Thread: Paul Leads In Military Campaign Donations, Obama is Next!

I find it very interesting that military personal would donate the most money to the candidates who are probably the most outspoken about the war. If that's the case I guess that would mean the fear peddlers from the right, who accuse anti-war advocates of supporting terrorism, have been wrong the whole time.
Paul, Obama draw support from military voters | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Originally Posted by steezer

I find it very interesting that military personal would donate the most money to the candidates who are probably the most outspoken about the war. If that's the case I guess that would mean the fear peddlers from the right, who accuse anti-war advocates of supporting terrorism, have been wrong the whole time.
Paul, Obama draw support from military voters | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Sorry to burst your bubble but as any military person will tell you Millitary employees are simply government workers and they do not represent the actual soldiers..

Originally Posted by steezer

I find it very interesting that military personal would donate the most money to the candidates who are probably the most outspoken about the war. If that's the case I guess that would mean the fear peddlers from the right, who accuse anti-war advocates of supporting terrorism, have been wrong the whole time.
Paul, Obama draw support from military voters | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

What if the contributions went something like this:

Paul 63,000

Obama 54,000

McCain 48,000

Guiliani 46,000

Romney 45,000

Thompson 44,000

Huckeby 30,000

Brownbeck 25,000

Clinton 10,000

Edwards 9,000

Would that make the results different? I think so. This study of a 1,000 people is meaningless.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but as I will tell you, and millions of others, George W. Bush doesn't represent the actual United States citizens...

Originally Posted by Common Sense Craig

Sorry to burst your bubble, but as I will tell you, and millions of others, George W. Bush doesn't represent the actual United States citizens...

LOL! That has nothing to do with the topic. Try again...

Originally Posted by Bert Spivey

LOL! That has nothing to do with the topic. Try again...

You have nothing to do with this forum.

Try another one...

Originally Posted by Common Sense Craig

Sorry to burst your bubble, but as I will tell you, and millions of others, George W. Bush doesn't represent the actual United States citizens...

He definitely doesn't represent what appears to be the will of the majority of United States citizens.
But as an icon, the world judges Americans through him, so in a manner of speaking he does represent the citizens of this country.

Originally Posted by The God Fearing

He definitely doesn't represent what appears to be the will of the majority of United States citizens.
But as an icon, the world judges Americans through him, so in a manner of speaking he does represent the citizens of this country.

Hmm. That has nothing to do with the article or my response.

Originally Posted by Common Sense Craig

Sorry to burst your bubble, but as I will tell you, and millions of others, George W. Bush doesn't represent the actual United States citizens...

Crybaby politics at its absolute worst. The legally elected president doesn't represent my personal views, perhaps I should cry some more... Until the left either impeaches him or the next elections pass he represents this country regardless of how much anyone wants to whine and cry about it.

Go Ron Paul!