Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Romney Gingrich Battling for 2nd Place

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 2:31:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Paul was on Leno a few days ago. Anyone who watched that and doesn't want Paul to win... sheeshh.

I'd vote Obama over these other wankers, but RP has my vote if he goes against Obama. Paul is getting pretty old, he'll probably be dead or senile before he gets another shot.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 2:52:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 2:31:36 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Paul was on Leno a few days ago. Anyone who watched that and doesn't want Paul to win... sheeshh.

I'd vote Obama over these other wankers, but RP has my vote if he goes against Obama. Paul is getting pretty old, he'll probably be dead or senile before he gets another shot.

Doesn't that imply that if he wins, he'll be dead or senile before his term is completed?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 3:43:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 2:52:34 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 2:31:36 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Paul was on Leno a few days ago. Anyone who watched that and doesn't want Paul to win... sheeshh.

I'd vote Obama over these other wankers, but RP has my vote if he goes against Obama. Paul is getting pretty old, he'll probably be dead or senile before he gets another shot.

Doesn't that imply that if he wins, he'll be dead or senile before his term is completed?

Lul
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 4:23:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?

No, I entirely guessed guessed that this was about Ron Paul and about PPP.

1) Why word it as "first in the nation" rather than Iowa? It seems like you're trying to mask what is really going on.

2) Paul at 23 and Gingrich at 20 (with Romney down at 14) is not a battle for 2nd, it is a battle for 3rd.

3) Paul is not doing very well in many other states, as indicating.

4) Regardless, you should still source your claims.

5) Paul is still going to lose and it will be even more enjoyable to watch now that his followers have a slight sense of false hope.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 4:57:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 4:23:41 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?

No, I entirely guessed guessed that this was about Ron Paul and about PPP.

1) Why word it as "first in the nation" rather than Iowa? It seems like you're trying to mask what is really going on.

Mask? No. I'm shedding light on what's actually going on. If I just said "Iowa," people would be like ok, that's one small, boring state. No, it's the First in the Nation state. That indicates much higher importance for the state than any other state.

2) Paul at 23 and Gingrich at 20 (with Romney down at 14) is not a battle for 2nd, it is a battle for 3rd.

Actually Romney has 20, Gingrich has 14. Gingrich is just another rise and fall flop.

3) Paul is not doing very well in many other states, as indicating.

He's doing well enough.

4) Regardless, you should still source your claims.

I'm typing on my iPod, it has no copy/paste feature meaning I'd have to spend 15 minutes memorizing and typing the link manually.

5) Paul is still going to lose and it will be even more enjoyable to watch now that his followers have a slight sense of false hope.

You have no basis for this degree of certainty.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 5:06:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I heard an unsettling rumor that Iowa never determines anything other tgan Iowa.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 5:12:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 4:57:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 4:23:41 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?

No, I entirely guessed guessed that this was about Ron Paul and about PPP.

1) Why word it as "first in the nation" rather than Iowa? It seems like you're trying to mask what is really going on.

Mask? No. I'm shedding light on what's actually going on. If I just said "Iowa," people would be like ok, that's one small, boring state. No, it's the First in the Nation state. That indicates much higher importance for the state than any other state.

You're over inflating the importance of the state. It is not more important than "any other state." Remember last election it went to Huckebee. McCain, who ultimately won the nomination, scored 4th in 2008.

If you go down the line, it typically votes for the most Christian member, or at least the one that has the most chrisitan message (and considering the primary two, Romney and Gingrich, it is not too surprising that they fall to Paul).



2) Paul at 23 and Gingrich at 20 (with Romney down at 14) is not a battle for 2nd, it is a battle for 3rd.

Actually Romney has 20, Gingrich has 14. Gingrich is just another rise and fall flop.

My mistake, but the analysis remains, just different names to them. Romney is much closer to 1st than Gingrich is to 2nd, therefore, the battle is not for second, but for first.


3) Paul is not doing very well in many other states, as indicating.

He's doing well enough.

12% (nationally) is not "well enough" to win.


4) Regardless, you should still source your claims.

I'm typing on my iPod, it has no copy/paste feature meaning I'd have to spend 15 minutes memorizing and typing the link manually.

You do a good job dividing up the quotes to respond to individual lines for being on an ipod.


5) Paul is still going to lose and it will be even more enjoyable to watch now that his followers have a slight sense of false hope.

You have no basis for this degree of certainty.

Call it a super natural prediction then.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 5:41:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 5:12:00 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 4:57:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 4:23:41 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?

No, I entirely guessed guessed that this was about Ron Paul and about PPP.

1) Why word it as "first in the nation" rather than Iowa? It seems like you're trying to mask what is really going on.

Mask? No. I'm shedding light on what's actually going on. If I just said "Iowa," people would be like ok, that's one small, boring state. No, it's the First in the Nation state. That indicates much higher importance for the state than any other state.

You're over inflating the importance of the state. It is not more important than "any other state."

http://history.howstuffworks.com...

Remember last election it went to Huckebee. McCain, who ultimately won the nomination, scored 4th in 2008.

Real Clear Politics says McCain finished third. Even though it was a third place showing, it showed McCain having an unexpected surge in which the media focused on and boosted him to the nomination.

If you go down the line, it typically votes for the most Christian member, or at least the one that has the most chrisitan message (and considering the primary two, Romney and Gingrich, it is not too surprising that they fall to Paul)

Ok.

2) Paul at 23 and Gingrich at 20 (with Romney down at 14) is not a battle for 2nd, it is a battle for 3rd.

Actually Romney has 20, Gingrich has 14. Gingrich is just another rise and fall flop.

My mistake, but the analysis remains, just different names to them. Romney is much closer to 1st than Gingrich is to 2nd, therefore, the battle is not for second, but for first.

Many mainstream news souces say it's a battle for second because neither Romney nor Gingrich can have a third place showing. They're both battling it out to stay away from third, not to knock Ron out of first.

3) Paul is not doing very well in many other states, as indicating.

He's doing well enough.

12% (nationally) is not "well enough" to win.

Double digits is good. Also, we all know that Ron Paul has far reaching national support, I have doubts as to whether it's an accurate representation.

4) Regardless, you should still source your claims.

I'm typing on my iPod, it has no copy/paste feature meaning I'd have to spend 15 minutes memorizing and typing the link manually.

You do a good job dividing up the quotes to respond to individual lines for being on an ipod.

Yea, it simply requires clicking backspace and enter. Two clicks. Typing a link requires back and forth window switching, memorizing, and typing long addresses (the one I just provided was short and easy to memorize, plus I was actually more motivated to post that link than others)

5) Paul is still going to lose and it will be even more enjoyable to watch now that his followers have a slight sense of false hope.

You have no basis for this degree of certainty.

Call it a super natural prediction then.

Or faith.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 6:10:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 5:41:50 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 5:12:00 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 4:57:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 4:23:41 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 3:51:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:48:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 1:34:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
It has come to this. Ron Paul is FIRST in the First in the Nation state with Newt and Romney battling for second.

Ron Paul has 23% in the latest PPP poll.

Link?

Because when I go to PPP's website, I don't see that. They haven't done a national poll since 11/29, so we aren't talking about national numbers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...

We see in Iowa, Paul in a moderate 1st (23 to Gingrich's 20, but since Romney is at 14, the fight isn't really for 2nd)
In New Hampshire, he is a distant 2nd (19 to Romney's 35)
In New Mexico, still a distand 4th.
In Virginia, tied in 5th.

Did you even read the OP?

No, I entirely guessed guessed that this was about Ron Paul and about PPP.

1) Why word it as "first in the nation" rather than Iowa? It seems like you're trying to mask what is really going on.

Mask? No. I'm shedding light on what's actually going on. If I just said "Iowa," people would be like ok, that's one small, boring state. No, it's the First in the Nation state. That indicates much higher importance for the state than any other state.

You're over inflating the importance of the state. It is not more important than "any other state."

http://history.howstuffworks.com...

That's a great opinion piece. However, the history of the Iowa Caucus have shown that it is not some shining light that will bring the winner to victory (see 2008).


Remember last election it went to Huckebee. McCain, who ultimately won the nomination, scored 4th in 2008.

Real Clear Politics says McCain finished third. Even though it was a third place showing, it showed McCain having an unexpected surge in which the media focused on and boosted him to the nomination.

Sorry, I went with the Iowa Caucus wiki, but whether it is 3rd or 4th, it still shows that Iowa can pick whoever they want, they don't determine the outcome. So it is not "the most important state."


If you go down the line, it typically votes for the most Christian member, or at least the one that has the most chrisitan message (and considering the primary two, Romney and Gingrich, it is not too surprising that they fall to Paul)

Ok.

2) Paul at 23 and Gingrich at 20 (with Romney down at 14) is not a battle for 2nd, it is a battle for 3rd.

Actually Romney has 20, Gingrich has 14. Gingrich is just another rise and fall flop.

My mistake, but the analysis remains, just different names to them. Romney is much closer to 1st than Gingrich is to 2nd, therefore, the battle is not for second, but for first.

Many mainstream news souces say it's a battle for second because neither Romney nor Gingrich can have a third place showing. They're both battling it out to stay away from third, not to knock Ron out of first.

Funny, I haven't seen them. But then, I tend not to follow single state caucuses because a single state doesn't really matter.


3) Paul is not doing very well in many other states, as indicating.

He's doing well enough.

12% (nationally) is not "well enough" to win.

Double digits is good. Also, we all know that Ron Paul has far reaching national support, I have doubts as to whether it's an accurate representation.

It is certainly better than he's ever seen, and I'll definately give him that. But it still isn't enough to win. You can say that it is not accurate, but in 2008, his support numbers were fairly accurate to how many votes he actually got in the primaries.


4) Regardless, you should still source your claims.

I'm typing on my iPod, it has no copy/paste feature meaning I'd have to spend 15 minutes memorizing and typing the link manually.

You do a good job dividing up the quotes to respond to individual lines for being on an ipod.

Yea, it simply requires clicking backspace and enter. Two clicks. Typing a link requires back and forth window switching, memorizing, and typing long addresses (the one I just provided was short and easy to memorize, plus I was actually more motivated to post that link than others).

Funny, on my ipod touch, there isn't a scroll up and down bar when in a text box. However, this is just being nit picking of me.


5) Paul is still going to lose and it will be even more enjoyable to watch now that his followers have a slight sense of false hope.

You have no basis for this degree of certainty.

Call it a super natural prediction then.

Or faith.

Call it what you want. Doesn't change my words. He doesn't have the support to win a nation wide primary, nor general election. He is winning in Iowa simply because the other two main candidates are a mormon and a guy that cheats on his wife.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public. He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2011 7:20:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
yeah get over it, gingrich, Romney or santorum will be the candidate. Why santorum? Because Governor Huckabee said that Santorum may take Iowa and he is rising fast in their polls, and if he does he will receive a large boost to about 10% then giving him chances in SC and florida. If he gets 2nds 3rds or first he wil rise to 20% and take away that vote from Gingrich, and possibly getting him the nominieship, but that also means Romney may win by default.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 10:03:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public. He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.

Omgosh we agree.
President of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 12:43:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

Not a fact.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public.

They already have. He has shaped the entire Republican debate to the point where people like Gingrich are pandering to Paul supporters by claiming to want to audit the Fed, Romney claiming to bring the troops home, Perry eliminating agencies of government, etc.

Not to mention, look at Pauls latest poll numbers.

He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.

Obvious reasons; what reasons are those? His position of advocating a free market? Or proposing to lower the corporate tax? Or deregulation of the market? Boosting the economy? Eliminating capital gains tax?

I fail to see why big business is opposed to that.

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 12:56:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/20/2011 12:43:45 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

Not a fact.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public.

They already have. He has shaped the entire Republican debate to the point where people like Gingrich are pandering to Paul supporters by claiming to want to audit the Fed, Romney claiming to bring the troops home, Perry eliminating agencies of government, etc.

Right, because no republican in the history of politics has ever wanted the fed audits, Bring troops out of a long un-popular war (granted, this one is less common, but not new), or eliminating some agencies of government.

Not to mention, look at Pauls latest poll numbers.

In one state, don't look at the others.


He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.

Obvious reasons; what reasons are those? His position of advocating a free market? Or proposing to lower the corporate tax? Or deregulation of the market? Boosting the economy? Eliminating capital gains tax?

His foriegn policy (Iran can have nukes if they want), his social policy (legalize all drugs, not exactly popular with the republican crowd). The only reason he is popular is because of his economic policy. He's being hush hush about the rest, but after a few weeks up front, all that will come out and he will drop just like all the others. Not to mention if the economy continues to improve, that will make economic issues less important to voters, and so the one strength of his gets deminished.


I fail to see why big business is opposed to that.

You obviously don't understand big business.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 1:01:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/19/2011 6:10:52 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2011 5:41:50 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
http://history.howstuffworks.com...

That's a great opinion piece. However, the history of the Iowa Caucus have shown that it is not some shining light that will bring the winner to victory (see 2008).

Real Clear Politics says McCain finished third. Even though it was a third place showing, it showed McCain having an unexpected surge in which the media focused on and boosted him to the nomination.

Sorry, I went with the Iowa Caucus wiki, but whether it is 3rd or 4th, it still shows that Iowa can pick whoever they want, they don't determine the outcome. So it is not "the most important state."

Iowa doesn't determine, but it indicates who is likely to win and the iowa results give the candidate a big media boost and electability boost.

Many mainstream news souces say it's a battle for second because neither Romney nor Gingrich can have a third place showing. They're both battling it out to stay away from third, not to knock Ron out of first.

Funny, I haven't seen them. But then, I tend not to follow single state caucuses because a single state doesn't really matter.

I dont follow single state caucuses either, it's all in the mainstream news. Iowa caucus is making headlines.

Double digits is good. Also, we all know that Ron Paul has far reaching national support, I have doubts as to whether it's an accurate representation.

It is certainly better than he's ever seen, and I'll definately give him that. But it still isn't enough to win. You can say that it is not accurate, but in 2008, his support numbers were fairly accurate to how many votes he actually got in the primaries.
You do a good job dividing up the quotes to respond to individual lines for being on an ipod.

Yea, it simply requires clicking backspace and enter. Two clicks. Typing a link requires back and forth window switching, memorizing, and typing long addresses (the one I just provided was short and easy to memorize, plus I was actually more motivated to post that link than others).

Funny, on my ipod touch, there isn't a scroll up and down bar when in a text box. However, this is just being nit picking of me.

There is, even on your ipod touch. If you hold your finger down, a magnifying glass pops up, then while holding your finger down, you can use it to scroll and navigate quickly up and down the text box.


Or faith.

Call it what you want. Doesn't change my words. He doesn't have the support to win a nation wide primary, nor general election. He is winning in Iowa simply because the other two main candidates are a mormon and a guy that cheats on his wife.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 3:16:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/20/2011 12:56:34 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/20/2011 12:43:45 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

Not a fact.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public.

They already have. He has shaped the entire Republican debate to the point where people like Gingrich are pandering to Paul supporters by claiming to want to audit the Fed, Romney claiming to bring the troops home, Perry eliminating agencies of government, etc.

Right, because no republican in the history of politics has ever wanted the fed audits, Bring troops out of a long un-popular war (granted, this one is less common, but not new), or eliminating some agencies of government.

Not to mention, look at Pauls latest poll numbers.

In one state, don't look at the others.


He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.

Obvious reasons; what reasons are those? His position of advocating a free market? Or proposing to lower the corporate tax? Or deregulation of the market? Boosting the economy? Eliminating capital gains tax?

His foriegn policy (Iran can have nukes if they want), his social policy (legalize all drugs, not exactly popular with the republican crowd). The only reason he is popular is because of his economic policy. He's being hush hush about the rest, but after a few weeks up front, all that will come out and he will drop just like all the others. Not to mention if the economy continues to improve, that will make economic issues less important to voters, and so the one strength of his gets deminished.


I fail to see why big business is opposed to that.

You obviously don't understand big business.

most republicans want to do that
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2011 4:00:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Big business may not like Ron Paul, but the people do. If Ron manages to run for the Republicans, he'll definitely get more media attention, and that is all he will need to get more widespread support.

Ron Paul would get more support if he had a bigger audience. He's got a good head on his shoulders, and is frighteningly honest for a politician. You always know where he stands. I respect the guy, and I wish more politicians were like him.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2011 11:31:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/20/2011 3:16:38 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 12/20/2011 12:56:34 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/20/2011 12:43:45 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/19/2011 6:49:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

Not a fact.

He is too much of a libertarian who's views cannot catch on with the general public.

They already have. He has shaped the entire Republican debate to the point where people like Gingrich are pandering to Paul supporters by claiming to want to audit the Fed, Romney claiming to bring the troops home, Perry eliminating agencies of government, etc.

Right, because no republican in the history of politics has ever wanted the fed audits, Bring troops out of a long un-popular war (granted, this one is less common, but not new), or eliminating some agencies of government.

Not to mention, look at Pauls latest poll numbers.

In one state, don't look at the others.


He is also not going to get any funding from big businesses for obvious reasons.

Obvious reasons; what reasons are those? His position of advocating a free market? Or proposing to lower the corporate tax? Or deregulation of the market? Boosting the economy? Eliminating capital gains tax?

His foriegn policy (Iran can have nukes if they want), his social policy (legalize all drugs, not exactly popular with the republican crowd). The only reason he is popular is because of his economic policy. He's being hush hush about the rest, but after a few weeks up front, all that will come out and he will drop just like all the others. Not to mention if the economy continues to improve, that will make economic issues less important to voters, and so the one strength of his gets deminished.


I fail to see why big business is opposed to that.

You obviously don't understand big business.

most republicans want to do that

Actually, most don't. They claim that they do, then when they get into office, they don't.

Businesses want to survive in the economic jungle, and they have to compete to do so. However, it is easier to win a competition when you have no competition. And often, it is easier for big business to simply hire lobbyists to get favorible laws that benefit them, while hurting competition, rather than face the competition directly.

You know when a big business is considering moving their head quaters to a new town, what is the first thing they do? See if the town and/or state is willing to give them special perks, like 3 years of reduced taxes (which would only apply to the business) and waivers on particular regulations that are costly.

They want people that will take regulations off of them, but leave them on their competition (typically small competition and new competition).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2011 11:53:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/20/2011 4:00:29 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Big business may not like Ron Paul, but the people do. If Ron manages to run for the Republicans, he'll definitely get more media attention, and that is all he will need to get more widespread support.

Ron Paul would get more support if he had a bigger audience. He's got a good head on his shoulders, and is frighteningly honest for a politician. You always know where he stands. I respect the guy, and I wish more politicians were like him.

Ralph Nader is a much better candidate than Ron Paul.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2011 12:00:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/20/2011 4:00:29 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Big business may not like Ron Paul, but the people do. If Ron manages to run for the Republicans, he'll definitely get more media attention, and that is all he will need to get more widespread support.

Ron Paul would get more support if he had a bigger audience. He's got a good head on his shoulders, and is frighteningly honest for a politician. You always know where he stands. I respect the guy, and I wish more politicians were like him.

Ron Paul actually gets a lot of attention, just not through old fasion media. He gets more attention through the internet than any other candidate. Back awhile ago, there was the Ames Straw Poll. Where different candidates paid for better spots (the closer you were to the front, the more you could harrass people into voting for you). Ron Paul paid the most to get the best spot (leading him to a second place finish) and as such, he got more attention at the Ames poll (being seen by every single person that came participated).

He was seen by 100% of the people due to his location (while other candidates were not, because once you pick your candidate, you don't have to go see the others), and 72% saw him, heard his message, and moved along.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2011 12:12:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've been monitoring the major News networks... msnbc, cnn, and fox. Mitt and Gingrich get the most attention. They never stfu about Gingrich as of late... Ron Paul gets coverage every so often.

You are right though, he gets a lot more attention on the internet.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp