Why Hannity Never Showed Poll Results after Iowa Debate

Originally posted by theovermensch
Anyone see the Hannity interview with Paul after the debate? It was a hatchet job. But I dont like how Paul is handling the issue of if he will run as a third party and his endorsment. He has gone from saying he has no intention to Wallace at the start of November-

www.opposingviews.com...

Now in the interview with Hannity he says he cant conceive of it. I guess he can change his mind and you couldnt exactly call him a liar but there seems to be something dishonest about his answers. Like he isnt telling us something. I think its disappointing in a way.

Its also interesting that Wallace has angered the Paul fans with his comments saying a Paul win would discredit the Iowa caucuses-

Text Text Chris Wallace walked back his earlier remarks to Neil Cavuto that if Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses, it will discredit the contest.

Wether you think Paul is being entirely honest about his intentions it looks like he might not have to worry about it. Fox news look pretty damn scared of Paul lately. I think their hatchet jobs on Paul and the lack of attention may be actually helping Ron Paul more than its hurting him.

edit on 16-12-2011 by theovermensch because: typo

edit on 16-12-2011 by theovermensch because: typo

This shouldn't bother you if you realize how the GOP has been working with the MSM, especially Fox on blacking out Ron Paul for years. The GOP is in a position where they have to support Dr. Paul if he wins the nomination. They can't come right out against him, but they can use their tool...the media like they did in last nights debate to try and make him look bad. They can try to manipulate the polls and play every dirty trick in the book to kill his run like they did in 2008. But now Dr. Paul knows how to play the game and he has much more support than he did 4 years ago.

So what can Ron Paul do to counter this? Not ruling out a third party run! They fear if he does this, he splits the vote and Obama wins.

So there you have it. It's Paul's Ace-In-The-Hole and I'm glad he's got it!

reply to post by maddog99

Text So what can Ron Paul do to counter this? Not ruling out a third party run! They fear if he does this, he splits the vote and Obama wins. So there you have it. It's Paul's Ace-In-The-Hole and I'm glad he's got it!

I know it is his ace in the hole but he should be honest with the die-hard Republicans that want to know who he will endorse. He owes it to these voters to be clear.

Does Paul stand for the Republican Party or himself. It would seem only himself and his supporters. This is an important issue to alot of republicans. They fear that Paul will suck alot of the anti-obama vote away and hurt the Republican Party. He should be clear about his intentions. He owes it to die-hard republicans.

Originally posted by theovermensch
reply to post by maddog99

 

Text So what can Ron Paul do to counter this? Not ruling out a third party run! They fear if he does this, he splits the vote and Obama wins. So there you have it. It's Paul's Ace-In-The-Hole and I'm glad he's got it!

I know it is his ace in the hole but he should be honest with the die-hard Republicans that want to know who he will endorse. He owes it to these voters to be clear.

Does Paul stand for the Republican Party or himself. It would seem only himself and his supporters. This is an important issue to alot of republicans. They fear that Paul will suck alot of the anti-obama vote away and hurt the Republican Party. He should be clear about his intentions. He owes it to die-hard republicans.

Okay, but what do you consider a die-hard Republican? What we now label as Neo-Cons? I was a young Republican and voted for Regan. I remember boasting how only Dems started the wars and Republicans ended them! Once I started learning a little more about politics and the world, I went Independant. After 9/11, the bail-outs, the housing bubble, etc, I found Dr. Paul and learned more than I could ever imagine.

But back to the question...

Ron Paul stands for true conservatism. None of the other candidates do. He already said he would support one of them only if they changed their views. The only one who's come close is Rick Perry who said ron Paul pretty much opened his eyes to the Fed and how Washington and money works. But they are all so far apart from him on his foreign policy...how could he endorse one of them? He would betray his supporters and destroy what he's been fighting for the past 30 years!

This battle has been going on between Ron Paul and the rest of the Republican party for years. He believes, as many of us do, there will be little difference between Obama and the rest of the GOP field. That's why I, like many, have decided to vote for the person and not the party and will write-in Ron Paul if we have to.

It's pretty much Paul or bust.

democracy is a double edged sword. the people can change their mind.

what we are witnessing is the end of the republican party as we knew. and the fight from the old guard to stay in power.

it's obvious the people want a new direction.

reply to post by maddog99

Text It's pretty much Paul or bust.

I agree but I dont think he should be shielded from critcism. And I think you will see this issue get bigger. Its pretty much all they have got. But I honestly dont think Paul should be able to use the Republican Party as a vehicle to get coverage and then ditch them when he doesnt win. I think alot of Republicans will be very angry if he loses the nomination and then hurts the Rebublican nominee by running third party.

I would say a die-hard Republican is somebody that wants a Republican to become President. Not a third party. I think they are entitled to feel that way.

Originally posted by theovermensch
reply to post by maddog99

 

Text So what can Ron Paul do to counter this? Not ruling out a third party run! They fear if he does this, he splits the vote and Obama wins. So there you have it. It's Paul's Ace-In-The-Hole and I'm glad he's got it!

I know it is his ace in the hole but he should be honest with the die-hard Republicans that want to know who he will endorse. He owes it to these voters to be clear.

Does Paul stand for the Republican Party or himself. It would seem only himself and his supporters. This is an important issue to alot of republicans. They fear that Paul will suck alot of the anti-obama vote away and hurt the Republican Party. He should be clear about his intentions. He owes it to die-hard republicans.

The same die hard republicans that voted for McCain and will vote for Romney if the old guard has there way. What the Republican party is is a firing squad in a circle. They should pull their heads out and quit worrying about who he will endorse and endorse Dr. Paul. He owes it to these voters to be who he is; a defender of the constitution and the people of this country. If he is such a loser as the Neo Cons believe then what are they worried about?

Originally posted by maddog99

Originally posted by theovermensch
reply to post by maddog99

 

Text So what can Ron Paul do to counter this? Not ruling out a third party run! They fear if he does this, he splits the vote and Obama wins. So there you have it. It's Paul's Ace-In-The-Hole and I'm glad he's got it!

I know it is his ace in the hole but he should be honest with the die-hard Republicans that want to know who he will endorse. He owes it to these voters to be clear.

Does Paul stand for the Republican Party or himself. It would seem only himself and his supporters. This is an important issue to alot of republicans. They fear that Paul will suck alot of the anti-obama vote away and hurt the Republican Party. He should be clear about his intentions. He owes it to die-hard republicans.

Okay, but what do you consider a die-hard Republican? What we now label as Neo-Cons? I was a young Republican and voted for Regan. I remember boasting how only Dems started the wars and Republicans ended them! Once I started learning a little more about politics and the world, I went Independant. After 9/11, the bail-outs, the housing bubble, etc, I found Dr. Paul and learned more than I could ever imagine.

But back to the question...

Ron Paul stands for true conservatism. None of the other candidates do. He already said he would support one of them only if they changed their views. The only one who's come close is Rick Perry who said ron Paul pretty much opened his eyes to the Fed and how Washington and money works. But they are all so far apart from him on his foreign policy...how could he endorse one of them? He would betray his supporters and destroy what he's been fighting for the past 30 years!

This battle has been going on between Ron Paul and the rest of the Republican party for years. He believes, as many of us do, there will be little difference between Obama and the rest of the GOP field. That's why I, like many, have decided to vote for the person and not the party and will write-in Ron Paul if we have to.

It's pretty much Paul or bust.

Yep , same here Man . I decided 8 YEARS AGO that Ron Paul should Run for President considering his Politics and the course our Country has been heading in since 9/11 . He is the Right Man at the Right Time to give this Country BACK to the American People !.......