Ron Paul Wins Iowa

[RickN]

Enough neocon Buellshite. Ron Paul is not a statist, unlike Obomney. That alone is a reason to vote for him.
Senator Inhofe...statist...Santorum...statist...Romney...statist...Paul...libertarian for the win

Libertarian, yes he is, Republican, no he is not. Libertarian is a cross between conservative economic policy and liberal defense and social policy. Always has been and you can look that up for yourselves.

He is a fun question for the RP fanboys, I have to assume RP knew his supporters in Iowa were not going to follow the wishes of the people that elected them and probably ordered it, what does that say about him other then just another politician that will do anything to get elected?

 

[Glocktogo]

The only real difference between RP and Obama is economic policy and that is the only reason I would vote for RP if he won the nomination. More a vote against Obama then for RP. Same as most other Republicans and Independents I know. As for the facts in this thread, what facts?????

RP is liberal on defense policy since while he words it differently the results are the same. Pull back our forces until things have gotten so bad we have no choice but to fight. Like the left he talks a strong defense but his plans do not back it up.
Liberal on social policy at least most of the times he talks like it, if pushed by any group he pretty much says what ever it takes.

As for Romney, as I have said only a little better then Obama or RP and that is only because of a strong business back ground that has created more jobs then Obama and his stance on defense, domestic drilling, and government regulation.

As I said many times before, of those running I preferred Santorum. That was because of his economic policy and because he was at least truthful about earmarks. Any political type that tells the truth even when no one wants to hear it is a breath of fresh air.

And what exactly is wrong with that? Why should we fight all over the globe all the time? More often than not, we're not fighting for the security of our nation. No, we're more apt to fight for "Democracy", which frequently coincides with the non-national interests of select campaign contrbuters. Except of course when we're propping up petty dictators, again in support of the non-national interests of select campaign contrbuters.

Libertarian, yes he is, Republican, no he is not. Libertarian is a cross between conservative economic policy and liberal defense and social policy. Always has been and you can look that up for yourselves.

He is a fun question for the RP fanboys, I have to assume RP knew his supporters in Iowa were not going to follow the wishes of the people that elected them and probably ordered it, what does that say about him other then just another politician that will do anything to get elected?

He's as much a Republican as you are. Moreso by my standards. You'd prefer the GOP champion a religious wingnut statist like Santorum than someone who actually adheres to the core GOP principles. Sanitorium is as much a liar as the rest, he just tells the lies you prefer. I guess only the neo-con version of the GOP is acceptable for your tastes.

 

[ez bake]

Libertarian, yes he is, Republican, no he is not. Libertarian is a cross between conservative economic policy and liberal defense and social policy. Always has been and you can look that up for yourselves.

He is a fun question for the RP fanboys, I have to assume RP knew his supporters in Iowa were not going to follow the wishes of the people that elected them and probably ordered it, what does that say about him other then just another politician that will do anything to get elected?

What that says is that you don't want to discuss any actual facts about Ron Paul.

I'm glad that most middle-of-the-road folks don't make their decisions based on assumptions and complete mis-information (like NEOCons and Libtards).

Wish more people had common sense.

 

[cjjtulsa]

And what exactly is wrong with that? Why should we fight all over the globe all the time? More often than not, we're not fighting for the security of our nation. No, we're more apt to fight for "Democracy", which frequently coincides with the non-national interests of select campaign contrbuters. Except of course when we're propping up petty dictators, again in support of the non-national interests of select campaign contrbuters.

My God - we drink similar Kool-Aid.

He's as much a Republican as you are. Moreso by my standards. You'd prefer the GOP champion a religious wingnut statist like Santorum than someone who actually adheres to the core GOP principles. Sanitorium is as much a liar as the rest, he just tells the lies you prefer. I guess only the neo-con version of the GOP is acceptable for your tastes.

But....but...but.....Sanitorium is a Christian. A Christian!

Like a typical Country song: sing about getting drunk with your buds, screwing bar tramps, fighting the entire bar, and then throw in a line about Jesus or going to church. And the faithful eat it up.

 

[Hobbes]

RP is a paleoconservative Republican.
That was about the only kind of Republican there was for decades until the neoconservatives adopted some of the foreign policy views of Democrats like scoop Jackson and hijacked the GOP.
Don't take my word for it Rick. Look up the roots of neoconservatism for yourself.

Neoconservativism is actually nearly identical to a liberal foreign policy. Intervene all over the world to "do good" and force American ideals on other cultures.
Woodrow Wilson foreign policy at it's finest. Fight wars all over the globe to make the world "Safe for Democracy".

Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan and a handful of others are about all that are left of the original Republican paleoconservative movement and the neocons are the unwelcome interlopers here, not RP.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Would someone please educate me? How does Paul manage to get delegates who will vote for him when he didn't win the state?

 

[Hobbes]

Would someone please educate me? How does Paul manage to get delegates who will vote for him when he didn't win the state?

"It’s part of a quiet strategy by Paul and his backers to amass an army of supporters at the GOP gathering in August in Tampa, Fla., to push Paul’s views on liberty, states' rights, the monetary system and foreign policy.
By working arcane electoral rules and getting supporters into positions of power in local, county and state party operations, the strategy is paying dividends across the nation."

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

"It’s part of a quiet strategy by Paul and his backers to amass an army of supporters at the GOP gathering in August in Tampa, Fla., to push Paul’s views on liberty, states' rights, the monetary system and foreign policy.
By working arcane electoral rules and getting supporters into positions of power in local, county and state party operations, the strategy is paying dividends across the nation."

Thanks Hobbes,

So, is he trying to use influence to set the party platform, or is he really trying to get the nomination?

 

[Hobbes]

They have several goals:

Influence the platform adopted at the convention.
Infiltrate the establishment control over the GOP.
Possibly build a base of support inside the party for Rand Paul in the future.
Swing the party back to the conservatism that used to be the hallmark of the Republican party before the liberals and neocons co-opted Republican foreign policy ideas.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

They have several goals:

Influence the platform adopted at the convention.
Infiltrate the establishment control over the GOP.
Possibly build a base of support inside the party for Rand Paul in the future.
Swing the party back to the conservatism that used to be the hallmark of the Republican party before the liberals and neocons co-opted Republican foreign policy ideas.

Thanks again,

I'm totally fine with trying to influence the party towards a more libertarian view.

I have heard folks on the radio acting like they wanted to win the nomination, despite the actual votes. That would be a huge problem for me.