I'm kinda antici.......................PAting too. I'm sure that he'll answer either Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. It's a 50/50 bet to which he'll pick, so there's no money in a wager.......but it's kind of sad when someone thinks that a candidate who isn't going to get more than a few percent of the vote is "viable." They must have different definition for the word "viable" than the rest of the planet does. But the really sad thing is that few percent is going to be enough to throw the election to Obama.Charles L. Cotton wrote:The Republican convention has started and we're still waiting to learn the identity of this viable 3rd candidate. Did I miss your answer?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Oh, I can't wait to read the answer to this one, although I think we all know what's coming. Since it is "silly" to say it's a 2 man race, who, pray tell, is the 3rd person with a chance to win?tallmike wrote:NopeCharles L. Cotton wrote:Well tell us; do you support Obama?
No, it is not a 2 man race. That is a silly thing to say.Charles L. Cotton wrote:If by "anti" you mean he wasn't a first choice, then I agree with your statement. But now it a two-man race so everyone is either anti-Romney or anti-Obama.
Chas.
I think voters like that rather enjoy being "les enfants terrible," the spoilers who would rather see the country go down in flames than vote for a compromise candidate. Their math just doesn't work, so they pray for Ragnarok.