Posted on 01/31/2012 12:00:06 PM PST by presidio9
The first primaries of 2012 are complete, but the fight over the proper role of government continues. The question before GOP primary voters is who best reflects their own answer to that question, and then, who is best suited to make that case to the American people?
A clear winner has yet to emerge, but there is little question about who has captured the loyalty of young Republican voters on this issue. Although finishing fourth overall, Ron Paul once again won the youth vote in South Carolina, winning 31% of ages 18-29, compared to Newt Gingrich who won 28%. Paul’s appeal, or more accurately, the appeal of Paul’s limited government message, is a key story to emerge from the Republican primaries.
There’s no mistaking the trend.
Mitt Romney won the New Hampshire primary, getting approximately 39% of the total vote. Ron Paul finished second with 23%, Jon Huntsman finished third with 17%, and Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum each won about 9% of the vote.
Yet young voters would have picked a different winner. According to Fox News exit polls, in New Hampshire, Paul won nearly half (46%) of the votes of people ages 18-29, while Romney won second place with just 26%.
Paul also won the youth vote in Iowa. In the Hawkeye State almost half (48%) of the Republican caucus goers ages 18-29 supported Paul, compared to 23% for the otherwise victorious Santorum, and 14% for Romney.
What is so appealing about Paul to young voters? One answer is that Paul has been the most outspoken candidate defending the importance of free enterprise and the limited role of government. And he has had a
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
What public drug policy do you prefer?
Reasoned and well planned enforcement against supplies and suppliers with support for those who are true victims and reasonable sentencing.
Of course at the rate we are going you'll get you cheap legal hash and wont be looking over your shoulder. I will be close to gone by the, and not long after that so with the US. Everyone will be strung out and worthless. My son will have to be the one worried about the legal crackhead running into him.
Slippery slope do your stuff. Everyone light up.
Longer sentences are unlikely to make much difference, seeing as how dealers willingly risk death (from competitors and edgy customers).
an adjust in focus better utilization of resources, more assets locally.
I'm all for moving responsibility to a local level. Do you support allowing localities to legalize if they so choose?
Many differences are possible. The current War on Drugs concept is out dated. The answer is not throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Of course at the rate we are going you'll get you cheap legal hash and wont be looking over your shoulder. I will be close to gone by the, and not long after that so with the US. Everyone will be strung out and worthless.
That's not what happened when the drug alcohol was legalized, so there's no reason to expect it when other drugs are legalized.
There’s no way to make any headway with this individual. In the Dictionary under “Obtuse” is says, “See JustSayNoToNannies”
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.