Could a 9/11 Truth Candidate Win the Presidency?
A new Wall Street Journal poll shows that 53% of Americans back the idea of building a third party to mount a presidential candidacy.
Seven of 10 say an independent would enhance the presidential campaign, and just 11% say they wouldn’t consider voting for an independent.
For the first time, I'm wondering whether a third party candidate could actually win. Now, of course, the candidate would have to get past the corporate media, who vehemently attacks anyone who does not support the corporate/fascist state. And the candidate would also have to be popular enough to overcome the election fraud which is sure to carried out by the powers-that-be in 2008. But if the candidate is popular enough, then even with alot of mischief, he or she might be able to win (even though there was voter fraud in 2006, the Democrats won).
True, the Wall Street Journal poll showed that in a hypothetical independent bid against Clinton and Giuliani, New York City Mayor Bloomberg drew just 16% from self-described independents. However, Bloomberg is just the same old same old.
If a candidate talked about real issues, like 9/11, and the Constitution, and fasiscm, he or she might do alot better.
What if Kucinich blew off the Democratic party -- which isn't supporting him -- and ran independent?
What if Ron Paul blew off the Republican party -- which isn't supporting him -- started talking about 9/11 truth, and ran independent?
Or should a new candidate who is a strong 9/11 truthteller run?
Obviously, another false flag attack and the whole Constitution (let alone an election) would probably be suspended, and the secret Continuity of Government Plan would be implemented. But perhaps a real 9/11 truth and anti-false flag independent candidate could get the word out, reducing the risk of another false flag.
The real question is -- given the media's hatred of anyone who is not a corporate lapdog -- are we prepared to get the word out about an independent candidate?