Keystone Phil Courageously Speaks the Truth

[Reluctant Republican]

It's clear the man has flaws(His poor character judgement perhaps is at the top of the list).  But can't we all agree that the man and his organization has proven he has a niche in the Republican party? Dismissing that niche is counterproductive, especially when it's getting more people, especially young people, involved in the Republican party than any other candidate.

With regard to the Ron Paul Survival Report, how is Paul's niche being "dismissed"? That it's being widely discussed suggests the opposite. Heightened scrutiny and reporters refusing to accept Paul's dismissals are signs that he's gained credibility.

I'm more arguing in the Republican party, I think it's a mistake to dismiss Paul and his supporters as insignificant. He's clearly taping into something, yet the party's response by and large seems to be to ignore him, and if that fails, to downplay him. Paul should be scrutinized as much as the other frontrunners. But if he's able to win Iowa, if he's able to place second in New Hampshire, and if he's able to win the 18-25 demographic of young Republicans, I think the party may want to take a look at what he's doing and emulate some of it.

[Keystone Phil]

You just proved my point. Your bitterness is more than obvious to everyone on the site. I was hoping you were willing to come around and have some decent conversation, but apparently that is too much.

Yeah, dude, because your post about two Paul critics just being bitter about their respective candidate's "failings" was definitely a sign of wanting a "decent conversation." Spare me. You're being bitter by responding the way you did. I'm simply having fun by picking on the biggest clowns in politics.

[Zarn]

You just proved my point. Your bitterness is more than obvious to everyone on the site. I was hoping you were willing to come around and have some decent conversation, but apparently that is too much.

Yeah, dude, because your post about two Paul critics just being bitter about their respective candidate's "failings" was definitely a sign of wanting a "decent conversation." Spare me. You're being bitter by responding the way you did. I'm simply having fun by picking on the biggest clowns in politics.

Both of you have shown no want to have any decent conversation for some time now. This is nothing new with the two of you.

[Keystone Phil]

You just proved my point. Your bitterness is more than obvious to everyone on the site. I was hoping you were willing to come around and have some decent conversation, but apparently that is too much.

Yeah, dude, because your post about two Paul critics just being bitter about their respective candidate's "failings" was definitely a sign of wanting a "decent conversation." Spare me. You're being bitter by responding the way you did. I'm simply having fun by picking on the biggest clowns in politics.

Both of you have shown no want to have any decent conversation for some time now. This is nothing new with the two of you.

Oh, right. And you and your crowd wants to have a "decent conversation" about Rick "Google" Santorum. Get off your high horse, dude.

[Zarn]

You just proved my point. Your bitterness is more than obvious to everyone on the site. I was hoping you were willing to come around and have some decent conversation, but apparently that is too much.

Yeah, dude, because your post about two Paul critics just being bitter about their respective candidate's "failings" was definitely a sign of wanting a "decent conversation." Spare me. You're being bitter by responding the way you did. I'm simply having fun by picking on the biggest clowns in politics.

Both of you have shown no want to have any decent conversation for some time now. This is nothing new with the two of you.

Oh, right. And you and your crowd wants to have a "decent conversation" about Rick "Google" Santorum. Get off your high horse, dude.

I have actually said a few nice things about Santorum.