Congratulations to Ron Paul
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (27) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It does have to be said, ladies and gentlemen. It has to be said.
Ron Paul took over 11,000 votes in Iowa and 10% of the vote. He bested Rudy Giuliani, Duncan Hunter, and Alan Keyes.
We can all say what we will about his supporters, but the guy has a core, loyal group ready to wade through snow to phone for him.
Congrats Ron. I expect a similar showing in New Hampshire.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Fred Stays In — Comments (17) »
Congratulations to Ron Paul 27 Comments (0 topical, 27 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Acknowledging the occurrence is one thing. But congratulations?
I'm sure the devil has a decent percentage of souls on his scoreboard, but I won't be congratulating him on it. Jim Jones had a core, loyal group ready to die for him, but I don't consider it praiseworthy.
For Paul's showing I have no kudos, only contempt.
absentee
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
I'd probably vote for Ron Paul if he was my only choice against the Democrats... better the nut who leans toward federalism than the nut who wants to put us all in diapers (the nanny state).
Now, please, nobody take that as me switching from the Thompson camp because I'm in for the long haul there but stranger things have happened in elections throughout our history when it comes to people like Ron Paul.
My top two are McCain and Huckabee--about as far as you can get from Paul on this side of the fence--and yet I will gladly vote for Paul over any of the top three Dems.
No one of good character leaves behind a wasted life - John McCain
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
for a while. We must be careful not to alienate his supporters, as tempting as it is.
...we were actually quite comprehensive in our imposition of daylight between us and the Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! campaign, and if we had it all over to do again the only difference is that we would have done it harder, earlier, and with more scorn.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Look, it's your website, and you can run it however you want. I'm not a Ron Paul voter so I don't really care one way or the other. However, you can't employ those tactics and then at the same time expect his supporters to line up behind the Republican nominee when the dust settles. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that libertarians aren't welcome in the GOP anymore (let alone on RedState).
...that we were expecting the Ron Paul supporters to line up behind the Republican nominee in the first place. Or that we wanted them, frankly.
It's not the small-l libertarians that are the issue. It's the Troofers, the ZOG/NWO black helicopter-crowd, the and-that's-why-you-don't-have-to-pay-income-taxers, the white nationalists, the Kuchinichite double-agents, the dig-up-Adam-Smith's-and-Milton-Friedman's-bones enthusiasts, and the Libertarian Smurfs who distress us so.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Except the Kuchinichite double agent! What in the world are those? LOL
You are dead on though, even as a Voldemort supporter, (Disclaimer, I also support Thompson and McCain) I have done a number of head smacking "D'ohs" over some of the moronic over-enthusiastic supporters.
But I still think that the large majority of Cthulhu supporters are reasonable people who believe that Government should be smaller, not bigger. Let's make sure there's a place for them in the Republican party once this is all said and done.
---
"The bass, the rock, the mic, the treble, I like my coffee black, just like my Metal." - MSI
...which was a shame, if only because of the nifty icon. :)
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that libertarians aren't welcome in the GOP anymore (let alone on RedState).
Libertarians are quite welcome. Nuts that spam websites and spit "Everyone else is a traitor" are not.
I'm willing to hazard a guess that many on this site would find the notions of libertarianism quite desireable (i.e. limited federal government, reduced spending, etc.)
I also find it hard to generalize since the editors have merely banned new posters and not those that have proven they are not trolls.
I hope this has at least a bit of sarcasm attached to it. This is about what I expected for Ron Paul. Were these results at all surprising?
He beat Giuliani. Big deal. Giuliani didn't really even campaign there. Duncan Hunter? Wow there's a shocker. And Alan Keyes...not even worth discussing.
Sure Crazy Ron has got core loyal supporters that support him. But obviously they weren't enough to make it into the top 4. I hope he gets even less in New Hampshire.
"Politics is the business of trying to convince fools to do the right thing."
-Braden Pace
Ahead of Fred Thompson.
And Giuliani may not have campaigned a LOT in person as of late, but he has run ads and mailings. Also, I think the Paul campaign was focused more on New Hampshire than Iowa.
No one of good character leaves behind a wasted life - John McCain
for New Hampshire. Think about it.
We must keep in mind that today is not about Ron Paul, but about Mike Huckabee, the man who best represents the Republican Party in Iowa.
Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire
When I was flipping between Fox, CNN, and the Orange Bowl last night, I thought it was strange that on the early versions the CNN pie charts, Bill Richardson's 2 percent was labeled, but Ron Paul's 10 percent was part of the nebulous white "other" zone. You can't tell me in the digital era that CNN could only come up with four colors for their pie charts. CNN has been trying to make Ron Paul look like an outsider nut case for some time now. I guess putting him on the chart (or at least mentioning his name once) would have given him too much legitimacy.
"Now the Senate is looking for 'moderate' judges, 'mainstream' judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we'd like it to say?"
Justice Scalia
Then again, you could make the case they put on "the top four" of each. Still, double digits should have given him a slice--and would have worsened a bad illustration for Giuliani.
No one of good character leaves behind a wasted life - John McCain
Full disclosure, I'm a Ron Paul disciple and I fully intend to vote for him in the primaries, even though I know he hasn't got a chance of winning and I will then be forced to vote for whichever "conservative" does win the Republican nomination. I rarely post here (I usually feel that I would make an ass out of myself due to the heavyweight political discussion that goes on in here), but I visit the site daily and I read many of the articles. That being said, I truly don't understand the hostility to Ron Paul that is regularly shown here. In my opinion, Ron Paul is more conservative than any other candidate actually running. Sure, his ideas are shocking, but I don't find them silly or stupid. He wants to return to the principals that this country was actually founded on. I sometimes think that the reason so many conservatives do not like Ron Paul is because he holds a mirror up to our party and forces us to see how much it has changed to resemble the liberal-socialist Democratic party.
Please know, I'm not a spammer nor am I here to insult anyone else's candidate or anything of that nature. I just wanted to stand up for my candidate. When Ron loses the primaries and we have some other Republican as the nominee, I'll back that one in November.
-Life is tough, but it's tougher when your stupid.-
John Wayne
Jake, it really wasn't about Ron Paul, but the behaviour of some of his supporters who showed up just to relentlessly spam the board. Honest, rational talk of Ron Paul from regulars is fine. Even newcomers if they hang around for a bit.
Duncan Hunter is more conservative than Ron Paul. For me it's hard to get behind someone who has the support of skinheads and 9/11 Conspiracy nuts. Even more so when I heard him agree with
one of those nuts who was babbling that the US was behind 9/11.
I am supporting Fred but will vote for whoever wins the nomination, unless it's Huckabee. I have no idea what I'll do if Huckabee wins, the man has no business running for president.
I say that and I am a Bible thumping Christian myself but the man scares me.
Ron doesn't agree with the freakasoids who think that the US was behind 9/11. He DOES think that our foreign policy as it applies to the Middle East has created a lot of enemies, some of whom are the very people who DID attack us. Ron's position on that issue has been misrepresented a lot in the media. I don't think it is hard to see that we've made some decisions that have come back to bite us in the ass. A perfect example would be the support of the mujadheen in Afghanistan. We helped create a monster in our attempts to defeat the Soviet Union, and twenty years later we are paying the price. Don't get me wrong, I know full well that it was a chain of events that were mostly beyond our control that led to the formation of the Taliban that later supported Osama Bin Laden. That is, in fact, the point of Ron's argument. We frequently make foreign policy decisions based on our immediate goals without any real thought about what the long term consequences may be.
I agree with Mike about Huckabee, he scares me. I think our politicians need to stop brandishing their religion about as if it is the most important aspect of their candidacy and actually start running on a platform that means something. I like Mitt Romney because of his "I am a Mormon but why does that matter?" speech. I personally hope he wins the nomination, if I can't have Ron.
-Life is tough, but it's tougher when your stupid.-
John Wayne
I should point out that other than Mike and Mitt, Ron Paul was the only one to actually win a country in Iowa. He carried Jefferson County. Whoever Ron Paul's man/woman was there, he should give him a promotion and make him part of the national team.
Who is this "Ron Paul" fellow??
_____________________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
--Aristotle
Is probably two too many. Most assuredly at least one too many.