What about the ones who are actually aliens?
.
Uh oh, Sarah Palin’s a Paulbot. The cognitive dissonance of this will surely explode many heads.
The Paul supporters who are Tea Partiers, So-Cons and the like we shouldn’t insult. Those who are peacecreeps, dopers, Lefties, Jew-haters and racists can go to Hell.
The Paulistinians will alienate themselves without help... their candidate is divorced from reality and rather alien when it comes to international issues.
What does she know or care about it anyway?
She’s right.
The question is, how to do it. It won’t be easy. Paul supporters generally tend to be all or nothing and for years have been getting nothing as a result.
I don’t think anybody (besides the establishment neocons) hate Paul for not wanting to go to war at the drop of a pin, but for his nutjob positions such as not having Israel as an ally and not caring if Iran gets nukes.
In fact the GOP should retire and hand over the controls to the TEA Partiers.
(P.S. Why is Willard getting all sorts of $$$ from The Goldman Sack?)
Good plan, let’s have the GOP be the hippie party.
Anti-war. Bush’s fault. Those are good campaign platforms.
Oh, let’s legalize all drugs.
All those people will vote for Mitt Romney, darling of big capital.
As long as he goes with that platform.
When he’s talking to Ron Paul supporters.
Then, when he’s in front of other people, tell them what they want to hear.
See, the real thing is winning the election.
We must have an establishment Republican - our team guy - in the White House.
And nice establishment majorities in Congress.
It’s like Occupy DC, Republican style.
Nobody will realize that we’re actually conservative and we’ll “win” the elections.
Seeing that the Republicans didn’t care about the Tea Party after the 2010 Election, I don’t think they’ll care about Ron Paul’s supporters after this primary either.
That’s kind of what I’ve been saying and I have no love for Ron Paul. He brings up some issues that really do need real discussion.
Personally I think a real honest discussion of the issues would disarm him.
Yes, lets not alienate those voters who believe the USA brought 9/11 on themselves.
because “a lot of Americans are war-weary and we are broke” and Paul has reached that constituency well.
Being war weary is one thing. Being ignorant of the fact that Iran and the islamofacists will not stop trying to destroy America or not caring because “war is not the answer” is another thing..
Gee Sarah when did you become a racist anti-Semite?
I wonder if that is what the German people said about Hitlers thugs.
i would vote for ron paul over the other liberal rino Rep. - i made fun of him in the past, but better him than Milt or any of the others
I sort of agree and sort of disagree with Sarah Palin.
Those wanting Ron Paul supporters to join with them, in favor of someone else, need to divide the Ron Paul supporters - separating the “wheat from the chaff”;
by appealing to the economic-Libertarians and those who agree with Paul’s general concern for our personal Liberty (we can at least ask ourselves if everything about our post 9/11 national security regime fully respects our essential Liberty?),
and not by trying to appeal to the Paul supporters among the 9/11 Truthers, the antiwar enthusiasts, or the transcendental-mediators and isolationist peace-niks.
While I am no fan of Sarah Palin, she is right on this one... but for different reasons: The Reagan Coalition had the support of those who are civil-libertarian minded. He sprung from the Goldwater wing of the Republican Party, which, while not the same as Libertarianism, is very palatable to Libertarians. And thereby, Goldwater Libertarians are a necessary component of Conservatism.
I have said here before that civil-libertarianism and the Judeo-Christian ethic are what should inform the conscience of every conservative: Libertarianism without the Judeo-Christian ethic will inevitably wind up in anarchy... and The Judeo-Christian ethic without civil-libertarianism will inevitably slide into Christian Socialism.
While I am no Paul fan either, I can see what our civil-libertarian minded FRiends see in him. The difference between Reagan Conservatism and Neo-conservatism is basically the lack of civil-libertarianism.
I heard Ed Rollins say the same thing a few times last night and this morning.
I think Palin is assuming that Paul supporters are Republican, this is where I disagree with her. Paul supporters are mostly Dems who are voting for him because they know if he is the nominee Obama wins in a landslide. Alienating Paul supporters doesnt bother me at all, since they are all a bunch of anti Semites anyway. I could give a rats behind what they think