Pretty shocking poll numbers I'd never thought I would see

[Moonbeam]

I don't think so. And I'll tell you why. No one has really had to fire their big guns at Paul. He's not a threat to them, and hypothetically speaking, if he were in the general election, he'd have a bigger fight on his hands. And I don't say this because he's full of bad ideas, but because his ideas are a hard sell to the American people. Americans are much more likely to buy into fear than anything Paul has to offer.

Shit, I guess I'm stuck with the lesser of two evils.

 

[bamacre]

Ron Paul is far from socially liberal. He's the most pro-life one out there, even voting for a federal ban on partial-birth abortion; he's even more pro-life than Sarah Palin, and he's very anti-illegal immigration.

These days too damn many people who consider themselves Republicans only care about Israel and having bases all over the world and that's why he'll have a tougher time in the primaries than in the general election.

In the debates, he'd crush Obama. Obama would look like a complete idiot, and start running negative, false ads against Dr.Paul in desparation, while Dr. Paul will win even more votes because he won't respond to Obama's BS personally.

I like Paul probably more than anyone else here, but honestly you are so far from reality it's disgusting. Personally, I wish you'd just quit posting anything related to him, you're not exactly the best person to sell his ideas.

 

[Carmen813]

Ron Paul would never win a Republican primary, and he'll never be president. And believe me, he knows that more than anyone else.

People were saying that about Obama not that long ago. I agree, Paul would face an incredible uphill battle. He doesn't have the national name recognition, he "looks" old, and he has been in Washington forever (even though it seems to have largely unchanged him). Paul's problems as a candidate are probably more of a presentation issue than of a policy one, though I think many would strongly disagree with his policies.

 

[bamacre]

Shit, I guess I'm stuck with the lesser of two evils.

You and the majority of the American people.

 

[bamacre]

People were saying that about Obama not that long ago.

No they weren't.

 

[Moonbeam]

You and the majority of the American people.

All the American people and thank God it WAS the lesser evil, but no thanks to you.

 

[Carmen813]

No they weren't.

In my opinion, yes, they were. I'm assuming you aren't a Democrat. Hillary had the nomination locked up months before a single vote was cast. That was the consensus among basically everyone.

It's easy to discount Obama's accomplishments in the Democrat caucuses if you don't like him, but until after Iowa no one really expected him to win anything. He was the long shot candidate. John Edwards and Hillary Clinton had substantially more name recognition.

Frankly, if Paul can learn from how Obama capitalized in the early Democrat caucuses I think he would have fair much better.

 

[bamacre]

All the American people and thank God it WAS the lesser evil, but no thanks to you.

No thanks to me, huh? You should reconsider your thoughts on this. If Ron Paul didn't exist, do you think that would have given McCain more or less votes?

You said it yourself, an honest man can't win. Is that the fault of the honest man or those voting? You see yourself as part of a society, but I bet when you look in the mirror, you only see Moonbeam. You can vote for whomever you desire, but you choose to let others vote for you. You're part of the same problem to which you're trying to find a solution. You can blame the American people all you want, but if you're one of them, you're nothing but a hypocrite.

 

[StageLeft]

Ron Paul aside, what you describe would be the fate of anybody honest who runs.

Pretty much.

 

[paperfist]

I have to admit, last election I thought he was a loon. Now I would support him. I agree 100% with his limited federal government stance, I believe thats how the Constitution was framed.

That's the problem, media makes him out to look like a loon and people buy into that. Put him on stage next to Obama (with out any ear pieces) and ask them political, historical and finical questions and see who comes out looking like a leader you would want.

 

[Deeko]

Ron Paul is far from socially liberal. He's the most pro-life one out there, even voting for a federal ban on partial-birth abortion; he's even more pro-life than Sarah Palin, and he's very anti-illegal immigration.

These days too damn many people who consider themselves Republicans only care about Israel and having bases all over the world and that's why he'll have a tougher time in the primaries than in the general election.

In the debates, he'd crush Obama. Obama would look like a complete idiot, and start running negative, false ads against Dr.Paul in desparation, while Dr. Paul will win even more votes because he won't respond to Obama's BS personally.

This is the problem with labels. You think that because he doesn't fit a couple of the socially liberal stigmas, that he is in no way socially liberal?

Fact is - Ron Paul does not fit the standard political labels in America. He does, however, side with Democrats on various social issues (posted earlier by several people) that Republicans are very against.

 

[nick1985]

That's the problem, media makes him out to look like a loon and people buy into that. Put him on stage next to Obama (with out any ear pieces) and ask them political, historical and finical questions and see who comes out looking like a leader you would want.

I also think Paul would fucking trash Obama in a debate.

 

[werepossum]

This was a Ramussen poll, which has been polling Republican leaning districts more heavily since last summer. They have a R bias of around 5% when compared to other pollers.

The reason this is interesting is that it means perhaps Ron Paul could survive the Republican primaries.

There are other reasons which lead me to think this poll is bunk (and indeed, all polls this year) but this doesn't seem to be the right thread to discuss it.

The last grouping of polls I saw had Rasmussen dead on the poll average as to Obama's support. He was a few points above average in Republican support (in the generic R v. D Congressional poll) though, I think he was the highest. Nick is right, it is interesting, but probably meaningless. While I too like the idea of limited federal government and libertarianism, I can't vote for him based on his stance on the military and illegal immigration. I suspect most middle and right voters will retain their own sacred cows as well, and since much of the left literally can't think beyond recognizing "D" (and in Florida even THAT is beyond them), there's not a lot of the electorate left. Probably he'll do much better, maybe even quadruple his last vote - but then 8% won't get you elected in a two-party system. Probably won't even get him matching funds.

Nick, you totally underestimate the power of the TelePrompter. LOL

 

[SamurAchzar]

These are not the questions you are asking and the concerns you have. I think what you're saying is that if Paul is elected and is effective it's bye bye Israel.

He believes that American money and American blood are for Americans and the aggressive uncompromising land grabbing apartheid of Israel is their problem and theirs alone.

I think Paul has less chance to be President and get anything real done than a snowball has a chance in hell, but it would be a sad but tough way to teach Israel the path she took is one that runs over a cliff. He who lives by the sword dies by it. Oh and, love thy neighbor.

This is one way it can play out. Let me suggest another:

1. America leaves Israel for dead;

2. Israel makes it very clear that without an American backing, any aggressor in the ME is a potential target for any one of its 200-odd nukes. Israeli ICBM's cover the entire globe, so stretch it out to Pakistan and N. Korea. Israel starts off by making an example of Iran, no one sheds a tear;

3. Israel becomes friendly with the Chinese and Russian, basing its next generation aircrafts on Russian airframes (which the Israelis upgrade for foreign armies anyway), and sell China all the military hardware it likes (some of it superior to American made stuff).

4. Instead of the Israeli high tech sector working for American companies (as any Intel users knows), they start working for the Chinese and the South Koreans.

Now is this scenario better for America? I believe not. I assure you the implications of this chain of events would cost the American tax payer much more than the $3bn US allocates to Israel (to buy US stuff on US soil, of course).

I'm always amused by the condescending fools who think Israeli-American relations are a one way street.

 

[Moonbeam]

This is one way it can play out. Let me suggest another:

1. America leaves Israel for dead;

2. Israel makes it very clear that without an American backing, any aggressor in the ME is a potential target for any one of its 200-odd nukes. Israeli ICBM's cover the entire globe, so stretch it out to Pakistan and N. Korea. Israel starts off by making an example of Iran, no one sheds a tear;

3. Israel becomes friendly with the Chinese and Russian, basing its next generation aircrafts on Russian airframes (which the Israelis upgrade for foreign armies anyway), and sell China all the military hardware it likes (some of it superior to American made stuff).

4. Instead of the Israeli high tech sector working for American companies (as any Intel users knows), they start working for the Chinese and the South Koreans.

Now is this scenario better for America? I believe not. I assure you the implications of this chain of events would cost the American tax payer much more than the $3bn US allocates to Israel (to buy US stuff on US soil, of course).

I'm always amused by the condescending fools who think Israeli-American relations are a one way street.

There are more geniuses in China and Russia than Jews in Israel so we need to shift, I think, from talk of condescending to talk of hubris. If Israel disappeared tomorrow, after the cheers died down, nobody would even notice.

 

[bfdd]

I bet the majority of Wingnuts could never get behind his policies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul
Gay Marriage, Non aggressive stance towards Iran, ending the embargo on Cuba, cutting financial aid to Israel, decriminalizing drugs, etc

Seems to me that he'd probably have an easier time with the Moderate Dems than the Wingers.

It really sucks that Ron Paul has to be part of the Republican party to get any face time. The dude has a lot of policies I actually like and I would of voted for him instead of writing in Zombie Thomas Jefferson last election.

 

[Lemon law]

Some how I feel that I have transported back in time two or three years, to a time before the 2008 political primaries started.

I can't say following this thread has been fun, and there is a certain FDA nausea warning that should be required, but brother here we go again.

The last time the Paulbots used polls to prove Ron Paul was gonna be a slam dunk for Prez in 2008, as the Paulbots came out of the woodwork like cockroaches after dark. But when the real polls came out, in the form of political primaries results and the general election, we found that Ron Paul, like Dracula, was already politically dead. No need to shoot him with a silver bullet or pound a wooden stake through his heart to induce that final death, because he was never really alive on the first place.

But still on dark and stormy nights, when things go bump in the night, and we sleeplessly ponder weak and weary, that is when the monsters under our beds come alive to plague the human mind and psyche. Is it a bird, is it a bat, is it a rat, or is it a Paulbot?

When I was a small child, I was convinced there was a alligator under my bed, so please do what I did, cut the legs off of your bed, squish em all, and sleep in peace thereafter.

 

[SamurAchzar]

There are more geniuses in China and Russia than Jews in Israel so we need to shift, I think, from talk of condescending to talk of hubris. If Israel disappeared tomorrow, after the cheers died down, nobody would even notice.

How would you, then, explain the overwhelming R&D activities of US companies in Israel? The fact Israel attracts more US VC money than any other country, regardless of population? Sorry buddy but you just have no idea.

 

[Lemon law]

Deeko you arnt reading the thread

I give up

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even if Deeko is almost certainly 101% correct, why do I suspect that nick 1985 will not give up. Like the energizer bunny, like bad Arnold S. movie lines, like Ossama Bin Laden, its not rocket science to predict Nick will be back, because some people are never capable of learning and hence never learn.

 

[Moonbeam]

How would you, then, explain the overwhelming R&D activities of US companies in Israel? The fact Israel attracts more US VC money than any other country, regardless of population? Sorry buddy but you just have no idea.

I would have no need to as one has nothing to do with the other.

 

[Mani]

So what? How does that differentiate between a truth teller and a fanatic? I bet it's because you agree with him, eh? So which are you?

Actually, I don't agree with him at all on many things. Several of his ideas are flat out pipe dreams. But at least unlike his fellow republicans, he is at least consistent between his message and his voting record. Not that Jesse Ventura is a bastion of wisdom, but he is spot on when he says both Dems and Republicans are rampant spenders, but at least the dems are cash and carry.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well I can't vote Dem this time around and the reps seem to love palin types. Unless something remarkable happens I may vote for him. I doubt that the reps will field anyone worthwhile so I'll probably sit out 2002 like I did the last.

 

[SamurAchzar]

I would have no need to as one has nothing to do with the other.

Well, the point was that the relations between US and Israel are a two way street, one that benefits Israel immensely BUT with advantages for the US that by far outweigh the cost.

Now, I'm not talking about the direct monetary aid as this is not the issue, Netanyahu looked to eliminate that dependency in his last term (you can imagine how joyful Lockheed and co. were at this possibility). That money, for the US, is chump change considering the strategic reach an ally like Israel provides it in the ME region (intelligence and strike capability). Unlike many other countries, not even one American soldier died over the protection of Israel, while Israel did the West some favors by taking out the nuclear capabilities in both Iraq and Syria, with no US intervention.

As Israel is the only country in the world that without an army, would be overrun in 48 hours, and surrounded by neighbours who don't think its existence is legitimate, denying Israel from arms procurement is just like announcing it has no right to exist. This, as opposed to what Ron Paul thinks, IS taking a stand, especially when you arm to teeth Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia at the same time.

Anyway I wasn't trying to make this another ME thread, my point was that only a child thinks US can do well without any regard to what goes on in the world. That vacum will be closed very quickly, and it will certainly not be in the benefit of America. Israel will do fine, probably, its the weaker countries - Japan, Taiwan, Chile, South Korea, Europe - that will have the problem.

 

[Moonbeam]

No thanks to me, huh? You should reconsider your thoughts on this. If Ron Paul didn't exist, do you think that would have given McCain more or less votes?

You said it yourself, an honest man can't win. Is that the fault of the honest man or those voting? You see yourself as part of a society, but I bet when you look in the mirror, you only see Moonbeam. You can vote for whomever you desire, but you choose to let others vote for you. You're part of the same problem to which you're trying to find a solution. You can blame the American people all you want, but if you're one of them, you're nothing but a hypocrite.

You tell me whose fault it is since I don't think that way. Is it the fault of an honest man that he can't win or is it the fault of the people? And when you decide which it is tell me then what we will do to fix that fault.

I'm personally glad that you are an idealist who will not dirty his hands to vote for the party you belong in and you have told me your aim is to fix the Republicans, but for me to cast a vote for Paul would be dangerous. I know the the Democrats are the lesser of evils than Republicans and if I voted for Paul I would waste my vote which isn't going to happen. I am, however, glad that you waste yours as you have no real idea about what is evil.

 

[Moonbeam]

Actually, I don't agree with him at all on many things. Several of his ideas are flat out pipe dreams. But at least unlike his fellow republicans, he is at least consistent between his message and his voting record. Not that Jesse Ventura is a bastion of wisdom, but he is spot on when he says both Dems and Republicans are rampant spenders, but at least the dems are cash and carry.

Fair enough.