The front-runners are there because the polling data says they are there. Polls of random citizens.
Well, now you bring up an interesting question.
Are they on top because that's all the media reports on... or does the media report on them cause they're on top?
I think it's a little bit of both, actually.
I mean, Clinton and Guiliani (and of course Fred Thomas) were pretty much well known before they announced their candiaticy... but the others never really broke out. As a result, their plans and their opinions aren't mentioned often, no matter how good (or bad).
I was reading some newspaper (sorry, don't remember which) and they had the audacity to say that no one's really talking about the economy and buisness and Social Security and the country's debt. THAT'S ALL RON PAUL IS TALKING ABOUT. I'm not saying this cause I'm a fan of Ron Paul, but more as criticism to the media.
There ARE people out there talking about issues, but it's usually NOT the frontrunners.
I've heard enough about Clinton and Healthcare and Guiliani and September 11th. What does everyone else have to say?
It's like they don't even care.
Unlike most of the Clinton stories, and unlike rumors that Obama is secretly a Muslim, the Huckabee stories are a matter of record.
Huckabee really did answer that questionare the way he did in 1992. The media is not making that up.
Huckabee really did involve himself in getting a convicted rapist parolled early because Huckabee bought into the far-right crazy conspiracy stories that the man was railroaded in order to "clear" Bill Clinton. And the man went on to murder someone.
It seems his own worst enemy, much like McCain, is his own record.
IMHO, that's what we should be discussing.
Then make your own damn thread. This one's mine.
