Skip to comments.Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted on 05/14/2012 12:11:34 PM PDT by Kevin C
Rep. Ron Paul of Texas said Monday he will not compete in primaries in any of the states that have not yet voted essentially confirming Mitt Romney will win the Republican presidential nomination. Mr. Paul said he will continue to work for delegates in states that have already voted and where the process of delegate-selection is playing out. He said thats a way to make his voice heard at the nominating convention in Tampa, Fla., in August. Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted, Mr. Paul said. Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have. He did encourage his supporters to still turn out and vote. His decision not to compete for new votes in other states leaves Mr. Romney as the only candidate still actively fighting for voters support.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
This may make his supporters become even nuttier and more vocal.
Nobody had Romney’s money.
He's the only one actually out there taking delegates away from Romney.
He's the only one out there promoting a sane, conservative fiscal policy.
He's the only one out there refusing to vote for the overreach of the federal government.
He's the only one out there pointing out that out military should be pulled from wherever it's not given ROEs that allow it to fight military battles to protect America by destroying the enemy and then coming home, rather than getting endlessly blown up doing pat-downs as a UN police force.
Nutty? There's about a 100 million American that agree with about 90% of what he says. Your tired meme is an ant against a tidal wave.
Romney had more money, more supporters, and better organization.
One can complain about Romney's scorched-earth rhetoric against Gingrich and others (to say nothing of his own ideological fudgings and missteps) but Romney didn't win on money alone. It was also man-power, hustle, discipline, and brains.
Not a fan of either, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing. If "making his voice heard" means holding Romney's feet to the low-tax, lesser-government fire, then some good will come of it.
He’s the only one out there advocating that we allow Islamic Jihadist to get nuclear weapons.
Romney won by default.
Money isn’t enough. Romney surived a 4 year smear campaign by people who were doing to him what they accused him of doing. It was very methodial. Romney is a tough fighter, a good man. Some people just refuse to see it cause they had their own agenda. This is the first time in a long time the Republican Primary voters got a really tough fighter who didn’t get it handed to him cause of some backroom deal, contrary to all that bull about him being the Establishment pick. There was a concerted effort to stop Romney at all costs, and it fell flat cause Romney is as smart as he is tough. A person doesn’t have to show their hand to be a tough fighter, in fact, the really good fighers don’t. The Republican party is very lucky this time, despite all the efforts to stop Romney. This is the first time in a long time, we have gotten a nominee who the powers that be tried to stop at all costs and failed, That includes Fox News and some others you worship.
We stuck around after the end of hostilities in Japan, Germany and South Korea, and it worked out extremely well. It just stands to reason you would want to exert control over a country after going to war with it and winning to make sure they remake themselves in a friendly form. Simply leaving after the war means risking losing your blood and treasure only to see the enemy reconstitute itself.
Not to mention, we need a military presence around the world as a counterbalance to would-be empires. Wherever we leave creates a vacuum that will be filled in by hostile, imperial powers to our eventual detriment. The Ron Paul foreign policy only works if you believe in pure "peace and love" hippie idealism where everyone would simply "make love, not war" if we completely removed our presence and influence. If you believe that, I'm sure there's an open spot in a Code Pink forum where you can engage with like-minded folks.
More vocal, perhaps. But they reached the pinnacle of nuttiness long ago.
With all due respect,I must ask you if you have talked to the typical Ron Paul supporter.I ask this because the ones that I’ve spoken to around here are a little bit around the bend so to speak.
You just wrote either the most ignorant or dishonest post I’ve ever seen on FR. Most of FOX News, Drudge, Coulter, The Washington Times, many “conservative” radio hosts, and the establishment Republican elites were in the tank for Romney from Day Zero and pushed and promoted him relentlessly. ROMNEY is the one who ran a smear campaign which CONSTANTLY accused the other candidates of the very things Romney was guilty of, namely having a history of liberal positions such as being pro-choice and pro-homosexual-agenda.
Bottom line, Romney simply could not have won his narrow plurality victories in most states without outspending his opponents as much as 20-to-1. He is a Wall Street insider, the most liberal Republican governor ever, and he bought the nomination with lies and smears.
He’s also a political dimwit who doesn’t understand the base or conservative ideology at all. The only reason he was successful in business is because the owner of Bain said he was very handsome and was a good salesman, and obviously wanted to hire him due to his being from a powerful political family.
I'm part of this 100 million. Unfortunately, the 10% includes really delusional stuff like the Jooze conspiring to take over the world and no need to confront Islamofacism, because we provoke it by having our people over there.
Plus, there's a certain element among his supporters that make fascist brown-shirts look like Cub Scouts competing at a pinewood derby by comparison.
Also, nobody had his meanness nor his unscrupulous tactics.
What Ron Paul is doing is working in states where selection national convention delegation slates have no connection to primaries or caucuses, and subverting the process by taking over county, congressional district, and state conventions and ramming thru Ronulan delegates. Just as they’ve done in Iowa. The delegate slate to be resented for ratification by the state convention has absolutely no correlation to caucus results - and it’s all been done “by the book”. Every other campaign has been asleep at the wheel - and are reaping whats been sown.
Who “worships” Fox News? The last time I heard something like that, it came from a leftwinger.
In your book, a “good man” might enable abortions, suck up to homosexuals, and say that sodomites have the right to adopt children. Not in mine. You can have him.
Romney or Zero.
Death by fire ants or death by anal rape.
Not much of a choice there.
RIGHT, and his money bought that.
His attack ads were orchestrated by him.
He can deny it, but those ads were his.
We have a deal. Congratulations, Vice-President Rand.
Just in my lifetime:
What a glorious eight years that was! But maybe it was because we were united behind a single conservative candidate rather than nit-picking over slight flaws of many candidates in a wide field.
What does that even mean?
Rick Perry, Tim Pawlenty, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul all count for nothing?
Never before have I seen so much spurious crap being passed off as analysis here on FR!
It is a disgrace.
You Romney-haters need to take the crazy pants off already! We've got work to do!
LOL.....Death by Bongo Bongo
So who is it that ran this cycle who you believe was a genuine conservative with only slight flaws?
I don’t think the kooks are what Paul meant to attract, but once they became his core base of support, he had no choice but the embrace them.
The comment wasn't that Ron Paul was nutty. It was that some of his supporters are. Big difference.
Nutty? There's about a 100 million American that agree with about 90% of what he says.
Then why didn't he win?
Your tired meme is an ant against a tidal wave.
A tidal wave that fizzled out with less than 10% of the vote. Hey, I like Ron Paul. I'm one of those people who agrees with at least 80% of what he says, though the rest made me unable to support him in the primary. Still, I'm glad he was in the race and raised these issues of limited government.
What a lot of people really resented, however, was the boorish behavior of some his supporters. Just the conservative/libertarian version of ill-mannered OWS types who equate shouting other people down to winning the argument.
You guys might have gotten further if the annoying tactics hadn't alienated so many people. Maybe that makes it fun for them, and they think it's funny. But it just comes across like a bunch of smug frat boys who think they're smarter than everyone else while puking on their shoes.
Oh please, beating all of those guys was as easy as beating the Charlotte Bobcats.
Romney is not running as a liberal.
Obama is, however.
When was the last time the 'Rats won with a self-acknowledged liberal as candidate?
What utter foolishness you just wrote!!!!! The ‘powers that be’ (Establishment) were behind Romney all the time even to this day. Fox News had been shilling for Mitt for months and your statement on Romney being brave is idiotic!!! Where was Romney and ABO (Anybody But Obama) as his staffers absorbed by the McCain camp were anonymously trashing and sabotaging Sarah and thus trying to hurt the McCain ticket for Romneys future ambitions? That not bravery but cowardly!!!!
That’s right. It was the most vicious campaign to destroy someone’s character I’ve seen, outside of what was done to Palin.
There is nothing more disgraceful than defeatism.
Reagan was clearly head and shoulders above everybody else in the field....This time around, they were all just a big gaggle of spares that were indistinguishable from each other. They picked Romney, for the same reason the pointy-headed boss in Dilbert picked the boss, "He has executive-style hair."
So what's your point? That was the entire rest of the field. If it was so easy why didn't someone else jump in and do it?
Good question....perhaps they knew the RNC wouldn't support them.
Yes, nutty was an accurate description of Ron Paul.
He's the only one actually out there taking delegates away from Romney.
Oh please. As of today, Paul has a whopping 104 delegates. That is still less than Gingrich has. Paul cultists are making jerks of themselves at some state conventions and swiping a few delegates here and there, but it isn't even remotely close to enough to make a difference. Romney has 973 delegates as of today and will easily win on the 1st ballot in Tampa.
He is, however, the only one who believes the traitor Bradley Manning is a hero and a patriot.
It’s a little early in the day to be drinking, isn’t it?
Damn right. We're supposed to vote for [insert "true conservative" name here] for President, and HOPE that when 0baMao wins re-election (in no small part because we allowed him to do so), (1) he can't get anything through Congress (which requires the Boehner-led, R-controlled House AND the squishy RINOs in the Senate WILL NOT compromise!? Brilliant!), (2) his SCOTUS appointments won't be any worse than Willard's, and (3) he won't slash and burn what's left of the country via Executive Orders.
Yeah, that sounds like a great plan to me! /s
Mostly conservative but with major flaws: Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry.
About as exciting as watching paint dry: Tim Pawlenty.
Anybody not named Romney?
Face it dude, we got stuck with a terrible candidate who won because he had lots of money, had the establishment backing him up, and played extremely dirty behind-the-scenes politics to get to where he is. That may make him a "fighter" in your eyes, but I don't really want that kind of "fighter" representing me. Hence, he doesn't, as I'll find an actual conservative, not-Romney candidate to vote for, even if it does mean I'm "throwing my vote away."
People made a big deal about 20% of Democrats voting "No preference" in the NC Dem primary last week. Don't forget that 35% of Republicans essentially voted the same thing, however, by voting for candidates who were either completely non-viable to start with (Paul) or who were already out (Santorum, Gingrich). Romney lost 35% of Republicans votes to people who aren't even in the race anymore, or who might as well not have been. Doesn't bode well for him, regardless of what Rasmussen is saying right now.
It's not how he is running that concerns me, its how he will govern that does.
Experience tells a different story.
C'mon folks, let's get out there and work hard so that our pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, anti-gun, pro-progressive taxation, pro-government run health care, tax raising, fee increasing, bad judge picking, religious liberty infringing, big government loving candidate can beat their pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, anti-gun, pro-progressive taxation, pro-government run health care, tax raising, fee increasing, bad judge picking, religious liberty infringing, big government loving candidate!!!!
Go Team R! RRRRRRRRRemember - if he's got the R after his name, you gotta vote foRRRRRRRR him!
Let us know how that works for you.
If you think Goode or Johnson are viable options, you are smoking more dope than an OWS encampment.
And a GOP cash payoff.