• I don't think

    it's so much Cain's infidelity as his campaign's incompetence in handling the issue. Cain was in over his head and obviously not ready for the big time even before this surfaced. Newt is surging because he's an experienced politician.

  • I agree

    I plan to ignore this and just keep doing what I've been doing.

  • I think

    this debate won't get much attention and you are vastly overestimating its significance.

  • I think

    it's about the norm for Reason magazine.

  • This doesn't surprise me

    I'm acquainted with a number of Jewish republicans, and they don't like Ron Paul at all. I do, however, support their decision. If it were a venue that's supposed to be objective, like CNN, I would say it's wrong to exclude Ron Paul, but I think the Jewish republicans are within their rights.

  • Huh?

    Cain knows nothing of foreign policy. Who's voting in this poll, anyway? Mindless members of the Cain Train? We can beat them.

  • I don't know who you are

    but you don't need to make your points by being insulting. There's no need for you to call anyone here "stupid."

  • I wouldn't worry about it

    Huckabee has a few die hard followers, but I don't think many people are paying much attention to him anymore.

  • I can


  • That was

    their original tactic. If you were around in 2007 and 2008, you would've seen their efforts to ignore him and strive to keep him out of debates, but we supporters raised too much fuss for them to ignore him completely, so we saw a smattering of news articles accusing us of being "wackos" who were supporting a "kook," and there was always the obligatory phrase, "he'll never be the president."

    Since then, the economy has overshadowed the threat of Islamic terrorism as top news, and news outlets realized putting Ron Paul in their pieces tended to raise their ratings and circulation. Along with that comes increased income, so they started featuring him. It's all about the bottom line.

  • I thought

    the same thing when I looked at the methodology.

  • This is stupid!

    Let's give Ron Paul negative publicity so at least he'll get some publicity! Let's give the neoconservatives reason to call us attention getters and media whores and whatever else they want to call us to discredit us!

    I'm joking, but there are people around here who have no sense of humor.

  • Actually,

    I voted for "He did it, but he doesn't think he was wrong," which I think is the most accurate answer. I wanted to let people know about the poll because I thought it was amusing. We could all use a laugh. I wanted people to decide for themselves whether or not they wanted to vote, and how they wanted to vote. You'll notice I made no recommendations to the contrary, but, for some reason, you consistently seem to think you know me better than I know myself and you put words in my mouth. You'd do well to let go of that attitude.

  • Plenty

    The Ron Paul national campaign just opened up a state office here, and they've gotten a lot of supporters on board.

  • Mark where?

    The answer is "yes."

  • It matters very much

    every indication of his competitors' lack of integrity highlights Ron Paul's strength of integrity that much more.

  • There's nothing silly

    about us confirming Ron Paul is the best alternative to Herman Cain. It don't care about the republican smears: we enthusiastically support our candidate, and if they choose to interpret our support as an indication we have no minds of our own, that's their problem, not ours. I refuse to walk on eggshells around of bunch of neoconservatives!

  • It wasn't my intent

    for us to rush to vote in this poll, but so what if we did?

  • I believe the accuser

    and I'm proud to say it!

  • I agree

    I have no doubt whatsoever he sees nothing wrong with expecting women to put out to advance their careers. I'll bet there were at least a few who cooperated, too.