• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

The data says that no sitting member of the House of Representatives has won the Presidency since...James Garfield in 1880. And if a sitting member of the House WAS going to win, there are about 400 more mainstream choices than Ron Paul. :roll:

But I'll tell you what. If you're convinced, you should head over to InTrade. Contracts on Ron Paul winning the presidency are currently trading at 1.0%. If you bet on him, you'll make a fortune when you prove us all wrong.

I totally agree with the guy that you roll your digital eyes at. If the media was feeding you something different, you would think Paul has a better chance. I to think Paul doesn't get a fair shake. Even Fox News tries to shut down Paul all the time because they hate how he undermines them.
 
The data says that no sitting member of the House of Representatives has won the Presidency since...James Garfield in 1880. And if a sitting member of the House WAS going to win, there are about 400 more mainstream choices than Ron Paul. :roll:

That is a terrible reason. We are talking about some real data saying what the people think about him not some fanciful notion that only Senators and Governors can become Presidents.

But I'll tell you what. If you're convinced, you should head over to InTrade. Contracts on Ron Paul winning the presidency are currently trading at 1.0%. If you bet on him, you'll make a fortune when you prove us all wrong.

Even if I were a betting man I could not reasonably discount the possibility that some "lone wacko" will knock him off before he gets the chance.
 
I agree with the general consensus that Congressman Paul has little chance of winning the nomination, much less the general election.

First, he has below average communication skills. Senator McCain didn't have great communications skills and paid a severe price at the debates. He won the nomination on a legacy of military heroism and long service in the Senate. He could not articulate the kind of message that galvanized public support. Paul's communication skills are even weaker.

Second, his largely libertarian domestic policy posture appeals to only a limited base. Even as major problems plague the nation's social welfare system, the broad majority of Americans supports a much more expansive social welfare system and aggressive defense posture than Paul envisions.

Third, his foreign policy of abication/non-interventionism/soft isolationism, also is outside the mainstream. Even as Americans worry about overreach, they also recognize that the U.S. has major interests and allies abroad. Paul's retreat to the other extreme to which American foreign policy has oscillated in the past is not likely to bring him broad support.

In effect, Ron Paul is far more prophet than political leader. He has a vision and unwavering commitment to that vision. However, he lacks the skill set necessary to align support behind that vision, as well as to compromise to make progress toward that vision. His Congressional record shows very little evidence of compromise and pragmatism. It does show, as one would expect from a prophet, unyielding commitment to his ideas.

Winston Churchill actually faced a similar problem prior to WW II. His warnings about the dangers posed by a rising Nazi Germany in general and Hitler in particular were widely dismissed. However, Churchill was not just an effective communicator. He was one of the world's great communicators. When his moment of opportunity came, his vision, unwavering determination, and powerful communications skills allowed him to provide one of the great examples of human leadership.

It is not clear that Ron Paul could do so even if the nation were to fall into crisis (unlikely in the near-term unless the U.S. succumbs to a self-inflicted crisis over a political impasse over raising the debt ceiling). In fact, he already had one such opportunity. During the financial crisis, he railed against TARP. At a time when an increasingly panic-stricken public was clamoring for solutions, that was the extent of Paul's position. He opposed TARP but offered no coherent and clear alternatives to save the nation's financial system from meltdown. The moment of opportunity that would have allowed him to distinguish himself and would have positioned him as a strong contender for 2012 passed.

During crises, the public seeks leaders who impose a sort of order on chaos and who provide a clear avenue of hope that shatters a panic. Senator McCain failed the first task when he succumbed to panic during the financial crisis. He lost his modest lead and never recovered. Congressman Paul failed on the second task when he opposed one suggested policy path but failed to substitute another concrete path. Advocating leaving the public exposed to full effects of a crisis wins no political rewards.
 
Last edited:
Even if I were a betting man I could not reasonably discount the possibility that some "lone wacko" will knock him off before he gets the chance.

If you were a betting man, you wouldn't worry about such a statistically unlikely scenario as him being "knocked off".

It'd be like holding pocket aces and folding because you are worried about someone pulling a flush with 7-2 off suit.

Hell, the dude's going to be 76 this August. It's a far more reasonable assumption that his ticker gives out before the primaries than to worry about assasination.
 
I know the corporate propaganda complex we call the media is telling you it is absolutely impossible, but the very things they claim to look to in order to determine that are telling the exact opposite. The data is saying he is fully capable of winning the nomination and ultimately the Presidency.

Today's polling numbers are meaningless. Given the time involved, the uncertainty is so great that even a candidate who is in the lead is not assured of actually winning the nomination. The evaporation of Hillary Clinton's overwhelming early pre-primary polling advantage highlights the magnitude of uncertainty that exists well in advance of the primaries.

Relying on such figures and trying to draw firm conclusions is little different from arguing that a company with steadily rising profits is destined for greatness. Beyond the company, a disruptive technology that satisfies a similar function as the company's products/services could steadily be gaining in the overall value proposition and the company's steadily rising profits could merely mask the reality that the company and its industry are prospering on borrowed time.

When it comes to Rep. Paul, one has to take a full look at his attributes, the appeal of his ideas, his capabilities, etc., to determine whether he can prevail. Given the importance of communication in aligning support, his noted below average communication skills put him at a decided disadvantage. If he cannot coherently articulate a compelling narrative why the broader public should embrace his vision/policies, he will not be able to broaden his base of support much beyond those who passionately embrace his vision. If he cannot point to concrete examples where he worked with others and accepted trade-offs to forge agreement over common ground, he will find it difficult to assert that he is a leader, not just a visionary. Given the above intangibles, even if Rep. Paul were leading the polls at present, I would suggest that his lead would likely evaporate once the contest begins.
 
This rise in the polls by Sarah Palin has a democrat like myself really worried. A few days ago I was convinced that no Republican could beat Obama in 2012 but now I see Palin has a movie coming out, has a national tour, and now is rapidly rising in the polls.

I sure hope the GOP does not nominate Sarah Palin for president. I am really scared of Sarah Palin as a nominee. Every person should do all they have to do to make sure she does not get the nomination because it would really hurt the Obama reelection chances.




was that convincing?
 
This rise in the polls by Sarah Palin has a democrat like myself really worried. A few days ago I was convinced that no Republican could beat Obama in 2012 but now I see Palin has a movie coming out, has a national tour, and now is rapidly rising in the polls.

I sure hope the GOP does not nominate Sarah Palin for president. I am really scared of Sarah Palin as a nominee. Every person should do all they have to do to make sure she does not get the nomination because it would really hurt the Obama reelection chances.




was that convincing?

Palin is a democrat dream. I would prefer both parties actually put forth a valid candidate. I'd even appreciate a valid third party candidate, but that's a steep hill to climb.
 
That is nonsense. As I said Ron Paul's approval ratings are far higher than his current share of the votes in these polls. In other words, he has plenty of room to grow.



I know the corporate propaganda complex we call the media is telling you it is absolutely impossible, but the very things they claim to look to in order to determine that are telling the exact opposite. The data is saying he is fully capable of winning the nomination and ultimately the Presidency.

His number is pretty high for the people who would never vote for him, though not as high as Palin's.
Which of the following candidates would you never vote for?

Candidate GOP Voters
Donald Trump 50%
Newt Gingrich 36%
Sarah Palin 36%
Mike Huckabee 34%
Ron Paul 32%
Mitt Romney 27%
Michele Bachman 27%
Gary Johnson 26%
Rick Santorum 25%
Herman Cain 17%
Tim Pawlenty 16%
IBOPE | Zogby IBOPE Zogby Poll: Cain Now Second to Christie As Top Choice Of GOP Primary Voters
 
whoever the nominee is for the GOP, it doesn't matter because Obama will be the easiest person to run against. If anything, the GOP primaries will be harder. Palin has a good shot to win it and she would be a great president and certainly better than the president we have right now but at the end of the day, the nominee (if it's not another "mccain") can stream roll through Obama.
 
Because even though there are plenty of undecideds who might break for Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty or Jon Huntsman or (if she runs) Sarah Palin, they sure as hell aren't going to break for Ron Paul. That 10% support for Ron Paul is pretty close to his ceiling. Most Republican primary voters just flat-out disagree with him on the issues.

I may go the next step and search for it, but I seem to recall you claiming about 5 years ago that his ceiling was 3-5%.
 
I may go the next step and search for it, but I seem to recall you claiming about 5 years ago that his ceiling was 3-5%.

found it.

you claimed his ceiling was 10-15%, which makes you a a freaking genius.

please accept my sincere apology for questioning you.
 
If you were a betting man, you wouldn't worry about such a statistically unlikely scenario as him being "knocked off".

It'd be like holding pocket aces and folding because you are worried about someone pulling a flush with 7-2 off suit.

Hell, the dude's going to be 76 this August. It's a far more reasonable assumption that his ticker gives out before the primaries than to worry about assasination.

Ron Paul is not young, but he is in far better health than McCain. If he drops from a heart attack than it probably wouldn't be a natural condition. The problem is, you think that sort of thing is beyond people in our government but that is far from the case. As it stands they will do anything they can to keep Paul from taking the helm of the Presidency. If it comes down to either letting him rise to the highest office in the land or snuffing out his life I think the calculations would be in favor of the latter option.

Honestly, the media coverage of Ron Paul has all the attributes of a media blackout. The way in which all the major media seek to isolate and demean his candidacy suggests very powerful people across the spectrum have very strong motivations for opposing him. We are talking about, in my opinion, people who would not bat an eye at killing their fellow Americans for political gain because they feel entitled to make those sorts of decision outside the public eye.

Certainly the establishment will do everything within its power to convince the masses that Ron Paul is not good for them, that Ron Paul is not the candidate they want to choose. Obviously they have succeeded with most people here, even a number of those who actually support him. However, all he really needs is to build up support in Iowa and New Hampshire. After that there would be no denying his ability to achieve what the establishment insists is impossible.

No doubt if he wins one or both of those major states you will see all sorts of attempts at demonizing him and defaming his character all over the media. A sudden U-turn will happen when the original states that are deemed to effectively determine the nomination become irrelevant in the eyes of pundits, just like the national polls have apparently become irrelevant. If directing the entire corporate media against him still fails to end his candidacy the tactics will just become increasingly dirty and if the only way to keep him out of office is to put him six feet under then some "lone crazy" is liable to take a few shots at him.

I get that you may have a hard time seeing that because you have been so heavily indoctrinated with the lie.

Today's polling numbers are meaningless. Given the time involved, the uncertainty is so great that even a candidate who is in the lead is not assured of actually winning the nomination.

That hasn't stopped them from using it to trumpet any other candidate, so why not with Ron Paul? Can you not see that there is an underlying motivation for denying Paul's candidacy? Any other candidate with these numbers would be getting all sorts of press coverage, but many in the media act like Ron Paul doesn't even exist. How can you not see that it is not about accurate press coverage and all about keeping people from voting for him?

His number is pretty high for the people who would never vote for him, though not as high as Palin's.
IBOPE | Zogby IBOPE Zogby Poll: Cain Now Second to Christie As Top Choice Of GOP Primary Voters

It seems pretty much every major candidate has similar figures. Only the lesser-known candidates have opposition lower than 25%. Notably the candidates who have higher unfavorability ratings all have far more media coverage and the preferred candidate of the establishment, Romney, is only a little lower than Ron Paul in terms of unfavorability.
 
whoever the nominee is for the GOP, it doesn't matter because Obama will be the easiest person to run against. If anything, the GOP primaries will be harder. Palin has a good shot to win it and she would be a great president and certainly better than the president we have right now but at the end of the day, the nominee (if it's not another "mccain") can stream roll through Obama.

Sarah Palin = Kathrine Harris. The GOP will never nominate Palin for president. Don't even think about it. She isn't presidential material. She has next to no experience and even less intelligence. Her major attraction is her message to the masses "I'm as stupid as you are and I can be president." Does that message resonate with a lot of people? Sure, but the people on the upper side of the IQ mean aren't going to vote for her.

The GOP cannot win a presidential election without support of the mainstream GOP (not Palainistas), without a significant number of crossover voters, Independent voters, on issue voters. Palin doesn't appeal to MOST voters and the GOP is well aware of it. At this point in time there the GOP is having a difficult time finding anyone dynamic and worthy.

Obama is horrible and as much as I'd like for him to be primaried he won't be. Do you know why? Because the Democrats see a GOP so hosed up it can't find a candidate that won't step on his own johnson coming out of the gate. Think about that - As bad is Obama is, and he's bad, the GOP still can't find anyone who galvanizes most Americans.
 
Ron Paul is not young, but he is in far better health than McCain.

WTF does McCain have ot do with a bet on Ron paul winning the election? :confused:

If he drops from a heart attack than it probably wouldn't be a natural condition.

So you know his cholesterol levels? His triglycerides?

You've said some erally stupid **** around here, but this is the dumbest thing you have ever said. I mean really and truly retarded. Sig-worthy in it's stupidity.

He's 76. If he dies of a heart attack, it's almost a certainty it was a natural condition.
 
Bachmann and Palin both stumping. I love it! The GOP is doing it's damndest not to push a serious candidate. How many more do we need to get "Bridesmaid's?"
 
WTF does McCain have ot do with a bet on Ron paul winning the election? :confused:

You were talking about Ron Paul's age as a reason why he might drop dead before taking office. McCain's health is far worse yet it seems he would have been more than capable of surviving up to this point had he won.

So you know his cholesterol levels? His triglycerides?

You've said some erally stupid **** around here, but this is the dumbest thing you have ever said. I mean really and truly retarded. Sig-worthy in it's stupidity.

He's 76. If he dies of a heart attack, it's almost a certainty it was a natural condition.

You obviously do not know much about Ron Paul. He is known for being avid about his health. I may not know his cholesterol levels, but I have little doubt he keeps it well within healthy parameters. The idea of him dropping dead from a heart attack in the next few years is ridiculous. Of people his age Paul is in the category that stands a very good chance of living to at least age 90 and possibly even older.

My opinion that it would not be a natural condition is based on the fact he has a very healthy lifestyle and no history of serious medical problems that I can recall. Were he to die of a heart attack before the election I do not believe it would be naturally-induced. There are many known ways to artificially induce a heart attack that are difficult or impossible to trace.

Like I said, your characterization of this as absurd is based on your naive and misguided belief that an assassination is out of the question.
 
Run Sarah Run......I've been saying for months that Palin is the only shot that the GOP has. The GOP would be foolish NOT to convince Palin to run and then to nominate her.

The only reason you want her to win the nomination is because it would guarantee Obama his second term.
 
You were talking about Ron Paul's age as a reason why he might drop dead before taking office. McCain's health is far worse yet it seems he would have been more than capable of surviving up to this point had he won.

I was talking about how the statstical probability of him dying of a heart attack is much greater than the chances of hm being assasinated with regards to making bets.



You obviously do not know much about Ron Paul.

You obviously don't know much about statistics or medicine.

He is known for being avid about his health. I may not know his cholesterol levels, but I have little doubt he keeps it well within healthy parameters.

Translation: You make **** up and pretend it is fact.

The idea of him dropping dead from a heart attack in the next few years is ridiculous.

two words: Jim Fixx

Of people his age Paul is in the category that stands a very good chance of living to at least age 90 and possibly even older.

And on what made up information did you base this made up "probability"?

My opinion that it would not be a natural condition is based on the fact he has a very healthy lifestyle and no history of serious medical problems that I can recall. Were he to die of a heart attack before the election I do not believe it would be naturally-induced. There are many known ways to artificially induce a heart attack that are difficult or impossible to trace.


My opinion is that this is a totally retarded belief.

Like I said, your characterization of this as absurd is based on your naive and misguided belief that an assassination is out of the question.


More idiotic statements from you, DoL.

I didn't say assasination is out of the question. That is just some idiotic nonsense you made up (your typical system of belief development, apparently).

I said that assasination is not likely and that using it as a reason to ***** out of making a real bet is just stupid. I then said a heart attack is more likely, but I didn't say it was likely.
 
Bachmann and Palin both stumping. I love it! The GOP is doing it's damndest not to push a serious candidate. How many more do we need to get "Bridesmaid's?"

It doesn't get mention in the media but Palin and Bachmann are good friends and supportive of each other. It would not be a surprise to see a Bachmann-Palin ticket.

A vice president's role would be made to order for Palin. Not as stressful as being president and would basically allow her to continue as a cheerleader.
 
I was talking about how the statstical probability of him dying of a heart attack is much greater than the chances of hm being assasinated with regards to making bets.

Someone as healthy as Ron Paul is someone I would sooner bet on getting assassinated before attaining the presidency as opposed to dying of a heart attack beforehand.

You obviously don't know much about statistics or medicine.



Translation: You make **** up and pretend it is fact.



two words: Jim Fixx



And on what made up information did you base this made up "probability"?




My opinion is that this is a totally retarded belief.




More idiotic statements from you, DoL.

The only thing I have screaming out at me here is "They are here to protect us! They are here to protect us! They are here to protect us!" What are you doing here anyway? Isn't American Gladiators on?

I didn't say assasination is out of the question. That is just some idiotic nonsense you made up (your typical system of belief development, apparently).

I said that assasination is not likely and that using it as a reason to ***** out of making a real bet is just stupid. I then said a heart attack is more likely, but I didn't say it was likely.

You may not consider it likely, but I consider it to be very likely should he be at the verge of ascending to the Presidency.
 
I like Ron Paul, but don't think he can beat Obama. I'm not looking for a re-tread actually. Last time I wanted Romney, voted McCain. As it stands TODAY I like Herman Cain. I've been listening to him for years. He is smart, and would be a man for the people. Plus he has the business savvy we badly need, as does Romney. The MSM disregard for Cain is incredible to me, and I have my own ideas about that.. not sure what this forum allows... I love Sarah, and she has grown a lot since last time around, but I just can't see her as POTUS. It's early, though. Unlike some people I know that will vote for their guy or not vote at all, at this point I will vote for whoever wins the R ticket, whether or not they are my pick, and I won't do a protest third party vote, either. I'm not sure the country can take 4 more years of Obama.
 
The only reason you want her to win the nomination is because it would guarantee Obama his second term.

Very very true. I share in that desire. At least we do not lie about it. It would be 64 and Goldwater all over again. Remember the FDR theme song? "Happy Days Are Here Again".
 
Someone as healthy as Ron Paul is someone I would sooner bet on getting assassinated before attaining the presidency as opposed to dying of a heart attack beforehand.


That would be a retarded bet.

The only thing I have screaming out at me here is "They are here to protect us! They are here to protect us! They are here to protect us!" What are you doing here anyway? Isn't American Gladiators on?

Hearing voices is often a sign of a serious mental disorder.



You may not consider it likely, but I consider it to be very likely should he be at the verge of ascending to the Presidency.

And you have the gall to claim you are able to view things rationally.
 
Back
Top Bottom