85 votes

Rand Paul Wins CPAC Straw Poll With 25%

1st Place Rand Paul 25%

2nd Place Marco Rubio 23%

3rd Place Rick Santorum 8%

4th Place Chris Christe 7%

5th place Paul Ryan 6%

6th Place Scott Walker 5%

7th Place Ben Carson 4%

8th Place Ted Cruz 4%

9th Place Bobby Jindal 3%

Other 14%

Undecided 1&


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Wow. Paul Ryan at 6% only stands to confirm

Paul Ryan at 6% only stands to confirm my hunch that the looser Romney campaign only picked him because he had to first names and they could run the headline (which I saw in print at the grocery store) ROMNEY PICKS PAUL!

Ron Paul

Won almost every poll I seen. Almost every internet poll and he still lost. Our votes do not count. Those Machines are rigged to go where ever they want. If we don't change to paper ballots and count it in front of every one, then nothing is going to change.

With what we have learned and what we now control

At the grassroots level, it will be VERY difficult for them to cheat.

And this time parts of the GOP machine will be turning in our favor.

As a measure of Rand Paul's growing popularity, consider that John McCain apologized on live TV for disparaging remarks against Rand.

That is more telling than any poll.

Each political movement needs

Each political movement needs time to mature and gain experience with the political process. RP's 2008 and 2012 campaigns were the petri dishes for the future campaigns. The GOP's old guard cannot compete with demographics and fresh political blood.

So What?

Ron Paul won CPAC, Iowa, Maine, and on and on..... We are going to have to buy every electronic voting machine to win an ELECTION. I can't hardly believe my eyes when I see so many still thinking a vote in 2016 will change anything. Ron Paul lost his own Texas district to Romney (you know the district which has elected Ron 12 times). The polling system is broken period. Our votes are not counted unless we happen to hit the button that is set to win.

I cant help but feel

I cant help but feel disapointed that rubio scored so high

Who cares

Rubio can not beat Rand. Rand is the chosen one. Don't you get it??

chosen by who???? bilderburg?

chosen by who???? bilderburg?

Doesn't matter who. The

Doesn't matter who. The people that decide whether or not he wins.







Rubio, you're not a natural born citizen, and you know it. Minor vs. Happersett Even if you were, you would not get my vote--your phoniness shines through.
Santorum, what can I say? You are still despised here in Pennsylvania. In addition, you make a mockery of Christianity. Are you really going to run again, just to take votes away from (a) Liberty candidate(s)?

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond


To answer in a word....yes. That narcissistic nitwit will run again. He will always have just enough of those creepy hateful supposed 'Christians' to keep him on a campaign trail. That trail always leads to nowhere but for St. Ricky it's those couple months in the spotlight that matters most. He even has his own version of campaign for liberty. http://www.patriotvoices.com/

Read over Minor v. Happersett

Read over Minor v. Happersett again. It doesn't rule on that issue one way on the other. The court merely says in that case that that that there are are "doubts" as to whether it is necessary to have two citizen parents to be natural born. BTW, I note that just about every birther who cites this case never quotes it.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court case of Kim Wong Ark (which came AFTER Minor v. Happersett) is crystal clear in ruling that all people born in the U.S. are natural born. You also have those pesky Chester Arthur and Obama precedents to contend with.

This birther nonense is not only ahistorical but makes us look silly.

you need to give this a rest

you have some sort of agenda to keep attacking this. When ever the natural born issue comes up you are there to attack it. Why do you care? What is your dog in the fight?

By the way, you are 100% wrong. You need to stop quoting Kim Wong Ark as you don't understand how it's not relevant.

Really. You are not an authority nor a historian nor a constitutionalists and you obviously don't understand the intent behind the natural born citizen clause. You don't understand duel loyalties and why that is dangerous in a president. You don't understand Natural Law and how it applies here. Stop posting about this subject until you do some honest research because otherwise you are only spreading misinformation and embarrassing yourself in the process.

Rubio is in NO WAY a natural born citizen. He was born both a citizen of the United States and a citizen of Cuba. He has duel loyalties. His parents were naturalized when he was 4 years old. He is not a Natural Born citizen. Original intent of the constitution bears that out. Short of a constitutional amendment he is not eligible. Constitution trumps all other laws. PERIOD!

You don't know a thing about

You don't know a thing about my background yet you make assumptions. You completely ignore the specifics of my points. Why? What are you afraid of? Don't you want free discussion on this issue? If not, what's your problem?

I have no intention of giving it a rest. Birtherism, like trutherism, is poison to the liberty movement.

"Birtherism, like trutherism, is poison to the liberty movement"

Agreed. Whatever the truth of the matter, I know two things.

1. The establishment will never admit (assuming it's true), that Obama (or any other politician) is ineligible or that the official story of 9/11 is a lie. It's just not gonna happen. Did we ever get the truth about the JFK assassination? Nope, and we never will.

2. It makes us look "kooky." Remember that one of the major ad hominems they throw our way is that we're "conspiracy theorists."

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Minor vs Happersett??

Did not this decision confirm the law in many states at that time that women were not eligible to vote?? What has this decision to do with where Marco Rubio was born?

For your edification,

galenrog: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Here's an excerpt from that site:
"...See Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court explained that the definition of a “natural-born citizen” is not found in the Constitution and confirmed that “[a]t common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners”)..."

There are MANY online sites that delve deeply into the natural born citizen scenario...

To Atkinson:

We had this same argument/discussion in the past. I am not going to continue to argue/discuss this with you because I think you have an agenda that has nothing to do with truth. I lost my patience with political poopheads quite a while ago; I will NOT have my time wasted if I can help it!
There is NOTHING WRONG with my reading comprehension, thank you very much!!

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond

SteveMT's picture

"Other" finished in 3rd place. IMO: Other = Ron Paul

Who else could "other" be?:

J. Bush

Nay, none of them. They are all losers with heavy baggage. Ron Paul is the only name that makes sense as "other."

lol Even CPAC

downplayed Rands win, "But wait, tied, virtual tied, literately tied, sen rubio." FFS he came in 2nd, 2% short. It doesn't matter if you won by 1 vote, a win is a win and a loss a loss. Stop pushing your neocons on us!

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Well, that's not true...

...it's very important who comes in a close second. VERY important. Remember, when Ron virtually tied Bachmann in the Iowa Straw Poll, the media made it a point to announce that...

...umm, never mind.

LOL...my thoughts exactly


"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

My goodness "other" = 14% Who

My goodness "other" = 14% Who are the other?. I'm sorry Ben Carson only got 4 %. I suspect Rubio will be the moneymaker. Is he eligible to run?

people voted for 67 different

people voted for 67 different candidates ... dwight eisenhower got a vote and so did richard nixon .. the other 14% is all of the other votes combined ... judge napolitano got some too

All paper money eventually returns to its real intrinsic value, zero. - Voltaire

Do you know Carson's position

Do you know Carson's position on 2nd amendment? You should know before you tout his name..


If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

The fact that he supports the

The fact that he supports the constitution includes the second amendment does it not? He reflects Ron Paul's position more than any other candidate I think. I'll try to find more specific references to the 2nd amendment.

Just a guess

Gov. Rick Perry
Sen. Mike Lee
Sen. Pat Toomey
Rep. Louie Gohmert
Donald Trump
Mitch McConnell
Wayne LaPierre
Nikki Haley
Scott Walker
Newt Gingrich

very good

very good

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

Final results of the poll

Full Results Video

PDF http://conservative.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/CPAC-Stra...

Ron Paul's influence is all over this.

Exercise Your Rights. If You Don't Use Them, You Will Lose Them.
My News Twitter http://twitter.com/sharpsteve
My YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/sharpsteve2003

So The MSM headlines will read

Rubio takes second at CPAC solidifying his place as the next GOP nominee