Ron Paul answers Chris Wallace's tough questions

[ceyko]

But you know if you agree or not, right?

No. On some issues I've never really given it much thought. So to some of the talking points it's a new talking point OR it's a new view that he has that I had not really thought about.

Now, once I decide - I'll know. However, as of now I'm still thinking about it.

I will say, that since he wants less government - I'm all for that.

You're making the assumption that everyone has all these issues studied 110% - which I think you do. I won't get into my personal scheduling, but I will admit that I've not thought about every possible thing out there and in that discussion alone, some new thoughts to me were brought out. I'm not saying I disagree with them, I agree - but to what degree - I'm not sure. See?

Either way, I'll vote for someone who is on my same thought process and as I said - I can't hate on someone who answers the damned question.

I know these discussions have been talked about into the ground on here. However, frankly there are a bunch of idiots arguing so it's better for me to learn in my own way. Out of 20 people arguing only 3-4 may have a clue, are being serious and are realistic at the same time.

I've had time to watch one other RP video and I was glued to it as well. This is the first time I've felt anything positive about a candidate. Problem is, what can her really get done while in office?

[jw33]

I would recommend watching "For Liberty Re-cut" on youtube when you get a chance.

[Vertnut]

Every single candidate has trade-offs. I've never, ever, agreed with a candidate on every issue..even Ronnie. It just depends on how big the trade-off is. You weigh them out and make a decision.

[Sgt Beavis]

Every single candidate has trade-offs. I've never, ever, agreed with a candidate on every issue..even Ronnie. It just depends on how big the trade-off is. You weigh them out and make a decision.

Just seems like common sense, right?