Paul supporters, what are you going to do....

[manifold]

Does it really matter whose support is more grassroots? Really?

The truth is you're both right, you just have different subjective understandings of what the term means. Paulie believes the true measure is word of mouth whereas Sallow believes the true measure is whether you win. An argument can be made for both.

No. It doesn't. I just want to see both campaigns get their due. They both did a good job of mobilizing ground support, and that is how elections should work (regardless of what happened after Obama won).

potato/potato

You're entitled to your opinion bro.

 

[johnrocks]

Keep on fighting and trying. I'd like to see actual fiscal /small government cons take the Party over than to cut n run.

 

[Sherry]

when the GOP tosses your boy under the bus again? Because you, me, and everybody else knows it's going to happen. There is simply no way in hell that an isolationist who wants to dismantle the FED is ever going to be given the keys to the GOP kingdom. We all know it.

My question is, as this is Paul's last hurrah, why do you guys even try to find a home in the GOP? Why not just run as a Libertarian. In this election cycle, that might actually work, as people are pissed at both parties. Even if not the case, why keep doing the same thing and expecting different results? From what I can tell of the Paul supporters, they aren't exactly in the bag for the GOP machine either. I mean, they stole your Tea Party idea. No you would think that Michelle Bachman came up with the idea.

Frankly, I just don't get it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Congrats on the second place finish behind Bachmann in Iowa. I do respect the groundswell that Paul carries with him.

However, we all know where this is heading.

I think it would be like Perot all over again....splitting the votes and easily handing Obama a victory.

I expect most of Paul's supporters to do the same thing that Hillary's supporters did when the DNC threw her under the bus.

Vote for Obama?

The PUMA movement was massively overstated and (not ironically) many of them went on to become "birthers". Look at what happened on election day.

You know exactly what I meant in drawing a comparison, but play stupid if you like.

 

[geauxtohell]

I think it would be like Perot all over again....splitting the votes and easily handing Obama a victory.

I expect most of Paul's supporters to do the same thing that Hillary's supporters did when the DNC threw her under the bus.

Vote for Obama?

The PUMA movement was massively overstated and (not ironically) many of them went on to become "birthers". Look at what happened on election day.

You know exactly what I meant in drawing a comparison, but play stupid if you like.

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

 

[geauxtohell]

Keep on fighting and trying. I'd like to see actual fiscal /small government cons take the Party over than to cut n run.

Thanks.

 

[Sherry]

Vote for Obama?

The PUMA movement was massively overstated and (not ironically) many of them went on to become "birthers". Look at what happened on election day.

You know exactly what I meant in drawing a comparison, but play stupid if you like.

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

 

[manifold]

You know exactly what I meant in drawing a comparison, but play stupid if you like.

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

 

[Sherry]

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Yes Mani, but you are an anomaly.

 

[johnrocks]

FTR, I hope after the primaries that he does run third party unless he wins the nomination and we all know hell having a blizzard is far more likely than that happening.

 

[geauxtohell]

You know exactly what I meant in drawing a comparison, but play stupid if you like.

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

Oh. I agree with that. I thought you were going to start going off on the "PUMA" movement. In fairness, that's where most of those types of post go.

 

[geauxtohell]

No, I really don't. Lay it out for me. I have no idea what you think Hillary supporters did after she lost the primary. I only referenced the PUMA movement, because that is the urban legend I hear the most around here.

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

 

[manifold]

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Yes Mani, but you are an anomaly.

Thanks, you make me blush.

But on this one, I really don't think I am as much as you think.

 

[Paulie]

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

I think you're fooling yourself if you don't think Obama is just as capable of involving us in Iran.

 

[manifold]

Alright, try to follow the bouncing ball....you made a comment about the GOP throwing Paul under the bus, so my comparison was the DNC throwing Hillary under the bus....in spite of that, most Hillary supporters voted for Obama at the end of the day, and I expect most Paul supporters will vote for the GOP nominee. Whether you agree or not, it's really not that complicated.

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

That's a big reason.

And another is SCOTUS nominations. IMO, the best thing that could ever happen to the SCOTUS is to have 2 or 3 Ron Paul nominees replace any of the current justices quite frankly.

I have enough faith in our system of checks and balances that I don't fear any of Paul's more radical ideas seeing the legislative light of day. I mean, even Obama only got one of his 'somewhat' radical ideas to see the light of day, and that one is long from a fait accompli.

 

[geauxtohell]

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

I think you're fooling yourself if you don't think Obama is just as capable of involving us in Iran.

Well, he's been in office for almost three years and hasn't been that hawkish towards Iran at this point. That beings said, given the right scenario, sure; he could turn hawkish. I have my doubts though. A large part of his candidacy was opposing military adventurism.

 

[geauxtohell]

But when it comes to my vote, he's correct. I support Paul, but plan to vote for Obama if Paul is not on the ballot.

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

That's a big reason.

And another is SCOTUS nominations. IMO, the best thing that could ever happen to the SCOTUS is to have 2 or 3 Ron Paul nominees replace any of the current justices quite frankly.

I have enough faith in our system of checks and balances that I don't fear any of Paul's more radical ideas seeing the legislative light of day. I mean, even Obama only got one of his 'somewhat' radical ideas to see the light of day, and that one is long from a fait accompli.

I have an earlier post on that. I think the SCOTUS and congress would reign in Paul on more of his (what I deem to be absurd) social positions. However, the President has almost unprecedented power when it comes to war now.

That is the one place I think Paul is the most sane and the lessor of all evils when it comes to the GOP field.

 

[manifold]

Why is that? For my part, I am scared that the rhetoric on the right towards Iran is going to get more and more hawkish (we saw it a little bit at Ames) and that anyone other than Paul on the GOP ticket is going to get us into Iran.

Which will be a disaster.

I think you're fooling yourself if you don't think Obama is just as capable of involving us in Iran.

Well, he's been in office for almost three years and hasn't been that hawkish towards Iran at this point. That beings said, given the right scenario, sure; he could turn hawkish. I have my doubts though. A large part of his candidacy was opposing military adventurism.

I'm inclined to agree with you that Obama is less of a risk to get us into Iran than all republican candidates not named Ron Paul. But it's certainly not because anything he said during his candidacy gives me any confidence in that regard.

 

[geauxtohell]

Hey, my state is an open primary. Maybe I'll vote for Paul in the primary. Nothing is scarier to me then putting someone I deem to be overtly hawkish on the GOP ticket. That means they have a good chance of getting the reins.

I voted in the GOP primary a few years ago, and am still holding my nose, but some things are worth the smell.

I say that as someone who makes no bones about being a partisan.

 

[Warrior102]

when the GOP tosses your boy under the bus again? Because you, me, and everybody else knows it's going to happen. There is simply no way in hell that an isolationist who wants to dismantle the FED is ever going to be given the keys to the GOP kingdom. We all know it.

My question is, as this is Paul's last hurrah, why do you guys even try to find a home in the GOP? Why not just run as a Libertarian. In this election cycle, that might actually work, as people are pissed at both parties. Even if not the case, why keep doing the same thing and expecting different results? From what I can tell of the Paul supporters, they aren't exactly in the bag for the GOP machine either. I mean, they stole your Tea Party idea. No you would think that Michelle Bachman came up with the idea.

Frankly, I just don't get it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Congrats on the second place finish behind Bachmann in Iowa. I do respect the groundswell that Paul carries with him.

However, we all know where this is heading.

I agree with this post 100%
Frankly, I don't get it either.

 

[geauxtohell]

If Paul does jump in as a 3rd party candidate, be prepared to see some real nastiness from the right. It will make the left's hatred of Nader look small.

Hell, it was bad enough in the '08 election. The GOP establishment hates Paul.