Posted on 12/26/2011 4:38:21 PM PST by TBBT
Ron Paul is surging in the Republican presidential race. Just not among Republicans.
The Texas congressman is leading some polls in Iowa and is in a tie for second in New Hampshire. A candidacy once dismissed as sideshow is now being taken very seriously; the front page of Monday's Des Moines Register featured a huge spread under the headline "COULD RON PAUL WIN?"
Given Paul's views on the Fed, the gold standard and social issues, not to mention his isolationist foreign policy, the polls have left some politicos wondering whether Republican voters have somehow swerved off the rails. But there's another question that should be asked first: Who are Ron Paul's supporters? Are they, in fact, Republicans?
In an analysis accompanying his most recent survey in Iowa, pollster Scott Rasmussen noted, "Romney leads, with Gingrich in second, among those who consider themselves Republicans. Paul has a wide lead among non-Republicans who are likely to participate in the caucus."
The same is true in New Hampshire. A poll released Monday by the Boston Globe and the University of New Hampshire shows Paul leading among Democrats and independents who plan to vote in the January 10 primary. But among Republicans, Paul is a distant third -- 33 points behind leader Mitt Romney.
In South Carolina, "Paul's support is higher among those who usually don't vote in GOP primary elections," notes David Woodard, who runs the Palmetto Poll at Clemson University.
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
More evidence for closed primaries/caucuses?
Yes, and he may well end up winning VA too! (snicker)
The GOP does not want them all closed.
They feed on having cross-over and Independent votes in blue and purple states. Otherwise, they’ll be stuck with very Conservative candidates.
I agree - close the votes. Leftists have no business voting in GOP elections.
I am a strict-constructionist conservative who has voted for Ron Paul every time I see his name on the ballot. Then again, I have admitted defeat to the marxists who have been overtaking our government and culture for decades. We live in interesting times. Tweeking will not solve our problems and overhaul will be met with anarchy due to the now dominant dependent class that we have so laboriously constructed.
I’m no fan of Paul but the GOP is going to self destruct in their rabid attempt to destroy him.
I see him as a symptom of our problems, not the cause.
There is a serious consideration that everyone should make about Ron Paul. First make a list of things he is advocating that you *like*, and the things you *don’t like*.
Second, and this is the important part. Which items on *both* lists can a president actually do? Remember that the POTUS is *not* omnipotent, nor as much as Obama wants, he is not a dictator.
The president does not appropriate money, nor does he really write a budget, other than a wish list. This is why so many presidential budgets are called “dead on arrival”, because congress quite properly ignores them.
In fact, if you look at the office of the presidency, what presidents enjoy most is doing the *unconstitutional* things that they are doing. And they do plenty of them.
Importantly, if Ron Paul stands for anything, it is opposition to the blatantly unconstitutional. So ask yourself, will he do what other presidents have done and ignore the constitution?
Will he issue the horribly unconstitutional “presidential signing statements” that Obama railed against as a candidate, but just a day or two ago went hog-wild with?
The bottom line, that many voters may grasp, is that for his many faults, he has made a career about following the constitution, not evading it.
Can any other Republican be trusted to do that?
And in the final analysis, if the president does not obey the constitution, does it matter what else he does?
Personally I think its because Paul only serves to help elect RINO frontrunners. If it weren’t for him, rationale might prevail and many of his votes would likely go to the reasonable conservatives in the race.
“I’m no fan of Paul but the GOP is going to self destruct in their rabid attempt to destroy him.”
Probably, and the irony is that RP already has talked at length about the concept of “blowback.” Can’t say as I hope the gop will get a clue. Better they end up on the trash heap of history with the whigs and we get a new, better party that might actually represent conservatives.
Me too. I vote for him to send a message. But now the message is = Ron Paul will be the Republican candidate!! and every one will gather in behind to support this intellectual giant. Now before you criticize my opinion— I want you to tell me who you really want. (so I can bash the hell out of he or she) And it better not be romney. Romney isn’t liked here and you would be well advised not to come out for him on this web site. You need some socialist website for that. WE ARE CONSERVATIVES.
Would they be similar to "compassionate conservatives"?
“They feed on having cross-over and Independent votes in blue and purple states. Otherwise, they’ll be stuck with very Conservative candidates”
That is a very good observation. It is one way the RINO establishment has to keep the Conservatives at bay. Anothers is to change the voting rules in mid-steam ala (Virginia).
Open political associations are stupid.
It’s like living in a big house on the edge of the ‘hood, and putting a big sign in the front yard that says, “Anyone who wants can live here.” And then acting shocked when you can’t stand living in your own house any more because the riff-raff have taken over.
I think the mischief slows down in South Carolina, which is an open primary state, but one I believe has less Paultards than IO & NH. And the mischief comes to a complete halt - at least temporarily - in Florida, where only Republicans can vote in the primary, and registration closes a few weeks before Florida’s January 29 primary, at January 3rd.
But Paul can do a lot of damage in the meantime. If Paul deprives Gingrich of victories in both IO & NH, then Gingrich will have to hang on and maintain momentum sufficient to win South Carolina & Florida, states where he is presently the polling favorite. I hope Gingrich makes it; but if he doesn’t, it will be Paul who caused Romney to win the nomination.
Well, it surely ain’t Democrats.
Nearly all Democrats are totally against 95% of what Ron Paul stands for, and for what Ron Paul is going to do.
The Democrats do not want to eliminate 5 federal departments, the Democrats do not want strict Constitutional Supreme Court Justices, the Democrats do not want a repeal of the 1934 and 1968 Gun Control Acts, they do not want a trillion dollar cut in federal spending, they do not want the income tax eliminated, the Democrats do not want welfare eliminated, etc etc etc
>>I am a strict-constructionist conservative who has voted for Ron Paul every time I see his name on the ballot.<<
With Pat Paulson dead, what else could you do?
As I just posted on another thread:
"The last thing the Republican party, and some here on FR, want is a candidate who is a principled, consistent conservative."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.