Ron Paul, enemy of Iowa

Politico ^ | 12/16/2011 | Ben Smith

[TBBT]

Iowa radio host and weathervane of the state's evangelical political opinion raises fears for Iowa's first-in-the-nation status should it select Ron Paul on caucus day.

"One thing is for certain," Deace writes. "if a candidate with Paul’s foreign policy views wins the Iowa Caucuses that will be the final nail in Iowa’s first in the nation status. Like it or not, the media and the Republican Party itself will simply discredit the results and start the process over in New Hampshire."

Chris Wallace made a similar point on Fox News before last night's debate: "The Ron Paul people are not going to like my saying this," he said. "But to a certain degree, it will discredit the Iowa caucuses because, rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he’s not going to end up as the nominee. So therefore, Iowa won’t count."

[TBBT]

Paul needs the hook...

[Past Your Eyes]

I’m quite sure neither Rong Paul nor any of his sycophant supporters really gives a rip.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Ron Paul is as phony as his eyebrows.

Maybe more so since his eyebrows might have been snipped from another and pasted on.

[Larry381]

Many of the people who are voting for Paul in polls are in actuality Democrats who support Hussein.

[Past Your Eyes]

Nice link. “;^o

[jjotto]

Paul is not going to win the Iowa caucuses and Deace isn’t a bellweather for anything except how to take cheap shots at high school and college athletes. And Iowa already doesn’t matter.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Ron Paul is as phony as my first link!

Ron Paul's Earmark Problem

[Captain7seas]

“I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he’s not going to end up as the nominee. So therefore, Iowa won’t count.”

Right, we sure as heck don’t won’t to get out of lockstep with the “establishment”.

[tacticalogic]

RP's foreign policy is a joke. The only reason he's getting any support is for his fiscal policies and views on constitutional limits on the federal governemnt. If one or more of the other Republican Party candidates had those views they could be a slam dunk.

I'd like to know why they don't. Why is he the only one?

[Norseman]

Ron Paul will be 77 years old by the 2012 election. There is no way in hell that a man that old will be elected to lead the most powerful nation in the world, period.

For starters, every woman over 50, having dealt with husbands and/or fathers in their 60’s and 70’s will realize the insanity of trusting the government to a man who will be 80 years old during his term of office. Most of them would never vote for a man that age to run the country, seriously.

The sad part is that we would probably be in more trouble if he lived the full 4 years than if he passed away early on.

I’ve posted on this age problem Paul has several times now and never gotten a response taking either side of the issue. I find that interesting. Perhaps even Ron Paul’s ardent supporters realize it’s all just a parlor game they’re playing.

Now, if he were to have already selected a VP candidate who held the same views, that I could understand, but there’s no sign of his intending to pass the baton to anyone else. He’s just a lone wolf candidate who knows he’ll never be elected, but likes having a national platform with which to spread his ideas around, some of which are pretty damned good.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

“Right, we sure as heck don’t won’t to get out of lockstep with the “establishment”.”

Yes Indeed. That wouldn’t do at all.

http://www.infowars.com/fox-news-pulls-poll-showing-ron-paul-debate-victory-claims-mitt-romney-won/

Since the Establishment Knows SO much better, as in throwing the Last election by shoving Canvasback McCain at us.

[JimWayne]

Sadly, here are the choices we have:

Ron Paul - Good economic policy. Has an isolationist foreign policy. He is not going to win.
Rick Perry - Supports socialist programs like bailouts and stimulus. Is for open borders with Mexico.
Newt Gingrich - Global Warmist. He will also talk about being a fiscal conservative but plans to trick us if elected president. His foreign policy is similar to Ron Paul's in the sense that he will not invade Russia or China.
Rick Santorum - progressive conservative and radical fiscal socialist who has supported ethanol subsidies and has also supported Muslims and Maoists in his newspaper article. He supported Arlen Specter and helped unions with earmarks. He has no foreign policy, just a lust for power.
Michele Bachmann - I thought she was good but she seems to have no support.
Mitt Romney - Socialist. Pro-Israel. Will invade other countries. These are things some people on FR care about. They do not care about America, only about Israel. They do not care about the economy of the US one way or other as long as they get some pro-Israel rhetoric. Mitt Romney is their favorite candidate.

[martian622]

In answer to your rhetorical question, it seems establishment Republicans seem to find his fiscal and constitutional policies as distasteful as his foreign policy of having congress declare war instead of the president.

The MSM has programmed us to hate Iran as Iran's MSM has programmed their people to hate us. It's been a long process of sanctioning and waging war on many ME countries, chasing Al Quaeda after 9/11, instead of going to the origin of the organization and home of the original terrorists - Saudi Arabia. The war on terror has given the fedgov extraordinary powers over everyone, including US Citizens, and it will never, ever be given up. Establishment types love this kind of power. IMHO

[RealImmigrant]

RP’s foreign policy is a joke. The only reason he’s getting any support is for his fiscal policies and views on constitutional limits on the federal governemnt. If one or more of the other Republican Party candidates had those views they could be a slam dunk.

I’d like to know why they don’t. Why is he the only one?

---

That is the real troubling part...no other candidate is as comitted to small government or sound fiscal policies

[Proud2BeRight]

Maybe it is the Illuminati, Big Foot and chemtrails that are at fault. Anything on Alex Jones has to on the mark, huh?

[Norseman]

>>RP’s foreign policy is a joke.<<

I’m sorry, but the real joke is his age. I mean, what do we think would happen if we nominated him? Get a lock on the vote of the elderly? Give me a break.

By the way, Rick Perry’s view that Congress should go part time and hold real jobs in the off season (as they do in Texas) is a pretty good start on limiting the federal government. It’s not likely to ever happen, but it’s the right mindset. He’s the most experienced conservative in the field, and Iowa will become very relevant if his bus tour results in a surprise performance in the caucus.

In fact, Perry should be going for some of the Ron Paul vote, given that he’s at least electable while Paul definitely is not. Surely at least some of his supporters can understand that.

[Proud2BeRight]

Blame America for 9/11, ignore Iran and the rest of radical Islam, promote drug use, etc. aside, once rational Americans get a look at the vile trash in the Ron Paul newsletters, his party is over.

[Norseman]

>>....his party is over.<

His party is already over. He hasn’t got a chance in hell and any sane person knows that.

Having said that, there is an encouraging note regarding his candidacy. The fact that he does have many young supporters, although uninformed about many of his views, indicates that there are a lot of young people out there who aren’t drinking the MSM/Obama/Democrat Kool-Aid that fueled the Occupy crowds.

Ron Paul advocates smaller, radically smaller, government and less government intrusion in our personal lives. The Dems argue the opposite. At least Ron Paul’s supporters are on the right side of that divide, and can probably be counted as being primarily in the Republican column should we ever succeed in running an actual conservative candidate for President. Of course, that remains to be seen, since neither of the two current front-runners comes remotely close to being a reliable conservative.

[littlesorrel]

Look this election is about killing the Tea Party and Sarah Palin from political life.If Romney gets the nomination does it matter who wins. Politics as usual. Hell if I was 77 and my country was going to hell and had kids and grand kids I would try to change the direction of the country.Without economic change what the hell does worrying about the rest of the world matter. We’re broke. Which candidate is closest to the ideals of the Tea Party ? Because without the Tea Party it is 2008 all over again.

[FrankR]