CPAC Surprise: Ron Paul Wins 2010 CPAC Straw Poll

http://www.gather.com/ ^ | February 20, 2010 | Laurel Elise Ava

[Maelstorm]

Texas Representative Ron Paul won the 2010 CPAC straw poll tonight, beating out both Mitt Romney & Sarah Palin, and raking in 31% of the vote. Paul, a Libertarian who is perhaps best known for his aggressive stance against the Federal Reserve, has a dedicated group of followers which have again affirmed their influence within the Republican party.

What this means for a 2012 bid for presidency is uncertain, however; Paul’s supporters were a vocal and visible group when he ran for President in 2008, but in the end, Paul walked away with only a small percentage of the actual votes. According the Huffington Post, Paul was the most anticipated speaker at the three-day convention, and his followers flooded the auditorium to hear him speak; yet when the results of the straw poll were announced, the crowd booed loudly.

Perhaps this shows just how much Paul’s old-school approach to Republicanism fractures the GOP. Ron Paul is an unorthodox figure in the political scene; his libertarian manifesto, The Revolution, is a New York Times bestseller; he rallies against neoconservatives and liberals alike while preaching states rights, free-market economics, and small government.

[dragnet2]

I believe it’s the author of this article.

[Deagle]

Yes, the polling resembled Chicago - they had to actually request a ballot and stand in line to vote... heh. Hmmm, not quite like Chicago, no dead people voting, no crazy hoodlums standing outside with truncheons, and no Rahm... Not quite Chicago I would say... You are right of course that it was voluntary and that made Ron Paul the favorite of those that were determined to vote him in (Seems that the younger generation has more perseverance).

Of course, you realize that this has no real bearing on who or how the actual election happens... Seems that the favorite of CPAC has a minimal chance of election if you go by past history.

[Deagle]

Wow...what a pessimist!

[GOP Poet]

lol. excellent visual and fitting considering you point.

[DakotaRed]

When underhanded tactics are used, such as disrupting Central Committee Meetings to embarrass leadership over trivial matters, I disagree with it.

When they discuss and announce how to infiltrate the party, act like a Republican and use the party resources, while ensuring they give nothing back to the party, I disagree with it.

When they demand one of their candidates be supported by the party, yet openly oppose other party candidates, I disagree with it.

That is neither “Democracy” nor “representation by the Republic.”

[Deagle]

Well, that happens all the time - Democrats infiltrating the Republican convention, and all aspect of them. What you are angry about (and me also) is that the immoral aspects of the parties. while I can understand your anger with their actions, it is not illegal (just immoral) and it is a part of our Democracy. Really, if they can dissuade us from our platform or beliefs, we or the Republicans should not be there anyway.

It really does get down to beliefs - if any of their tactics prevail, we are lost anyway - aren’t we?

[DakotaRed]

Do you want to just withdraw from fighting terrorists and allow them here before fighting them again, when we will have no allies?

Do you want to follow the folly of “audit and end the fed” with no regard for why it was created, which will hand manipulation of the economy back to the majority party?

Or, do you not realize it is already audited independently every year?

As far as “the immorality of the party’s,” you do not cure immorality by acting immorally.

How you claim the party’s are immoral, then justify their actions as not illegal, just immoral befuddles me.

Are we lost anyways? No. There are many true conservatives fighting the RINO’s, the Paulies, the Gay Agenda, you name it.

Somehow, I also get the feeling you support their takeover more than you let on.

[Deagle]

Heh...no, I disagree with all of his national security ideas. I do agree with some of his economic ideas though and wish that the next President would eliminate many Federal government offices along with their budgets. I also think that the Fed need some control... I guess that makes me a Ron Paul kook...heh.

Look, he is crazy in some areas, but would love to see him get into office and pass a flat tax, eliminate overseas bribery, eliminate about 10 offices of government (ED, HUD, Energy, NPR, Art Subsidies, etc.). He does have some good ideas... I would just love to see the Democrats faces when this was proposed!

[Deagle]

Oh, and if you really think that the Fed is audited, you need to get more information...

[Deagle]

You brought up so many issues that I could not begin to address them all in one post...

Parties immoral? You better believe it - both parties are immoral to the max. Both only want to win re-election, give a damn about the country, much less the people. You are blind to reality if you do not see that we do NOT have statesmen today, only those that want to get re-elected. It is all about money and power!

I look at both parties and see only one or two that seem to give a damn about the direction of the country. Even they will NOT bring up the coming economic catastrophe that is heading our way and actually push for a resolution. So, yes, both parties are not only immoral, but absolutely selfish and give-a-damn about the direction the country is heading. That is what I am pessimistic about!

[TheThinker]

I like Palin, but she stepped down before her term was up.

Because she stepped down, she's now in a better position to oppose Obama's agenda.

[fwdude]

Wow...what a pessimist!

No, a disgusted realist. Are you completely oblivious to the fact that the organizers of CPAC allowed a leftist homosexual activist front group to co-sponsor the event? How can you be "optimistic" about that?

[Deagle]

No, it was a conservative homosexual group that believes along the same lines as the rest of the conservatives. Now I can understand why you may be dismayed with that, but there are homosexual people that believe in the cause. I would have to ask why you are so against that? I can understand a religious difference, but really, those beliefs do NOT mean that you are suppose to castigate them. You really need to get a bit of tolerance. Bring them into the fold and change them if you believe so strongly...don’t castigate them.

[des]

I think the attendees were following Coulter’s advice to keep it close to the vest. It’s too early to throw someone to the wolves. Looks like Romney is out there on a limb.
Besides, we all know it’s gonna be Bush/Cheney 2, right?

[fwdude]

"Conservative homosexual" group? How about some ocean front property in Oklahoma?

There is NOTHING conservative about activist homosexuals. Even their so-called conservative fiscal stances are whitewash - scratch the surface a little and you'll find their real agenda is socialistic.

[DakotaRed]

Well, here is the 2005 - 2006 audit. http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/rptcongress/annual06/pdf/audits.pdf

Here is a pretty good discussion on it, http://commentarama.blogspot.com/2009/12/audit-fed-pros-and-cons.html

Sen. Judd Gregg calls Paul’s move “Politcal Pandering.” http://www.rttnews.com/Content/PoliticalNews.aspx?Id=1136747

Another article detailing the Fed, http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/11/the_wrong_scapegoat.html

Six economists opinions, http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2009/08/03/6-economists-on-why-ron-pauls-fed-audit-idea-is-wrong/

I too think there needs to be some changes in the Fed, but don’t feel Paul’s proposals is anything less than his own personal grudge.

I’m still checking around. I too once was in full support of his idea, but looking at the other side I’m discovering some of his claims aren’t necessarily genuine.

[DakotaRed]

Then please explain how you justify the possibility of Paulies taking over the party as not illegal, just immoral.

Immoral is immoral.

That is why I am supporting candidates that are dsiplaying to me a different approach and the attitudes from old.

[DakotaRed]

I beg to differ with you also on “it was a conservative homosexual group that believes along the same lines as the rest of the conservatives.”

Legislative Priorities
GOProud’s Conservative Agenda
The so-called “gay agenda” is defined by the left through a narrow prism of legislative goals. While hate crimes and employment protections may be worthy goals, there are many other important priorities that receive little attention from the gay community. GOProud’s agenda emphasizes conservative and libertarian principles that will improve the daily lives of all Americans, but especially gay and lesbian Americans.
1 - TAX REFORM - Death tax repeal; domestic partner tax equity, and other changes to the tax code that will provide equity for gays and lesbians; cut in the capital gains and corporate tax rates to jump start our economy and create jobs; a fairer, flatter and substantially simpler tax code.
2 - HEALTHCARE REFORM - Free market healthcare reform. Legislation that will allow for the purchase of insurance across state lines - expanding access to domestic partner benefits; emphasizing individual ownership of healthcare insurance - such a shift would prevent discriminatory practices by an employer or the government.
3 - SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM - Bringing basic fairness to the Social Security system through the creation of inheritable personal savings accounts.
4 - DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL - Repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.
5 - HOLDING THE LINE ON SPENDING - Standing up for all tax payers against wasteful and unneccessary spending to protect future generations from the mounting federal debt.
6 - FIGHTING GLOBAL EXTREMISTS - Standing strong against radical regimes who seek to criminalize gays and lesbians.
7 - DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTION - Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment.
8 - ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP - Package of free market reforms to encourage and support small businesses and entrepreneurship in the gay community.
9 - REVITALIZING OUR COMMUNITIES - A package of urban related reforms; expanding historic tax preservation credits; support for school choice.
10 - DEFENDING OUR COMMUNITY - Protecting 2nd amendment rights.

http://goproud.org/?page=legislativeagenda

[Deagle]

Further reading:

http://www.auditthefed.com/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/18/economists-opposing-fed-a_n_362287.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/18/economists-opposing-fed-a_n_362287.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125175164147973783.html

[Deagle]

Please DakotaRed, I’m not disagreeing with you in any way other that Democracy. If they take over, then that is what it is - a vote by more people for than against.

You seem to think that Democracy is a bad thing and we should find another way. That is called Fascist by any other name.
I’m only saying that if that if that happens, we are all doomed anyway.

Please, let Democracy play out...if it doesn’t work, then you can think about other alternatives...