It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Ron Paul attacked Romney zero times in 20 debates

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Lately there has been an idea that Ron Paul and Romney have been "teaming up" in the debates. I personally noticed it myself during the last one...and even commented about it during the debate on the debate thread on ATS.


An analysis of 20 debates by ThinkProgress shows that Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul did not attack rival Mitt Romney once during those televised face-offs.

That’s in comparison to Paul attacking Romney’s rivals — like former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — a total of 39 times during those debates, the report said. ThinkProgress reported that Paul attacked Santorum 22 times and Gingrich 8 times in the debates.

He attacked Texas Gov. Rick Perry and businessman Herman Cain four times each and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann one time while they were in the race. The numbers come as Santorum accuses Paul of teaming up with Romney to keep him down in Michigan, a state holding a primary on Tuesday. (SEE ALSO: Rand Paul says ‘it would be an honor to be considered’ as Romney’s running mate)


news.yahoo.com...

My theory, stated in another thread, is that Ron Paul is being buddy buddy with Romney for him to pick a Paul for VP. Not Ron Paul, but his son Rand...as Ron can't be seen as compromising his principles in supporting Romney...but he can support his son (even if he didn't publicly, it will obviously still be perceived that way). If that would happen, you would have both Ron and Rand Paul speaking at the Republican Convention. This also brings Paul supporters, tea party supporters, and perceived "moderate" Romney supporters all together.

Of course, this is just all m speculation (and Romney would have to start charging up in the polls as well).....but it is strange that Ron Paul doesn't go after Romney like he does the other candidates...especially since Romneycare was the model for Obamacare.....
edit on 28-2-2012 by David9176 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Ron Paul simply would never sell out like that. Remember, this is the man who won't rule out a third party run, just because he can't literally see the future. He's not the kind of guy that would campaign for the White House, just to get another man, possibly his very exact opposite on the GOP side, there in his place.

If anything this can be explained very rationally, without ignoring that Paul would never turn from being Mr. Consistency to Mr. "I give up!" Right now Romney is being attacked by both Gingrich and Santorum, and is especially threatened by Santorum. So tell me, why would Paul need to attack Romney if Santorum and Gingrich are already doing it for him? With the strategy I seem to see Paul using, he's sitting back, letting Newt and Santorum team up on Romney, and from there is taking down Santorum and Gingrich. This is especially evident from the last debate, where Paul got Santorum all nice and flustered.

You need to not just focus on what it is that Paul is doing to Romney, you need to watch what he's doing throughout the whole stage. Remember, this whole idea that Romney and Paul are teaming up is little more than speculation from the man who got locked down like a shot up school and became visibly irate during the previous debate.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Does Ron Paul really attack anyone? He will counter the argument but is he really known to just come out of the blue and center on any one candidate? Most of the times I can recall that he said anything about anyone of them was when he was attacked first. Saying that Rick Santorum was fake was in response to a question about Rick and the ad Pauls people were running. I've noticed that Ron Paul doesn't really come out and say anything about Obama, at least not like the other 3 do. I think he sticks to the problems at hand and how we can fix them not the drama the others like to stir up.

So if Romney doesn't attack Ron Paul then I don't see Ron Paul saying anything back.

I've also noticed the last few primaries that Santorum didn't pick on Paul as much as he did earlier on. Guess he got tired of Paul making him look stupid.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
You may be correct. Although I cannot imagine that Dr. Paul's support base would unquestionably swing over to Romney just because his son is chosen as a running mate, stranger events have unfolded in the political arena in my lifetime. Santorum's comment that the seperation of church and state are not absolute, as well as other statements regarding Satan and Iran might be highly motivational to the religious right, but they also alienate voters such as myself who are non-religious, and do not see Iran as a viable threat. In my opinion the man is a religious nut and no actual threat to the Paul campaign. Given enough time I believe he will fall by the way side having shot himself in his proverbial foot by drawing his voter base from such a narrow field. Romney continues to flip flop on issues just as he has done through out his public service, and may take the same route as well. If I am presented with the choice between Obama and a Mitt Romney/Rand or Ron Paul ticket I will simply refrain from voting, as neither will produce the changes necessary to restore this country, in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I don't recall RP 'attacking' anyone, except in a rebuke. But then I haven't kept up on all the debates so my info is limited.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
What do you mean attack? You mean argue/debate with Mitt?
Disagree?


I like at the end Bachmann saying Israel is our greatest ally. What a dolt.

Also just a great RP moment:



edit on 28-2-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Political strategy. i noticed it as well, but honestly as a human i think Mitt is better than foamy Santorum. but not by much. Paul and Newt are also friendly. Its like in MMA when Ben Henderson beats Donald Cerrone twice and cerrone is in Bens wedding. not a conspiracy, just mutual respect. They are all supposedly on the same team, Santtrum just sucks..People in Michigan democrats actually voted for Santa foam to get back at mitt, because "they are sick of how things are going"..hahaha Then why not vote for the guy thats different.? Im gonna laugh when Obama looks at Mitt and says " your just a white copy cat version of me" hahahhalol



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
OP please don't tell me you are this susceptible to the media manipulation.

This has already been debunked and/or quashed.


Anybody buying this nonsense is chewing on the bone that the media threw at you.

It is a distraction.

They are desperate.
edit on 28-2-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Paul has already said like 30 times, no conspiracy there...His son is not interested in oromney..Im not either..Paul also said Andrew Napolitano would be his vice. What more could you ask for.Honesty and Judge Honesty..Even the democrat fluoride brains in michigan can see that Santorum is the weakest guy, thats why they voted for him. easy win for Obama. I would vote obama over santorum or Mitt..but i wont need to vote ,thats been taken care of..The media has already done their part in consuming the minds of moral americans and turning them into warmongering fools. Hopefully more repubs in Cali and Washington and Oregon will give an alternative suggestion besides Mitt/Foamy.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join