his ideas aren't in any way novel. Ron Paul wants to go back to what the Constitution stands for, that is novel in this day in age.

Ron Paul.

He isn't Obama.

While there are many reasons why I would vote for Ron Paul over Obama, the primary one is the fact he is not a Marxist commie wanna-be like Obama and his cronies Pelosi and Reed.

Ron Paul. He seems more in touch with the everyday people. Does homework on issues & has realistic plans on how to fix things. He is more honest & does not say things to get votes. Go Ron.

Ron Paul is a far more sensible, wisened man with a profound understanding of economics.

The thought of righting the economy and bringing our troops home from foreign soil has a nice feel to it. Paul, without question.

Obama. At least with Obama I know what I am getting, and Obama does not have an isolationist view of the military.

It won't end up being Ron Paul unfortunately. Corporations would NOT ALLOW for that. You know they are our true rulers.That is a lot of money in fighting those, unnecessary as they may be, wars.The other Republicans are retards.

Sarah Palin, since she has more to offer than these 2 goooks...I mean coooks.