I'm delighted that Duncan Hunter won this one! Wasn't expecting that!
I would love it if Duncan Hunter could be the one who runs against Hillary/Obama, but I had practically given up hope on that happening. Like all the other "second tier" candidates he is marginalized by the press which is extremely annoying. I'm not too excited by the "top" candidates, or Thompson.
I agree with him on practically everything, particularly the border, illegal immigration, taxes, and trade. I think that the illegal immigration problem needs to be dealt with swiftly and firmly by a leader unconcerned with PC attitudes--he has demonstrated that in his border work here in San Diego. I like that he and his son have served in the military. I like his stance on the Iraq war. He doesn't seem the type to become embroiled in tiresome scandals. He isn't the most charismatic speaker I suppose, but he does speak very clearly about the issues. He stays focused!
I hope that this win will allow him to raise more money and thus get more visibility. I am going to vote for a Republican regardless this election, but I want to be able to vote for one I believe in, and so far Hunter fills the bill for me.
|
|
--
...is squirming desperately to deny the surge of interest from "outsiders" who have been energized by the Ron Paul candidacy.
For the past couple of decades, there's been a lot of noise among the Republicrat leadership about how they want the Party of Smoot-Hawley to become an inclusionistic "Big Tent" permanent majority.
Now, when the candidacy of Dr. Paul begins attracting and exciting people who are *not* members of the Republicrat's incestuous customary cluster of "social conservatives" and Rotarian socialists, they (and their mouthpieces in venues like Townhall) get all nervous and tight-sphincter'd, and they start post dim-witted mesomorphs at the doors to keep these heretics out.
I'm enjoying this immensely.
It used to be tht watching the DemaGOP clustercopulation was the most fun as the presidential cycle ran, but now that the Rockefeller RINOs are facing the first Goldwater-type challenge they haven't been able to suppress since 1980, there's some real entertainment value in following the normally staid Kabuki theater process by which the Republicrats pretend to choose a presidential nominee.
If this goes on, the collective Townhall crop of paid bloggers and amateur suck-ups (like Mr. Lewis, the pitiful weasel) will turn with supple spines to embrace Dr. Paul as their Only True Begetter of victory in 2008.
And that'll be worth watching, too.
--
"I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time."
..-- H.L. Mencken |
|
The analyst asked if Ron Paul can't win here, where can he win. It was a good question and here are a few suggestions of places to look:
Alabama Straw Poll (81%)
Strafford County (NH) GOP straw poll (73%)
Allegheny County (PA) straw poll (45%)
DeKalb County, Georgia Straw Poll (24%)
Gaston County, NC (36.6%)
Ronald Reagan Club (Washington) (28.0%)
It seems that when there is a wide open field, Dr. Paul either holds his own, or outright wins the event. What do these victories mean? Maybe nothing. Primaries and Caucuses are open to anyone. Not just those bused in or who have been GOP in the past. |
|
|
Had this been a "Whitehouse Dinner" for the Elites, and they had shown up after spending their money to only find out that they would be turned away, all hell would have broke loose! The video clearly shows the time of arrival, which they adhired to............It does not look good for the State of Texas and their straw poll organizers. Speaking of Texas Oil, when can we expect some coverage of the "Oil Tycoon" from Texas that found himself in the middle of the "Oil For Food Scandal" with the U.N. and Sadam Husein?........Is that case not taking place this month? How do these "Globalist" stay under the radar so well? |
|
Finally, Matt, just in case you may be having difficulty following my discourse, let me recreate the straw poll scenario vividly for you:
A delegate goes online, registers, and pays the fee to gain admission to the polling location. Now, of course, this could be any delegate, regardless of political persuasion. However, what do you think might differentiate the Ron Paul delegates as a group from the others. It wouldn't be, now, that the great majority of the Paulites found out about their candidate online and might be more likely to pre-register online, would it? Trick question. Sorry about that.
But, meanwhile back at the cyber ranch. The online delegate is instructed to arrive at an appointed time, expecting to be already pre-registered and only needing to pick up an official delegate badge. There is no indication that there is a deadline beyond which the delegate will not be permitted entry and certainly no indication whatsoever that the beginning time and the "drop dead" time are one and the same. What is wrong with this picture, Matt?
My advice--take the mulligan, Matt, and while you’re at it, have Mary Katharine take one, too for her smug characterization of Ron Paul’s third place showing as “the metaphor for the entire campaign,” for as our Decider-in-Chief once said when confronted with a similar situation, “There’s time for politics....that's an absurd insinuation!”
|
|
To reiterate Matt Zarathustra Lewis spoke thusly:
"If he can't come in first place here, where can he come in first place? It also shows that he had all of these supporters but it really didn't translate into first place."
We might also consider the fact that someone decided that delegates were not to be admitted to the voting area after 10:00 AM, even though the notice that people registering and paying online received indicated that they were to arrive at 10:00 AM. One eye witness on location, for example, estimated that "dozens of people per hour were turned away" over a three hour period. Another "estimated about a dozen delegates every 10 mins were turned away for over 3 hours."
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread300335/pg1
I’ll cut you some slack, Matt, on the latter point, since you probably recorded the interview before this affront to our Republic ever surfaced. I would suggest, however, that it would be in the interest of journalistic integrity to revisit your statement and perhaps to take advantage of the opportunity for a "do over" and in so doing draw attention to this unconscionable, indirect manipulation of the poll results.
It would appear to me that Ron Paul probably should have at least taken second place in this event orchestrated by the Texas Republican Party machine which has been known not to favor him in the least, to put it politely. But, even garnering 17% in such an event with core delegates is a big step up which cannot be ignored given that the Gallup poll had him at 3% and the Iowa Straw Poll at 9%.
|
|
[Okay, I will break my post into three parts and see if that works.]
"The big loser has to be Ron Paul." Thus spake Matt Zarathustra Lewis, who in my mind is the big loser in this affair, as he publicly displays a loss of intellectual acumen while attempting to play out Nietzsche's “will to power." Ubermensch, you seem not, Matt.
"If he can't come in first place here, where can he come in first place? It also shows that he had all of these supporters but it really didn't translate into first place."
Duh...let's see, errors in logical analysis, perchance, Matt? The voting was restricted to those who had previously been delegates. Most of the huge groundswell of Paul supporters have never been involved in the political process, or have been disaffected from it, or have come over from other parties. So, hmmm, they WOULD have a bit of difficulty voting, wouldn't they? That is, they would have difficulty voting in the straw poll, but not in an election. You had no difficulty, however, Matt, raising up your straw man to swat down so deftly with your incisive analysis.
|
|
|
I have tried repeatedly to post a comment less than 2,000 characters without success. I am attmepting to posting this as a test. |
|
I do think that there were too many candidates for people to really get a good idea of where each was coming from. Even in the Republican debates, with so many candidates, there wasn't enough time to dedicate to each one.
From the beginning, I was hopeful for Hunter, Tancredo, and as time went on, hopeful that F. Thompson would enter the race. I've been disappointed that neither Hunter nor Tancredo seemed to have much traction. But, things might be changing for Hunter.
I keep in touch with a good friend who lives in So. Calif. and knows about Hunter first hand. I've been hearing good things, so I'm hopeful.
I'm still open at this point...
|
|
|
and past voting record of DUNCAN(Please build my fence!)HUNTER was not shocked......A true conservative such as he should have been doing well from the beginning when conservatives actually vote. Hopefully, this will give him some momentum, and voters will start listening to his policy positions. |
|
|
|