Ron Paul's Straw Poll Showing

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then the conductor called your stop, breaking you out of your waking dream and you realized that it will be Romney or Giuliani against Clinton and Paul will have no influence on policy, the usual objective of the unelectable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just for the record Copernicus, which Neo-con are you supporting? I know Guliani is the front-runner, but Romney just won the Straw poll. Also, that Bush wannabe Fred Thompson could actually get off his rear and run. I'd just like to know before it becomes a 100% lock for the nomination. So many of you Neo-cons were pushing George Allen before he fizzled out, just curious if your brave enough to back someone before he becomes a "lock".

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't classify any of the candidates as neo-cons, but disregarding that attempt at perjorative, of the current group Giuliani. I am probably more closely aligned with Romney's policies and style than Giuliani's but I accept the reality that a Mormon can't win the big one. It is that same acceptance of the reality of anti-Black and anti-woman sentiment that gives me hope for Giuliani in the general election, not any real understanding of the issues by the swing voters. As Ive said before, sometimes you just have to take the ugly wins. They still count in the standings.


Edited to fix mis-reading of the question.

[/ QUOTE ]


You agree with Giuliani's stance on gun control and abortion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pro-choice and Giuliani is pro-keep the decision with the woman. Its not exactly the same, possibly better than the same, because he's willing to support law even if he's not in total agreement.

Gun control? Absolutely. nothing wrong with registration and demonstration of some minimal competence.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I win by Giuliani is hardly a win for Republicans, Conservatives, or America.

[/ QUOTE ]

Compared to Shrillary a one eyed cocker spaniel choosing policy by where he poops on a grid of alternatives is a win for America.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Cocker spaniel>>>>>>>Hillary=Giulian i.

[rpr]

[ QUOTE ]
This was not a good showing for Ron Paul. His numbers were inflated by Giuliani and McCain not showing up. Before the poll, Paul's commincation director Jesse Benton said, ""We expect to be in the top three. We've got four staffers organizing and we've got a lot of web site RSVPs from volunteers."

Let's not forget....Ron Paul is still less popular than Tom Tancredo.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think it was a good result, although I'm disappointed that his numbers weren't higher. If you seen any of the video from the event, Ron Paul volunteers grossly outnumbered Romneys' paid volunteers. Maybe its just a few die hard supporters from out of state, but $2M or $8M -- whatever Romney spent -- he couldn't get 1/10th of the on the ground support Paul had even with 150 family members there. While waiting for the results in the coliseum, there was at least a 100 Paul supporters and I saw 3 Brownback people. I didn't see 1 Tancredo person the whole event (via Justin.tv).

Rudy and McCain's low numbers just show how the poll is based on who pays to win. The whole poll seems like a joke designed just to raise GOP funds.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
This was a party, not an election. Hitching a ride on a Romney bus, taking a Romney ticket, and then voting for Paul is like going to a club, but because you can't afford it, you feel justified in stiffing the cabbie, sneaking in the fire exit, and then stealing a bottle from behind the bar.

The straw poll is about as important as the class president election at Ames High School. Maybe less so, at least the class president may get a little back seat action out of his win.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was a party AND a vote which helps shape the Prez election to at least some degree (MSM reporting it widely). So your suggestion is that if a candidate buys your vote, you better damn well vote for him or YOU are the one undermining our system. Great.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then the conductor called your stop, breaking you out of your waking dream and you realized that it will be Romney or Giuliani against Clinton and Paul will have no influence on policy, the usual objective of the unelectable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just for the record Copernicus, which Neo-con are you supporting? I know Guliani is the front-runner, but Romney just won the Straw poll. Also, that Bush wannabe Fred Thompson could actually get off his rear and run. I'd just like to know before it becomes a 100% lock for the nomination. So many of you Neo-cons were pushing George Allen before he fizzled out, just curious if your brave enough to back someone before he becomes a "lock".

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't classify any of the candidates as neo-cons, but disregarding that attempt at perjorative, of the current group Giuliani. I am probably more closely aligned with Romney's policies and style than Giuliani's but I accept the reality that a Mormon can't win the big one. It is that same acceptance of the reality of anti-Black and anti-woman sentiment that gives me hope for Giuliani in the general election, not any real understanding of the issues by the swing voters. As Ive said before, sometimes you just have to take the ugly wins. They still count in the standings.


Edited to fix mis-reading of the question.

[/ QUOTE ]


You agree with Giuliani's stance on gun control and abortion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pro-choice and Giuliani is pro-keep the decision with the woman. Its not exactly the same, possibly better than the same, because he's willing to support law even if he's not in total agreement.

Gun control? Absolutely. nothing wrong with registration and demonstration of some minimal competence.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I see wrong with that is government control. Honestly, I trust my neighbors more than I trust politicians, and that means I trust my neighbors with guns more than I trust politicians or police with guns. I think the common people should have guns as the ultimate barrier against government tyranny, exactly as our forefathers intended. I don't think government should be in the business of deciding who gets to own guns and who doesn't, because that defeats the very purpose of guns being the check of last resort against government tyranny.

Giuliani is probably the most rabid anti-gun candidate of the entire current crop. He believes you should have to prove to the satisfaction of government officials that you actually NEED a gun before you should be allowed to possess one.

Giuliani is essentially a Liberal except when it comes to civil rights and Constitutional rights. He is pro social spending, pro big government, pro illegal immigration, deeply anti-gun, pro gay rights, and pro-abortion. How is this candidate NOT a liberal? The only way I see him as being not a liberal, is that he believes that freedom is giving up certain rights, and that he would be willing to use the state to enforce the giving up of those rights which he thinks you ought to give up.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Giuliani is essentially a Liberal except when it comes to civil rights and Constitutional rights.

[/ QUOTE ]

And torturing smelly foriegners.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Giuliani is probably the most rabid anti-gun candidate of the entire current crop. He believes you should have to prove to the satisfaction of government officials that you actually NEED a gun before you should be allowed to possess one.

[/ QUOTE ] That is not my understanding of his position. I have only heard/read him to say that he would favor demonstration of competence to use a gun, not a demonstration of need for a gun.

[ QUOTE ]
Giuliani is essentially a Liberal except when it comes to civil rights and Constitutional rights. He is pro social spending, pro big government, pro illegal immigration, deeply anti-gun, pro gay rights, and pro-abortion. How is this candidate NOT a liberal? The only way I see him as being not a liberal, is that he believes that freedom is giving up certain rights, and that he would be willing to use the state to enforce the giving up of those rights which he thinks you ought to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said in my orignial post, my positions align somewhat better with Romney's and he is unelectable imo. My biggest difference with his that you don't even mention is immigration and that is so far off that it makes him only the best anti-Hillary choice. I don't think its fair to characterize him as "pro-social spending" or "pro-big government" though. He has programs he believes in and programs he doesnt.

Eg. he is not pro Universal Health Care, the biggest ticket item on the socialist agenda. He is anti-welfare as its currently structured and recognizes that the able bodied should be incentivized to work.

On the "big government" side, again he's anti UHC, the biggest government you can get. Hes for privatizing a lot of the public education system and for vouchers.

On abortion he is pro-choice as a matter of law, not a matter of conscience. Abortion as a bellweather of a candidate is way overblown anyway.

On the fiscal side he is in favor of continuing the Bush tax cuts, in favor of reducing the AMT burden and in favor of reductions in sales/use taxes.

WRT to homeland security he is pro-Patriot Act, pro-wireless wiretaps and overseas eavesdropping.

Characterizing him as a "liberal" is way off the mark, imo, especially on the big issues except immigration.

[renodoc]

I'm surprised you even know he got 9%-- all of the news stories I've come across don't even mention him.

[j555]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm surprised you even know he got 9%-- all of the news stories I've come across don't even mention him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I watched a couple news programs this morning and a couple of them conveniently show who placed 1-4, then they go on to talk about how Tommy Thompson will drop, Fred Thompson, Giuliani, and McCain and show who placed 6-10. They could at least show the results and who placed 5th. This is why Ron Paul has absoultely no chance at the nomination.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was not a good showing for Ron Paul. His numbers were inflated by Giuliani and McCain not showing up. Before the poll, Paul's commincation director Jesse Benton said, ""We expect to be in the top three. We've got four staffers organizing and we've got a lot of web site RSVPs from volunteers."

Let's not forget....Ron Paul is still less popular than Tom Tancredo.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think it was a good result, although I'm disappointed that his numbers weren't higher. If you seen any of the video from the event, Ron Paul volunteers grossly outnumbered Romneys' paid volunteers. Maybe its just a few die hard supporters from out of state, but $2M or $8M -- whatever Romney spent -- he couldn't get 1/10th of the on the ground support Paul had even with 150 family members there. While waiting for the results in the coliseum, there was at least a 100 Paul supporters and I saw 3 Brownback people. I didn't see 1 Tancredo person the whole event (via Justin.tv).

Rudy and McCain's low numbers just show how the poll is based on who pays to win. The whole poll seems like a joke designed just to raise GOP funds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying it's a bad result, but it's definitely not some great moral victory that some Ron Paul proponents want to make this out to be. It wasn't so bad that he should consider quitting the way that Tommy Thompson and Duncan Hunter should.

The guy who really had the great results is Mike Huckabee, who reportedly didn't rent any buses to bring people in. And he exceeded expectations even though the Club for Growth ran negative ads against him in Iowa. I wouldn't be surprised if Huckabee and Paul had expenses in the same ballpark. Huckabee is certainly closer to Paul than Romney in spending. Say what you want to about Romney and his spending, but other candidates have spent more for less in the past (Steve Forbes).

The bottom line is that Ron Paul didn't really change his standing relative to other candidates. Tancredo and Huckabee did. Romney is sort of in the same boat as Paul, but maintaining the status quo is more valuable for a front-runner than it is for a lower tier candidate trying to improve and seem viable. But Ron Paul is still a third-tier candidate, a tier that will get smaller if Huckabee and possibly Tancredo are promoted to second tier and Tommy Thompson and Duncan Hunter drop out. He hasn't done anything yet to dispel the notion that he is this year's Alan Keyes who thinks he sees the Republican version of Howard Dean in the mirror.