Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
2,401 posts, read 4,324,492 times
Reputation: 1464

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
We're in uncharted territory here. History doesn't always match up with what's happening today. Obama has the organization, the money, and economy that is improving. He also has the luxury of having the GOP candidates duke it out for a long time. That's going to drain the resources of whoever actually wins the nomination.

The GOP establishment doesn't really care who the nominee is, even if it Ron Paul, all they care about is winning and that's what they are getting nervous about. They see their chances at beating Obama slipping away.
Yes we're in uncharted territory. Why? Because of the Internet and social media (and greatly reduced influence of traditional media) , the establishment can't control the process like they've been able to do in past election cycles.

Forgive me, but you are niave to think they'd be OK with RP. Watch the traditional GOP talking heads speak. They are all about discounting RP as well as the other non-Romney candidates IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:37 PM
 
Location: NC
1,956 posts, read 1,802,354 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Zona Stona View Post
I've noticed that the word 'electability' seems to carry a lot of weight with Republican primary voters, and they like to claim that Dr. Ron Paul has none. I realize this has become 'conventional wisdom', but if history is any guide, conventional wisdom is seldom very wise. I'd just like to give my thoughts on the matter.

Most Republicans have stated that they will vote for whoever gets the nomination, because they MUST defeat Obama come November. Ron Paul supporters, on the other hand, have made it clear that unless Paul is the nominee, they'll be voting for a 3rd party candidate, writing in Ron Paul, or skipping the whole thing completely. As you know from my posts, I happen to belong to that group. Many Republican strategists have come to the realization that no Republican candidate can win in November without the support of the Ron Paul people, as has been evidenced by their pronunciations over the last few weeks. This leaves the Republican party in a quandary. Do they nominate someone who will NOT get the support they need to win in November, or do they nominate the ONLY candidate who can garner ALL the votes it will take to unseat Obama?

Many people here on C-D have advised the Ron Paul supporters to give up on Paul because he's 'unelectable'. My advice to them is this... If you want to get rid of Obama you'd better get behind Ron Paul, because without him you CAN'T WIN.

THINK about it...
Here's my 2 cents on this.

The establishment knows very well that the best person to run against Obama is Paul.

In a general election:
  1. Paul gets 100% of his supporters. Of course.
  2. Paul gets other Republicans too because they would vote for anyone to get Obama out.
  3. Paul gets the disaffected Progressives who have been fed up with Obama.
  4. Paul gets the Independents who see Paul as a viable alternative to the R vs. D freak show.
  5. Paul gets votes of a lot of folks from the Libertarian party, Constitution party and the like, when they see that the best person to make the libertarian ideals go mainstream is none other than Paul.

I am not worried about Paul's prospects in a general election at all. No one should be. He will win. So what is wrong then? Why isn't the Republican party not pushing Paul? Isn't it a no-brainer?

The answer is simple - if it's Paul vs. Obama, the actual establishment interests are better served if Obama wins, not Paul! Ideally they would want to nominate a Republican establishment candidate like Romney against Obama and have him win so that they can keep the GOP rank and file happy, BUT, even if Obama wins, the establishment does not lose much. Obama or Romney, there is not going to be any significant change in policy, but Paul is a different beast altogether.

Nominating Paul is detrimental to the establishment (and I mean he will really cook their goose), so an Obama vs. Romney charade is what the establishment wants. Doesn't matter who amongst them wins, we lose. Of course the establishment knows that Paul will win against Obama, but they don't want him to. The only hope for us then is for the GOP rank and file to defy the GOP establishment and go for Paul.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Keosauqua, Iowa
9,611 posts, read 21,135,113 times
Reputation: 13662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
I don't think Ron Paul's opposition to Social Security, Medicare, and public education would play well in a general election.
Social Security was never intended to be permanent in the first place. It was established so that people who lost their life savings when the banks failed would have something to live on when they retired. As long as people who have paid in and have nothing else don't get their benefits cut I think most people would agree that the program is an albatross that needs to go away.

And Dr. Paul is not opposed to public education. He just wants control to shift from the federal government to local school boards. Not everyone would be for that, but a lot of folks are pissed off over the fact that a lot of federal funding for schools has dried up and now see very little benefit to having the government involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Keosauqua, Iowa
9,611 posts, read 21,135,113 times
Reputation: 13662
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving_pains View Post
Here's my 2 cents on this.

The establishment knows very well that the best person to run against Obama is Paul.

In a general election:
  1. Paul gets 100% of his supporters. Of course.
  2. Paul gets other Republicans too because they would vote for anyone to get Obama out.
  3. Paul gets the disaffected Progressives who have been fed up with Obama.
  4. Paul gets the Independents who see Paul as a viable alternative to the R vs. D freak show.
  5. Paul gets votes of a lot of folks from the Libertarian party, Constitution party and the like, when they see that the best person to make the libertarian ideals go mainstream is none other than Paul.

I am not worried about Paul's prospects in a general election at all. No one should be. He will win. So what is wrong then? Why isn't the Republican party not pushing Paul? Isn't it a no-brainer?

The answer is simple - if it's Paul vs. Obama, the actual establishment interests are better served if Obama wins, not Paul! Ideally they would want to nominate a Republican establishment candidate like Romney against Obama and have him win so that they can keep the GOP rank and file happy, BUT, even if Obama wins, the establishment does not lose much. Obama or Romney, there is not going to be any significant change in policy, but Paul is a different beast altogether.

Nominating Paul is detrimental to the establishment (and I mean he will really cook their goose), so an Obama vs. Romney charade is what the establishment wants. Doesn't matter who amongst them wins, we lose. Of course the establishment knows that Paul will win against Obama, but they don't want him to. The only hope for us then is for the GOP rank and file to defy the GOP establishment and go for Paul.
Well said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 06:42 PM
 
Location: Back and Forth FRANCE
2,713 posts, read 3,009,710 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Zona Stona View Post
If you want to get rid of Obama you'd better get behind Ron Paul, because without him you CAN'T WIN.
LOL so it's come down to this..

The 13% are so desperate.......Ron Paul and his fans will not affect the election. They will whine and ***** then they will shut up and go back into their corner, just like the last 2 times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 06:47 PM
 
791 posts, read 456,622 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermaine88 View Post
LOL so it's come down to this..

The 13% are so desperate.......
And so RIGHT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,167 posts, read 22,137,026 times
Reputation: 23791
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Zona Stona View Post
I think it would play exceedingly well when people get educated as to what they're getting in return for what they're PAYING for it.
Therein lies the problem. Voters don't like to be told to "get educated" in either party. Very few voters actually pay much attention to the finer points of any candidate's position. They decide from what they see on TV and vote the way they have always voted in the past.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 08:26 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,385,881 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
Since the only person electable is Obama, kind of makes this moot. All the electable Repubs said, naw, I'll wait for 2016.
Look at the polls. Romney leads Obama in many swing states, including the two most important - Florida and Ohio.

It's going to be very close (assuming Romney gets the nomination).

Anyone other than an Obamatron elitist or a Paulbot can see that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,385,881 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Zona Stona View Post
I've noticed that the word 'electability' seems to carry a lot of weight with Republican primary voters, and they like to claim that Dr. Ron Paul has none. I realize this has become 'conventional wisdom', but if history is any guide, conventional wisdom is seldom very wise. I'd just like to give my thoughts on the matter.

Most Republicans have stated that they will vote for whoever gets the nomination, because they MUST defeat Obama come November. Ron Paul supporters, on the other hand, have made it clear that unless Paul is the nominee, they'll be voting for a 3rd party candidate, writing in Ron Paul, or skipping the whole thing completely. As you know from my posts, I happen to belong to that group. Many Republican strategists have come to the realization that no Republican candidate can win in November without the support of the Ron Paul people, as has been evidenced by their pronunciations over the last few weeks. This leaves the Republican party in a quandary. Do they nominate someone who will NOT get the support they need to win in November, or do they nominate the ONLY candidate who can garner ALL the votes it will take to unseat Obama?

Many people here on C-D have advised the Ron Paul supporters to give up on Paul because he's 'unelectable'. My advice to them is this... If you want to get rid of Obama you'd better get behind Ron Paul, because without him you CAN'T WIN.

THINK about it...
Outside of CD, you are few and far between. Most Paul supporters will end up voting for either Obama or the GOP nominee. More will choose the GOP nominee than Obama.

While some may vote third party or not at all, most will not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2012, 08:34 PM
 
791 posts, read 456,622 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Outside of CD, you are few and far between. Most Paul supporters will end up voting for either Obama or the GOP nominee. More will choose the GOP nominee than Obama.

While some may vote third party or not at all, most will not.
You really don't get it yet? It's OK, you can believe what you like. Lotsa folks in Noah's day didn't think it was gonna rain...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top