Posted on 09/06/2007 10:52:38 AM PDT by freedomdefender
Ron Paul clearly won the Republican presidential debate last night held in New Hampshire. Viewers were asked to text in their thoughts on who won the debate, Ron Paul received 34%, Giuliani 17%, all others lower. Fred Thompson who did not appear at the debate was clearly the largest loser as his pro-war stance and republican hard line talking points seem to be not what the people are looking for.
Sean Hannity, Fox News pundit, was clearly upset with the results and deliberately ridiculed Congressman Ron Paul. Although outpacing all other candidates by a 2-1 margin, it was clear that Chris Wallace and Brit Hume had tones of sarcasm when talking of Ron Paul. Giving absolutely no credence to Cong. Paul's responses, they even cut off his answer in a heated exchange between Paul and Huckabee, then declaring that Huckabee won the debate on that point.
Ron Paul demonstrated last night that he is the only Republican candidate that gives any thought to issues and his answers, all others gave stock replies and mostly followed the party line.
(Excerpt) Read more at casinogamblingweb.com ...
One thing I like hearing from Paul (wish there were other candidates with the balls to do it), is the debate to shut down a number of worthless government agencies. All those overpaid, pampered for life bureaucrats would actually have to find a job.
Suffice it to say that anyone who thought Ron Paul won needs a tinfoil hat and medication.
You see, trickery is not my game. So I was not aware of this deceit at FR. I find that troubling. But thanks for the info. I will no longer acknowledge the polls here as valid.
In case you haven't noticed in the past couple of years FAUX NEWS has made some radical changes. Jerry Rivers is their new king, I expect to see B.O.R. having a Gypsy with Tarot cards as his next stunt. Hannity? He has become a Rockefeller Republican and no longer makes any pretense he is anything else but such. Thus the reason for kissing up to Rudy. Gretta? Boring. Shepherd Smith? No thanks. Brian Wilson was one of their better reporters and he's management now. That leaves who? The Beltway Boys who finish each others sentences now. John Gibson is about the only one worth listening to.
To get Breaking News after 10:00pm now I use CNN. Yes I know they are liberal but they make no pretenses being Conservative or even fair and balanced. I'm smart enough to wade through their agenda. They have a couple of good ones but mostly it's slim pickings. I would say I watch far less TV than about anyone on this thread unless they do not have one in their homes period. I watch the news maybe three times a day the rest of it I read from reliable sources.
Now one thing about Hannity. He owed Ron Paul the same courtesy and respect he has given other Republicans. His conduct last night was unprofessional. But Sean is a pro-Rudy's Boy. Rudy doesn't like Ron Paul so Sean doesn't. I am sick and tired of hearing about King Rudy and his programs liberalism in NYC. The man just happened to be mayor on 9/11 and likely done about as much as Ed Koch would have actually because they are pretty much cut from the same cloth.
Of course you don't know Jack about what I stand for politically actually. I am pro-military who thinks national defense is the first responsibility of government. I'm also pro-Constitution. I have likely made several hundred post calling on the DEMs and GOP even when Slick Willie was in office -present to raise our End Troop Strengths and re-build our military to a realistic level. But I'm realistic to understand the The Bush Team is not gonna go there as they are part of the decades old problem in the GOP goiing back to Rockefeller's run for PoTUS and continuing with Nixon, Ford, Poppy Bush, and Junior. The only relief we have seen from that disaster was from Reagan. Of course Da Bush's hated all the man stood for as did Cheney.
I think the GOP has kicked many of it's good conservatives in the teeth to please the DEMs like they did to the House Managers. One of them former Congressman Ed Bryant I have voted for several times only to have the RNC push it's or rather lately W's favorite long time friend Neo Con instead.
No I'm not a Neo Con and of course you also ignore the fact that there are two others also running in the GOP I would have no problem supporting in the general election for POTUS. I'm sick and tired of the GOP demanding I vote for it's Liberals. Bob Dole was my last such vote. BTW I'm not Libertarian either. I don't think many who read my post can call me a DEM plant even though they may not agree with me.
Here's the real problem in the GOP. When a Gun Grabber Liberal is being pushed as the party favorite then maybe it's time for those serious about Constitutional Conservatism to look elsewhere to cast out votes.
Well said American. BTTT
Dr. Paul is telling the truth in a country that has fallen in love with the sweet lie. The fact that he has as much support as he does gives me a little more faith in my fellow Americans.
This out of touch appeaser is the Jimmy Carter clone!
The calls would be so extensive that yes it would be automation. Well they either use automation which would require maybe two persons to program the computer or several hundred to a thousand to count votes and check numbers against a list now which do you think is more practical and realistic? It's computerized and designed to lock out the from number sent on text. Text requires an originating number.
How about it anyone in here try to vote twice and if you did what was the error message?
What you seem to be overlooking was this poll was open to everyone. Believe it or not there are Conservative DEMs. Reagn won landslides on their votes. Weyrich, Phillips, James Kennedy, Falwell, and others knew how to energize that base. In 1994 so did the GOP.
We engaged in nation building in Japan and Germany after WW2. I suppose Ron Paul would have been against that as well.
The problem with Somalia or Yugo style nation building (Clinton style) is that it's done in an extremely half-a$$ed manner with far more concern about focus groups and "world opinion" than we're already suffering. (You think it's bad NOW...) The motivation is moral preening, making us appear to be compassionate in the eyes of the "enlightened" so we'll be called "progressive" and "evolved" at Manhattan or Hollywood dinner parties -- and actual results be damned.
Problem is the public doesn't have the stomach for a drawn-out involvement in a fight where we don't even have a side. This leads to rules of engagement designed to avoid casualties but which also ensure defeat, and -- ironically -- often increase bloodshed on all sides.
There is a totally different set of incentives here:
CLINTON STYLE: We're trying to help people and just be generally be nice (or more importantly APPEAR to be doing good to brown nose European/PC elites), and we'll avoid any real fighting that might actually make a difference for the locals and quickly pull out with egg on our face the moment the first image of a dead GI appears on TV.
BUSH DOCTRINE STYLE: We either defeat Islamist terrorism or we start memorizing the Koran.
Victory in such a war means draining the fever swamp of terrorism -- e.g., democratizing the Middle East. Basically the same as post-WW2 "nation building" but without the "post" part -- it's done on the fly, OJT. This means a learning curve and inevitable mistakes. So quit crying over failures, there are always failures in war, yes, even by the winning side, which sometimes makes even more mistakes than the losers (see Civil War). You don't have the luxury of just taking your ball and going home to sob in the corner of your room while Mom bakes you some cookies, because she'll be dead because the bully followed you home and got to her first on his way to you.
Ron Paul is just another neo-isolationist Democrat ostrich whose foreign policy ideas hang entirely on the assumption of good will from those hellbent on killing us.
I thought it was Rudy doing the cackling.
And just when we thought we were all alone, along comes Dr. Ron Paul. They odd part is that all those saying they don't want RP are bringing the truth to the masses as well. It was afterall the naysayers who made me look. So I owe them the gratitude for that one.
Think it, feel it, believe it, and it shall be.
tnp
Could you fearists let us know when we'll need to start memorizing the Koran? I mean Islam has only been around 1200 years or so and I didn't know if I missed a notification from our imaginary Islamic overlords to start....
Believe me when I say that my son fully understands that most Americans do truly support not only the soldiers in Iraq, but their mission also. What most Americans may not understand (thanks to the Lame Stream Media) is that the vast majority of Iraqi citizens also support out soldiers and their mission.
We are at a crossroads in this country, and this next presidential election will be critical for our futures. If we do not choose the next President carefully we will doom the Iraqi people and our own. Ru Paul is but one of the many dangerous people who compound our folly each and every time their mouths open and they belch forth their hatred of America. The others are primarily the demoncratic candidates, and the demoncRats in congress. We need strong leadership for our future, not someone who will hide his head in the sand and pretend that we can all just get along.
Agan, thank you and your son. SD
Not our fault if all of you are technically lame.
Not our fault if the pollsters only call landlines when so many people under fifty only have cellphones or VoIP either.
What does any of that have to do with whether it was an accurate poll?
If Paul were elected president, bomb shelters would come back into fashion.
I believe Honorable Dr. Paul would probably consider American bomb shelters to be an unfair advantage over oppressed and aggrieved Arabs or Persians.
You know, it's hard to find good friends. These horrible backward people are always so suspicious of our noble intent.
Extremely naive. Assumes there were all these democratic America-loving angels waiting in the wings as alternatives to these alliances of convenience and we deliberately chose the devils just so you could "sigh" at us with contempt.
In other words, what was this clearly superior alternative in each and every one of these cases you cite that the whole world missed? Who were these angels?
Allow me to qualify my earlier comments. I’m not claiming that the polls being conducted on FR have been “spammed”. I’m mearly stating that for anyone who knows how, multiple votes could be cast. I know that this has been done on liberal websites, but I do not know that this occurs here. I’m like you in that I do not vote more than once on the polls conducted on FR. I hope that most on this site follows that same ethical behavior.
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.