Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (3,797)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Great, but not about Ron Paul.

  • Defense: the new face of Imperialism.

  • bryanraleigh2 is one of those people in the states that thinks true freedom is sitting on your parents couch your whole life eating chips and having absolutely no social responsibility (not that he would understand the concept) is true freedom and then, when he realizes how pathetic his life is, gets mad that the liberal government paid his healthcare so he could be alive to experience how sad he is.

  • if ron paul wins the nomination, I'm voting Republican. Hands down.

  • @mexchika0408 Ummm...why don't you do what many of us are doing and registering republican NOW so you can vote in the primaries and assure that he will be the nomination?????

  • Peter Paul mary??? Bill wtf man. What a bad joke and the guy telling it is even a more worse joke.

  • Man, Jon really wanted to hit Bill over the head with a chair through most of that interview.

  • oreilly holds back so much on this guy. he needs to let loose and kick the balls off this fucking comedian. wow. unreal how much he holds back just to let this comedian side step every single question. good fucking god

    have fun latinos and blacks getting welfare-ed to death by liberalism and never experiencing true freedom. toodles.....

  • @bryanraleigh2 I like how you hold back on proper punctuation.

  • @bryanraleigh2 Ok I can't really tell but, is that last statement racist. Don't give me some angry comment back but shoo'. About the other thing, (Cough) go fuck yourself. You should have to prove you actually have an education before you post things. Be cool.

  • fucking jon stewart the comedian is obviously on the defensive the entire interview. it's like he personally doesn't like bill oreilly and yet oreilly is trying to be friendly to the stupid fuck.

    far left liberals are just pissy sad pathetic shit human beings that have no love for others or care about anything but themselves.

  • bryanraleigh2 :

    I don't want to get into a big thing about all this, but first, Jon is by all measures, a moderate, it is only from an extreme right wing perspective that he would look anything other than that. Second, liberalism is not crazy, or sad, or pathetic, Liberals push to ensure basic social services are guaranteed as a fundamental right, to health and to dignity, in what way does that suggest an uncaring perspective? I believe your words are unfounded and empty.

  • "Then why did Fox News not treat Ron Paul better?"

    It's Fox News for gods sake, what did you expect -.-

  • @ZlatkoTheGod ALL media is biased. I expect the same from Fox as I do from CNN and MSNBC. I almost had a heart attack last week when that moron Lawrence O'Donnell TOTALLY twisted Ron Paul's words and made him out to be completely different than what he is. So before you go knocking on Fox....make sure you aren't wasting your time thinking other venues are truthful and fair. ALL suck!!!

  • @SweetaliciousArt I know, but we were talking about FOX News specifically. Anyway, believe me I know way more about propaganda than I should, and I'm only 15. BTW I live in a country where throwing babies in the air and caching them with those little knives on top of a rifle is considered heroism. So yeah, I know that all media sucks, we need Ron... seriously.

  • Comment removed

  • Dude, Bill is the queen of word acrobatics. For every valid argument Jon comes up with, Bill just waffles, distracts with bad jokes, attempts to condescend, or ignores. What a loser.

  • Harvard not letting Bill'O on their campus says that Harvard has good taste and knows who to associate with and who not to.

  • Thumbs up for a guy like Reilly for having the balls to have Jon on his show like this while letting him talk.

  • Jon Stewart is awesome and VOTE RON PAUL

  • jon stewart is genius..FOX suX

  • Part of the reason they want nukes is due to a self preservation streak, with the USA talking threats continuously the only way they can prevent an invasion is to get a nuke or two.

  • @ENTERRAPTURE20 Please. *eyeroll*

  • What an idiot, if ahmadinejad wants to get rid of jews, why wont start for the jews in iran?

  • @digomide81 why won't what start for Jews in Iran?

  • @Noise509 getting rid of them.

  • Jon Stewart OWNS this discussion / debate.

  • Faux news isn't journalism it's theater of mind control. All who watch beware of good feelings.

  • @gameralholbert ALL media is.  CNN and MSNBC is no better. In fact...this election, CNN has been EXTREMELY unfair to Dr Paul. Probably worse than Fox.

  • @SweetaliciousArt Just because you say "probably worse" doesn't mean "probably worse".

  • @SweetaliciousArt Agreed. And you should have seen Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last thursday after one of the debates. He twisted Ron Paul's words like there was no tomorrow. TOTAL scumbag!

  • I like that Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart actually like each other even though they have different views on so many things. I think they're a good example to the rest of the nation not to demonize the other side.

  • @ccar3y you can see the hatred in Jon's eyes when he talks to Bill...how could you think they like each other?

  • @zakmyrr

    I definitely don't see the hatred in his eyes. There is an intense focus when he is talking about issues that he deeply cares about, but no hate. And I say that they like each other because they have said that they like each other.

  • Bill O'Reilly OWNED!!!

  • i'm voting ron paul 2012

  • Jon Stewart is awesome. He's really really smart. I love how you can tell he's getting peeved at these stupid idiots who don't know anything.

  • Powerful title and very good point ....

  • Jon Steward simply doesn't understand that Ron Paul is a fucking idiot. This guy has openly refused to draft a budget for social security stating that he believes it was "unconstitutional." Plus Ron Paul wants us to return to a time when we had the gold standard and completely remove the Federal Reserve. What Ron Paul doesn't understand is that the dollar was worth less before the Reserve and we had little over 30,000 currencies. Again Ron Paul is fucking stupid.

  • @Didymusification Ron Paul might be the most brilliant man running for president in decades. Just because you might not understand the economics and aspects of his views doesn't mean you call him crazy. Look up the Federal Reserve... you might be surprised how much they have destroyed the country. However, what I think is crazy, is that every person besides Dr. Paul wants to start shit with Iran. You will think so too when your baby comes out with two heads.

  • @JTEchicago

    You do realize that there's no such thing as, "getting rid of the federal reserve"? They perform a necessary function. The best you can do is dismantle the Fed and redistribute their role to the states. So, instead of a single body that's accountable for their duties, you have 50 independent state committees each dancing to their own tune.

    Unless you plan on each state having it's own currency, disbanding the Fed is a ridiculous idea.

  • @JTEchicago Ron Paul brilliant? Ha! I think it is you who doesn't understand. Ron Paul will never win the presidency. Too extreme. America needs a moderate not some loon who wants us to return to the state of isolationism that we were enduring after the WWI. Clearly some historical perspective is needed.

  • @Didymusification I will give you a historical perspective. Isolationism would have saved our entire economy. If we would have just kept our nose out of the middle east's ass, guess who wouldn't have gotten planes crashed into our buildings? Fast forward 10 years later, where we are in crumbles due to the trillions spent on war. Ask Norway, Sweden, Australia, etc. how isolationism is working? I think "too extreme" is going into senseless war killing thousands. You be the judge.

  • @JTEchicago

    On the other hand, our move away from isolationism could to be said to have played a extremely large part in our roles in both world wars and our expansion past the continental US, which is still today a great source of power for us. I'd personally consider us to be in a fairly decent position globally-the US still pays substantially less than most of the world for gas. Of course, this is purely from a "practical" standpoint and does not include how it effects people.

  • @AuxKipchak We do not need to own the whole worlds lands! That's the mentally that Israel has, and it gives them the worst peace index behind the U.S. of developed countries. If we spent more time and money worrying about our own country and resources, we wouldn't need to worry about stealing them from others. Let islands be islands, not Americans.

  • @Didymusification Yep he's definitely an isolationist.

  • Oh my god! What the hell happened to Bill O’Rielly? He allowed his nemesis guest to talk. Bill acted human and reasonable. His arguments fell flat as usual but he somehow sounded NOT like an old, angry, geezer who drinks too much every night.

  • Jon Stewart seems like he is'nt focusing on the argument

  • @123svenni lol

  • Only hicks take Fox News seriously. When are we going to get this false news company off the air? It's everything that's wrong with America

  • @MikeFromSF No man... It's sad. Tons of educated people watch Fox News and take it seriously as well.

  • @GageRoadStudios well they're obviously not getting their education from Fox News

  • Comment removed

  • Well Jon.....Because no jew can own Ron Paul.

  • billow the human white racist clown looking at his shoes yes they are bigger than any step you will ever make, but try billow one more step palinville or bauchmanville let the ladies tell you no .you have no control over my privatesor do you?

  • Wow, that was some of the best discussions with John Stewart which I have heard. He's quite articulate and knowledgeable.

  • clearly 72 people had their brains eaten

  • a sketch comedy show?Then why take anything Jon Stewart says seriously? Media bias is not a conspiracy,it is a fact. What happened to all the hundreds of thousands of anti-war protesters after Obama was elected? In 2008, in the lead up to the election, the Mainstream media talked EVERY Day about gas prices! Now, gas prices will go over $4/gallon and for a longer time, WHERE is the media? Where are the daily war death tallies? 370+ Americans killed in Iraq in the month since the "End of the War"?

  • @pcmiddleton Think about what you're saying, then about the CLEARLY biased news channel you're apparently trying to defend. Stewart's goal is to expose hypocrisy in the media and politics at large. As for mainstream media bias... I think you're confusing the term "bias" with actual news coverage.

  • Every time I see Stewart on O'Reilly's show, he BODY SLAMS him! Why do they keep bringing him back?

  • jon stewart is by far the best at keeping oreilly's mouth shut

  • Jon Stewart pretends he is mainstream and unbiased, but it is all bull crap. He makes cruel jokes about Conservatives and FoxNews, but he'll make only slight jokes about how hip or cool Obama is. The fact is, just like with Saturday Night Live, intelligent people can see through all the haze and BS from Obama and his MainStream Media friends. Conservatives are not the bigoted, idiotic caricutures they are made out to be: ie, Stephen Colbert. Chris Wallace nailed Stewart, who was not jovial.

  • @pcmiddleton The comparison of a sketch comedy show to a conspiracy theory about mainstream media bias... This is amazing absurdest satire, the likes of which I have never seen before! Bravo young citizen, for my view of both foxnews and conservatives has certainly changed.

  • @pcmiddleton

    I saw the interview you're referring, Wallace was destroyed...

    Wallace sat there slinging mud the entire interview and not a single point stuck.

    Secondly, since when has Jon Stewart every even alluded to the fact that he isn't biased??? And then you bring up SNL? Are you kidding me? They've lambasted conservatives and liberals alike? Were you around in the Clinton years? Do you understand differences between bias, fact and sensationalism?

  • 71 ISRAELIS WATCHED THIS.

  • I'm a staunch conservative, and I'm through with FLOCKS news!! Even MSNBC is less biased!

  • See the video "Ron Paul on the American Civil War." In it he claims that the US Government could have simply bought all the slaves and avoided the Civil War. Conservative estimates give the value of those slaves at over $4 billion. The entire US Government budget was $78 million.

    This is typical Ron Paul double-talk. His followers just eat it up.

  • "ppffffft... that whole Iraq..... thing... didn't work out so well...".... doosh.

  • Since when does not being allowed back on your alumni's home turf mean it's a good thing? Argument invalid.

  • I fucking hate that cocksucker Bill...

  • proof that fox news is BAD and just wants views.

  • I smell a zionist khazar.

  • @Ruttie2 The fish smell comes from between your legs.

  • @switchon11 Oh shut up.

  • On The Daily Show, Bill said that he was an anarchist. Hmmmmmmmm.

  • harvard educated media elite...haha, love that his own college wont let him back, must be a bad seed....and a hypocrite...it happens.

  • fucking fox news wont even talk about Ron Paul, sold out fakes.

  • LOL..... "That whole Iraq thing...did not go well" 3:25

  • @callinglast the onetime in his life that Oreiily has understated something

  • @sickness11010 ...cool story, bro...

  • @sickness11010 What the... I don't... wha? Spelling? Words?

  • I hate how O'Reilly wastes air time just negating as many comments as he can

  • i just like reading you're 'star spanked girl'. take that for name picking !

  • "That whole Iraq thing did not go well" yes, brilliant $800B 100,000+ dead, zero weapons of mass destruction found. YEP, didn't go well.

  • @neosailor that's a pretty solid statement :l

  • the more I watch stewart... especially in modern days... the last two years or so. the more I like him. He seems like such a liberal normally but, I think he's a pretty straight shooter. I hope he continues his libertarian streak that he's been on.

  • Muppets!

  • jon stewart should run for president

  • Bill O'Reilly deserves to be raped.

  • You guys need to find out who Jon Stewart is, and who his brother is.

  • I hate O'Reilly

    NO ONE BUT PAUL 2012

  • This is actually the most calm and relaxed O'Reilly I've seen. Wow, Jon brings up amazing points.

  • GOD DAMN jon stewart KILLED oreilly

  • Iran has never threatened to wipe out Israel or kill jews, this is a false America media based rumor that the conservatives feed on. The only thing the middle eastern countries pledge is justice for the Palestinians, which is what they have wanted for 50 years.

  • It pisses me off that he straight out ignored Ron Paul again when questioned about him.

  • @thebounceknight cause we have been lied to for so long my our government, and told if we go agenst them we are crazy idiots

  • bill orielly just said "trust me." I laughed so hard I puked.

  • still talking about shoe and underwear bombers? those were proven false flag incidents. so why still push the terrorist card?

  • you cant stop an idea.

  • Liberals love Ron Paul, because they know he can't win.

  • I like how people call O'Rielly a twit, but then say Ron Paul is a hero/ good president/ not fucking retarded. Obama is going to win. The Republican candidates are so ridiculous it's a joke. It's sad when their last "Sane" candidate was Bush, and he turned crazy after he got into office.

  • @kublkun HAHHAHHAAh do you actually believe that !!!!!!!

  • @kublkun

    I don't think Obama will win actually, he lost the Catholic vote when he declared war on them (and on separation of church and state). Santorum and Romney are both MUCH better options than obama. The Catholic vote is a huge vote for democrats, they've lost it, and college students aren't NEARLY as enthusiastic this time around.

  • @Smullet90 Too bad the people's vote only counts in a tie, huh? The Electoral College votes for the president, not us. We vote for the candidates.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    You're such a goddamn know-it-all snob, seems like every youtube video has one lurking around waiting for some innocuous comment to pounce on. What you say is true, but when we vote for the candidates for the electoral college they pledge to vote a certain way. The people's vote counts for way more than a tie. People who vote differently than they promised have NEVER changed an election.

  • @Smullet90 You're making a generalization about me.. I never claimed to "know-it-all" as you put it. So you're implying that the people we put into office don't lie just to get elected? No one has ever lied under oath before or went back on a pledge in politics? Sorry, you have no argument there. They have changed an election when it's a select few people voting and not every person whose vote counts.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    NO, I didn't imply that nobody has lied to get elected. That has nothing to do with the question at hand. What we were talking about was the electoral college, and when we go out and vote for the electors, they pledge to vote a certain way. The people who vote differently than how they promised to vote (faithless electors) have never been enough to influence an election.

  • @Smullet90 Well it has something to do with it considering every vote counts does it not? Again just because someone makes a pledge doesn't mean they'll stay loyal to it. You're contradicting yourself. People who vote differently than how they promised are NOT faithful.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    Thats why I said faithless, not faithful. Again, no, they have never influenced an election, every vote counts, but when someone has the majority of electoral votes irregardless of how you vote, your vote doesn't matter.

  • @Smullet90 But majority can be 51 votes to 49 and that one vote sways the election then is what I'm saying. Just because it's never happened before (for arguments sake because you don't know that it hasn't) doesn't mean it can't happen.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    I'll admit that it can happen, but the fact is that it hasn't. Many states (like half or so) half laws regarding it. I think if it influenced an election they would probably consider changing the vote.

  • @Smullet90 Alright you've admitted it can happen so how do you know it hasn't because you don't know the way everyone thinks and I'm sure you haven't studied everyone who has voted in the Electoral College or the reasons they were voted in. If you have I'd like to know exactly how you did that please because I'm very curious as to how that could be.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    wikipedia (dot) org/wiki/Faithless_elector

    Just remove the (dot) and put in the period.

  • @Smullet90 You're giving me evidence based off of Wikipedia.. A so called "factual site" that any member can edit and might I add Wikipedia isn't a valid source for anything in a professional setting.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    This isn't a professional setting, this is youtube. You'll notice several elections missing, those are years without faithless electors. As for wikipedia not being credible, you can find all the citations for the sources at the bottom. Since you are making the argument, it is on your shoulders to provide counter evidence for the evidence I have already submitted. If you believe it is factually wrong you need to find a better, more reputable source and correct me.

  • @Smullet90 I didn't say this was a professional setting, my argument was concerning the source you gave me and its history of false information taking into consideration that anyone can go in and change it as long as that person is a member of the site. So I'm not going to go out of my way to prove that Wikipedia isn't a viable source to base you're evidence off of because it's already known that it's not a viable source to begin with. You can base your opinion however you'd like.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    You know, in the real world, and "professional settings", we base our arguments off of facts and real data, not what-ifs. The fact remains that when people vote for electors, those electors say, on the ballot who they will vote for. You don't seem to understand this. You also don't seem to understand that it is relatively simply to know who changed their vote, and not something super secretive. I choose to base my opinions in fact. Good day sir.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    You know, in the real world, and "professional settings", we base our arguments off of facts and real data, not what-ifs. The fact remains that when people vote for electors, those electors say, on the ballot who they will vote for. You don't seem to understand this. You also don't seem to understand that it is relatively simply to know who changed their vote, and not something super secretive. I choose to base my opinions in fact. Good day sir.

  • @Smullet90 I can't ask a question? I'm just trying to say Wikipedia has a history of not being a reliable source is all. I'm not even voting for Obama, I just defend him for all the criticism he receives because it's not his fault for the state of country because it was passed on to him in that state. I just choose to look at the positive side of things I guess and not focus on the negatives because those are easy to see. Ron Paul 2012

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    Oh god you would be a Paulite.

  • @Smullet90 Alright why isn't he the right choice?

  • @Smullet90 Alright why isn't he the right choice?

  • Alright what could you possibly have against RP? Who do you plan on voting for?

  • @Smullet90 Alright what could you possibly have against RP? Who do you plan on voting for?

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    First off, I have nothing against Ron Paul per se, except in all of his years in office he hasn't accomplished much of anything. Stewart loves him, Colbert loves him, and the most ignorant and annoying people I have ever met are ardent followers of him. I won't be voting for RP because he won't win the nomination. I'll be voting for Romney or Santorum. I would rather have either of them any day than Obama.

  • @Smullet90 He hasn't done anything because his ideas and theories are controversial however he's predicted many things would happen to this country before they happened and then they wind up happening. Show me a video that has either Romney or Santorum winning a SINGLE debate with Ron Paul. Don't waste you're time looking because there isn't one. Seriously go watch every debate. You'd be surprised. You're not voting for him because he's not popular basically?

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    I want someone who can get the job done as president. Maybe I want someone like Ron Paul (i think some of his ideas are great, some horrible) but he has to prove he can win. If Ron Paul got the Republican nomination I would vote for him, but I'm not going to sabotage any chance of getting Obama out of office by voting for Ron Paul during the election. But than again, voting doesn't matter according to you, so I guess I can do whatever.

  • @Smullet90 Then Ron Paul is the guy you should be voting for in Novemeber regardless if his name is on the ballot or not. What ideas are horrible, in your opinion, that he has? You said yourself almost half the states don't have laws to punish the faithless electors so we have to take it upon ourselves as the people to make sure this man gets into office. He's the only guy who has been consistent and correct as well as honest his entire political career. But then again one vote doesn't change

  • @Smullet90 an election according to you.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    /facepalm

    You're incorrigible.

  • @Smullet90 Actually I was pro Obama for awhile but upon further research I'm finding the ONLY man for the job is RP so I wouldn't be so quick to write me off as incorrigible when you really don't know me. You never told me what ideas of his you find horrible either.

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    Non-interventionist policies have failed, we tried that and it didn't work (WWII). All of his ideas on foreign policy, the legalization of all drugs, and pretty much every policy and idea he has except his fiscal ideas about the free market, and even those I'm not sure if he really believes or if he's just a liberal disguised as a libertarian. During his time in office, how much has he REALLY focused on fiscal issues, and how much time has he focused on social issues?

  • @Smullet90 Alright first of all, I'm sure Paul will help our allies if they need it as they did in WW2. He's suggesting pulling the troops from countries because you don't see any of their troops here do you? So what gives us the right to place ours in theirs? The legalization of drugs effectively eliminates a trillion dollars of wasted money spent on incarcerating these people convicted of drug crimes. He's suggesting the gov't doesn't need to be involved in our personal lives and what we do

  • @Smullet90 with our bodies because who are they to tell us what we can and can't put into our own bodies? During his time in office he vetoed every bill that would waste money so I'd say he's pretty concerned with fiscal issues. He focuses on constitutional issues. Also if we get out of these wars it saves trillions of dollars wasted on an endless conflict.

  • @Smullet90 Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the US put an embargo on Japanese oil (kinda like Iran?), so Japan attacked us as a means of survival? So we economically intervened, but not militarily? Is that interventionist or non-? I don't think Paul ever said non-intervention is perfect. If we had not put sanctions on Japan would they have attacked us? How many times have we been hurt or made things worse when we intervened compared to when we did not intervene?

  • @angramainyu992 We didn't put an embargo on Japanese oil, it was the exact opposite, we stopped trading them OUR oil (historical figures suggest 80 percent of the oil going into Japan was from the US at the time). So, Japanese leadership saw that they had two choices: give in to Eisenhower's demands and pull out of China (in which they saw as too humiliating), etc. or start war with the United States. They chose the latter and we all know how that turned out.

  • @angramainyu992 However, you do bring up a good point in that all these sanctions do not work. We can compare China and Vietnam to North Korea, Iran, and Cuba as to what works. Generally I think you keep trade up with them and they slowly change, as it has happened to China and Vietnam. However, once a country starts invading other countries, I think embargoes, as with Japan prior to WW2, simply wont work. But for Iran and Cuba, we trade with them and put the onus on their leadership to oppress.

  • @Smullet90 Did you notice you're "evidence" doesn't even include the most recent election..

  • Comment removed

  • What your looking at is 2 people that don't like one another trying to talk to each other without swearing or using stupid language. It's hard to bite your lip when the person 3 feet away from you believes opposite everything you believe. Good Job John! lol

  • They both made poor points. Driving every jew in the sea is made up nonsense. The israelis use that lie to get the dumb yanks to keep giving them money and weapons

  • I think this was actually one of the more civil Orielly "debates"

  • Thanks Jon Stewart, for telling it like it is to one of the most entrenched and ignorant people on television.

  • @Mythra13 It is clear that Jon Stewart has alot more respect for Bill then you do. They certainly have different political beliefs but they both realize that the other has a fairly good understanding of politics and the way the world works and just have different ideology on how to deal with it.

  • @Stiletos The Democratic and Republican political approaches do not deal with the underlying problems of our society, they just make a show of dealing with them. Yes, these two TV personalities understand the way the world works, they know how to make a lot of money by talking about issues that the general public feel strongly about. In the end are we any better off?

  • how can people look up to o'reily for information when he can't even tell you why the tides go in and out? or hell why the sun comes up and down!

  • LMAO!!! CAUGHT HIM!!!!!!!!

  • a corporate-funded talking head who keeps discussion on his show within a very narrow spectrum is an "American hero?" we don't need corporations telling us who to consider heroes

  • The only thing I'll give O'Reilly is that he actually seemed more civil. But he also seemed more stupid, and if I were ever on his show I'd be far worse than Jon is even on his show on the worst days!

  • why cant american ppl see what a twat o rielly is and what a hero ron paul is

  • @thebounceknight "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right". Thomas Paine. The American people have been propagandize to stupidity. People you support Ron Paul are the last true Americans left. The rest are retards who want the NDAA, Patriot Act, Enemy Expatriation Act, WW3, terror attacks, and the banks in charge of their government

  • @thebounceknight I didn't quite see it until I heard him call Shawn Hornbeck a "pervert", or something to that effect, and condemning him as a criminal. Shawn Hornbeck, if you don't know, was kidnapped as a little boy and raped for years by a man who then demoralized and confused him to the point of getting him to help kidnap another boy, when Shawn was getting too old for the old pedophile. I am a male childhood sexual abuse survivor, and that just pissed me the fuck off.

  • @thebounceknight

    Ron Paul is a crazy loser

  • @verbod LMAO everyone who is anti RP says that and can't back anything up. Let's hear why he's a crazy loser, in your opinion.

  • @thebounceknight They're both twats.

  • @thebounceknight I wouldn't call someone who wants to subvert democracy a hero. Ron Paul is now out to get the nomination by convincing the delegates to ignore the will of the voters.

  • @avatarmn Lol? Seriously? Not even. The candidates know how it works. They know they need to get their supporters in as delegates. And Santorum/Romney voters, nominate Ron Paul supporters as delegates.. their fault..

  • @SelaFatale And traditionally, the delegates support the candidate that won the popular vote. Ron Paul wants them not to. It's within the rules, and it's massively horribly wrong and immoral.