Paul Wins NV Straw Poll in Absentia, Beats Romney Who Spoke in Person

[Scary_Tiger]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to vote for Paul. His stance on abortion contradicts his other views, imo. Banning, or allowing the states to decide, seems to be a pretty clear case of violating property rights.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allowing it to be murdered is a pretty clear violation of the baby's rights.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
also abortion is a pretty major issue, and you can't really back off the positions RP has made

[/ QUOTE ]

Ron Paul has already softened his position on abortion. In the videos thread there is a recently posted one of a speech in Iowa where he hammers the "life begins at conception" and a nationally televised one where he talks about how abortion should be states rights, how he doesn't want federal law to determine what individuals do.

[/ QUOTE ]

he doesn't want federal law to determine what individuals do, but he'll still define the beginning of life at conception. That will ban all abortions because it would be murder. Its not that hard, just come to terms with the fact that RP wants to abortion

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if federal law defined life as beginning at conception, most abortions still wouldn't be murders because there's not a general federal law against murder.

[ikestoys]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
also abortion is a pretty major issue, and you can't really back off the positions RP has made

[/ QUOTE ]

Ron Paul has already softened his position on abortion. In the videos thread there is a recently posted one of a speech in Iowa where he hammers the "life begins at conception" and a nationally televised one where he talks about how abortion should be states rights, how he doesn't want federal law to determine what individuals do.

[/ QUOTE ]

he doesn't want federal law to determine what individuals do, but he'll still define the beginning of life at conception. That will ban all abortions because it would be murder. Its not that hard, just come to terms with the fact that RP wants to abortion

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if federal law defined life as beginning at conception, most abortions still wouldn't be murders because there's not a general federal law against murder.

[/ QUOTE ]

::head asplode::

[j555]

All states have their own murder laws. And the DoMA defines marriage at the federal level as a union between a man and a woman, yet Massachusetts seems to allow gay marriage. So I think it's similar to the DoMA in structure, but maybe I'm interpreting it wrong.

[ikestoys]

[ QUOTE ]
All states have their own murder laws. And the DoMA defines marriage at the federal level as a union between a man and a woman, yet Massachusetts seems to allow gay marriage. So I think it's similar to the DoMA in structure, but maybe I'm interpreting it wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

pretty sure all the act says is that a state doesnt have to recognize a different state's gay marriage law. Saying that you can't be charged for murder at a federal level is el oh el and shows how desperately you want Ron Paul not to be so anti-abortion. I find the mental backflips funny, keep them coming.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
misfire-
support your prior post plz. do you have any data that supports this? or are you just gasping at straws defending RP?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure which prior post you're referring to. If the one about Dean, I could pull the numbers, but I didn't think there was any controversey... Dean polled like he could be the nominee, and then came in a distant third in the Iowa caucus. (Yeeeeaahh!!!)

If you were referencing my claim about the New York Times referring to the income tax as unamerican...

Quoth the New York Times Upfront:

[ QUOTE ]
The hue and cry reached a crescendo in 1894, when Congress passed a new income tax: Any money earned over $4,000 was taxed at 2 percent. In Eastern cities, where most of the nation's rich resided, the wealthy blasted the new law as class warfare, an attempt by lower-income Americans to use government to grab at their wealth. In an editorial, The New York Times called the income tax "vicious, inequitable, unpopular, impolitic, socialistic," and even "un-American."

[/ QUOTE ]

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Saying that you can't be charged for murder at a federal level is el oh el and shows how desperately you want Ron Paul not to be so anti-abortion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always understood that you can only be charged for murder at the federal level if you murder a federal employee. I seem to remember Timothy McVeigh* having two trials, one at the state for all the civilians he killed, and another at the federal level for the federal employees or agents. If that's true, I don't see how abortion would be any different if Roe v. Wade was overturned.

*Quoth wiki:

[ QUOTE ]
"The U.S. Department of Justice brought federal charges against McVeigh for causing the deaths of the eight federal officers leading to a possible death penalty for McVeigh; it could not bring charges against McVeigh for the remaining 160 murders in federal court because those deaths fell under the jurisdiction of the state of Oklahoma."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ikestoys]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
misfire-
support your prior post plz. do you have any data that supports this? or are you just gasping at straws defending RP?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure which prior post you're referring to. If the one about Dean, I could pull the numbers, but I didn't think there was any controversey... Dean polled like he could be the nominee, and then came in a distant third in the Iowa caucus. (Yeeeeaahh!!!)

If you were referencing my claim about the New York Times referring to the income tax as unamerican...

Quoth the New York Times Upfront:

[ QUOTE ]
The hue and cry reached a crescendo in 1894, when Congress passed a new income tax: Any money earned over $4,000 was taxed at 2 percent. In Eastern cities, where most of the nation's rich resided, the wealthy blasted the new law as class warfare, an attempt by lower-income Americans to use government to grab at their wealth. In an editorial, The New York Times called the income tax "vicious, inequitable, unpopular, impolitic, socialistic," and even "un-American."

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

i was thinking you were talking about Dean's rise, not fall. I guess youre saying polls aren't always right, etc. etc., therefore RP isn't in that bad of shape. But Iowa was a caucus, which is inherently unpredictable. The reason why he fell so bad was because he looked like such an idiot afterwards

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that you can't be charged for murder at a federal level is el oh el and shows how desperately you want Ron Paul not to be so anti-abortion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always understood that you can only be charged for murder at the federal level if you murder a federal employee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't you aware that Ron Paul plans to make all unborn babies federal employees?

[iron81]

Polling data leading up to the Iowa caucus.

Polling data leading up to the New Hampshire primary.

Based on the Iowa Caucus wiki page, the vote totals are not reflective of support that would be counted in polling. If a candidate does not get at least 20% support from a precinct, that candidate gets zero delegates from that precinct. You'll see that the lesser candidates got 0% of the vote when that is obviously impossible. Essentially what happened was, the undecideds and Gephardt supporters who weren't allowed to vote for Gephardt gravitated to Kerry and Edwards. This does not mean that the polling was inaccurate and the polling correctly predicted that Kerry would win Iowa. The Zogby tracking poll indicated that Kerry took the lead from Dean a few days before Iowa.

Moving on to New Hampshire, the polling pretty much nailed it. The polling average was within 4% even in a highly fluid situation one week after the Iowa results.