59 votes

NY TIMES: "[Paul's] strong second ... was the more telling outcome "

Dozens of newspapers all over the U.S. are closely affiliated with the NY Times and feature NY Times stories.

Finally, a lot of older people who don't do much net surfing are going to hear about the doctor!

Representative Ron Paul of Texas finished a strong second in the state’s Republican primary on Tuesday, which in many ways was the more telling outcome in a race where Mitt Romney’s dominance was never in doubt.

Mr. Paul polled well ahead of the late-surging Jon M. Huntsman Jr., who ran third, and Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, who battled for fourth. Mr. Paul benefited from the large turnout of independent voters, getting the nod from about a third, a little more than Mr. Romney. He also did well with young voters and those who said they were liberal on social issues.

But even if political analysts continue to regard the libertarian-leaning Mr. Paul as a protest candidate, with no shot at the nomination, his success here — on top of a third-place finish last week in the Iowa caucuses — means he will probably continue his campaign for months and perhaps to the summer convention.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/us/politics/ron-paul-finis...

Comment viewing options

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

Keep up the calls. Money is

Keep up the calls. Money is DEFINITELY needed, but we MUST make phone calls to Iowa. It's as easy as pie.

http://phone.ronpaul2012.com/

Don't be afraid of calling strangers, I have had quite a few great conversations with complete strangers. It's fun spreading the idea of Liberty!

What a Great Picture!

Now, does anybody think he looks like he lost?

People judge on superficialities, I know, but there's more than one way to look like a winner, as shown, and more than one way to look presidential (as shown in the rallies where we hang on his every word).

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

posted on Twitter

Thanks.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I told you BABY BOOMERS eyes were opening!!!!

Great statistic below on 45% of New Hampshire people being over age 45.

YES, YES, YES, YES!!

They attack Romney and do not

They attack Romney and do not think Ron is worthy of attack. I hope SC supporters can put an end to that concept really fast in this next battle. We must prevail if we possibly can! It seems that everyone who is a candidate against Ron is pretty certain that attacks will not work, so what will they do if he can possibly continue to finish high? Give up, is what..

If 50% of RP's NH voters were under 45.

I hate it when they say Mister Paul. It's DOCTOR Paul

He is a doctor. Not some guy with a Ph.D. in history or art...he is an OBGYN Doctor and had his own medical pratice.
I can always tell the type of person who I am reading baised on this very subtle point.

And when Dr. Paul becomes president, I will call him...

DR. PRESIDENT.
I like it! It's got a ring to it!

Has there ever been

a US president who had a terminal degree, other than in law?

This Was Discussed Last Campaign

It is the practice in journalism and in Congress, to refer to each member as "Mister" (I'm not sure what they do for the women), rather than by any of their other titles in order to show that each of them is equal under the law.

Hard to argue with that. Now, some are referring to him as "Dr." because they either don't know about that custom, or because they've caught it from us.

At any rate, it's helpful to point out that he is more than a politician, although it's also helpful to call him "Congressman" or "Representative."

We obviously feel that "Paul" by itself is just too informal for what he represents.

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

The Associated Press ...

... is calling RP the "anti-establishment alternative to Mitt Romney."

http://news.yahoo.com/paul-says-2nd-place-nh-shows-strong-su...

Wow. The AP is owned by all the major media outlets, and is syndicated worldwide.

I thought AP was owned by Reuters

who in turn is part of the Red Shield corporate dynasty. Has there been a recent change in ownership?

And wow Yahoo readers are

And wow Yahoo readers are ignorant tools.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

lets educate them

thats our duty !

----------------------------
Dr.Ron Paul's 2002 Predictions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

No doubt, but the hate coming

No doubt, but the hate coming out of some these people is crazy. I expect us to be able to convince some, but the ones who are blinded by hate and media spin are tough converts

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

Proof

that there's no difference between Willard and Obama:

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2012/01/10/us/politics/10ni...

one word: TELEPROMPTER.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself." - Thomas Jefferson

LOL

I think they are the same for so many reasons....but "teleprompter" is the icing on the cake.

or between Willard and Santorum

https://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2012/01/10/us/politics/10n...

Maybe Santorum has finally seen the handwriting on the wall. Looks like a concession to me.

If not in the primary, when?

This makes me ponder the question of how a political party is supposed to evolve its views if alternate views render one automatically "out of the mainstream" and therefore "unelectable".

If not in the primary, when will Republicans ever debate our foreign policy? Clearly neo-cons don't want it to change and don't want a debate, but actual Republican voters are very open to portions of the argument:

- cutting military spending on "war profiteering" as Paul put it. Tie this to crony capitalism and corporate/bank elites in bed with politicians.

- cutting foreign aid to everyone but Israel

- focusing defense strategy on defending the US and gradually drawing down troops stationed around the world

- avoiding a full-fledged war in Iran

- stop nation-building in Afghanistan and focus on combating terrorists with a smaller, more nimble force

The argument is there to be won, but it won't be won among Republicans (yet) by emphasizing absolutes like "bring the troops home". Save that for the general election.

Those "analysts" ought to be fired

All they have ever said is "Ron Paul has no chance." Frankly, apart from Romney, he's the only one with a chance.

Funny, those high-paid analysts never saw how unelectable Perry or Bachmann were from the beginning. They never say Gingrich or Santorum has NO chance now. It's only Ron Paul, raking in more than 20% of the vote in both Iowa and New Hampshire, who is supposedly doomed.

Looks like America is telling those "analysts" to shut up and eat crow.

Actually the Correct Term is Anal-

yists :/)