91 votes

On Iowa, Romney, Santorum, and Paul

Last night, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum finished in a statistical tie for first place in the Iowa GOP caucus vote. While Romney's strong finish wasn't surprising, Santorum's sudden rise in popularity will have many empty suits and skirts in the Dead Stream Media (DSM) scratching their hollow craniums. Ron Paul finished third, a few percentage points behind. While this isn't the stunning victory his supporters had hoped for, he still managed to more than double his support from his 2008 finish of 9.93% of the vote. Not bad for a fringe candidate that many 2008 political experts predicted would have no real impact on the future of American politics.

If it's true that Romney's strong showing in Iowa bodes very well for his chances to win the Republican nomination, then the biggest winner of the Iowa GOP vote was Barack Obama. But before I get into why Romney has no chance in the general election, let us try to understand where Rick Santorum came from. Then I'll attempt to paint his certain fall from grace as quickly as it will happen in real life.

How Santorum Won (yes, that's a win)

There were a combination of factors at work that propelled Santorum to his strong showing. I'm going to start with what I feel is the most important. I like to call it the RedState.com voting bloc. There is a strongly committed group of neoconservative voters that exhibit a similar level of passion as the hardest of hard core Paulites. They probably don't view themselves as "neoconservative" and perhaps quite a few of them don't even know what that means, nor could they trace the history from Kirzner to Buckley to Cheney to Limbaugh, but they nonetheless unshakably agree with the ideological arguments presented by neoconservatives. Their home on the web is RedState.com. Their home on the airwaves is Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin. They watch FoxNews and turn it off when Napolitano and Stossel come on. They hold up Ann Coulter as a paragon of the intellectual 21st century American woman. They have their fingers crossed for Sarah Palin.

It's been a tough 4 years for the RedState gang. They became energized behind George W. Bush's so-called leadership in thrusting America into two failed wars and the never ending war on anything that looks terroristy. In 2008, they rallied around Mike Huckabee, propelling him to a commanding Iowa victory. When Huck's evangelical army couldn't carry on that momentum, they threw their might behind Guiliani. When he turned out to be a womanizing career politician that couldn't beat a fringe nobody named Ron Paul in the GOP debates, they settled on McCain. McCain promised to keep their sacred war in Iraq going for 100 years if need be (Constitution, be damned!). They were overjoyed when he hired the Alaskan sweetheart to stand next to him on the campaign trail. The only way McCain could have become more appealing to the RedState faction would have been to name Danica Patrick as Vice President. Unfortunately for RedState, and thankfully for the rest of us, John "Bomb Iran" McCain was completely out of step with the independent vote in America. They were already tiring of the war, they were angry over the bailouts that he (and Barack) had vocally supported, and they viewed him as 4 more years of Bush. In other words, he was exactly what RedState wanted. Yes, by 2008, the neoconservatives were already out of step with Independent voters. Their base was shrinking.

The Joke's on EVERYONE

Santorum's Iowa victory is highly amusing. The RedState voters have become even more polarized and out of step with mainstream American thought than they were in 2008, when they were banning Ron Paul supporters from their forums for debating too intelligently. They are ready to latch on to anyone not named Mitt and especially not named Ron Paul. The hatred of Paul goes back a few years and is by no means a recent phenomenon. I don't know who fired the first shot, but it may have been Paul himself when he delivered a scathing speech on the history, ideas, and disastrous effects of the neoconservative movement on the House floor in 2006. That speech highlighted the chameleon political affiliations of the movement, e.g. siding with Moynihan and the Democrat Establishment in support of the Vietnam War. Paul also traced the history of the leadership and their views on foreign and economic policy. Reading neoconservative columnists like David Frum and David Brooks, who espouse economic ideas that resemble classical Communism, makes you wonder how the gang ever found a home among Republican voters so quick to salute the American flag and so eager to remind pesky libertarians how a strong national defense purportedly defeated the great Communist threat.

There is no doubt that 2011 has been a difficult year for RedState. The opposition to America's foreign policy and growing domestic police and surveillance state has steadily climbed. The RedState party has found it harder and harder to rally behind a decent candidate. There was the flirtation with Michele Bachmann. That was followed by the rise of Perry. After his disastrous debates, they jumped onto Herman Cain's 999 wagon. Cain, the former Federal Reserve board member and ultimate Establishment insider, tried hard to paint his candidacy as an "aw shucks, I'm just a regular fella" routine, but he was way too stupid and promiscuous to pull it off. He collapsed more quickly than he ascended. Along came The Newt, everyone at RedState apparently forgetting his epic corruption, promises broken, infidelity, and megalomania. After a few scathing ads from Romney and Paul reminded voters that he's about as Establishment as it gets, it looked like Ron Paul might actually get enough reluctant RedState converts to do the unthinkable, win Iowa.

Dropping Like Flies

And then Bachmann and Gingrich imploded, and the DSM took their best shot at Ron. Michele was really done two months ago, but nobody told her remaining supporters. Still polling around 8-10% as the Iowa vote neared, Bachmann's campaign derailed with defections and absurd charges of bribery, followed by Michele's knee jerk reaction to fire her political director for honesty. This coincided with The Newt's rapid fall from favorite status. These events left RedState voters in a state of confusion. Do they do the unthinkable and vote for Ron Paul, or perhaps the slightly less detestable Mitt Romney? It's unclear whether the surge in support for Santorum over the last week was driven first by disaffected RedStaters or the Media (Un)Elite. It doesn't really matter anyway. The day before the election Rush Limbaugh threw his support behind Santorum, with no real explanation except that he wasn't that "kook" from Lake Jackson, TX. It's also unclear whether or not some reluctant RedStaters were deterred by the relentless media attacks on Ron Paul for his newsletters, but it did appear to stop his momentum. The confluence of events was the perfect storm to lift Santorum to a victory in Iowa.

Rick, We Hardly Knew Ye

But who is Rick Santorum? I'm not convinced that anyone who voted for him even knows. After all, his candidacy is a joke. Not only is he corrupt, but as far as nutcases go, Rick blows all previous nutcases (Perry, Bachmann, Huck, The Newt, Fred Thompson, Cain, Trump, and on and on) right out of the water. He is the nuttiest of the nuts, the wackiest of the wack, and probably the single most out-of-step-with-mainstream-America human being on the planet. And now, thanks to RedState desperation, he is a top tier candidate for the Republican nomination. How delightful! The DSM likes to mock Ron Paul for his so-called unelectability, but what will they say about RickRoll? He's about as electable as Coach Sandusky.

The Irrelevancy of the Neocons

The truth is that the RedState faction and their neoconservative leadership represent an ever shrinking and less relevant group in American politics. I am just going to be frank. Some of their ideas are laughable and some are downright crazy. Among the craziest is their fanatical belief that Iran is trying to acquire a nuclear weapon in order to wipe Israel off the map and install a global caliphate.

The Iranians Are Coming!

Let's set aside for the sake of brevity whether or not translations of Iranian proclamations and writings indicate that Iran actually wants to do these things and assume that the Rickster is correct. Iran is going to nuke Israel. Last time I checked, Israel had around 300 nuclear weapons, more than enough to respond in kind. No nation has ever used a nuclear weapon against another nuclear capable nation, because that is suicide. However, it's not because Iran might be suicidal that America (and Israel) is leaning towards war. It is because of the economics of violence. When a country raises its capability of self defense (e.g., through acquiring nuclear weapons), the cost of intimidating, cajoling, persuading, and forcing them to comply with the mandates of foreign powers skyrockets. This is a law of intervention. As the power of the defense rises, the cost of intervention rises. The Western powers, namely America and Israel, would like to continue to fight on the cheap. That's the secret to the Iran war propaganda.

Even crazier is the line often repeated that Iran wishes to install a global caliphate. I've heard this asinine suggestion repeated by Sean Hannity, the RickRoll, Ann Coulter, and Michele Bachmann, and quite a few others. My answer to that is "So Freaking What???" My history books tell me that the Soviet Union, the most powerful military the world had ever seen (at least from 1945-1970'ish), had roughly 10,000 nuclear weapons and all the global domination aspirations a Lindsey Graham could ever dream. Yet their sphere of influence rarely extended past Eastern Europe. They couldn't even control Castro and his rambunctious little Cuban commune. Yet, according to neoconservatives, I am supposed to be shaking in my boots if Iran gets just one nuke, as they will surely use it to impose Sharia Law all over the world, even... in my own neighborhood! My how Simi Valley, California will be different with a mosque on every corner!

I'm scared. Somebody hold me.

Support the Troops, By Voting Ron Paul

Finally, the real nail in the coffin for the neoconservative faithful, and the most delicious aspect of the entire RP vs. Neocon debate for many of us, is the paradox between the foreign policy rhetoric of Santorum and pals compared to the support they receive in turn from the Active Duty military. The general RedState feeling toward the military is one of reverence, God Bless the Troops, and awe for the supposed might of the American war machine, despite its paucity of actual victories. Ron Paul is seen as "soft" on national defense (really, it's National Offense) and "left of Obama" on war, is if all political ideas can be expressed in linear terms. To show their appreciation, the US Active Duty military showers the GOP with donations and shuns Ron Paul.

Oh, wait. Actually it is the opposite. The top three donors by organization to RP's campaign are the US Army, US Air Force, and US Navy. His military donations compared to Rick Santorum should be a national joke. Through three quarters in 2011, Ron had garnered over $113,000 in donations, while Santorum's total was so tiny I can't even remember if he had over $1,000. Santorum supports the troops, he says. However, just like every neocon and RedStater, he sure doesn't listen to them.

I Don't Ask For Much

Ah to be a debate moderator for one question! I'd ask Rickety Racket, "Mr. Santeria, if your belief that Ron Paul's foreign policy ideas are dangerous and a threat to our national security is correct, and your belief that America must remain aggressive to combat every threat in the War on Terrorist-looking-stuff is correct, then why is Ron the overwhelming, almost unanimous choice for the Republican nomination among the Active Duty military, at least as judged by their pocketbooks?"

And as a follow up, "do you ever worry that completely rejecting and discounting the opinions of the Active Duty military, while at the same time constantly sending them into harm's way, might cause serious problems for national security that could include defeat on the battlefield or possibly even a military coup?"

I would just enjoy watching the Rickster try to explain to us why the military's opinion on national security is meaningless while he decorates every other sentence with effusive praise for that same military.

(And yes, after Ricky Ricardo drops out of the race a month from now, the same line of questioning would work just fine on The Face Guy of the Republican Party.)

I think it is rather obvious which hard core faction is out of step with mainstream Americans, and it ain't Ron Paul's.

Face Guys Up Front, Rude Dudes In The Back

That brings us to the Face Guy, Mitt, or should I say the bridesmaid to Baracks' 2012 wedding (ok, renewal of the vows with America- this analogy was a stretch). I'm going to put out some simple math for everyone. We know that Mitt's supporters (these are people you will never actually meet because Mitt inspires people to the level of "meh... whatever") can be swayed to vote for just about anyone, especially if it means the difference between winning and losing the general election. After all, to be a Mitt supporter, winning the election is all you can really care about. His history as a Progressive welfare statist, Wall Street lackey, and consummate insider can't be endearing qualities stealing the Republican voting base's heart. It's all about winning.. .duh.

But that's not how the Paulites roll. They put principle ahead of winning, and have done so for 4 years at least. Even as the base of support for Ron has swelled, the new additions over this last cycle have proven to be just as committed to the cause of liberty over the state as the 2008 base. I'm just one person, but I think I have the pulse of the liberty movement. In overwhelming numbers they will not compromise and cast a vote for Romney "just to win." They see clearly that a Romney victory wins nothing and hence, is pointless. That's anywhere between 8-15% of the likely national Republican base, plus another 10% or so Independents and Democrats that are committed to Ron that won't cross over. That's the death of Mitt Romney.

So let's hope that the Republicans voting for Mitt can do simple math. They're not going to win, making their support for Mitt pointless. Their only hope is to rally behind Ron Paul. That being said, if your idea of an election is a game to be won, then you're probably not politically conscious enough to recognize the value of Ron Paul or accept the reality that Mitt cannot win.

2012 may or may not be our time, but our time is coming. In the meantime, let's have some fun watching the dying RedStaters as they attempt to come to grips with their increasing irrelevancy.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks davidinliberty! You said it, man!

Great article. The odds are moving to Dr. Paul's favor as we speak. Even as we plod through the South Carolinian's bog or swamp or whatever. Our campaign is priming and soon all of America will be on fire with the song of LIBERTY!!!!!

Alejandro

As the Iowans Look Back

They got exactly what they deserve. They got willingly suckered. Be careful fools, character counts. Principle counts. Sad reality: once you swallow the big lie, you've got to swallow all of the rest of them that follow. Is it OK to look the other way if someone steals? "One precinct "got los"t as they were driving the tabulation to a secret location. But the top 2 candidates discussed it and decided on a number". Karl Rove Fox News. Followed by an ugly horse race cartoon and ridiculously suspucious surge by a total clown.
Wow, the precinct was where all the college kids are. Ya know, the ones with all the debt and wars?
Live with that, holy hypocrits. Sad to say, you get what you deserve.

Dude. Pwned.

This really, really made my day. It satisfied all the sick anger burning within me to make the RedStaters irrelevant. I don't need to be angry - I should be laughing! Thank you!

I'll be reading all of your posts from now on ;)

Romney and Santorum

and their campaign managers brokering votes for various counties ? C'MON FOLKS, same thing as NH four years ago, trucks with ballots going off on wild goose chases, they can't track down one particular county chair to get their counties totals.
Yada, Yada, Yada....As far as I'm concerned Iowa can be completely discounted for absolute corruption. Romney was paying people to vote in meaningless straw polls 4 years back...tell you anything ????? Huntsman, Gingrich and Santorum AREN'T EVEN ON THE BALLOTS IN THREE STATES ?
THE REASON BEING THEY HAVE NO SUPPORT...WHY WOULD YOU VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE NOT ON THE BALLOTS OF ALL 50 STATES...WAKE UP PEOPLE...!!!!!!! Are you hearing this in the lamestream press...NO..!!

Those three are DONE..Romney will do absolutely anything for votes because he has nothing in his tank other than the lamestream blowing smoke up his behind..

Just one last kick in the nuts, then a final deathblow

GPS Locater?

It might help them from getting lost

I love your

observations and analysis. Romney was around here last night for a big event and the only way to describe it would be "tepid" almost to the point of embarrassing.

h-daddy

Jessie Clyde's picture

I also remember hearing that

I also remember hearing that the number of votes Romney got was 6 less than in 2008. What does that tell you about his support? (To me it means that he's got his base, and little else!)

Jessie Clyde

Yea but who or what is his base ?

Are they just diehard Mormons..Things change over the span of 4 years, here they've changed drastically...If your concerned about the future of your kids and grandkids could you really support Mitt Romney, he has no plan outside bombing Iran then shoveling dirt on America's grave.

Just one last kick in the nuts, then a final deathblow

Great

David,

SmartMuffin from CAPS here. Great to see you getting the audience you deserve. It's a perfect fit.

Daily Paul Readers,

You guys are in for a treat. This guy is brilliant!

Dude, Where's My Freedom?
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

davidinliberty's picture

Thank you for the warm welcome.

I am extremely grateful for the positive feedback! If you'd like to follow me on twitter, I have just opened an account, @davidinliberty, and will be tweeting soon.

You can find me on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/dvdburns

It appears that my sense of humor goes over well here. For any who took offense to my sometimes vicious characterizations of our opponents, don't fret. I will grow on you.

Well, not really. It actually gets worse.

I'll be back soon.

We are the roses that grow from the concrete...

David In Liberty

David Burns
Simi Valley, CA

photoshopwiz's picture

+

what a fantastic writeup! DId you coin the great phrase DSM ...
(dead stream media) ?

Here's a supportive link for your article ...

Momentum: DailyPaul.com Passes Top Neoconservative Blog RedState.com

2 B Words...

Brilliant - Bravo!

Always remember:
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ~ Samuel Adams
If they hate us for our freedom, they must LOVE us now....

Stay IRATE, remain TIRELESS, an

this needs

published somewhere. Excellent article!!

Jackson County Georgia

War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.
Thomas Jefferson

Talent hits a target no one

Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. -- By Arthur Schopenhauer

Couldn't have said it better myself

Hands-down I believe the mindset of the liberty movement is principle over party. At least for me it is. I can give a rats behind about the GOP as a group. For me it's about the individual and that person is Ron Paul. I will write Ron Paul in for the general election (as I did for 2008) if I must and live with the consequences, because I recognize a win for either party is still a loss for the country.

It Was NOT a "Statistical Tie"

A statistical tie is when you take a sampling of the full population, and project what the full population would do based on the sample: when the results are within the margin of error, meaning the sample size mathematically creates a range of likely error, you call it a "statistical tie."

The caucus vote was not calculated with statistics. They did not sample the population of actual voters. The actual voters who actually voted (100% of them) were simply counted.

Thus, for example, when Ron Paul came in second to Michele Bachmann in the straw poll, by a fraction of a percent, it was not a "statistical tie," but a really close second. If they had used a sample to statistically project how those voters would vote, it could have been called a "statistical tie."

The straw poll, itself, does not count as a sampling of the voting population because it was not a true statistical "sample" which, by definition, must represent the whole. This is what people mean when these "polls" are not "statistically valid": If you have to pay to vote, and be really interested, and are bussed by a candidate somewhere to do it, or just happen to be online at DP, and then "vote" in it, this will not accurately reflect how people, generally, will vote at an actual voting booth.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Thank you!

We need to be both honest and correct or we lose credibility.

Is a straw poll without fee a sampling?

The caucus vote is actually a straw vote that requires no fee.

Red State dot com is anti-Paul

I searched back through the posts on the days leading up to the Iowa caucus at RedState.com. The only time Paul is mentioned is in connection with racist newsletters, conspiracy theories, and insane supporters. The site dismisses him and does not include him in conversations of importance, articles pertaining to the debt crisis for example. The site does not seem to cast this type of negativity at the other candidates, and a post from today paints Ron Paul supporters as mean, cruel, and insane.

jaseed's picture

Little Change at RedState

since 2008.
I remember TenoG alerting me of their slant before the days of Daily Paul.
Great article, something to keep on hand, without a doubt.
Thanks, davidinliberty!

"My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them".
Senator Barry Goldwater, Senator Rand Paul
and others.

“The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.”

– Thomas Jefferson

Applealing to RedStaters is a waste of energy

Great article, thanks.

The majority of the RedStater bloc cannot and will not be swayed or reasoned with.

The muslim boogyman is not the real enemy of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, real freedom and prosperity for America.

They are.

The article does a superb job in describing many of the reasons why.

However let me just add:

Studies have been done on these people. They have a very specific personality type that one researcher referred to as an Authoritarian Follower.

A quick net search on 'Authoritarian Follower' can give you plenty of details on what kind of people they are.

But the three primary qualities are:

- a high degree of submission to perceived established, legitimate authorities in their society

- high levels of aggression in the name of those authorities

- a high level of conventionalism

These are the same types the formed the core of the Nazi Party, and every totalitarian regime in history.

Again... most of them cannot be reasoned with and do not care about reason.

They ultimately do not care about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, individual liberty, or any of the principles that the country is founded on.

They dont understand those things, no matter how much they might believe they do or protest to the contrary.

They are the true enemy. So don't waste too much time trying to bring them over to our side.

This will end in frustration and lead to feeling down, banging your head against a dead end.

IMO focus on people that are reasonable and respond to truth and facts.

egapele's picture

That's my brother you're describing.

Now it's no wonder I haven't been able to get him to come around. I gave up a few years ago. Hmm...he's a huge fan of Michael Savage. Thanks for the info.

That's Interesting

I never thought to consider personality types.

Brilliant!

This is mostly my sentiment, as well. It's funny you should bring up Soviet Russia, because I see a lot of parallels between them and the neoconservative admiration with hegemony and militarism. The neocons probably would endorse a military parade akin to what the soviets did and not see the irony in it at all.

Ron Paul statistically took 2nd place in Iowa GOP caucus vote

"IF" Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum finished in a statistical tie for 1st place then, why are the media saying Ron Paul finished 3rd? What happened to 2nd place?
Shouldn't Ron Paul statistically have been listed in 2nd place?
Is this another MSM farce to make Ron Paul look like he didn't come in 2nd?

The way I see it, Ron Paul took 2nd and it should be listed that way as long as the MSM insist on saying Romney and Santorum tied for 1st place.

Excellent post!

I hope that everyone read the entirety of this long article because I think we need to start beating the drum about the main thrust of the final segment. That is, there are only two possible winners for POTUS in November, Obama or Ron Paul. Because once you adopt the Liberty paradigm, you see right through the Statist propaganda and it's downright impossible to ever vote for a candidate that spews it. If David's numbers are correct, and I think they're a good guess, then I agree that there's no way Romney (or anyone else outside of RP) has a chance. The fact that RP got 48% of the under 30 vote, that bodes well for the Liberty movement's future.

If you're reading this Tom Woods, I think that this would be a great Rev Pac ad theme.

Individual mandate caused a HUGE fit in the GOP

I keep asking people:

What's Romney going to say to Obama in a debate on healthcare mandates? "Yea, that's the worst idea I ever had".

What's he going to say in the foregn policy debate?

"I know u got Bin Ladden, took out Libya, escalated in Afghanistan, are drone striking US citizens, and signed the indefinite detention act ... but, um, your not bombing Iran fast enough."

Good luck selling that in the General Election, McCain ... uh i mean Mitt.

I have a hard time believing it, but:

"So let's hope that the Republicans voting for Mitt can do simple math. They're not going to win, making their support for Mitt pointless. Their only hope is to rally behind Ron Paul."

I have actually seen plenty of them so driven by their fear and warmongering that they have openly admitted they will either support Obama or go for a third-party candidate, if the choice falls down to Paul or Obama.

It's a mexican stand-off - we see no significant difference between Obama and the rest of the republican candidates to make it worth supporting either (and I'd imagine a good many of us are angry enough at the short shrift received from the party to support Obama ourself; the devil we know may be better than the devil we don't; let's just burn this f--ker down, etc.), and apparently they feel the same way JUST because of a foreign policy all the actual intelligence experts and agencies *I've* seen reporting on it agree with - and they don't...I've actually heard them claim that the CIA is wrong and doesn't know what it's talking about ("and exactly what are YOUR foreign policy or intelligence qualifications, I wonder?").

It's so utterly ridiculous - they scream about conservatism, but that only extends so far as them imposing their control over how the rest of society behaves. They scream about democrats, but don't realize that they adopted democrat policies decades again.

Sheer lunacy.

I'm am voting for Paul and no

I'm am voting for Paul and no one else.

It's hard to see any real

It's hard to see any real difference between Obama and Mitt Romney. Romney is basically the Republican version of Obama. Given a choice between Obama and Republican Obama, people will vote for the real thing.

Excellent!

Excellent!

Great Essay

Once the media starts to focus on how Santorum raised the debt ceiling more times than Obama and how he spends like a drunken sailor, he'll fall off the map too. He won't be able to stand the barrage much like Bachmann and Cain couldn't. Newt can't handle it and neither can Perry, but they're too hopeful to realize that they're finished. Once Santorum is done, it's only Romney and Paul.

And as for Romney, this guy is probably the worst of the whole bunch. This guy created what was supposed to be the most offensive part of Obama's presidency in his own state. And this is supposed to be the Republican nominee? If the media ever vets this guy he's done.

And by process of elimination, the only person left is Paul. We have to realize that Old Right ideology is the winning ticket of the future. Paul won 48% of the 17-29 vote, while the next closest didn't even have half of that. Paul actually did best among those with lower incomes, which would be an interesting answer to the Democratic stranglehold of that income group. He won 43% of independents; that is a huge deal. Among those polled looking for a "true conservative", Paul actually wins, which signals to me that he will get the conservative vote no matter what. And Paul has the most committed support. Among those who actually knew who they were voting for way ahead of time, he was the big winner.

It's time to face it Republican Party: Paul is the only person who can defeat Obama and the future of the party.

well done!

Yes, the GOP is now divided into 3 distinct factions:

1. the Neo's (Santorum) - as stated in the article, Rick will fizzle even faster than Huckabee in 2008. Don't be surprised to see a resurgent Newt play the role of John McCain later in the campaign.

2. the Anti-Obama's (Romney) - the ONE thing that GOP'rs can rail against Obama is the healthcare law, the ultimate irony is that is was modeled after RomneyCare. (You just can't make this stuff up.)

3. Traditional Republicans (Paul) - Clearly the growing faction, bringing in independents and disenfranchised Dems. To win, will have to defeat Corporatist America and awaken the slumbering brainwashed masses, by no means an easy task.

Excellent article BTW.

I wanted to like this post, I really did...

... but I was turned off by the decriptions of Cain and Santorum as "stupid" and "nutty", respectively. How is that any different than those who use those same terms to describe Dr. Paul? Or for Cain and Santorum to call Dr. Paul a "grumpy old man" or "disgusting"? It does not accomplish much, if anything at all. I could understand explaining the dangerous implications of Santorum's ideas, but the negative epithets made me feel the poster lost credibility.

What makes the difference...

I also would prefer a more civil choice of words, but here's the difference:

David is not pretending to be an unbiased news source for the world. He is publishing to Paul fans on a Paul fan site. Bias in this setting is assumed.

"I'm scared, somebody hold me"

beautiful...

I prefer "Newtle" to "The Newt" however, much more deflating...

Santorum in his own words

Dr. Paul needs to use Santorum's own anti-liberty words in his next campaign ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gwwmm-cQxU

If you are not OUTRAGED, you're not paying attention!

Good post.

Good post.

I can tell you've been around the block.

Good insight. Delightfully written. Compelling to read.

It was educational too, I wanted to keep reading to learn.

Thanks for sharing!

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

Excellent, but use this for foreign policy argument...

How does this well written article translate into political activiey. I agree that Santorum is indeed the latest Republican flavor of the month. It will ultimately come down to Mitt and Ron Paul.

There's now doubt that Ron's foreign policy is indeed his (perceived) weakness. I live in Florida, which is neocon country. But I have found one article that really gives people reason to pause. (See link below.) When I show this to people, it really makes them think. In fact, I will be prepared to hand these out when I'm handing out the super brochure.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/nov/...

Mirand Sharma

Another Iran Video

One more Iran video...

Rick Steves' Lectures: Iran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtELk8S3dhU&feature=player_em...

It's an hour long, probably not great for short attention spans but Rick Steves makes it enjoyable. Very informative...

Another term for preventive war is aggressive war- starting wars because someday somebody might do something to us. That is not part of the American tradition.
-Ron Paul

I enjoyed this

Intelligence goes well with my morning coffee.

Your ending statement, "2012 may or may not be our time, but our time is coming," is very true. Unfortunately, as Ron Paul has said, it may be the ultimate collapse of our financial system that will bring it.

Santorum, redstate and the rest of the neocons say "support our troops," but they are not talking about the actual enlisted troops, they are talking about supporting the military contractors, war profiteers, and military industrial complex.

Actually...

comment

Well-written article...

...that nails it. I believe you're exactly right on all points.

You are correct!

Loved the humor. Excellent article, and you are so right about us Paulbots, lol. I wrote this ending to a blog just this morning:

There are millions more, just like me, who believe the Constitution is the law of the land and it guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and no one should have the power to infringe on those rights. That’s what Franklin, Madison and Jefferson thought, too. I’ll take that kind of crazy any day. I will not devalue my integrity to vote for anyone who does not represent me. No one else does. Ron Paul and only Ron Paul gets my vote.

Good job

I like the argument that a vote for Romney is useless because he can't win. That's what I keep hearing about Ron Paul. Thanks for the ammunition.

Eloquently Stated

Very insightful post, thank you. I will be filing your points away as resource for debating my Red-Eyed friends!

If my need to be RIGHT is greater than my desire for TRUTH, then I will not recognize it when it arrives ~ Libertybelle

could someone post

the video he was talking about that made all republican cheerleaders hate paul. I would love to post it to my facebook page with the caption this is why rush hates paul.