Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If it isn't Paul on the GOP ticket I'm most likely voting Libertarian. There is zero chance of me voting for either Obama, Romney, Bachmann, Hunstman, Gingrich, Santorum, Johnson, Cain, or Perry. None of those candidates represent the values that are important for me in a President.
I was referring to the C-D polls on this. There have been a few.
But if you are saying that you wouldn't vote for the GOP nominee if it weren't Paul (regardless of who it is), then you aren't really supporting your point that Paul running as an independent would lead to an Obama win. You are supporting the fact that it would have no impact on the GOP nominee, though.
I was referring to the C-D polls on this. There have been a few.
But if you are saying that you wouldn't vote for the GOP nominee if it weren't Paul (regardless of who it is), then you aren't really supporting your point that Paul running as an independent would lead to an Obama win. You are supporting the fact that it would have no impact on the GOP nominee, though.
A huge portion of the Paul base, are anti-war voters that flocked over to the Ron Paul camp from Obama. So while we will split the votes, and it is closer to taking away from the GOP nominee, there is a chance that it could split both ways, and nullify any real split.
There is also a thought going around that if Obama wins, that we'll be able to get more liberty candidates in 2016 on both sides. Which would be much easier than trying to, again, vote out a sitting president.
I think the problem is you are comparing a 3 term governor of the 2nd most populous state and one of the largest economies in the world with someone like Howard Dean (internet sensation that he was) and Hillary Clinton (whose primary qualification was being First Lady). Not to mention Hillary didn't excite the lefty base like Obama did, and Guiliani was a pro-choice Republican.
If you don't see the differences there, perhaps it's because you don't want to?
Anyway, not to take away any of your hope. Look at the C-D poll, it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy.
Texas is set up as a weak governor state, one who throughout history has proven to provide weak presidents (at least Connecticut born ones) who do not govern by the constitution but rather the whims of lobbyists and the military industrial complex. The irony of a three way run off with a Ron Paul third party bid that you've previously mentioned would be that Perry couldn't have been a 3 term governor if it wasn't for a third party candidate and the refusal for Perry to debate when it wasn't.
IMO, Perry failed tonight. He looked worse than Bachmann, Paul, Gingrich and Sanotrum. He was supposed to be the front runner while coming in and when the night ended he was caught huffing and puffing behind even the former federal reservist Cain.
You really think Hilary didn't excite the lefty base??? They loved her before Obama came along. She led the polling for a long time. The black and youth vote is what put Obama in.
Agreed. I would add that the media coverage/celebrity endorsements/establishment move easing towards Obama before Iowa allowed him to win the state and build momentum. But to say that at this point in that race that the base wasn't excited with Hillary is not the truth. The rally around Hillary was enormous. The Clintons had an insider network to work the campaign leftover from the BC years similar to how GW Bush had his fathers beltway insiders who immediately went on board. A lot of those networks have substantial pull over the media and will always be able to generate the most thrill over their candidate from the get go.
Perry as a third term governor has his own people and they have done a great job of getting the people who only listen to soundbites and have tow the party line bias engrained into their head to immediately jump on board. Again, this is not new. This happens every cycle and IMO I don't think that Perry will make it past his sizzle if he continues with his appearances as they are. When I take a look back at how TPaw performed in the first couple of debates I see the same thing in Perry right now. They are put onto the stage by their handlers and they do not really have anything to say except look at me heres some plan that I've given zero thought to that I am going to propose...oh, you want to know what I mean by plan? Isn't saying I have a plan enough? I hate that the other candidates are wasting their time attacking Perry. I hope that Paul smarts up and decides he would be much better off sending his opposition Obama's way and to let Perry shot himself in his own foot.
Perry is being exposed to have some "liberal" policies, isn't he? Requiring cervical cancer vaccinations for 12-year-old girls, and giving in-state tuition to illegal immigrants?
He's not the solid conservative that he's claimed to be.
Texas is set up as a weak governor state, one who throughout history has proven to provide weak presidents (at least Connecticut born ones) who do not govern by the constitution but rather the whims of lobbyists and the military industrial complex. The irony of a three way run off with a Ron Paul third party bid that you've previously mentioned would be that Perry couldn't have been a 3 term governor if it wasn't for a third party candidate and the refusal for Perry to debate when it wasn't.
Still, a 3 term governor of the 2nd largest state and a economy similar in size to Canada or Russia is far and away the most executive and economic experience of any other GOP candidate.
Quote:
IMO, Perry failed tonight. He looked worse than Bachmann, Paul, Gingrich and Sanotrum. He was supposed to be the front runner while coming in and when the night ended he was caught huffing and puffing behind even the former federal reservist Cain.
And it's fine you'd think that; you already said you were a Paul supporter first, then a Libertarian. So you would have very little relevance (beyond the current support of Paul) in the GOP nominee decision. And we know the bad blood Paul and his supporters seem to have with Perry... I suppose I'd want Perry to fail too, if I was supporting another candidate.
The reality is that Bachmann did the best in the debate; I can agree with that. But to say Perry failed, that's just wishful thinking on your part. He was the frontrunner going in, he's the frontrunner coming out. Bachmann probably got bumped up; Paul got bumped down. Romney will remain hovering at about 20%.
Agreed. I would add that the media coverage/celebrity endorsements/establishment move easing towards Obama before Iowa allowed him to win the state and build momentum. But to say that at this point in that race that the base wasn't excited with Hillary is not the truth. The rally around Hillary was enormous. The Clintons had an insider network to work the campaign leftover from the BC years similar to how GW Bush had his fathers beltway insiders who immediately went on board. A lot of those networks have substantial pull over the media and will always be able to generate the most thrill over their candidate from the get go.
Perry as a third term governor has his own people and they have done a great job of getting the people who only listen to soundbites and have tow the party line bias engrained into their head to immediately jump on board. Again, this is not new. This happens every cycle and IMO I don't think that Perry will make it past his sizzle if he continues with his appearances as they are. When I take a look back at how TPaw performed in the first couple of debates I see the same thing in Perry right now. They are put onto the stage by their handlers and they do not really have anything to say except look at me heres some plan that I've given zero thought to that I am going to propose...oh, you want to know what I mean by plan? Isn't saying I have a plan enough? I hate that the other candidates are wasting their time attacking Perry. I hope that Paul smarts up and decides he would be much better off sending his opposition Obama's way and to let Perry shot himself in his own foot.
I do wish they would concentrate on Obama more and what each of them are planning to do different instead of attacking each other. However, each debate pits them against each other on purpose with the gotcha questions that lack substance. The questions in these debates are so lacking and becoming very redundant.
I was referring to the C-D polls on this. There have been a few.
But if you are saying that you wouldn't vote for the GOP nominee if it weren't Paul (regardless of who it is), then you aren't really supporting your point that Paul running as an independent would lead to an Obama win. You are supporting the fact that it would have no impact on the GOP nominee, though.
Are you seriously referring to a CD poll? If thats your criteria than according to almost every other non-scientific poll on the internet Paul would be winning about 40-60% of the votes. If you want to see how crazy it is to use CD polls for anything meaningful than all that you'd have to do is take a quick trip to the city vs city subforum and check those polls, because that is about as telling as you can get to try to extract any meaningful data from a CD poll.
And don't put points in my mouth. I wrote that I would not vote for any of those candidates if Paul does not get the nomination. I never said that Paul running would lead to an Obama win. And I'm supporting the fact that I would not vote for any other GOP candidate other than Paul, how you managed to try to spin it to mean that it would have no impact on the GOP nominee though is beyond me. It would be one less vote for either the GOP or the DNC, but the only party that will likely get my vote in 2012 would be the GOP. I'd be their lost opportunity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
