Sunday, August 05, 2007
|
|
Rudy Wins Sunday Morning Debate
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
8:00 AM
|
11:24 - I've got to declare Rudy Giuliani the winner today. This is partly because he performed the best, and partly because the other candidates under-performed. Putting aside the obvious fact that his social positions are liberal, he is (by far) the most "ready for Prime-Time" candidate in the debate. Rudy has clearly thought-through the questions and answers to a greater degree than the other candidates. His answers are not platitudes, but well-reasoned responses. He is already attacking the Dems, which earns him points with me. What is more, he is rhetorically ready to lead the country, and defend his positions. And rather than merely answering questions posed from a liberal worldview, he rejects the incorrect premises (this is most likely a product of his law training).
11:21 - For 10 1/2 years, Huckabee had a framed picture of average Arkansans in his office, with the words, "Our Boss," below.
11:19 - Rudy points out the three leading Democrat candidates haven't been in the executive branch, they haven't run a city, etc.
11:18 - Sam Brownback says as president he would hope to appoint the next justice to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
11:15 - Tommy Thompson vows to end breast cancer by 2015.
11:14 - Romney says the biggest defining mistake he ever made in his life was running for Senate, being pro-Life, but saying we should keep the status quo.
11:11 - Tancredo says income tax gives the government the power to manipulate behavior. Brownback wants a flat tax, not a fair tax.
11:07 - Huckabee absolutely supports the fair tax. Says more Americans fear an IRS audit than getting mugged. Huckabee and Romney spar over the fair tax. Romney says we should: "Get rid of the tax on savings."
11:04 - Brownback says Bush has "over-relied" on Cheney's experience.
11:02 - Tommy Thompson makes a good point that the media will likely mis-report that all Republican presidential contenders don't care about children having health care (just because they prefer a free market solution, as opposed to the S-Chip).
10:56 - We're on commercial. Live blogging is neat, because it's an excuse to take notes. And that tells you things. For example, it has now become apparent that Rudy Giuliani is the leader when it comes to ideas. Several times, he has injected a new idea which then, other candidates copied. One example of this was when he was the first to call the S-chip socialized medicine.
10:54 - McCain makes the point that not a dime of the pork-barrel projects had anything to do with inspecting or repairing bridges.
10:52 - Rudy is brillaint at these debates. By reminding folks of his background as Mayor, he gains credibility. And, perhaps more important, he refuses to accept the assumptions of the questioners: "There is a liberal Democratic assumption that you raise taxes to get money," he tells Yepsen. Other candidates should learn this lesson.
10:50 - Huckabee is asked if taxes should be raised to fix bridges. Taxes seem to be his Achilles heel. He seems to duck the question. Huckabee is doing well, but I must say I don't think he's making the same splash he has in the other debates.
10:44 - McCain defends Bush's Inanugural address (and the argument that we should care about spreading Democracy, by invoking JFK's pledge to, "bear any burden" and Ronald Reagan's "shining city on a hill."
10:43 - Rudy makes the point that before building Democracy in other countries -- before having elections -- you need to first instill a culture that understands the "bedrocks of democracy," such as rule of law. This is a very, very good point.
10:32 - On the "S-Chip," Rudy scores points by being the first to refer to "socialized healthcare" (and compare it to health care in Europe, Cuba, etc.).
10:26 - Nice touch having David Yepsen, the dean of the Iowa press corps, as a guest moderator.
10:25 - Is Ron Paul the Eugene McCarthy of the right?
10:23 - Tommy Thompson thinks Iraq needs 18 states -- not 3 (as Brownback wants).
10:20 - Tancredo wonders when he will ever field a question ...
10:19 - "He's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week." - Romney on Obama.
10:17 - Giuliani points out that in 4 Democrat debates, the words Islamic extremism were never mentioned. He points out that Iraq is a battle in a larger war.
10:15 - Brownback is proposing essentially a three-state solution for Iraq. This sounds similar to what Joe Biden has proposed.
10:11 - Taking a page from YouTube, ABC includes video clips from "average" Iowa voters. To answer the first question, Ron Paul says we're losing the war, and "should just come home." In the next question, Duncan Hunter scores some points by attacking the Democrats for wanting to cut and run.
10:06 - George just showed a clip of Romney attacking Rudy (will this entire debate be a "gotcha" game?) on guns and social issues. This isn't good for Rudy. He wins when the questions are about terrorism.
10:04 - Wow. This got off to a quick start. George started off by putting up an audio clip of Sam Brownback's robo-calls about Mitt Romney. Sparks are flying. This is the first true "debate" I have seen. Romney and Brownback are going at it over the abortion issue. Brownback points to a YouTube clip of Romney. Romney calls Brownback "desperate" and says he's "holier than thou for being pro-Life longer than I have." (Brownback is smart not to back down. It's one thing to be caught "going negative," it's even worse to backpedal and look weak)...
I'll be watching the GOP debate this morning (10 am ET). Then, I'm interviewing Theodore Olson, the Former Solicitor General (who is now a big Giuliani supporter). Stay tuned ...
|
|
He's a tunnel-visioned isolationist robot. But other than that, I have nothing against him.
|
|
Fortunately, Tancredo's much more likely to end up in a mental hospital (babbling about blowing up Mecca and asking orderlies if they’re Mexican illegals) than in the Oval Office. But other than that, I have nothing against him.
|
|
But other than that, I have nothing against him.
|
|
Durn these Midwest ABC affiliate; they don't know what the "live feed" button is for.
Some more "but other than that lines, I have nothing against him."
- Rudy Giuliani is an anti-business social liberal,...
- John McCain is a tax-and-spender who can't read the Constitution,...
- Tommy Thompson is a free-spending hater of social conservatives (at least he was in Wisconsin),...
- Mitt Romney is a Taxachusetts flip-flopper,...
- Mike Huckabee is a proven tax-and-spender,...
- Sam Brownback wants to hand over the Southwest to Mexico,...
- Duncan Hunter has no experience and no traction,...
- Fred Thompson is ducking all these debates,...
...but other than that, I have nothing against them. |
|
He did much the same thing as Giuliani did, and he's undeniably less-liberal than Giuliani.
The video questions are undeniably better than the YouTube questions that CNN gave the Dems, and they still stunk. |
|
Drudge is highlighting Romney's zinger at Obama, "He's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week" at the top of the Drudge Report.
Matt Lewis, we're fighting Islamic Jihad, and THAT is the most transcendent issue no matter how much you and your ol' buddy Sam Brownback obsess over abortion, and no matter how much Ron Paul & The Acolytes would rather focus on abolishing federal bureaucracies. |
|
Rudy only won with facetime, nothing else. It was interesting to see how the foolish moderator, by the people's standard, stay away from Dr. Ron Paul when it came to health care issues and taxes. I guess he wanted to make sure the message of Liberty and Freedom does get a chance to be heard by their audience.
Ron Paul in 2008. |
|
The honest answer is that both Rudy and Mitt turned in very strong performances and put more distance between themselves and the rest.
Interesting perspective below from Jonathan Martin. Apparently Frank Luntz's panel like Mitt best...but I give Rudy kudos for his performance today as well.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0807/The_view_across_the_street.html
Try not to let your support of Rudy cloud your view of reality. |
|
{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}}WHO WON THE REPUBLICAN DEBATE IN IOWA?
Brownback
13% 2,764
Giuliani
18% 3,775
Huckabee
3% 705
Hunter
2% 383
McCain
2% 415
Paul
43% 9,081
Romney
14% 3,036
Tancredo
3% 678
Tommy Thompson
2% 392
Total Votes: 21,229
|
|
ABC Reset Republican Debate Tally After Ron Paul Win?
Why does the media keep playing games with Ron Paul?
FreeMarketNews.com-ABC TV apparently reset its tally of who won the Republican debate it broadcast on August 5, Sunday morning.
At 10 AM EST, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex) was winning the debate with over 1,000 votes. Mitt Romney was next with 106. After the debate at approximately 11:10 AM EST when the tally was rechecked, ABC showed Ron Paul had just 445 votes. Second was “Nobody Won. I’m Voting Democratic.”
Of course, it could all be an innocent gliche, and perhaps ABC will explain these tallies or see fit to rectify them. But it has long been FMNN’s contention, along with others, that Ron Paul, an old fashioned Jeffersonian conservative, would serve as a metaphor and magnifying glass for America’s current political difficulties and expanding corruption.
Read the rest of this entry »
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/abc-reset-republican-debate-tally-after-ron-paul-win
|
|
The father of the conservtive movement would call you a liberal vis your support of Preident Bush's failed foriegn policy.
The father of the conservative movement would call you a liberal via your support of President Bush's failed foreign policy. NEOCON-MEN like you are dangerous radicals!
Buckley: Bush Not A True Conservative
(CBS) President Bush ran for office as a “compassionate conservative.” And he continues to nurture his conservative base — even issuing his first veto this week against embryonic stem cell research.
But lately his foreign policy has come under fire from some conservatives — including the father of modern conservatism, William F. Buckley.
Buckley finds himself parting ways with President Bush, whom he praises as a decisive leader but admonishes for having strayed from true conservative principles in his foreign policy.
In particular, Buckley views the three-and-a-half-year Iraq War as a failure.
“If you had a European prime minister who experienced what we’ve experienced it would be expected that he would retire or resign,” Buckley says.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/buckley-bush-not-a-true-conservative
|
|
"Ron Paul is a soulless freak.
He's a tunnel-visioned isolationist robot. But other than that, I have nothing against him."
Dr. Paul is trying to save freedom for all Americans. Even you, Frog.
This whole isolationist claim is getting really old. Dr. Paul is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist. Isolationists do not believe in free trade; non-interventionists do.
We are more isolated now from the rest of the world, than we have been in decades. Heck, this administration won't hardly even talk to anyone. And if you don't realize that Americans, for the first time in a long time, are not heralded, but hated around the world, you must be keeping your eyes and ears closed.
Seriously, can you not see what is going on?
We diverted our attention from those who attacked us (bin Laden and Al Qaeda) and overthrew and continue to occupy a country where Al Qaeda was NOT. Saddam was a dictator, but he served as a balance against Iran and he was not an imminent threat to our national defense. And now, we're told that we must stay in Iraq, because Iran could get control of Iraq. Well, DOH. So, tell me again why we overthrew Iraq?
While we were off on this side nation-building effort in Iraq, we allowed those WHO DID attack us, to escape to Pakistan and rebuild. Does this make sense to you?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, we're told that it is necessary to illegally wiretap American citizens; open our mail; require us to carry biometric National ID cards, complete with a national database; Homeland Security cameras going up everywhere..... just to "keep us safe".
WHILE OUR PORTS AND BORDERS REMAIN WIDE OPEN.
Does anyone besides me, see a problem with this picture? |
|
|
...of the 9,081 votes Paul has gathered thus far in on-line voting, 9,050 of them won't be voting in the Republican primaries, 4,500 won't be voting at least twice, and 9,075 won't be adding to Mr. Paul's almost empty piggy bank. |
|
who should just go suck on a Democrat. But other than that I have nothing against him...
|
|
Do you have any proof of your claim that there is double-voting going on? If not, you need to retract your libelous claim. Were you aware that Dr. Paul recently blew away all competition in the FreedomWorks email VALIDATED poll? I suggest you check it out: http://www.freedomworks.org/strawpoll/
Now, as far as the "piggy bank" is concerned, Dr. Paul has more money in the bank than all but Giuliani and Romney. And if you subtract the millions that Mitt "loaned" his own campaign, the gap closes even more.
I do appreciate your concern for the good doctor's campaign bank account though. He is very careful in spending other people's money. Isn't it just sad that other government public servants don't do likewise, because if they did, we wouldn't be 9 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt.
So basically, Greg, everything you said in your post is a bold-faced lie. Surely, you can do better than that. |
|
|
Ron Paul clearly has the largest number of finatical, loyal supporters of all the candidates. They watch every event, and wait for the opportunity to respond to the polls. If he is really that popular, why isn't he getting more money? The troulbe is, he has no leadership qualities. It's like listening to someone scratching on a blackboard. He has a number of good ideas regarding protecting the constitution, and preserving our sovereignty, but is so far from reality on other ideas (i.e. leaving Iraq quickly, amnesty) that his credibility is shot. America votes into office someone who is more maintream, not someone on the fringe. |
|
No Clear Winner, Edge to Rudy
Since I was unfortunately working the morning of the debate, I could only listen to the debate on radio. I realize that the visual media of television is as important these days as the actual message of the candidates, but I am not going to watch a replay of the debate on television because frankly I'd rather hit the beach. In any case, here is my rundown of the debate that occurred in Iowa.
Excerpts:
There are some definite differences among the candidates on Iraq. They ranged from a pullout (Ron Paul) to a Biden-like partition (Brownback) to a position that the surge is working (McCain). None of the candidates seem to realize that a troop surge in far more meaningful numbers is needed to secure Iraq.
Although the Democrats offered little in their debate on Darfur, (with the exception of Biden and to some extent Obama) if genocide prevention in Iraq is a reason you use to justify troops remaining in Iraq, then show some courage and address a genocide that's happening right now in Darfur.
Does anyone really believe that if a fair tax is implemented that there wouldn't be a run on greenbacks so heavy that you couldn't cut down trees fast enough to supply the pipeline of cold cash?
For complete coverage please visit http://www.NonPartisans.Org
|
|
|
It says a lot--all of it negative--when someone who received only 12% of the votes in the Drudge poll is called the winner. Giuliani was soundly trounced by one opponent at 32%, another at 37%. FWIW, I don't support either of those who whupped Giuliani him. I just think it's comical to paint this loser as a "winner" when "whiner" is more accurate. |
|
Well lets see...
Ron Paul raised more than most if not all of the "2nd" tier candidates. and over 40% of his total was from REAL americans donating less than $200 bucks. True he doesn't have the special interests backing him; but I consider that a good thing.
Conservatives will not turn out to vote for Giuliani or Romney. Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican that can win the general election. Either back him or you deal with a Democrat President and Democrat congress. |
|
|
MATT LEWIS IS DRINKING THE COOL-AIDE AGAIN I SEE. Does this gut get paid to write this SLOP?? |
|
|
Rudy didn't win. He looked pathetic. He sounded so foolish. Americans think he is a joke. But don't tell that to ABC, NBC, or FOX. Republicans will not have a party if he is the nominee. |
|
|
No way conservatives are going to turn out in numbers sufficient to elect a RINO like Rudy. Why waste a vote for a liberal RINO who is nothing more than a democrat in disguise? |
|
|
The only thing I have against Rudt the RINO is that he is Rudy the RINO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question:
Why is it that if you support Ron Paul, you are a fanatic?
Answer:
Because he has no chance of winning.
There is only one way Ron Paul could have any chance of winning, and that is if he wasn't "Ron Paul".
Sorry, that is just a fact of life. Don't get angry with the messenger, just get over it and support someone who does have a better change... and that's anyone else! |
|
The idea that the military overwhelmingly support Ron Paul is a crock.
I looked up the numbers for Q2. Ron Paul got about $22,000 in total donations from the military. That is about $200 from 100 people (or $2300 from 10 people). There are 1.4 million active duty members. Paul got donations from about .0001 % of the military.
The Romney and Rudy are not asking the military people for money. They are already giving enough by being in uniform. |
|
|
Perhaps you should inform the FEC then, because it is their numbers that were reported. I understand that you hate it, but it is fact that Ron Paul received more donations from our brave active military and veterans, than any other candidate. |
|
WHOA THERE fairfacts. Dr. Paul isn't for amnesty. Not one bit. In fact, he wants our borders/ports secured, an end to birthright citizenship, visa rules enforced, an end to welfare for illegal aliens and absolutely NO amnesty.
If standing up for our Constitution and everything our country has stood for since it was founded, is "fringe", then I will happily stand in those ranks. The reality is that the Republican Party has shifted strongly to the left. It's sometimes difficult to tell some in our party from the socialists on the other side of the aisle. So what is your definition of "mainstream", Fairfacts? Socialism? Is it mainstream to believe that it's ok for our government to give social security to illegal aliens? How about opening our mail without a warrant, or wiretapping us without due process? All while our borders are left WIDE OPEN.
By the way, how did you guys like it when John Kyl, Lindsey Graham, John McCain and others stood with Ted Kennedy, against the American people on amnesty? It's been a few weeks since that vote, so now has everyone become complacent again? What are your thoughts about the 9 TRILLION dollars we are in debt. Not to mention the fact that our government is borrowing 3 billion dollars a day to support their spending habit. That's not even speaking to how money is being printed like there is no tomorrow, which is devaluing every dollar already in the marketplace. Have you noticed how much the value of the dollar has sunk in the world market? |
|
Our country is in big trouble, folks. Dr. Paul is the only one who has had the guts to get up there and tell us the truth. Yet, you sit here and throw darts at him. Maybe the survival of our country is a joke to you. Is that it?
A President's first job is to his country. The war in Iraq never had anything to do with our national security. It was planned during Clinton's administration.
If you want more information, here you go:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
|
|
Do you base your decision on who you think has the best chance of winning? I find that curious. Because I choose to vote for the person who has the best principles. I figure, if I vote my conscience, I have done my best.
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -- John Quincy Adams |
|
No disrespect intended, but I base my opinion on objective reality and third party perspective.
Seriously, I recommend reading Letters to a Young Conservative by Dinesh D'Souza. It's on sale at Amazon.com right now and it's must reading for everyone at any age.
You could vote for someone who has a real chance of moving the Republican Party in a more conservative direction, or you can throw your vote away. That's you right too!
|
|
|
|
I have seen way to many people call Rudy a RINO on this post.
IMO the issues today that make you a Republican 1) Support the War on Terror 2) Believe in lower taxes and laisser-faire, supply-side economics 3) Are against the welfare state.
Rudy is a vocal supporter of the War on terror, was able to cut taxes as Mayor of NYC and the number of people in NYC on welfare saw a huge drop.
He is liberal on some social issue. Yes he is pro-abortion, yes he supports some gun control and he has been friendly with the gay community.
Although, I am pro-life and pro-second amendment, disagreeing with me on those issues hardly earns you the RINO stamp. Supporting higher taxes, and being against the War on Terror would.
As Conservative, we should judge candidates on the issues that really matter in our lives. For the record Rudy has said he would appoint Federalist Judges.
|
|
"10:11 - Taking a page from YouTube, ABC includes video clips from "average" Iowa voters. To answer the first question, Ron Paul says we're losing the war, and "should just come home." In the next question, Duncan Hunter scores some points by attacking the Democrats for wanting to cut and run."
This shows how silly these labels are and how dumb people are when they buy these generalizations and name calling. Is Ron a Democrat? No. Do all Democrats think we "should just come home?" No. According to Matt Lewis, Duncan Hunter "scores points" by being wrong. I'm sorry, but saying "I don't want to cut and run," is not enough to get my support for President. A President can't just let our boys sit there as target practice for Iranian mortars. Sorry Matt, but to "gain points" he needs to have a PLAN and EXPRESS it. What's your plan? Oh, wait, I know, "wait until September."
Honestly, it sounds like the surge is working and I'd like to see George ramp things up by actually taking this country to war. Send the mercenaries (contractors) home and re-institute the draft. |
|
"You could vote for someone who has a real chance of moving the Republican Party in a more conservative direction, or you can throw your vote away. That's you right too!"
Throwing your vote away, H.R.C., is through fooling yourself that you are doing something good for your party, or your country, by "satisficing" your vote. Nor, if you are honest with yourself, can you sit there and tell me that Giuliani or Romney would move our country in a "more conservative direction". It's this same type of thinking that elected George "open borders, damn the Constitution" Bush. Or, is he ok with you, because he is a Republican? He most certainly is not a conservative.
I don't know about you, but I'm certainly glad that our forefathers didn't mirror your stance of making their determination of whether to fight for our Independence by buckling under to whether they had "a real chance". Aren't you?
Americans need to stand up for our country and our Constitution. If We the People do not, we will not have either much longer.
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -- John Quincy Adams
|
|
I hadn't seen that, Jack. WOW! Ron Paul is right. The Republican Party has completely lost its way.
What happened to:
- limited constitutional government
- personal privacy
- personal responsibility
- strong national defense
- fiscally responsible government
- individual liberty
- national sovereignty
|
|
Liberty
It does not bother me that Ron Paul got more donations. I am cognizant of Ron Paul and have been for a few years. I do not view him as a threat or even a nuisance. You are technically correct Paul did get more donations. You spin that fact into an implication that Paul has major support from the Military and he doesn't. I am clarifying the spin.
The reality is that Paul is not supported by the majority of the military. You are implying a result that does not derive from the actual numbers. The $20,000 that Paul got from the military is about 1% of his total donations.
Nobody is getting substantial money from the military. Primarily because nobody is asking for money except from a few high ranking stateside brass. |
|
Tancredo made a great remark and how very true.
"Tancredo says income tax gives the government the power to manipulate behavior."
|
|
|
Your posts are brilliant-keep it up. |
|
Why is it that he always gets the most votes for winning a debate? Maybe...
A) He doesn't flip flop on issues.
B) He doesn't avoid answering the questions.
C) He refuses to accept donations from lobbyist.
D) His main interest is saving THIS country, not others.
Even if you don't support his ideas you have to respect the man.
I mean, how can you trust Romney (Mr. I hate abortion but I'm willing to vote for it so i can get into office) and Giuliani (The closet liberal tax raiser and pro choice man) on a personal level much less with the power of the U.S.
You talk about not having leadership but Paul's the only one with the nuts to stand up for what he believes whether it gets him in office or not. |
|
1. Shouldn't the candidates be IN CHURCH on Sunday morning?
2. Did Rudy wear a dress? |
|
"The reality is that Paul is not supported by the majority of the military."
You have made a claim with no substantiation, B.G.. Care to provide your proof?
"You are implying a result that does not derive from the actual numbers. The $20,000 that Paul got from the military is about 1% of his total donations."
I implied nothing. I stated facts. Dr. Paul received more donations from our troops and veterans, than any other candidate.
"Nobody is getting substantial money from the military."
That may be. But, what they *are* donating, they are largely donating to Dr. Paul.
|
|
You said "- Rudy makes the point that before building Democracy in other countries -- before having elections -- you need to first instill a culture that understands the "bedrocks of democracy," such as rule of law. This is a very, very good point.-"
No, no it's not! Who the heck are we to go around the world instilling cultures? Our freedom and democracy arose from within, and I'll never believe we can (or should) seed it anywhere else using our guns and our sons.
( And by the way...Mitt, if you're reading this, your friend Pakistan isn't a democracy. ) |
|
Big Dogg asks Rudy a bunch of questions. As a supporter of Rudy, let me supply some answers:
"Why was the city SO racially polarized on your watch?"
ANSWER: You haven't a clue how racially polarized New York City had been, even long before Giuliani. I used to live there. Go learn something about the 1977 power outage and what happened under Mayor Beame.
"Why did you HAVE to disband the Street Crime Unit?"
ANSWER: The level of street crime in New York went down so much under Giuliani (compare his crime-fighting record to other American cities in that time period) that it speaks for itself. Don't argue with success. You have enough trouble defending Bush's foreign policy failures.
"Why did you rebuild your command center at 7 WTC instead of Brooklyn?"
ANSWER: For the same reason the U.S. never relocated the White House and Capitol Building to Oklahoma, despite the fact that throughout the Cold War everybody knew that Washington DC was a prime target.
Why did the firefghters of 9/11 have insufficient radios?
ANSWER: For the same reason that the Bush Administration failed to connect the dots before 9-11 too: Because no one foresaw a catastrophe so big that it would take so much of the New York Fire Department and kill some 250 firefighters in the space of a couple hours.
"What experience do YOU have on the international stage?"
ANSWER: Giuliani is the only Republican who told both Arafat and a Saudi Prince that their antics were not welcome in a major American city. He has walked the walk with these Islamist extremists, telling them off even as Mayor.
"Why have you cheated on your various wives?"
ANSWER: None of your frigging business. If Giuliani can win the War on Terror, he can sleep with as many mistresses as he wants. He will have earned them. It's Miller Time!
|
|
specsaregood writes: "Ron Paul raised more than most if not all of the "2nd" tier candidates. and over 40% of his total was from REAL americans donating less than $200 bucks. True he doesn't have the special interests backing him; but I consider that a good thing."
It's not a good thing if you're trying to run a modern Presidential campaign.
It takes big bucks to run a campaign like that. Contributions from average Joes won't cut it. The GOP's usual business backers won't support Ron Paul because he won't continue the corporate welfare favors to them.
For example, agribusiness contributes heavily to the GOP in each election cycle. But they're expecting Government favors in exchange--continuation of price supports for farmers, continuation and enhancement of the ethanol subsidy for ethanol fuel, etc. Ron Paul isn't going to support such things and they know it and they won't support him.
As it is, so far the Democrats have managed to raise much more money for their candidates than the GOP has managed to raise for theirs. That's a serious problem because in 2008 as always, the Democrats will also have the built-in advantage of union support--the AFL-CIO and NEA will work for Hillary almost as if they are an official part of the Democratic Party structure.
Again, Ron Paul can't peel off those workers because they're not prepared to throw away the cushy deal their unions have with the Democratic Party for pro-union favors.
Reagan managed to appeal to many blue-collar workers, but NOT on that basis.
Be reasonable. Even if you're sure that Ron Paul has all the right answers, in politics it's never enough just to be right.
|
|
|
|