Ron Paul the pro-internet gambling candidate is now TOP TIER

fearless · 08-17-2007, 11:00 PM

On Thursday Illinois had its first-ever straw poll. The results:

1. Mitt Romney -- 40.35%

2. Fred Thompson -- 19.96%

3. Ron Paul -- 18.87%

4. Rudy Giuliani -- 11.61%

5. John McCain -- 4.12%

http://www.hoinews.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=45223

Ron Paul has to be considered a top-tier candidate now. His candidacy is gaining momentum. I think sports bettors should get behind him because he's the only pro-internet gambling candidate:

Ron Paul is co-sponsoring a bill to legalize online gambling along with Democrat Barney Frank.

Ron Paul Champions Internet Freedom

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

CrazyL · 08-18-2007, 12:16 AM

Of course we're all biased in a sense, but I actually agree with him on some issues aside from internet gambling.

durito · 08-18-2007, 12:36 AM

Ron Paul won't get more than 1/10 of 1% in the general election.

fearless · 08-18-2007, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durito

Ron Paul won't get more than 1/10 of 1% in the general election.

What kind of odds will you give on that?

How in the world can you say that? He got 9% in the Iowa straw poll and nearly 19% in the Illinois straw poll. Can you give any reasons for what you're saying?

durito · 08-18-2007, 01:05 AM

I'm assuming he's running for the libertarian party as he has in the past.

I just checked and I'm a little off. He's done better than that in the past. He got 1/2 of 1% in 1988.

Though the libertarian got .3% in 1992, .5% in 1996, .4% in 2000, and .3% in 2004.

I'd be shocked to see anything over .5%

fearless · 08-18-2007, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durito

I'm assuming he's running for the libertarian party as he has in the past.

I just checked and I'm a little off. He's done better than that in the past. He got 1/2 of 1% in 1988.

Though the libertarian got .3% in 1992, .5% in 1996, .4% in 2000, and .3% in 2004.

I'd be shocked to see anything over .5%

I'll bet you even odds on 5%.

ritehook · 08-18-2007, 01:32 AM

It would be great to see Ron Paul as president - a chance to reverse our slide into historical oblivion, a la the old Roman Empire. And of course our personal passion, to bet on the Net.

But I agree with the naysayers as a practical matter - he has little chance in a general election, or in the Republican primaries.

Tho this time with the electorate pissed and bewildered, as a 3rd party candidate he could actually break the 5% barrier.

BTW, I think the Frank bill will not much affect sports bettors (it's being pushed by poker players). As I understand it any sports league can opt out. So how many milliseconds will it take, if this bill became law, for the NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA etc to opt out? (The over/under is 2 milliseconds)

durito · 08-18-2007, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainbowworld

I'll bet you even odds on 5%.

You are serious? 5% of the vote in the general 2008 presidential election? (That's a 10x increase on any libertarian in the last 5 elections)

You are on. How much?

durito · 08-18-2007, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ritehook

Tho this time with the electorate pissed and bewildered, as a 3rd party candidate he could actually break the 5% barrier.

Sure, a 3rd party candidate like say Bloomberg could easily break 5%. He, however, has unlimited funds available much as Ross Perot did. The Libertarian candidate (presumably Ron Paul) will not.

fearless · 08-18-2007, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durito

You are serious? 5% of the vote in the general 2008 presidential election? (That's a 10x increase on any libertarian in the last 5 elections)

You are on. How much?

I misunderstood what you said. Ron Paul has said that he won't run as a third party candidate. Us Ron Paul supporters are hoping that he will get the republican nomination, that's the only way he'll be president.

Now, he's definitely in the top five at the moment. He took fifth in the Iowa straw poll and third in the Illinois straw poll. He's gaining momentum and he's got a legit shot!

Also, he is the presidential candidate that will end the Iraq war immediately. I can't see why people aren't rallying around that more. Ron Paul is the guy that would bring us back to following the constitution. His presidency would be a revolution in America and it's just what we need!

fearless · 08-18-2007, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ritehook

As I understand it any sports league can opt out. So how many milliseconds will it take, if this bill became law, for the NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA etc to opt out? (The over/under is 2 milliseconds)

Please explain that to me? Betting on games only makes those leagues more popular. More popularity means higher ratings, more tickets sold, and more revenue. For example, I have almost no interest in sports when I'm not betting on them and I'm sure that there are tens of thousands (if not millions) of people like that. Most of the sports leagues just aren't interesting enough unless you can bet on them, imo.

durito · 08-18-2007, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainbowworld

I misunderstood what you said. Ron Paul has said that he won't run as a third party candidate. Us Ron Paul supporters are hoping that he will get the republican nomination, that's the only way he'll be president.

Now, he's definitely in the top five at the moment. He took fifth in the Iowa straw poll and third in the Illinois straw poll. He's gaining momentum and he's got a legit shot!

Also, he is the presidential candidate that will end the Iraq war immediately. I can't see why people aren't rallying around that more. Ron Paul is the guy that would bring us back to following the constitution. His presidency would be a revolution in America and it's just what we need!

I will bet you my entire bankroll he won't win the Republican nomination. The powers that be (big corporations/wealthy individuals) will never let that happen.

durito · 08-18-2007, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainbowworld

Please explain that to me? Betting on games only makes those leagues more popular. More popularity means higher ratings, more tickets sold, and more revenue. For example, I have almost no interest in sports when I'm not betting on them and I'm sure that there are tens of thousands (if not millions) of people like that. Most of the sports leagues just aren't interesting enough unless you can bet on them, imo.

While that may be true, they will all opt out.

fearless · 08-18-2007, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durito

I will bet you my entire bankroll he won't win the Republican nomination. The powers that be (big corporations/wealthy individuals) will never let that happen.

I wouldn't bet on this either for the same reason. If everything was fair I might on Paul winning.

But, do you remember what Jesse Ventura accomplished? I think the big Ron Paul movement we're seeing is similar to what Ventura did. The big difference is that Ventura didn't have to deal with Diebold voting machines...

However, I've heard it said that TPTB will only overturn a close race with the machines because otherwise it would be too obvious. What we need is for Paul to win a big majority, it's definitely still possible and I'm keeping faith.

fearless · 08-18-2007, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durito

While that may be true, they will all opt out.

Why? Aren't they there to make as much money as possible? If betting makes the leagues more popular and thus raises revenue, what's the problem?

LVHerbie · 08-18-2007, 03:07 AM

I've been active in the libertarian party in the past and there is no way Ron Paul gets 5% on that ticket... he has already said he has no interest in running as a third party again and he is no longer actively affiliated with the libertarian party...