In your scenario I would have to currently agree with the ODDS MAKERS, but I think that there is a long time until the election and things can change quickly. As it is today Hillary is 2-1 Paul is 7-1, I agree that today Hillary would win. I think in the next year Dr. Paul's message will gather strength and when he wins a couple of the Republican straw polls and primaries he will become better odds than Hillary.

I think Fred is already in trouble and he aint even announced yet, the odds makers don't see him as a serious threat.I use the odds makers because they are not liberal or conservative, they are simply CAPITOLISTS. They make those odds based on what they think will make them money and what will not. They don't use personal biases or favoritism in their odds making because they would be out of a job pretty quickly, those people are statisticians and they are good at it...

Originally posted by RRconservative

This is about the 10-15th post about Ron Paul, and you are calling me redundant?

Sure he may have 1-2% of true Republicans, but he is being built up by anti-war(American) Democrats. (There I said it again )

This is so obvious, but there are alot of uninformed people out there, so I can see how they can be fooled.

Yeah, actually I am calling you redundant. I normally don't mind but it seems to be for some reason other than discussion.

I do find it odd that you left out and did not reply to this section of my post: "I'd love for you to substantiate that..."

I disagree and have had quite a bit of personal and online experience that totally contradicts what you are saying. So, where are you getting your info.

There is nothing unAmerican about being against this war (matter of fact there are many reasons to be, even if you exclude the garbage/hackery/flipfloppityness the Dems use for political fuel).