Politics The Marginalization of Ron Paul (or How Media Plays Favorites)

I would expect Paul to do well in Iowa, and the handful of other states with caucuses rather primaries, particularly since in Iowa he has the best field staff across the state (left over from 08), Cain has barely built a ground team at all and Romney is not putting serious money into Iowa.

Caucuses attract a far smaller number of voters, primarily the hard core committed voters willing to sit in a school auditorium or church basement for 2-3 hours and debate the merits of their candidate as opposed to the more casual voter who just wants to walk in, mark a ballot and leave. If all states had caucuses rather than primaries, I might take Paul more seriously as a potential nominee.

Another recent Iowa poll doesnt have it that close
http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/11/getting-crowded-in-iowa.php

I think Paul is polling third or fourth in the January primaries - NH and SC.

The surprise is Newt. IMO, he is the one to watch for now.

But I do like that you are only interested in polls if they swing your way.

 

I found this table on a site with no link to its origin so can't verify its validity. I'll have to research further to determine if the 33% and 17% numbers are accurate. But it immediately says to me that, if the Iowa caucus is no great indicator of who will win the Republican nomination, never mind the general election, how important are the current polling numbers in respect to a general election? If I were a Republican, I'd be looking at who I thought would most likely give Obama a run for his money.

 

Ron Paul is the best shot the GOP has at challenging Obama. It is very hard to attack Ron Paul as a person (which is good), but his ideas will come back to the center after the primaries. I would even say that his plan that came out last month was too high and doesn't fix enough. I just think he needs to come up with transition plans to go from government agencies to the private sector. That would alleviate a lot of worries. And explain to people how it would work if the government didn't fund or regulate something.

Here he is, agreeing with Michael Moore on Afghanistan... I doubt any other GOP candidate would ever do that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7myjtY13M8&feature=related

 

I don't think it requires further explanation. I think the private sector has already proven itself unworthy of the responsibility and most of us are aware of it.

We let the fox sleep in the hen house. The fox ate 75% of the hens before we realized our error. Ron Paul is asking us to trust the fox not eat the remaining hens if he lets the fox move in permanently.

 

My worry is that people looking for change will be lulled into voting for Paul. Misinformed/under informed people voting with their guts can often be a disaster.

 

So what do you call the people who voted for Obama? Duped?

 

The majority.

 

You're supposed to use an adjective. Weren't you paying attention?

 

I was thinking of Obama when I wrote that... I was also thinking of the people who voted for Bush Jr. and the current Mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford.

I believe that most voters vote with their emotions rather than their intellect. I believe that the process by which we are expected to inform ourselves has been so gamed by the players and the media, that we can no longer make informed decisions without spending a lot of time digging for ourselves. Time most people do have, or don't want to spend.

 

Duping supporters that voted for Obama would have required him to have intentionally set out to deceive. I don't think he did. I think he entered the White House with good intentions. Partisan politics being what they are, forced him to make concessions to the right, where he may have preferred to keep to a more liberal agenda.

Whether or not this is true will hopefully be revealed during his next term when re-election is not a factor and he has the support of a less partisan Congress.

 

Informed.

 

Right, because politicians would never deceive us, especially our beloved president.

 

I am in complete agreement.

I've kept a very close eye on Obama since just prior to his running for U.S. Senator (Illinois). The Dem machine felt Obama was their only chance in 2008. They believed Hilary Clinton would win if he didn't run and would not make room for Obama when he was supposed to run for the first time in 2012. He protested that he was not ready, that he wanted more time to learn the ropes in politics (the bulk of his experience was in academia and community activism). Obama ultimately caved and jumped the gun. He won, no surprise, and it shouldn't have been a surprise given his paltry political experience at the Federal level that while sincere, his promises were not realistic for the reasons Joniemack cites.

 

Duped?

You mean Obama is not a foreign born secret Muslim who wants to confiscate your guns, kill granny with death panels and socialize the US economy?

Damn.
--- merged: Nov 18, 2011 12:05 AM ---
BTW, Paul is fourth in the latest Iowa poll of likely Republican caucus voters.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...rich_surges_to_double_digit_lead_in_iowa.html

 

Generally, I avoid any discussion about politics like the plague as it is akin to arguing religion.
However as a Canadian who was relocated to this country long ago, I'm gobsmacked at the degeneration of respect for the office of the President of the United States. It's one thing to criticize his policies and politics, quite another to take aim personally at the leader of the most powerful country in the world.
Even when you (Americans) quite literally had a crook in the presidential office there was a veneer of respect right through the bitter end. I mean no disrespect to anyone personally but as a group, WTF is wrong with you people? Don't you see that when you denigrate your president as a person, you denigrate yourselves? (And it matters not if you didn't vote for him--he's YOUR president.)

 

I've witnessed public disagreement and discontent for every President since JFK but nothing compared to what Obama has been forced to tolerate. Slurs and slander against his race, his character, his loyalty to the US, his birthright, and his intelligence. I agree, it's appalling - the fact that it stems from the leaders of the opposing party makes it all the more outrageous.

 

Uh, no. I'm an individual with God-given rights and freedoms represented in the Constitution of the United States. I do not link myself or my identity to any political figure.
--- merged: Nov 18, 2011 12:46 AM ---

No, it doesn't stem from other politicians it stems from regular Americans who see right through Obama's "charm." He may wow the more gullible folks but those of us with a keen eye can spot his disingenuousness from a mile away.

 

You know what? You are absolutely correct, Eddie. The leaders of the Republican Party are not clever enough to come up with their own slurs so they take the Koch Bros funded Tea Party temperature at regular intervals and spew out whatever beer soaked, testosterone laden slur is popular with the rank and file, at any given time. If you want a good racial slur it's always best to seek out the source.

Remember Michelle Malkin's delightful reference to the First Lady as "Obama's Baby Mama?" She's too stupid to have come up with that one all by herself.
How about Doug Lamborn (R-Col) referring to the President as "tar-baby". Ooh, good one! Probably overheard it at the last Tea Party rally he attended.
And everyone knows the whole birther movement was born (no pun there) in the Tea Party thick of it amidst a raging bonfire and machine gun salute to 2th amendment rights.

I stand corrected.

 

Ah yes, cloaked in the warmth of God and the Constitution. Good on ya, Eddie.

 

Name any talking head currently defaming the POTUS and I'll bet can find a quote by them to the effect of "like him or not he's your President, he's the President of the United States and for that reason alone you should show respect for the office" when GWB was in office. The Dixie Chicks mentioned they were "embarrassed" by the fact he was from their state. The folks on the right went nuts. Had CD burning parties and tossed them off country music radio. Ted Nudgent regularly goes on stage these days to tell the crowd "Obama can suck on my Mac-10" while firing blanks from his machine gun in the air. And the crowd cheers.

Makes sense... right?