hannon44

...I was hanging out and thinking...

what if the 420 culture could unite for a candidate that would eliminate the Federal Govt's "War on Drugs?"

the candidate...Dr. Ron Paul

the thought...at 4:20 each day, donate $4.20 to the Ron Paul campaign
Ron Paul 2008 — Hope for America

with a little math...$4.20 x 1000 donors/day = $4200/day = $29,400/week = OVER $1.5 MILLION between now and the 2008 Presidential election!

any takers?

Tenderlungs

If I had money to spare I would consider it.

I'd rather see Mike Gravel in office though.

steakii

yeah, good luck with that. That would be something like $1,500 a person (or something like that just did estimates in my head.) Thats alot of money which alot of people dont have

Buzzby

One and a half million dollars is a drop in the bucket when it comes to Presidential campaigns.

I'd rather vote for the least offensive candidate who actually has a chance of getting elected.

__________________

tekkenlaw

This,

The media decides who gets nominated for the party, and apparently they don't want Ron Paul.

__________________
"Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself." -- Jimmy Carter

Trocisp

There's a lot more to being president than the war on drugs.

Did you know Ron Paul wants to eliminate the Federal Education Board?

Before you vote for a candidate for one issue, make sure you agree with all of his stances, not just his position on drugs.

tekkenlaw

That's why I prefer Mike Gravel, I don't agree with a lot of what Ron Paul has to say.

Trocisp

A lot of people are blinding supporting Ron Paul because it's popular, and he's getting an assload of free online press.... I don't want people not to vote for him, in fact, I want people to vote for whoever they want. I just don't want them to think they're supporting someone with similar ideals to them, when, in fact, he may not have similar ideas at all.

fat_enchilada

Hilary is popular, with nearly half of all democrats supporting her.
Ron Paul is NOT popular, with about 5% of the nation supporting him.

He hasn't got a chance - and I'm not saying this as a critic, I've been a fan of his long before the possibility of him running was mentioned. There are some things that I don't agree with him on, but that isn't a problem for me for two reasons: 1) On most issues, you can just do it on the state level, and 2) he's not likely to be able to shake up too many things, because he'll be fighting congress the entire time. What'll happen is you'll see more of our civil liberties protected (pardoning marijuana offenders, refusing to enforce marijuana laws, etc.) and congress being unable to pass laws that don't have bipartisan support. That sounds like a great idea to me.

Trocisp

While I agree with a lot of stuff Ron Paul says, I can't see myself supporting any candidate who thinks it's a good idea to build a seven hundred mile fence along our twenty one hundred mile border with Mexico. That automatically eliminated all the currently-running republicans.