Posted on 12/27/2011 11:35:45 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Go to any Ron Paul event and the audience is part of the tale. They’re younger, rowdier, more socially diverse than Republican rally regulars. Any one of them might have driven across the state to see Paul speak or be able to riff at length about Austrian economic theory. Any one of them also might be a Democrat or an independent, a fact that’s poised to play a big role in Paul’s story in 2012.
...The fact that roughly half of Paul’s primary supporters are Democrats or independents is probably an asset in selling his general election viability, which his fellow Republicans have frequently called into question. In a recent CNN survey that polled hypothetical head-to-heads between Obama and Paul, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich respectively, Paul tied Romney in performing best against the President in large part because he outperformed all the other GOP candidates among Democrats, independents, 18- to 34-year-olds and non-white voters....
(Excerpt) Read more at swampland.time.com ...
I believe a lot of Ron Paul’s support is cynical (follow the money). Young people "looking forward" to no jobs in the Obama depression, or working on degrees in areas where government money could fund a study, a program (their professors have sucked on this tit for decades) -- instead of being “wasted” to support the "evil" military and “misguided” war on drugs -- which also ties into what they've been taught in many institutions of higher education -- so many useless degrees and “green” thinkers believing that Ron Paul is the Rx for what ails the country. So they're leaving support for Barack “hope and change” Obama at the school house/no job market door and flocking to Ron Paul which has the sweetener of hurting those “evil-rich” conservatives who are destroying the planet and are ready to “bomb” the world.
The problem for them is -- they never will get the money; it always finds another home. With the debt and deficit ballooned out of sight, that money isn't heading in their direction. The naturally productive ones will eventually “grow up” and realize the truth about living in a safe, free market society but many will hang fast to the hope (libertarians for sure) that once the "war on drugs" and the "evil military complex” have their wings clipped, some of those trillions of “wasted” dollars will certainly flow to them. It won't and their lot will be worse. We have for too long been building “me-me-itis” generations, whose values and goals are nurtured and fanned by teachings of socialist professors spawned in the Sixties who have multiplied themselves with our youth.
So Ron Paul is their cup of tea. They’re only one step away from OWS (most likely have a foot in both camps already). If Ron Paul definitively said, "I will not run third Party," much of his support would evaporate today. Which is precisely why he has not ruled it out.
Many of Paul’s backers are actually RATS. Remember “Operation Chaos”?
I do remember.
When you get right down to it, even here there are more folks than I would like to admit, who think Paul’s thoughts on the military and foreign policy are exactly right.
Add in his comments on the federal reserve and spending, and they think he’s the perfect candidate.
While there are some things I agree with Paul on, his military and foreign policy alone would cause me to be unable to support him.
If this man were president, I think he would harm this nation on a level that would be roughly comparable to that of Obama.
He would thumb his nose at our allies, and embolden our enemies around the planet.
It would be Obama's 2nd term.
Shades of 2008, all over again.
It turned out that, despite the massive amount of press Paul got, he only got 10% Of REPUBLICAN Caucus voters, since most of his supporters were actually LaRouche DEMOCRATS, Registered Libertarians, and whimsical internet supporters who don’t vote in Iowa.
This could be our best hope after all. Paul will draw more Obama Democrats or extremely Liberal Independents than he will Tea Party or Conservative/Republicans.
A Paul win in Iowa, will hurt Romney much more than it will Newt. Perry is still not even a remote possibility. The conservative electorate has reserved itself to that foregone conclusion. The National Average Polls don't lie, when they consistently say the same thing repeatedly.
He does keep the Constitutional conversation alive. I agree with you a hundred percent. I am tired of forty attack RP threads though. Don’t we have anything else to talk about.. Besides, for all I know, his attackers could be department of useless government employees, Fed Reserve folks, goonion members. In other words, a lot of people fear running out of other people’s money.
He does keep the Constitutional conversation alive. I agree with you a hundred percent. I am tired of forty attack RP threads though. Don’t we have anything else to talk about.. Besides, for all I know, his attackers could be department of useless government employees, Fed Reserve folks, goonion members. In other words, a lot of people fear running out of other people’s money.
As far as the military goes, it would probably be far worse than Obama’s first administration.
His spending would be better, but at what cost to some programs we actually need to survive.
Paul’s foreign policy is almost suicidally bad. However, he’s the only candidate that gives a crap what the Constitution says about anything.
I'm not really sure what Ron Paul's position on the military is...We all know what the liberal media says about it...We know what the GOP says about it...I don't know that Ron Paul has ever really made it clear...
As I understand it, Paul's position is that of the Constitution...No foreign entanglements but a large and tough enough military to defend ourselves against any and all at any given time...
Is that your take on Paul's position???
Constitution? MY BACKSIDE! How is it in the Constitution that we weaken our National Defense, or blame that National Defense for us being attacked on our own soil with the killing of 2,800 innocent people!?
To compliment Paul on any aspect in that respect, is ludicrous.
The problem in foreign policy is not fighting the fights, its in the United States government’s refusal in the post World War II-United Nations Era to win any of the wars America gets involved in.
The United States needs to fight its wars for the United States and win them, not fight them for the United Nations and “New World Order” like we are doing right now and drag them out with limited tactics and objectives.
The fact that we have open primary’s in the lead states is an atrocity
“Rinse Pubus” and the RNC have to go.
Thanks for the note of agreement. I like your Constitutional point. I agree. I will say that his supposed standing in Iowa, has a lot of people pulling out the long knives.
Ron’s ability to attract the wing-nut youth, has me wondering how many of those folks are hard core leftists whose professors have championed him.
Paul believes that Iran has every right to possess nukes. He actually hopes they get one. Paul hates Israel to the degree where he actually said that if he had been President in World War 2, he would have not have tried to stop the Holocaust.
Is this the kind candidate for “President” You want to support? I don't think that even Obama is that radical or stupid!
Why in the world would they vote for the guy cutting their social welfare safety net when they have the REAL deal in Obama. This is not a guessing game. This isn't "OUR" hope this is more HOPE for Obama's change. Because in the end Obama will make the "racist, bigot, nut" stick to Paul.
If Paul can openly spout so much of his lunacy in public, what other insane stuff is he harboring in that spider filled brain of his????
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.