The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: Well

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: R.J. (see in situ)


His position IS potentially more constitutional, that is if we have misconstrued what Rand meant. Which apparently is the case and the reason for the debate. what did he actually mean? You're most likely be right rhino, they are probably both equally constitutional and lead to the same conclusion, only semantics and nuances got in the way. I don't care for your last statement though.

Their differing approaches will not determine who will get elected but rather who they will be beholden to when they do.