Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The LIVE Iowa Caucus Road To The Whitehouse Thread. CSPAN and Other Live Streams!

page: 47
61
<< 44  45  46   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by livefreeordieinnh


The point I take away from the caucuses is that the Republican party is fractured into three distinct groups along (seemingly) single issue lines. I'll call them the fiscal cons, the social cons, and the extremes. Not that extreme means anything bad. You can have extremely good health, for example. There is one slot for each vein of conservative, and at this point Mitt takes the voters that are concerned about fiscal-ness first, the social cons have hopped between Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, Newt, absurdly I might add, and I guess now it's Santorum.

Which brings me to the extremocons, who have, with the youth and independents, chosen the aforementioned Doctor. White supremacists, truthers, rastafarians, they all flock to this guy.


I guess I don't follow. One of Ron Paul's main topics is all about fiscal responsibility and getting our own house in order. He's given specifics on what he'd like to do in order to accomplish that. What has Mitt said or done to earn him those fiscal voters? I'm not buying that.

I'll give you Santorum with his recent surge. You can thank Faux News for that. If there was any doubt how the media can prop someone up enough to influence the voter, then there was a prime example. A guy polling at what 10% or less a couple of weeks ago and then all you hear on FN is Santorum, Santorum, Santorum.

Like I've said before, those undecided voters only remember the last few sound bites when then go to vote and, unfortunately, it has a lot of influence on their decision. So crazy that these folks don't research the candidates, but only go by those little sound bites or talking points and decide, "Hey, that guy thinks like I do, so he's good."

And again, lumping all of the rest to Paul. I know what you are trying to say, but there is a much larger "normal" voter base in his camp than what's been put out there. It's just that I'm tired of reading Paul = crazy voters.

Romney is nothing more than a do over from 2008. I think he has a lot of his base from that election still in tact as well as those who were disappointed in the disastrous choice of McCain/Palin. Ugh. Now, Mr. Family Man, Let's Bomb Iran Santorum is polling well and will threaten to weaken that base.

Dilution is the solution to the polution.

I've read a lot of posts about a Romney/Santorum ticket but when was the last time that another Presidential candidate dropped out (i.e. suspended) of the race only to accept the VP nod? I'd venture to say that IF Romney is selected (he he), then you could see a Marco Rubio or Chris Cristie as a VP pick. Both have a lot of appeal and would draw in those undecided Republicans that wanted to see them run but didn't. I suspect there was a reason why they didn't run.

Don't get me wrong. I love Ron Paul and would like to see him pull up an upset in NH. I think his age (no matter how healthy he is) is a setback, despite how he draws in the younger voters. When you tell Leno that the President you most admire is Grover Cleveland, that tends to age you a bit. I wonder how many people in the audience were like, "uh....who's that?"

NH will be interesting. Keep us posted.




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP

ONLY 1 group of supporters came in third after predicting a landslide.
Once it becomes evident he will be going to the GOP convention with no delegates, he will call on all of you dearly devoted to support another candidate. Doubt if you all will, the Obama democrats, Blue Republicans ,will go back to their camp and the core fanatics will stay home.



What, you got some problem with obama? I don't think so.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Speaking as a Brit I have a question about something that's been puzzling me - why are the Republicans so leery about Mittens? After all, the Romney Unit seems to have a fairly professional ground game.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a Brit I have a question about something that's been puzzling me - why are the Republicans so leery about Mittens? After all, the Romney Unit seems to have a fairly professional ground game.


The GOP (Grand Old Party) establishment wants him as the nominee.

Personally, I think the guy is a liberal dressed up like a conservative. And, I don't find him genuine....all talk.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freenrgy2

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a Brit I have a question about something that's been puzzling me - why are the Republicans so leery about Mittens? After all, the Romney Unit seems to have a fairly professional ground game.


The GOP (Grand Old Party) establishment wants him as the nominee.

Personally, I think the guy is a liberal dressed up like a conservative. And, I don't find him genuine....all talk.


Yes, he does rather make Kerry look like a solid lump of rock. How many times has he switched his position on topics like healthcare?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by Indigo5
 



Ron Paul will most likely get the Second most Delegates in NH. Not Santorum .


Maybe...I hope so. Paul is a better candidate than Santorum. I personally feel Ron Paul is the best candidate of the nominee pool, but there are forces that working against him that I think are difficult to overcome. He can round up the TP vote, but the TP vote is not the majority of conservatives and some of them are faux Establsihment Republicans. Paul can divide the GOP but not get enough momentum to win a general election...Mind you I am not knocking Ron Paul, just talking strategy. "Electability" is what many GOP will return to.

Again...Primarily two opposing forces in the nomination...with the "legislate values" crowd humming around Santorum.

Folks who want to vote thier beliefs vs. .................Folks who want President Obama out.
"True Conservative" ........................vs. ................."Electability"
Ron Paul .........................................vs. .....................Mitt Romney

And if the vitriol toward President Obama over the past few years is any indicator, I suspect Romney/Electability/Oust Obama will overtake Ron Paul.

Emotion trumps honesty/principles is the message I have seen from the right in recent years.

In that context...hatred of Obama will trump voting for a "True Conservative" and Romney's electability will triumph.

I would likely, but not for certain vote for Pres. Obama over Ron Paul, but I would love to see him get the Nomination. I think he is the candidate most capable of making President Obama answer the genuinely honest and difficult questions. The fundemental questions about the direction America has gone in the past 30 years.
No one is better suited to debate the President in my opinion....and the President needs a strong opponent for Democracey to be healthy. He needs to explain himself and our direction.

Put it this way, Ron Paul is the only GOP Potential Nominee that has a remote chance of making me vote conservative this year. I want to see him take it to our President and I think the American people deserve an honest discussion/debate of the issues and don't think we will get that national debate with a Santorum, Romney or Gingrich.

I might not agree with all of Ron Paul's positions, but the man is honest and his mind is actually active, intelligent, informed and he is actually thinking when he speaks...the other guys are simply selecting from a mental list of dumb talking points when they speak. Perry is a great example of this...he is meat puppet with the mental capacity of 6 year old boy in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 

You have a pretty good grasp of the GOP, but, don't underestimate the powerful bloc of voters that are under 40. They are Ron Paul all the way. Many voted for Obama, but not again.
This will be the story, I think.
In fact, I think I will make a thread about it.
edit on 5-1-2012 by SurrealisticPillow because: Announce new thread



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a Brit I have a question about something that's been puzzling me - why are the Republicans so leery about Mittens? After all, the Romney Unit seems to have a fairly professional ground game.


That is part of the GOPs reservations. They smell a President Bush remix...an idea that has the establishment GOP excited and the Genuine TP wing recoiling a little, but wondering if they need to play along to oust Pres. Obama.

The other factor is Mitt has flipped on a whole menu of social issues to appeal (thus unsuccesfully) to the far right and the TP folks.

Mitt is a moderate and a corporatist...much like GW Bush was. Mitt likely will be a tool for the Big Business wing of the GOP...more war, less regulation...good times
Paul scares the crap out of Big Business because he might be conservative, but he is "Peoples" conservative rather than a "Corporate" conservative. he might do things that are good for business, but he will not do it at the behest of corporations...no control by corporations. Romney...he will roll over IMO, do as he is told. Big Business knows Romney, they pay his bills.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by Indigo5
 

You have a pretty good grasp of the GOP, but, don't underestimate the powerful bloc of voters that are under 40. They are Ron Paul all the way. Many voted for Obama, but not again.
This will be the story, I think.



That is an interesting thought. Many of those who voted for Pres. Obama were off the radar prior to 08 and thus discounted. New, young, minoity voters. Not sure if Paul can round up the minority vote, but if he can thoroughly mobilize new young voters and toss in devout Paul supporters plus toward the end of the nomination cycle those that will follow any nominee to oust Obama, he might have a shot. He needs more money and more exposure and a tighter message that the public at large can get behind. Fingers crossed. I like to see democracy in action



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Interesting thoughts. If Romney really wants to beat Obama, then his VP pick is going to be very important. And I'd like to think he would move a tad bit more to the center with some of his views. If his VP is not mainstream enough and thinks like he does or he doesn't move towards the middle more, he will lose.

RP supporters will not move. Most Americans need to realize that a President Paul most likely would not be able to implement a lot of his ideas. Sure, he can spur debate and lay out a framework for what his America would look like, but a Republican controlled House and Senate would not go along with it. He can, as Commander in Chief, make those decision on troop deployments, etc. And in this vein I think he can have a lot of impact.

As far as I can tell, the GOP has already picked Romney. The question is whether Santorum will have enough movement to cause the GOP to reconsider. They definitely don't want Paul even though he's the most true conservative in the field. They want a hawk (again), so I think the reality as it stands now is that either one of them could come away with the nod.

I wish that TP's and more mainstream Republican's would get this notion of us having to engage in preemptive strikes or buildup our forces as a sign of strength out of their heads. If they could take a step back and really look at the world situation, I would hope they would see that this isn't a great idea. And they need to stop calling RP an isolationist. He's not. Non-interventionism is not the same thing. He should have the motto, "Be nice until you need to not be nice."
edit on 5-1-2012 by Freenrgy2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Interesting thoughts. If Romney really wants to beat Obama, then his VP pick is going to be very important. And I'd like to think he would move a tad bit more to the center with some of his views. If his VP is not mainstream enough and thinks like he does or he does move towards the middle more, he will lose.

RP supporters will not move. Most Americans need to realize that a President Paul most likely would not be able to implement a lot of his ideas. Sure, he can spur debate and lay out a framework for what his America would look like, but a Republican controlled House and Senate would not go along with it. He can, as Commander in Chief, make those decision on troop deployments, etc. And in this vein I think he can have a lot of impact.

As far as I can tell, the GOP has already picked Romney. The question is whether Santorum will have enough movement to cause the GOP to reconsider. They definitely don't want Paul even though he's the most true conservative in the field. They want a hawk (again), so I think the reality as it stands now is that either one of them could come away with the nod.

I wish that TP's and more mainstream Republican's would get this notion of us having to engage in preemptive strikes or buildup our forces as a sign of strength out of their heads. If they could take a step back and really look at the world situation, I would hope they would see that this isn't a great idea. And they need to stop calling RP an isolationist. He's not. Non-interventionism is not the same thing. He should have the motto, "Be nice until you need to not be nice."


Agree with most everything you said. I am starting to feel like Santorum will go the way of Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, Cain et al..A phenomena of "anybody but Romney" more than a choice that can last the long haul and scrutiny.

I like Ron Paul's foriegn policy most of all. We have been involved in foriegn wars near perpetually since Korea.

Trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.

And we suck at nation building. Everyone does. It is a farce for giving money to the military industrial complex.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

This is just the first act in a very long play.

Interesting to note though, with the surge in Santorum (even if it is just in Iowa) is it a referendum against Obama?

I know what polls and public opinion is reported by the media, but could this be the tart of a groundswell against Obama and his policies?

Well, the republican party is a walking groundswell and referendum against Obama - as far as against his policies, well, some of them. The republicans like all too many (foreign policy, force and size of government - as long as they can pick what government's tinkering with - and so on).

Now, as far as the independent and dem support that Paul pulled in greater share, I would say that definitely speaks to the displeasure these have with Obama, but as for the usual GOP voters supporting Santorum or others, it's not really much other than what's expected of them and directed by the 'conservative' and evangelical talking heads.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


It is a bit of a false statement to say that Paul brings in a large group of Dems for support.

From the CNN entrance polls...2% identified themselves as Democrats. Out of the 120,000 that voted, that is 2400 people.

These are the first numbers that kind of show that it is a myth that Ron Paul is pulling Democrats away from Obama.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 

Too bad that they didn't ask how the people voted in the last election. Then we would actually have an idea how many "Democrats" or "Independents" were convinced to support a "Republican".
Your logic is skewed.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by SurrealisticPillow
 


My logic is based on the only numbers that are available to us.

To base your logic on anything else is just make believe and fantasy.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
A fair point, but I also didn't say that. Perhaps I worded poorly, but I meant the share of indy and dem support he got as compared to the other republicans (who are generally the ones making the claim that all of Paul's support is just democratic "mischief voters" and as such any votes he gets should basically be discounted by the party).

As far as pulling dems away from Obama, I don't think there can be any serious doubt that he is - the question is just a matter of to what degree it actually is. The Blue Republican movement is definitely out there, though, and there are plenty of anecdotal testimonies online from supposed disgruntled democrats.





new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 44  45  46   >>

log in

join