Ron Paul on Tonight Show/Jay Leno

[eapking]

Folks, if anyone runs 3rd party on the "right" side we get 4 more years of Barry. Guaranteed.

[Guest bkelm18]

Folks, if anyone runs 3rd party on the "right" side we get 4 more years of Barry. Guaranteed.

We've pretty much got 4 more yrs of Barry guaranteed anyway with the trash the Repubs are putting up for election.

[Oh Shoot]

We've pretty much got 4 more yrs of Barry guaranteed anyway with the trash the Repubs are putting up for election.

Sadly, Mitt is the only one that for sure who can beat Barry, and he will be the GOP nominee -- but could also be perceived as having too many damaged goods by the independent voting bloc by the time he finally gets the nod (not to mention disgruntled conservatives who may throw away their vote to "conscience"). And the Dem machine won't have had much to do with that, all his damages will be incurred from other Rep candidates.

Who Mitt picks as running mate will probably as important as in any previous election in history.

- OS

[kieefer]

Sadly, Mitt is the only one that for sure who can beat Barry, and he will be the GOP nominee -- but could also be perceived as having too many damaged goods by the independent voting bloc by the time he finally gets the nod (not to mention disgruntled conservatives who may throw away their vote to "conscience"). And the Dem machine won't have had much to do with that, all his damages will be incurred from other Rep candidates.

Who Mitt picks as running mate will probably as important as in any previous election in history.

- OS

ditto.

[mav]

We have a candidate (Paul) running for office that truly represents a change from the corrupt politicians we have in office. He has remained consistent on his views for decades, and has been proven correct on several of his predictions involving economic matters. What I find amazing is how many people are so quick to dismiss his candidacy without trying to put up a fight, but yet, they constantly complain how bad things are in this country and how corrupt our system has become. What do you call that?

In a couple of weeks the people of Iowa are going to vote in the first primary. If the polls are correct, it looks like Paul has a very good shot at winning it. All I have heard the last couple of weeks from various news outlets and talk radio is bashing of Paul. It has gotten so low that Paul is now accused of being a racist and anti-semite. I have heard Iowans called imbeciles, morons, etc..., and now it has been suggested that if Iowa chooses Paul they should lose their place in the primary process and not be taken seriously in future elections. All of this is coming from the right side of the aisle. People in one state are exercising their right to vote for whom they feel is best for the country and they are now ridiculed and threatened. Seriously, WTF?

These last several months have been a real eye opener for me. Some people whom I had always considered to be champions of conservatism I have found out aren't really all that conservative. On certain issues they are as pro big government as any modern day liberal (improperly defined). I have decided that they are as much of the problem as the liberals and R.I.N.O.s in Washington.

[kieefer]

Winning Iowa does not seal the deal. Still plenty of time.

I don't like the reality but I think OS sees it coming.

[mav]

I don't like the reality but I think OS sees it coming.

Mac is a fairly smart guy, but I don't necessarily agree with his assessment. I will concede that Romney stands a much better chance of beating Obama than most of the other candidates, and certainly stands a better chance than Newt. Newt is hated too much by the left, moderates, and conservatives to build a coalition to defeat Obama. Romney stands a better chance only because he can appeal to moderates and disgruntled democrats. However, if Romney hopes to defeat Obama, he cannot lose many conservatives, and I don't think he can pull that off.

I know you guys are going to think I'm nuts, but I honestly believe that Paul is the only one currently running that can defeat Obama. A lot of his issues are appealing to moderates and independents, and a lot of his domestic policies are pure red meat for conservatives. His biggest challenge will be getting the nomination. A win in Iowa will certainly help, but it guarantees nothing.

[Oh Shoot]

Winning Iowa does not seal the deal. Still plenty of time.

I don't like the reality but I think OS sees it coming.

Well, odds that GOP winner in contested Iowa caucus gets the nomination are exactly 3:3 since '76, so it's a coin flip. But Paul ain't gonna be it, and winning Iowa won't change that. Huckabee's on line two, and he's all there, without Paul's lunatic half plus age. Although most American Nazis agree RP is da man.

Axelrod has quit praying for Paul to be the opponent, knows it won't happen; watch for more and more Dem Pac Attack ads focusing on Romney, as Axelrod hoping that he might get Newt as consolation prize. Mitt's been vetted to death, won't be any more surprises, just rehashing of the same ole, he's a lock unless he gets snuffed or something.

- OS

Edited December 21, 2011 by OhShoot

[Guest lostpass]

Sadly, Mitt is the only one that for sure who can beat Barry, and he will be the GOP nominee -- but could also be perceived as having too many damaged goods by the independent voting bloc by the time he finally gets the nod (not to mention disgruntled conservatives who may throw away their vote to "conscience"). And the Dem machine won't have had much to do with that, all his damages will be incurred from other Rep candidates.

Who Mitt picks as running mate will probably as important as in any previous election in history.

- OS

Right now this is correct. The only person who has a chance to beat Obama is Romney. Which is odd, the differences between those two aren't that great. I guess the race would be interesting, Obama is really good at campaigning and debating and Romney seems to be able to use advertising at a almost genius level.

That assumes, however, that things are static for the next year. If someone else beats Romney for the nomination and a double dip recession hits or there is a huge scandal (gun walker won't cut it) then whomever the republican nominee is could walk to the whitehouse.

Right now this whole race seems like John Kerry versus Bush. Democrats didn't vote for who they liked, they voted for who they thought could beat Bush. It didn't move the party forward, it didn't help them in congressional elections. It just set them up to lose. Nominate someone who talks a more conservative game than Romney and the party and the democrats are pulled to the right.

[Oh Shoot]

...Nominate someone who talks a more conservative game than Romney and the party and the democrats are pulled to the right.

None of the real conservatives have gotten legs. Perry is obviously a doofus, makes Dubya look like Mensa Rhodes Scholar; Cain's goober beat him out before folks came to admit they really don't want THAT much of an "outsider", and Bachmann, well, not real sure why she's never caught fire. Newt's an ever changing FrankenPol, a patchwork of now you see me now ya don't on the right/left continuum. Huntsman is only right of middle left. Something's just "off" with Santorum, he won't catch fire if he takes to wearing Sterno suits.

So looks like I'll be voting for a guy I wouldn't buy a used car from, unless something really wild happens, like a brokered convention where an hitherto unheralded Shining Knight appears to Save America.

- OS

Edited December 21, 2011 by OhShoot

[kieefer]

See,

Gary Johnson is dropping out and running as a third party libertarian. That opens the door for Paul.

Report: Gary Johnson to Drop Out of GOP Race, Run as a Libertarian | TheBlaze.com

[Oh Shoot]

See,

Gary Johnson is dropping out and running as a third party libertarian. That opens the door for Paul.

Report: Gary Johnson to Drop Out of GOP Race, Run as a Libertarian | TheBlaze.com

Wonder if the Lib Party will actually name him, they may well still hope Paul comes over after Super Tuesday. Their convention isn't until May.

- OS

[Guest lostpass]

None of the real conservatives have gotten legs. Perry is obviously a doofus, makes Dubya look like Mensa Rhodes Scholar; Cain's goober beat him out before folks came to admit they really don't want THAT much of an "outsider", and Bachmann, well, not real sure why she's never caught fire. Newt's an ever changing FrankenPol, a patchwork of now you see me now ya don't on the right/left continuum. Huntsman is only right of middle left. Something's just "off" with Santorum, he won't catch fire if he takes to wearing Sterno suits.

So looks like I'll be voting for a guy I wouldn't buy a used car from, unless something really wild happens, like a brokered convention where an hitherto unheralded Shining Knight appears to Save America.

- OS

I suspect there is a reason that no decent folks are running. And that reason is they think they can't win. They are probably right but I also think that when Obama ran in 08 he wasn't running to win, he was running to set himself up later. Some palatable conservative folks are making big mistakes right now because they are waiting for 2016.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Lets start a write-in campaign for the Gary Busey/Randy Quaid ticket!

[Guest jackdm3]

Just as well. Americans are suckers for actors.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

The only person who has a chance to beat Obama is Romney. Which is odd, the differences between those two aren't that great. I guess the race would be interesting, Obama is really good at campaigning and debating and Romney seems to be able to use advertising at a almost genius level.

That assumes, however, that things are static for the next year. If someone else beats Romney for the nomination and a double dip recession hits or there is a huge scandal (gun walker won't cut it) then whomever the republican nominee is could walk to the whitehouse.

Right now this whole race seems like John Kerry versus Bush. Democrats didn't vote for who they liked, they voted for who they thought could beat Bush. It didn't move the party forward, it didn't help them in congressional elections. It just set them up to lose. Nominate someone who talks a more conservative game than Romney and the party and the democrats are pulled to the right.

I don't quibble much with your general analysis, but have trouble agreeing with your top paragraph.

Romney will need to be a true master in advertising in order to make a majority of voters like or have any empathetic feeling toward the man. I've always felt the same about Obama but evidence seems to show that Obama actually does stir positive personal feelings from a goodly number of people, regardless of how wrong-headed his policies.

As far as campaigning, Obama seems to like that better than actually doing the job. He gets off on traveling around repeatedly shouting "yes we can" and "I never said it was gonna be easy." He gets a James Brown riff going. But James Brown would have done it a lot better (and been a much better president). Malcolm X would have kicked Obama's butt on all fronts in public speechifying, had Malcolm been born 20 years later. Even Van Jones is better looking, more personable, and stirs more positive feelings than Obama when giving a speech.

On the debating angle, I think Obama is about in the same league as Palin, only capable of sorting thru the library of generic catch phrases and liberal sophisms, searching for the cookie cutter aphorism which best makes at least a crude match to the situation. Very little original thought involved. However, he sometimes does it quicker and more convincingly than Palin. Other times he covers the desperate database scan with stammering and weak jokes until he picks the best match. Sometimes he just messes up entirely and fails in complete incoherence.

However, maybe if somebody can pick the cookie cutter aphorism quick enough and convincingly enough, it passes in American politics as exactly the same thing as debating skill? Dunno.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Lester Weevils