Posted on 08/16/2007 4:10:41 PM PDT by lfrancis
>>> “My assumption is that Democrats probably voted for Ron Paul”
>>>> “Maybe the Democrats voted for Ron Paul since he is against Iraq and that is the #1 issue this year across both parties”
A lot of democrats will likely vote for Ron Paul in the general election as well.
Aren’t there hundreds of people in Romney’s family working for the campaign? If just his relatives voted they would’ve won such a small sampling!!
Libertarians seem to be of two streams. One are disaffected Republicans who actually associate Libertarian thinking with traditional conservatism and they hold to strong views on federalism and the division of powers between federal, state and local governments. They do not hold to the idea of Constitution-as-living document because the Constitution was bear on human behavior and limiting excessive use of power, a principle which is timeless. They seem quite well informed.
The second group seems to be a Johnny-come-lately collection of disaffected 60’s types more single-issue focused on things like pot legalization and narrow civil liberty issues. They are loathe for government to legislate what they see as “morality” at ANY level which, of course, is an absurdity—speed limit laws being themselves a moral law to preserve life, for example. This bunch seems less well informed and more emotional and perhaps, for them, Libertarianism is merely a last stop on the way to irrelevance.
The former groups is far from universal in being conspiratorial though they DO often see outfits like the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateralists etc. as setting the baseline for foreign and public policy, and that, really, would be hard to dispute. Calling it conspiracy only serves to label-then-marginalize them for convenience sake in order to end debate summarily. The former, mindful of the Supreme Court, is also more likely to pull behind a GOP candidate, even holding their nose, and mocking this bloc of voters violates not only the “11th commandment” of the GOP, it will surely play a role in ensuring a Democrat goes to the White House.
If these people are nuts, then so are people like Richard Viguerie, Phyllis Schlafly and Paul Craig Roberts, all former Reaganites with direct ties to the Reagan administration. My view is that, with commitments to $66 trillion in government spending among other issues chargeable to the GOP Congress and President, a falling dollar, having laid waste to manufacturing through managed trade and a trillion dollars spent to build a democracy in a place with sand for walls and scant democratic impulse, we in the GOP have fallen far. The open southern border alone makes a mockery of controlling terrorist risks and being unable to identify the absurdity of that paradox makes me simply shake my head for while I like Ron Paul very much, I consider myself a traditional Republican in a land where truth has been turned upside down in my party.
>>>Aren’t there hundreds of people in Romney’s family working for the campaign? If just his relatives voted they would’ve won such a small sampling!!<<<
And the all drive across the country in one big caravan and vote in straw polls, eh?
Plausibility meter is floating at pretty darn tootin’ unlikely. Especially given the uptick in support Romney has been receiving relative to other candidates and the downward drift of most others.
You’re not analyzing those statistics very carefully, are you?
Romney is stated as being 9-million dollars in debt, but that’s because he loaned himself 9-million dollars while on on the campaign trail. Less fundraising, more footwork. In other words, Romney has 12-million dollars of cash on hand. He’s not in debt at all. But he is having to spend money to get name recognition, and it seems to be paying off.
As for those 6-months in Illinois, again, you haven’t been paying attention. Romney hasn’t spent squat in Illinois, though he doubled up any other candidate, name recognition and all.
So before you go lecturing us all on educated voters and what they know, how about taking a bit more effort to put yourself into that category and read a bit more, okay? Also, the word is RINO—not RHINO. Not that it applies to Romney in the first place.
And your willigness to exclude those who profess faith in Christ from the kingdom of God is thus noted. Not exactly what John 3:16 implies, but I’m sure you’ve been appointed official and divine arbiter on these matters.
I had such high hopes when Bush got elected in 2000. I “knew” that with a Republican majority in the House and Senate, we could get some real stuff done. (I was naive and didn’t really know who Bush was)
Now, it is hard to defend the Republican party. Can’t call them the small gov, less entitlement party anymore.
So, where do I look for a candidate that represents limited gov, strong defense, pro-growth? Who is strong enough to look at the Gov programs and agencies and cancel them if they aren’t meeting the stated purpose. Also, I want a President that recognizes that America is the greatest country on earth. And believes it is his responsibility to make it greater. Some of the talk I hear makes me wonder if some candidates think it would be better to make America weaker and other nations (and U.N.) stronger.
From my opinion, we need someone with a strong stomach to go through every “Secretary” and dismantle programs that aren’t working. The solution for the past xx years has been “It isn’t working, here is another $100,000,000 see if that fixes it.” I’m tired of my money being used for nonperforming projects.
I know you can’t run a country like a business, but it sure would be interesting to compare how the country is run to how BP is (since they have the highest profit ever).
/rant
It is one thing to be anti-this-or-that candidate but to say that getting 40% of the vote of a nine candidate field (more than 2x Thompson) is "puny" is nothing less than blatant dishonesty.
And the outspend cannard is just more sour grapes. Romney has spent money to make money. That is he has taken the chances by spending money to establish himself as a top-tier candidate and with two straw polls in his favor will now probably replace money spent with new contributions - above and beyond what he has already spent.
I never thought Hunter was in it to win it,
but wanted the chance to advance his ideas.
Even his dear 'other half' makes it clear
her priority isn't where HE is.
Their son is the one whom they hope to promote
with the healthy PAC funding donations ~
Supporting his race so that he can replace
Duncan's seat is their prime motivation.
IMO
He’s running a bad campaign— so bad, I believe, that it has to be on purpose. For a while, I thought that perhaps he was running for vice-president. Right now, I don’t think that he’s running for anything, and I believe more strongly than ever that his and his wife’s major concern is their son’s campaign.
I would suggest that before people make a fool of themselves that it would be nice to read what others have posted previously...Regarding the large family of Romney voting to skew this straw poll, I don’t know of a single one of them living in Illinois, and you had to have a valid Illinois drivers license in order to participate in this straw poll. As for some of the other postings acting as if Romney spent a lot of time in Illinois, that is just plain ignorance or a lie on their part. To my knowledge he has spent no time here whatsoever. This man has tremendous credentials as a Republican. His background in business, Olympic CEO, and Governor make him uniquely qualified to be our next President. Intelligence wise, very, very few (if any) people have ever simultaneously got their masters’ degrees in both law and business and been in the top 5% in both degrees at a prestigious school...that’s unheard of. This man epitomizes what most Republican’s claim to embrace.... His strong military, economy, and family is exactly what we need, and he has the persona, diplomacy, and intellect to not only win the election, but to lead America to knew heights of greatness..GO MITT!!!
I think the Iowa Straw poll being in Ames definitely helped him.
“I think it is unfair to characterize Ron Paul as someone who caters to conspiracy theorists. He cannot really help it if a few kooks support him.”
I would agree with you were it not for the fact that Ron Paul has shown up on the Alex Jones shows.
“The fact of the matter is Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror.” — That is completely opposite to the truth. “Al Qaeda in Iraq” is the name they call themselves, maybe, just, maybe you can figure out the connection.
Mitt is doing very well in the fundraising category and that’s very important. You have no idea.
I am proud of my candidate. Go, Mitt!!
Mitt Romney has the organization and leadership skills and guts! That is clear and nothing you say will change that fact! Go, Mitt!!
bobthomas - Thank you for the eyewitness report! It’s frightening the way anti Romney folks jump on the bandwagon trying to outdo one another with snide swipes and petty backstabbing remarks. Oh, well, thanks for being there and for your report to set the record straight - not that the anti Romney’s will pay any attention. From the horse’s mouth:
“To sum it up, it was a pretty even playing field...Mitt Romney hadn’t campaigned in Illinois one bit, and yet he more than doubled that of any other candidate....Those of you who keep talking about his poor showing in the National Polls are apparently not noticing that he has come from around 5% in March to about 16% now. I believe his strategy of steam rolling most (if not all) the early primaries will pay off for him.”
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.