I really, really don't like Newt Gingrich, but I have to give him credit for being a very savvy politician. Not in a policy-making way, but in a consolidating personal power and persuading others sort of way. All the great dictators of the 20th century had this sort of political shrewdness. I think if he actually became president, he would be very very effective. And by effective, I mean dangerous.
I don't think catering to the hardcore republican primary voters is very difficult. As a president the audience changes significantly so the efficacy of his tactics goes way down.
no, but I bet you heard about it... ...on abovetopsecret.com http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread793966/pg1 considering ALL YOU DO is regurgitate garbage from that site, your recent participation in this thread tells me that you might have been banned from making new threads in D&D. one can only hope.
So then we shouldn't worry about the national debt? Just because Ron Paul talks about how this problem was created doesn't mean that his ideas would fix it. In fact, his policies would only make the situation much, much worse. How are you gonna pay off the national debt with no income tax and no capital gains tax?
This isn't his first time in the limelight though. He was an important player in Republicans winning the House in 1994 and made himself into a powerful Speaker of the House. I think his hubris was his only undoing then. And his rise in this primary from pariah to legitimate threat reminds me of what a major figure he used to be.
who cares about this? i'm a paul supporter too, but you need to cool it with these stories. it's not likely that he won, and outside of "perception" a win in iowa is pretty meaningless. dr paul may very well gain the most number of delegates despite coming in third. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-you-read-about-the-sly-move-the-ron-paul-camp-pulled-last-night/
Actually no, I saw the videos to the right of the video I was watching on youtube. I had heard something about this before and I knew his polling #s were alot more impressive then the votes he received, but I didn't know about them moving the votes to another location to be counted. That's like me holding a raffle, and pulling the winner out of my hat in my office with the door closed, to make sure my neighbor Greg who I don't like doesn't win. :grin:
The WSJ editorial page is long noted for being a total tool for the 1% and has been key in miseducating tens of millions to believe in trickle down. Of course they would plug Ron Paul's economics!!
Well, actually, the "contract on America" was not a scintillating win, and he staked his career on it. I can't believe he's bringing back the same language in this political phase, (except that all males try to relive what they see as their "glory days.")
Is that all it takes? I was thinking there is some sort of "Christian" or perhaps "southern" or some other angle to this? Maybe they are just like a high school dropout in my wife's family who says: He voted for Bush II because he "is for what I am for and against what I am against. I'm for the death penalty and I'm against abortion". Needless to say he is a deacon in a small local Baptist church. Hey I realize that Jimmy Carter is a Baptist, too and I try to remember this. As it was a family gathering I decided not to pursue the political discussion.
well, the reason why it is on fire is because the previous owner left a ring of gas around the house, and bankers lit it on fire with shoddy contracts. and I guess matches. only one presidential candidate is at least, even if it is somewhat of a facade, trying to fix that.
And he was widely considered a failure at this once he got elected and was trounced by Clinton who were able to coopt his ideas and use his unpopularity with a wider audience against him.
Ron Paul was never leading the polls by upwards of 50%. He was never even anywhere close to that. You really should fact check your posts instead of regurgitating whatever nonsense you hear as fact. Every single poll of Iowa: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...owa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html And the vote tabulation wasn't done in secret. They were done in public, and if you actually watched the results, you'd have seen CNN actually showing some of the counting going on. This kind of nonsense is why no one takes anything you say seriously.
Yeah, I liked how he left all the blame on the elite media and didn't mention at all how it was his own ex-wife who purposefully brought this information to the nation's attention in an attempt to ruin his presidential bid. I'm not sure what else the 'conspirators' are supposed to do when they have a story like this gift-wrapped for them.
