Will Ron Paul fizzle out?

Post Reply New Topic

Honestly, Ron Paul's done a lot of pandering to the Iowa Religious Right and the Tea Party overlaps substantially with religious rightists.

Ensuring that the only support system for the poor around are Church missionaries also benefits religious right proselytizers.

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 28 Dec 2011, 10:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Only the righteous poor deserve to be fed.

The religious right will not support the elderly because they feel it is the children's responsibility.

Younger people will vote for Ron Paul thinking that they can get a bigger paycheck because social security taxes are not withheld. Unfortunately young people do not realize that someday they will get old and they will need that social security money.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edQNjJZFdLU[/youtube]

The indigent old and young must do the decent thing.

Or Paul Ryan can just wheel them off of a cliff.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

You know, of all the reasons I have for possibly voting Paul, lower taxes would have to be at the very bottom of the list. I'm much more interested in rolling back the civil liberties violations we've seen expanding under Bush/Obama than in keeping a bit more of my paycheck, in fact I'd be willing to pay if I thought it would help get rid of DHS or some of the other jackbooted feds.

It looks like Rick Santorum is suddenly surging in Iowa, particularly among the religious extremists.

or so says the media. The guy has no money and no organization.

The CNN poll yesterday was over a week old and only registered republicans. 0 Democrats, 0 independents, 0 new voters. Democrats and independents are expected to make up about 1/4th of caucus goers on January 3rd, Ron Paul leads with them with 39% to 12% for Romney. It's hard to predict how many crossover or new voters there will be but it definitely won't be 0, especially with no caucus for the Democrats this time around. Factoring that in, Santorum is still sitting near 10% give or take. No change at all. Some surge, lol.

It appears that Bachmann campaign is self-destructing so her remaining supporters might be looking to abandon ship come caucus night. Santorum could pick up quite a few of them but according to latest PPP poll crosstabs, the second choice for Bachmann supporters are Paul at 31%. Santorum at 27%, and 9% for Mitt Romney. Bachmann only is polling at 10-11% so we're only talking about a couple % change.

Ron Paul has a ~0% chance of winning the nomination. So it doesn't really matter.

Romney is going to slide right in there. What we are watching is the base trying to come to terms with it by acting out. The same forces that put John McCain in there will win out.

Yeah, if only he had the black and white zealotry of a Ron Paul hero-worshiper. As we all know, the MSM is either completely right on everything they say about Paul or completely wrong, there's no in-betweens.

Throwing around political terms as epithets without understanding their meaning makes a person sound crazy. For example, Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, not a Republican (although perhaps you're using "Wilsonian" as a doctrine advocating use of U.S. military power abroad). Trotskyites are a splinter group of Marxist-Leninists who chose to follow Leon Trotsky over Joseph Stalin; it was a faction of Soviet-style communism. Some claim that some founding members of neoconservatism were formerly attracted to an anti-Stalinist left-wing politics, but this is not sufficient to make neoconservatism some variant of Trotskyism.

Of course there is an in-between. There is legitimate coverage of the issues that they may disagree with and then there are smears. I will say Cenk is better than 90% of the MSM(if he's still considered part of it) when it comes to giving somebody their due.

They all advocate interventionist foreign policy with the intent of some sort of worldwide revolution. The influence of the former 2 on the latter is undeniable.

I'm not sure. Elements of the base are becoming more zealous and less inclined to compromise all the time. I've read statements to the effect that Obama would be better than Romney because they're both liberals and Obama would be, politically speaking, easier to obstruct.

I could see the zealots splitting off, just to play spoiler.

of course theres plenty of small reasons paul supporters try to convince himself that he has a shot of winning.

the fact is before he can face obama, he needs to win the republican base.

moderate republicans will reject his economic policies.
strong republicans will reject his national security policy.

his support lies in some independents and libertarians (less than 3% of the country), and thats it.