WSJ: Ahead of Iowa, Republican Race Is Wide Open
This is great news! The pro-war neocons can all split the vote, leaving our man Dr. Paul as the only real choice.
By JOHN HARWOOD | Wall Street Journal
December 20, 2007; Page A1
WASHINGTON -- Two weeks before the Iowa caucus, the race for president, while tightening among Democrats, is wide open on the Republican side, highlighting the unusual fluidity of the first campaign for the White House in over a half- century that doesn't include an incumbent president or vice president.
A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows that Rudy Giuliani has lost his national lead in the Republican field after a flurry of negative publicity about his personal and business activities, setting the stage for what could be the party's most competitive nomination fight in decades. [See charts]
After holding a double-digit advantage over his nearest rivals just six weeks ago, the former New York City mayor now is tied nationally with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 20% among Republicans, just slightly ahead of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 17% and Arizona Sen. John McCain at 14%. Other polls show Mr. Giuliani's lead shrinking in Florida, one of the states he has based his strategy around.
Let's say Anti-Male Neocons or Pro-Legislation Neocons
The way to a landslide victory for RP is not to highlight those elements of his policy that huge amounts of Republicans disagree with.
I respect the anti-war message, although I disagree with it like most Republican males. I am seeing resistance to RP harden among Republican males in the rest of the blogosphere because they incorrectly say "they are all Soros-funded liberals who want to turn tail and run".
They imagine that, if we are "anti-war", we will also be pro-feminist and pro-gay-marriage and otherwise "save the whales" types.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I am more of a "save the males" type.
The anti-RP Republican males think that they are the "alpha males" and we are, at the least, the kind of males who nurture their soft side.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
I am for RP because he is the only politician who does not like the idea of making new laws all the time, especially at a time when Republican Senators (and Huckabee) all have feminist legislative aides telling them what to say and what to vote for.
I am for RP because he and Tom Tancredo were the only politicians to stand up to anti-male legislation since Bush and his evangelist cabal came into power (VAWA and IMBRA legislation make men second class citizens who are defined upfront as abusers).
The Neocons have embraced radical feminism because Karl Rove has an insane theory of "building unbeatable power bases" and because radical feminists want to destroy Muslim male society for its chauvinism.
I know that Ron Paul has the backing of the "alpha male" in our society and it follows that he has the backing of so many military guys (and truly strong women).
Although I would like to see RP strike out against Neocon support for radical feminism now, if RP does not place first in Iowa and New Hampshire, I recommend that he go for the Hail Mary play and spend the time from January 9th to January 28th in Michigan and Florida talking about how his rivals are anti-male and pro-legislation. Rather than define himself as "anti-war", he can push how a government is not supposed to be legislating and earmarking much at all, much less doing so behind closed doors where others cannot get a word in edgewise...especially servicepeople and veterans who might happen to be male.
At this exact moment, Ms. Brytt Brooks of Republican Senator Mitch McConnell's office is deciding herself whether $430 Million should go to radical feminist groups via the Commerce Justice and Science Appropriations Act because Senator McConnell is the deciding factor for those appropriations. I and a few other guys are trying to contact her but she is always "unavailable".
A few years ago, it would have been a "no brainer" that a Republican Senator would NOT approve of $430M in corrupt earmarks for questonable feminist groups. A few years ago, I would have believed that Senators themselves did the research and made the recommendations on earmarks and new laws. But Republicans have abandoned reason and now fairness in our democracy is up to one legislative aide.
This is not the way to run a democracy.
Anti-Male, Anti-Feminist, Anti-Poor, Anti-Individual??
I think there is a play always to say, "X group has been adversely affected by the government and freedom will help them."
For me, for example, I believe the underclass is kept under by government programs and government control and government attention.
The problem with your suggestions is that Dr. Paul is preternaturally against any 'group think' appeal. I asked him in 88 to talk more about freedom and the underclass (in the Walter Williams' State Against Blacks way) and he just couldn't do it.
Using "us vs. them" and not individual thinking is just not something he does readily.
reLOVEution, Dennis
"The best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in nursery." - Disraeli
Don't Vote For Ron Paul for anything less than
Re[love]ution & Renaissance
Dennis
Yes but Individuals Are Fighting Neocon Feminist Group Think
You make good points, but if one can criticize Neocons for their desire to stop Iran from getting nukes (something I agree with the Neocons about), we can just as easily criticize the Neocons for selling out to the radical feminist left who want Internet regulation and lopsided laws that divide the genders.
Remember that most women despise radical feminists precisely because they see "Group Think" being fed to them and they reject this.
Heck, the IMBRA law makes it illegal for an American man or woman to be introduced to a foreign woman or man online without a background check (on the American alone) and a Republican judge temporarily upheld this saying "There is no fundamental liberty interest in an American contacting a foreigner".
It would not be pandering to "Group Think" for Ron Paul to loudly talk about this one law alone, much less the forces and other laws behind it and ahead of it (if IMBRA is upheld in the SC, background checks will be legal for the government to mandate whenever anyone wants to contact anyone else).
Since 9-11, pro-war-against-Islam types have found that those who most fervently hate the Muslim males are the NOW types who then branched into Republican "women's groups" like the Tahirih Justice Center whose main agenda is making sure no American man can talk with a woman online without being background checked.
If the polls turn out to have been accurate (God forbid) and RP loses in Iowa and NH, he is going to want to start talking more loudly about what most Republican males would really find heinous about what the Neocons have been doing to us.
Republican males like me who support the war in Iraq can be instantly converted to vote for RP if RP points out specific laws and Group Think threats to our individual freedoms.
Found this.
http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2004_Primaries.htm
I was just wondering.... how
I was just wondering.... how many of you have voted in a primary.. I never have! this is my first! I always vote in the general election, but never a primary.. I'm sure the turn out for primaries is low! you take into account that Ron Paul supporters are hardened troops and would die for their general, when the orange bowl is on, its 10 degrees out, and nobody feels like voting--- Ron Paul will win easily! were the only ones who will show up.. then those other 4 neocons split that vote.... its exciting!
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
Continue reading..., the Truth is out there!
After reading the rest of the article, I found this part especially relevant...
"The ferment is far more pronounced in the Republican field, partly because of President Bush's low popularity; in the latest survey, Mr. Bush's approval stood at 34%. It also reflects an aging of the conservative coalition that Ronald Reagan marshaled in 1980, with economic, national security, and social-issue voters all vying for supremacy.
"Defining itself as Ronald Reagan's party no longer works," says James Reichley, a onetime White House aide to Republican president Gerald Ford. "There's got to be some new definition of what it means to be a Republican."
The Neo-con definition hasn't worked/isn't working. Putting Regan quotes in Dubyas' mouth, or any of the other candidates mouths for that matter, has no ring of truth or conviction to it. That the Congress has an even lower approval rating than Dubyas' can't all be placed against the narrow Dem. majority. They're all suffering from a serious lack of credibility, and all attempts to define conservatism down to what is being offered by the other candidates "just ain't cutting it" !
The Ron Paul Revolution has an appeal to all ages who have searched it out, because it calls us to an even higher standard of Liberty than Reagan even dared explore, but which our Founders knew was possible. This is what we are called at this crucial juncture of history: to help connect those who still believe that Freedom is our birthright, with the very real possibility that electing Ron Paul could bring our nation closer toward that ideal than its been in any of our lifetimes! ...or risk forever losing that possibility again.
If "We The People" don't tell them, how will they Know?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it. - Patrick Henry
Where is the missing 18%
Notice that 18% of the vote don't show up ... was Ron Paul's name even on the ballet? It was 20 / 20 / 17 / 11% with 18% missing ... which is incredible since that missing 18% is in a close 3rd place :p
hate to be the spoiler,
hate to be the spoiler, but:
In such a fluid contest, the pollster Mr. Hart cautions, "Within a month its going to be totally different." A fifth candidate, former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, also draws double-digit support at 11% after shooting up to second-place in the Republican field earlier this year.
Rich in NH
"Time makes more converts than reason." -Thomas Paine
Learn Liberty: lewrockwell.com/tomwoods.com/mises.org
Get EDUCATED, not AGITATED!
my blog: www.takebackrag.blogspot.com if you please
I didn't mean to give the
I didn't mean to give the impression that I believed that RP was that missing 18%, just that it was kooky to leave out such a large % given the low numbers for all the candidates. Although my Q asking if Paul was on the ballot is still up in the air. :p
The values voters, Feminism and IMBRA
One of the large group of Voters not being courted by Candidates is the working Blue Collar White Males. Carey Roberts talks about this ignored demographic. Which has been moving from the Democrats to the Republicans. The issue of Gender relationships, and IMBRA is even more significant because it strikes at the very heart of what it means to truly be an American. And what is so frightening about the NEOCON hijacking of America.
The Rights of Free Association, Equal Protection clause under the constitution. The Fact is Governments do not give rights, they restrict them. The US Congress and Senate, And the Executive Branch by voting and sustaining IMBRA. Have declared US Men to be violent, sexual Criminals and Predators. Where is the evidence to support this? Your Government under the Conservative Republicans voted in a law favoring one gender over the other.
The whole contract with America back in the 1990s was supposed to reform welfare and strengthen the family. The Polar opposite has happened. We now have nearly 4 in 10 children born out of wedlock. Marriage rates are plummeting, Divorce is so high in some states including California the states no longer publish the figures.
IMBRA is in fact an attempt to regulate Market demand for Wives. By creating a barrier to entry to Foreign Wives. It is an attempt by one Gender with the aid of an egregious Uncle Sam to regulate the life choices of the other Gender. It is in your face Feminist Fascism, disguised as an altruistic means of protecting Foreign Women.
It makes US Men vulnerable to identity theft, and voids the presumption of innocence that is basic to our Criminal Justice system. Those behind it intend to enact more Draconian measures to punish Men, and next Women who will not obey the Feminists who promoted this. This strikes at the very heart of what it means to be an American. Will we let freedom die completely? Will we let the Government regulate how many children we can have? What race we can marry? Where does it stop?
That our Government and both parties support this is a frightening development. It is the beginning of the road to Tyranny and Dictatorship.
What is Feminism really? A trojan horse movement. It is nothing but Communism and Socialism repackaged. Gender replacing Classes and the same intent. For Nanny Government to completely regulate and control your life.
There is a growing number of Men willing to break ranks with their usual Politicians who will rally to this issue. And to Divorce reform. It is a sizeable group as well. This is also a major Differentiator for Ron Paul. It will take courage to support this. But it could change the entire dynamic of the Election.