I would be willing to place some very serious money on how close that total is to the results we see for Ron Paul in New Hampshire.

Five thoughts:

1.  Most polls are conducted by the media or other organizations which are owned and/or controlled by the not-so-secret-any-more powers that see Ron Paul and his threat to their plans for a one world government of the elite as their worst nightmare.  Hmmm. . . .

2.  Most polls are conducted by phones using two years or older voter registration records.  Many of Ron Paul's supporters were either disillusioned and had dropped out of the farce we call a free democratic election, or else were too young, to be on such rolls.  Many others may not fit the profile of those who sit at home by the phone, or, like me, may not even have a regular phone other than my cell phone.

3.  Are we to believe that only the 5% of the voters who support Ron Paul are the ones who watch the televised debates where Ron Paul has won virtually every time?  The ludicrous idea of his voters spamming the post debate call-in votes has been put to rest by restricting votes to only one text message per phone number the last two or more debates - despite Sean Hannity's idiotic red faced blustering over the results.

4.  Are we also to believe that donations from a mere 5% support base combined to give Ron Paul  the largest single day fundraising total in history (over 37,000 individual donations totalling over $4.2 Million!)?

5.  And finally, are we to believe that our military is so out of touch with the rest of the population they protect and serve?  Ron Paul has received substantially more money from our troops than any other candidate - more in fact than all the rest of the Republican candidates combined.  If one counters that with the argument that he has received such support because he has promised to bring the troops home, the obvious rebuttal is the fact that fully 70% of the public has indicated that they favor the same thing.

Perhaps if he teamed up with Mrs.Clinton it might just work.

Not in this lifetime.  Hillary is no more than Dubya wearing a different mask in our pretend game of two party's handpicked and filtered candidates could possible represent a fair and democratic election for the hundreds of millions of citizens in this country.  Much the same is true in Jolly Old England as well, is it not? Now, let's see - which country's leader is Dubya's best pal and most ardent supporter of the debacle in Iraq?  Hmmm again.

Our elections have little to do with who really runs this country and the world. The Bush's and Clintons are actually firm friends who merely keep up the pretense of opposing each other's views.  Ron Paul represents everything that Hillary and virtually every other candidate does not - independence from the control of the Bilderburg power elite, less government and restoration of the freedoms and principles of our founding fathers.

Can Americans put prejudice aside or perhaps risk more of the same? The question goes begging,tomi.

America can and is putting aside prejudice when it comes to Ron Paul - which is openly apparent when you see the diversity of age, sex, race, religion and philosophies that makes up the swelling group of Ron Paul supporters.  No other candidate can claim such a diverse group of supporters - one which truly represents the melting pot of ordinary people who make up America.

The question that goes begging is how many of us (and how soon) will be able to see past the electoral charade that has so cruelly been played on us every four years for ages now and take action to restore our country before it is lost forever. For the sake of our country, our world, and our children, I hope that the answer is "enough of us soon enough before it is truly too late".

DQ