Posted on 05/03/2007 10:23:46 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
DRUDGE REPORT
The Reagan Derby
Well, with 47,617 individual Votes recorded as of 12:55AM EST on 5/4/07, The Drudge Report has provided perhaps the most sweeping and comprehensive initial survey of viewer reaction to the first GOP Primary Debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
The Results thus far:
With an optimistic, confident demeaner and a polished presentation, Mitt Romney decidedly overshadowed the erstwhile Front-Runner, Rudy Giuliani. Rudy's primary strength thus far has been his vast name recognition and the sheer momentum of his supposed "inevitability" -- and yet, in terms of viewer reaction, for him to be trailing (by double digits) a former Governor not widely known outside of Massachusetts until this election season demonstrates clear vulnerability on Giuliani's part.
However, the greatest source of comfort to Constitutionalist Conservatives has to be the tremendous upswell of support being registered by the former Leader of Ronald Reagan's Electoral Delegation from Texas, United States Congressman Ron Paul -- and that DESPITE receiving comparatively little "face time" from the debate organizers. With viewer reaction to the first GOP Primary Debate already placing Congressman Ron Paul solidly in third place, nine points ahead of his nearest rival and within five points of Giuliani himself, a tremendous opportunity exists for Ron Paul to establish widespread national Name Recognition and garner increasing support for his broadly-appreciated message of Individual Liberty and strictly-limited Government Power.
With the second GOP Primary Debate rapidly approaching, Conservatives can take heart in knowing that the Message of Reagan Republicanism still resonates when presented confidently and forthrightly --and that there's at least one GOP Candidate on the stage who has stood solidly for Reagan Republicanism for thirty years: RON PAUL.
I've already got an Article idea for the Info you passed along to me.
In the meantime, I've posted a more Philosophical article concerning issues which should be important to Conservatives.
You've probably already seen me developing some of my ideas on these threads. Now I just put some of them together. WHY VOTE RON PAUL? Conservative Issues which are MORE IMPORTANT than Iraq
In other words you will not address the substance of my questions.
Very well then.
gosh your notto optimistic about iraq—their are alot of people LIKE ME who are paying attention-but are very quiet and non-politico outwardly and inwardly have the heart of a christian soldier ready to do battle.
After such a warm and wonderful introcution, I believe I'll pass.
I choose with whom I will have discourse, and one of my criteria is manners.
Have a lovely day!
That is mostly the way I see it. Perhaps some die hard Ron Paul fans got busy too. Last night after the debate, he barely registered on the FreeRepblic and Drudge polls. As the ONLY Republican anti-war candidate, a lot of libs could easily decide to have fun and send votes his way. I can even see something like that working somewhat on the R side: split the pro-victory vote 9 ways with the anti-war vote going to one man. I think the most valid tally was the one about an hour after the debate.
“What are we defending that is American in Iraq?
The oil?”
Sorry. Anyone who says we are fighting for oil is a nutter. What next? “Flames don’t melt steal,” perhaps?
I don’t even know who the hell Ron Paul is. Romney is getting my vote he can pick Newt for VP.
Time for a REAL Reagan Republican to step up to the plate.
Reagan was not afraid to use force to protect our interests overseas. Grenada, Panama
Post the rest while your at it.
Tell me what victory in Iraq will look like???
Sunni and Shia Muslims holding hands with Turkish Kurds and singing kumbaya? A government headed by mainly Shia Muslims with known links to Iran and using a Constitution based on Shria Law? What are we defending that is American in Iraq?
Simple questions.
I know a ton of Dems that are supporting Ron Paul.
I would have to assume that they are trying to get the least electable candidate in the primaries.
Then there are those supporting him for his surrender at any cost.
Glad to hear it.
BTW: Are you aware that it was Dr. Ron Paul, and ONLY he, who wanted to actually declare war on Iraq?
(this is what it actually says in the Constitution)
The weenie Congress did not agree to actually follow the U.S. Constitution and did the only other thing they could, which is to unlawfully abdicate their war powers to the POTUS.
We can always depend on Congress to avoid any heavy lifting.
"..support for the criminal Islamic Terrorist thug-regime.."
What part of "criminal Islamic Terrorist thug-regime" do you not understand?
You can say anything you want...
I know some on FR think it is "bad" or "evil" or at least a negative, but I actually find it encouraging that Ron Paul has a certain appeal to those who are NOT conservative, but are concerned about the leviathan growth of gov't. All you have to do is look at some of the comments on Ron's YouTube spots. Libs who have been in love with "big government" are suddenly aghast that the same big government is being used to fund and support ideas they find abhorrent. For the first time, I hear murmuring of "federalism" with some of the more rational members of the left. I even hear of the need for RTKBA from paranoids that are convinced we are headed to "Christian Totalitarianism." I actually find that refreshing, even as I abhor the culture of death (abortion and homosexuality) it springs from. I would love to find a way to actually discuss issues rather than the constant mindless screaming and vitriol that goes on.
A candidate that wants to deny moneys to "doing good" by government is appealing to conservatives who still know what the constitution is, AND to libs who don't know what the constitution is, but find the idea of limited government a novel and appealing idea, now that they can't have all the levers of power.
Again, thank you for continuing to post irenic posts re: a really great American.
I have to say, I was impressed with Romney. I’m still doubtful I’d vote for him, since I don’t agree with him on some of the issues, but he’s clearly very good at debating and at handling himself in public situations.
Don’t you just LOVE Free Republic?
In view of the fact that Ron Paul voted TO GO TO WAR against Iraq, how can you make such a statement?
You just pissed off a bunch of people by saying that. I miss the days of Reagan, when conservatives were HAPPY. It is not that we didn't see the evil, or the foolishness. It is just that we were focused on ROLLING BACK government. We had ideas like SHUTTING DOWN the bureau of Indian Affairs (it was proposed to take the entire budget, leave it as is, and simply print checks and dispense to the people on reservations). Now the most vocal people are often a bunch of bitter, hateful, prune faced blue haired geezers engaged in a scorched earth screamfest. Moreover, they will agree to any number of government expansions as long as it is "our guys" doing it. I long for a leader who is not concerned with burying the left and rubbing their faces in it, but simply with going around, over, or through them to achieve the goal, all the while keeping cheerful about it. We might "win" an election without that, but we will never win the CULTURE without that.
Ron Paul reaches out to any number of persons who want freedom, and he is a man of INTEGRITY. Man! do we ever need that combo!
You just pissed off a bunch of people by saying that. I miss the days of Reagan, when conservatives were HAPPY. It is not that we didn't see the evil, or the foolishness. It is just that we were focused on ROLLING BACK government. We had ideas like SHUTTING DOWN the bureau of Indian Affairs (it was proposed to take the entire budget, leave it as is, and simply print checks and dispense to the people on reservations). Now the most vocal people are often a bunch of bitter, hateful, prune faced blue haired geezers engaged in a scorched earth screamfest. Moreover, they will agree to any number of government expansions as long as it is "our guys" doing it. I long for a leader who is not concerned with burying the left and rubbing their faces in it, but simply with going around, over, or through them to achieve the goal, all the while keeping cheerful about it. We might "win" an election without that, but we will never win the CULTURE without that.
Ron Paul reaches out to any number of persons who want freedom, and he is a man of INTEGRITY. Man! do we ever need that combo!
Ron Paul has no chance of gaining the nomination.
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.