http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...stablishment/2012/01/20/gIQAf8foiQ_story.html Interesting. I wonder if the Paul supporters will follow their leader into the Romney camp.
It is pretty interesting to see how, in each debate, he goes after the popular Non-Romney but never really touches Romney. Yesterday, he was totally focused on Santorum. Really, it's in his interest for the non-Romney to stay viable - as that's the only path to a brokered convention, which is the only way his delegates are going to matter at all. So he seems to be working against his own interests. If Romney takes a commanding lead, the contest is over.
This is all speculation. What Ron Paul wants is for people to look at him in a one on one battle with Romney. There is Romney then there is the Not-Romney. Santorum is the easiest one of the Santorum and Gingrich to bring down. Santorum has a horrible record, and he has nothing to back up his stumbles along the way. It's not so much about attacking Romney. Romney speaks for itself. Romney is as close to Obama as you can get. He wants to eliminate the weeds and distractions so the people can see Ron Paul is the only choice that isn't Romney. Paul has addressed this numberous times as he and Romney are at opposite ends on all the issues. The only candidate that has remotely tried to change his stance to appeal to the Paul supporters is Newt but he can't do that without shattering his core of supporters.
If Dennis Kucinich was running for president, Ron Paul would support Romney over him. Ron Paul is mainly about market fundamentalism or econ for the 1%. It would be interesting to see how many of the young converts would go for Kucinich over Romney due to concerns about civil liberties or perpetual war. Ron and Rand know who pays the bills.
doubtful. you told me that if i like mainstream GOP economics than ron paul is my guy - you have no credibility when discussing paul. i would almost like to see paul get the VP nod so we can watch our resident romney-supporter/paul-hater korjiou's head explode, but i dont see any scenario where paul would get the VP pick - him and romney are at odds on most key issues - romney has more in common w/ obama than he does w/ paul.
The media is trying to discredit Paul It's all speculation by the media and press to further put Romney in the spotlight
Non-Romney is a hyper-conservative. Ron Paul doesn't fit the mold on foreign policy and thus will never be able to play that role - he has his supporters, and he has his detractors. Nothing he does or any other candidate does is really going to change that proportion. If he's the only alternative, he'll still get his 10-20% while Romney will just take the rest. If the GOP voters saw it that way, Romney wouldn't be leading the GOP nomination right now.
it seems people also forget about Paul supporters main slogan along with the paul Revolution "No one but Paul" that seems pretty straightforward to me
From the original article linked to by Carl Herrera “It would be very foolish for anybody in the Republican Party to dismiss a very real constituency,” said one senior GOP aide in Washington who is familiar with both camps. “Ron Paul plays a very valuable part in the process and brings a lot of voters toward the Republican Party and ultimately into the voting booth, and that’s something that can’t be ignored. Exactly, Ron Paul is quite useful to bring in folks to support economics for the 1%. No honest Paul supporter can refuse to admit that on civil liberties and even foreign wars, Obama is somewhat better than Romney and all the other GOP contenders.
Ron Paul would probably love foreign wars if they could be done without taxes and government spending. Private armies would probably be ok.
I agree with most of the things you say glynch, but this is crazy. You are becoming as irrational when it comes to Paul as the Paulbots. You can't question the fact that he has been a staunch non-interventionist for decades...
MSNBC gets WEAD-WHACKED! <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/V9WeqvXy3Ew" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Doug Wead talking about the Romney conspiracies and talks about Romney and Santorum in cahoots against Paul in other states. Doug Wead telling it like it is.
He is easily the best Republican candidate. Given that the GOP base is cuckoo for fighting more wars and increasing military spending, they won't vote for him. I think Obama pretty much has this election in the bag. Btw, basso - how in the world do Romney/Santorum/Gingrich expect to balance the budget when they want to increase military spending and cut taxes? According a new report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Paul's plan is the only that will cut the deficit. I'd say the GOP base is cuckoo for cocopuffs and want to drive this country into a ditch ala George W. Bush....
Also to add on the comment above, please explain what Conservative means... the GOP are conservatives they are suppose to spend less. As Dr. Paul points out, the other 3 men want to cut on the proposed increases to spending. If you do the numbers the other 3 candidates will be saving a little bit but when you add in the billions of dollars deeper in debt we go each month, its still putting us deeper in a hole just not as rapidly as Obama.
It was basically a joke about Ron Paul and taxes and wars and private armies. Paul is indeed non-interventionist, but anti-war libertarians do often emphasize how one of the reasons to hate war is because it strengthens the state and involves taxation and government spending. It is probably partly an attempt by the antiwar libertarians to convince those libertarians who on the whole support interventionism to join them on the basis of their common hatred of taxation/government I do hate libertarianism passionately as it is a basically an amoral philosophy of selfishness. For some young misguided idealistic types, not otherwise conservative, it can be a gateway drug to heartless support for economics for the 1%.
