Posted on 12/17/2011 7:36:29 AM PST by 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."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
FYI Charles Black did a poll on election day in 1992. Never reported on any network. Question if Ross Perot had a chance to win who would who have voted for? Perot would have won with 40% of the vote. Here we are 10 trillion dollars more debt latter.
All that really means is that the Republicans missed an opportunity by not nominating Ross Perot. Perot didn’t have a chance, as indicated by the actual result. If he’d have been nominated as a Republican, he’d have had a chance. By running as a third party candidate, he tossed the election to Clinton.
All we need now is for Ron Paul to go the same route, with potentially the same result, four more years of the worst President the country has ever endured.
>>Which candidate is closest to the ideals of the Tea Party?<<
You ask the wrong question. It should be “which candidate that has a decent chance of winning the general election is closest to the ideals of the Tea Party?”
Unfortunately, the GOP establishment seems to be using just the other half of the question: “Which candidate has a decent chance of winning the general election?”
I support Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Ryan, Daniels, Palin, Rubio, Gingrich and Romney, in that order, based on my question, and I really hope we don’t make it to the bottom two names on the list, even though I agree that either would be preferable to Obama, by far. Any one of the people on my list should be able to beat Obama in 2012, if they run anything close to a competent campaign.
And Ron Paul isn’t even on it. He can’t win a general election, even as the Republican nominee. For that matter, there’s a decent chance he won’t even make it to the general election. According to actuarial tables, there’s a greater than 4% chance he’ll be dead by November of 2012. (Oh, and about one in four chance he wouldn’t be alive at the end of his term.)
Nothing Changes.Perot ran for President because he was winning in the polls. Then the political class went to work.Character assainations, MSM attacks , the next Hitler, can’t win. The same attacks given to Palin after they were leading in the polls. The attacks come from the GOP establishment and Democrats.
Ron Paul will end up supporting Romney...and telling his supporters to do likewise.
How Right you are.
If it’s False, Defamatory, or Libelous of Fox WHY hasn’t FOX asked them/sued them to apologize or take it down?
And I don’t believe that article references “Illuminati, Big Foot and chemtrails”.
I’ll leave Those to the Establishment types who shoved old Canvasback at us last time, because McCain had about as much chance of Winning as the” Illuminati, Big Foot and Chemtrails” did, and the Establishment types who chumped us with McCain had to know it.
If they Didn’t, and they’re the Same fools trying to Romney us this time, .....
Enemy of the IRS, fed reserve, dept of Ed.. Etc. Thankfully, those will all continue to be protected by the establishment.
Look Romney is going to be the nominee. The political class wants it that way. I’m not a Ron Paul guy but I trust him more than the rest. Palin was and is my choice. The political class knows that if Palin had one more convention speech she would win in a landslide. People at the Institute of Advance Study at Princeton call this imprinting. She would have imprinted another generation of conservative voters and anchored them for generations.Think of Obama’ s speech in Boston 2004 and Reagan in 1976. It’s called crony capitalism Keep things as is and under control by the political class.
Your tagline, wasn’t that the original name of General Thomas Jackson’s horse??
1. Blame America for 9/11? This canard is only plausible if you buy into the equally specious belief that that average American has any say in what US foreign policy should be. You think that the clowns that control US foreign policy are acting in the best interests of the American people? You think they give a damn about the will of the American people? How can the American people be held responsible for something they have no control over and are not in agreement with?
"The issues are much too important for the voters to be left to decide for themselves." - Henry Kissinger
2. Iran is a fourth rate power and poses absolutely no threat to the American people. What army do they have? What navy? Iranians have killed how many Americans? Is it as many as Mexicans kill every day? Do the Iranians have us by the financial short hairs like the Chinese do?
3. If radical Islam is such a threat why does the US and NATO continue to import hundreds of thousand of Muslims into US and European countries every year? After 9/11 Bush never stopped importing Muslims or closed the southern borders though which battalions of screaming, suicidal turban heads could have marched undetected. If radical Islam is such a threat why did the US-NATO bomb Libya in order to hand it over to our mortal enemy Al Qaeda?
4. The "War on Drugs" is an abject failure and a colossal waste of money. Drug abuse is way up, drug profits are way up, the American people's liberty is way down. Ron Paul doesn't want anyone to abuse drugs and its a slanderous lie to say he does. Paul only says that the problem should be handled by the States like is says so in the Constitution.
>>Look Romney is going to be the nominee.<<
I’ll bet you $10,000 that Romney is not going to be the nominee. (just kidding)j
But it’s highly unlikely that he will be. He can’t get past 25% in the polls for a reason. We’re looking for the ABR candidate and aren’t going to stop looking. Eventually, we’ll settle on Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, or have a brokered convention, if two of those three survive the primaries.
Ask yourself this: Regardless whether your choice is Gingrich, Perry, Bachman, or Santorum, if you have only one of those on the list to vote for, versus a vote for Romney, does Romney get your vote? Or does the other guy/gal, the ABR candidate, regardless where you stand now?
My bet is that ABR wins, though it’s going to be a messy process getting there. By the time it’s over, Tim Pawlenty might find himself wishing he’d stayed in the race. In fact, he probably wonders that even now, given the way things have been going.
You obviously support some of the most fringe parts of Paul’s ideology, what do you think of his vile newsletters? Do you believe, as Ron Paul does that there was “glee” in the Bush administration after 9/11? Do you also defend the OWS parasites like Ron Paul does?
Ron Paul is a nutcase on the far libertarian fringe of society. He is NOT conservative. He is NOT Tea Party. He is not GOP.
Defend his positions all you want, but find a different horse.
The man will be 77 Years old by election day. He will never, ever, be the President of the United States, if for no other reason than that. So, the only logical position for his supporters is to find the candidate who best reflects most of his views. And that is what many of them will end up doing, rather than wasting their vote and simultaneously contributing to Obama’s re-election.
Clearly, with the possible exception of foreign policy, Obama’s method of governance is the antithesis of Paul’s, so a Paul supporter would be ill-advised to contribute to Obama’s re-election. Or they just don’t care about the country, in which case they might actually be potential Obama supporters in Paul’s absence.
>>Ron Paul will end up supporting Romney...and telling his supporters to do likewise.<<
Ron Paul will end up supporting Gingrich...and telling his supporters to do likewise.
Ron Paul will end up supporting Perry...and telling his supporters to do likewise.
Ron Paul will end up supporting Bachmann...and telling his supporters to do likewise.
Ron Paul will end up supporting Santorum...and telling his supporters to do likewise.
Contributes a lot to the discussion when the reasoning is absent...no?
I was one of the idiots that voted for perot...and learned the lesson of a lifetime about “vote splitting”...never again.
Not necessary .
ONLY people that old remember when America had some freedoms.
They are the ONLY ones that know what liberty is.
Younger men and women have spent so much time in communist indoctrination and social engineering by schools, the press and the goverment, they would make terrible leaders for a free country. They are afraid of freedom.
I Heard That!
We’re ALL Living the ‘Issues’. And a Lot of us are tired of living those ‘Issues’
http://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/letter-azcc-villaraigosa.pdf.pdf
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.