Liabel for saying "no chance of winning"?

[Elwar]

Ok, all throughout the Republican primaries there were pundants who would say things such as "Ron Paul has no chance of winning" or "There's no way he'll win", etc.

Considering there was a chance of winning (even if it's 1%, it's still a chance), wouldn't it be libel for someone to publish an untruth about someone?

Maybe even the "he's crazy" claims as well...?

[apropos]

Paul is a public official, and that alone makes it much harder to win something like this.

Considering how the election turned out, this case would be thrown out immediately. Sorry.

[Elwar]

I'm merely looking to the future, to nip this in the bud before it starts either with Rand/Peter or in 2012...

Stating that someone has "no chance" is quite easily a lie...even I have a billion to one chance of becoming president.

[apropos]

Well, you'll have to prove the statement was made with actual malice. Actual malice means that the defendant who communicates a defamatory statement does so knowing that the statement is false or very likely false. With the faintest doubt there was actual malice, the first amendment argument wins.

A one in a billion shot and having no chance are the same thing to any reasonable person.

[Flirple]

How is saying "He has no chance of winning", or saying anything for that matter, a violation of Ron Paul's property rights or us supporters' property rights?

You don't have a natural right to your reputation, only a right to your property.

What about everyone on these boards who have made the similar statements about other candidates and politicians in the past? Should they be charged with liabel too?

I think maybe someone needs to bone up on their Rothbard ;)

[RM918]

If only it were true. Paul could sue to fund a campaign in 2012 quite easily. Not very likely, though.

[angelatc]

Paul is a public official, and that alone makes it much harder to win something like this.

Considering how the election turned out, this case would be thrown out immediately. Sorry.

The way the election turned out could be construed as evidence of damages. Just sayin'...

[ford_jj]

Ok, all throughout the Republican primaries there were pundants who would say things such as "Ron Paul has no chance of winning" or "There's no way he'll win", etc.

Considering there was a chance of winning (even if it's 1%, it's still a chance), wouldn't it be libel for someone to publish an untruth about someone?

Maybe even the "he's crazy" claims as well...?

We can create the chance. http://www.photosnag.com/img/4713/n09x0302vnsn/clear.gif

[micahnelson]

You want to limit someone's speech in order to promote liberty?