Republican nomination poll

[Heather]

I voted Newt because the poll isn't about who you want to win but who you think will win.

yes, this. unfortunately

[frankiej]

I said Michelle Bachmann just to fuck with the polls results... Not that I really care though.

[Heather]

Thanks for your help, Frankie!

[frankiej]

I'm always around to help those who need it

[houseofcantor]

Ya know, there was no Paul on this list when I voted. already there is electoral chicanery.

What makes Paul worse than Newt, in my book, is people actually seem to like him. I mean, otherwise rational people. I can't do it. I'm prejudiced. An avowed creationist ain't got the intellectual goods to get the job done.

I like Obama, but Gwynnie did it! I admit my irrationality; it's more of a "devil you know" consideration at this point.

[Tiberius]

Either Leo and Tiberius decided not to read the OP, which states 'who do you think will WIN', not who do you want to win, or they really are daft enough to think that someone on 9% can win.

The more I read about Ron Paul suggests he's only about economic libertarianism, not social libertarianism. Sad really because he's clearly the smartest, yet also the most deluded.

I did read the OP. I think Ron Paul will win, mainly because the election isn't over yet, so we can't call it for anyone. Look at how people like Newt Gingrich started at a very small percentage, and yet he's now in second place. The media have been avoiding mentions of Ron Paul, so I wouldn't trust many polls that say he's got 9% in the first place. These polls can't tell you who will win; they can tell you what a (small) selection of people think at one point in time; not how they will vote when it comes down to it.

I'd like to see some of the reasons you think Ron Paul isn't a social libertarian though. He's for drug legalisation, against any legislation that attempts to "define" marriage (thereby leaving it up to individual churches), and is a supporter of the Occupy movement.