The McCain Disconnects (Ron Paul moonbats shifting their support to McCain?)

Captain's Quarters ^ | Feb. 02, 2008 | Ed Morrissey

[jdm]

In that vein, Mark Tapscott looks at a story from last March, regarding Tom Daschle's claim that McCain wanted to negotiate a switch to the Democrats.

[JaneNC]

As contradictory as it is....(Ron Paul’s isolationist stance and McCain’s pro war stance)...yes, Paulies are going ot McCain.

It is baffling. It must be the nut factor attraction.

[TigersEye]

But there's a bizarre disconnect in the warm embrace between McCain and the electorate's mavericks. They hate the Iraq war, while he's willing to fight it for another century.

It's a con job. They know he's not electable.

[ex-snook]

Yeah. I’m sure the Paul supporters want to back someone who wants to spend 100 years in Iraq and bomb Iran.

[Earthdweller]

Ed...not all Libertarians are anti-war, they have a brain and see that there is a threat from extremists. Stop with the stereotypes will ya.

[kinoxi]

The ‘jedi mind trick’ will garner him some votes from the paultards.

[Martins kid]

I think the moonbats are supporting McCain because they know he will lose against Obama or Hillary. Their goal is to punish the Republican party because it did not support Paul.

[MNJohnnie]

Tough on Foreign Policy? You think Mr “Close Gitmo and extend the same legal protections US Citizens have to the terrorists” McCain is going to have a “tough” foreign policy? The father of the Baker Commission and the plan to surrender Iraq to Iran and Syria is “strong on Foreign Policy”? Not based on his recored. Even on Iraq he has twisted with the political winds. He was for it, then he was for it but against how it was being fought, then he wanted to send 250,000 more US troops to Iraq, then he fathered the Baker Commission to find a political deal, then when it looked like he was politically dead, he had his campaign minions fraudulently claim The Surge was his idea.

This is what the nuts know. McCain talks tough, but in actuallity would be weak on National Security. That way the nuts get the best of both worlds, their agenda being pushed by a mis labled “Conservative” McCain administration

[airborne]

It makes sense if you factor in that many Paul supporters are liberals funded by Soros.

[ncalburt]

That is exactly the crowd I saw in San Fran during Xmas at the Ron Paul . It was the way radical eco - crack pots.
I guess Soros must want Paul to run as third party to kill any Repub chances at the WH.

[digger48]

[Viking2002]

Yeah, well I'm a country-first, party-second kind of guy, too, but McCain's means are an ass-backwards and upside-down way of achieving the ends most of us seek.

[cripplecreek]

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

This just proves that Ron Paul never had the "moonbat" vote to begin with.

Everybody here were screaming that a bunch of lefitsts, troofers, and white supremacists were going to cross-over and vote for Paul in the primaries. So what happened? Paul never placed higher than 5th place except for NV and LA where he finished a distant 2nd place consecutively.

So this is validation that these aforementioned groups were all backing McCain so he'd be the weakest of the field to go up against Hillary or Obama. Why would leftist moonbats support Paul anyway? He's the total opposite of their views, and that includes the war.

FReepers have eggs on their faces.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Paulies are going ot McCain

Sorry, the primary results refute your absured allegations.

[cripplecreek]

I’m not buying it. Love him or hate him, Ron Paul is at the opposite end of the political spectrum from McQueeg. This is just more media smoke and mirrors no different than the claims that conservatives will support McCain.

[airborne]

His method is divide and conquer.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

It makes sense if you factor in that many Paul supporters are liberals funded by Soros.

Paul is not funded by anyone. All of Paul's donations came from individual Americans from all political backgrounds.

Why would Soros support someone who's completely at odds with his agenda? Why hasn't Paul finished no higher than 5th place in the primaries? I know you guys hate Paul because he's not a RINO and he doesn't kiss the party elites' asses like the other guys, but don't adopt liberal media and Dem talking points when it comes to him.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I’m not buying it.

You're not buying it; you REFUSE to buy it when the facts are right in front of your noggin. Simply because you hate Paul which is clouding your judgement.

Love him or hate him, Ron Paul is at the opposite end of the political spectrum from McQueeg.

You got that right. He's not a liberal open-borders entrenched Washington insider that McLame is. Even McCain himself said 20 years ago Ron Paul was the most honest man in Congress, to Kent Snyder (who ran Paul's 1988 Libertarian presidential run).

This is just more media smoke and mirrors no different than the claims that conservatives will support McCain.

It's quite obvious that liberals and independents were backing McCain because they knew he'd be easy fixins for Hillary. The fact of the matter is this: The lie that truthers and liberal nutcases were supporting Paul blew up in FR's face.

[JaneNC]

the thread is about the Paulies going McCain....

And, on blogs and on forums, I have seen this as well.

It is not absurd.
I know two people personally who were Paulies and now going with McCain