Ron Paul Could Very Well Win Iowa

It seems as though the media/establishment have settled on a common narrative on the GOP’s 2012 race. Some say that Rick Perry, well-funded and finally on his game, could still make a comeback but the conventional wisdom at this point is that it comes down to Mitt Romney versus Newt Gingrich.

But throwing a monkey wrench into that narrative is Ron Paul, who could very well win in Iowa:

The race for the Republican nomination may have come down to Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, but in the contest for the Iowa caucuses, their high-profile battle might still turn out to be a sideshow. Even as the national party prepares to choose between the former speaker and the former Massachusetts governor, Iowa Republicans may end up choosing between Gingrich and Representative Ron Paul.

In every post-Thanksgiving poll but one, Paul has been neck and neck for second place in Iowa. In most of them, he has lagged well behind the soaring speaker, coming in just below 20 percent while Gingrich hovers around 30. But a new Iowa survey, from Public Policy Polling, shows Gingrich leading Paul by just a single point, 22 percent to 21.

Of course, winning Iowa doesn’t mean winning it all. Mike Huckabee won Iowa in 2008 but quickly faded from the race after. That being said, the success of Ron Paul’s campaign this cycle (which has gotten much more traction than his previous runs) is a symptom of conservative dissatisfaction with the “front runner” candidates. I think it also marks a shift to the right in the electorate, and I wonder if Ron Paul weren’t Ron Paul if we’d even be talking about Romney or Gingrich winning.

Rep. Paul comes with a lot of baggage. The perceptions of him, fair or unfair, are mostly written in stone. People who dislike Ron Paul at this point aren’t ever going to like Ron Paul for various reasons. But another candidate campaigning on Paul’s platform (minus, perhaps, his views on foreign policy) would be winning this race.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Jamermorrow

    In Iowa you don’t have to be a Republican to vote in the primary. I am hoping that independents show up and vote for Paul. I don’t see too many Independents voting for Romney or Newt. If Ron Paul changed his foreign policy than many of his supporters would not be supporting him. Most of his supporters know we can’t afford to police the world. Most of his supporters believe taxation is theft. War requires taxation so hence war requires theft. If people like his economic policies they should start reading up on the Austrian school of economics.

  • Brenarlo

    The major difference between Huckabee and Paul is that Paul can do very well in New Hampshire, whereas Huckabee cannot.  If Paul wins Iowa and Romney falls to 3rd or lower, then New Hampshire is up for grabs and it’s entirely possible Paul wins them both.  This isn’t the likely scenario, but it’s becoming more realistic everyday. 

    • Jamermorrow

      Paul’s followers are not going to change their minds. He is not going to lose people he can only gain people. Where as more information gets out on Newt and Romney they could start losing. An important question is who does Bachmann’s, Perry’s, and Santorum’s, followers go to once they bail?

      • Brenarlo

        I think it depends on how Iowa shakes out. 

  • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

    It seems as though the media/establishment have settled on a common narrative on the GOP’s 2012 race.

    If a new front runner every few weeks is what you call “a common narrative”, then yes.

    • Sp

      It’s always been Gingrich all along.  After all, he’s the one the rich Brits and Israelis favor.

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        He sure corralled them with his Palestinian’s are make believe people, didn’t he?

      • GIL

        MAYBE YOU SHOULD ASK REV. WRIGHT, OR LOUIE FARAKHAN TO RUN, THEY’RE MORE IN TUNE WITH WHAT YOU BELIEVE. YOU DRUNK PIECE OF SHIT.

        • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

          Gil do you believe the Palestinians are not a real people?  If not, do you think Americans are a real people?

        • Sp

          Gil gets pissed when you mention the people who call him ‘bitch.’

  • intheknow

    Mark Levin doing a great job explaining why ronpaul is a threat to US National Security with his pacifiist policies.    

    http://www.therightscoop.com/mark-levin-slams-ron-paul-caller/

    • Jamermorrow

      Can we afford our foreign policy? Can we afford the wars? Is taxation theft? Do you believe that people should be forced to pay for the war through taxation? Do you believe Congress should declare war or Presidents should declare war? Do you believe War helps the economy or hurts the economy? Why did we not get attacked by terrorists before we started policing the world? Should we use military might or economic might? 

      • intheknow

        So the Paulbearers would rather fight our enemies on our homeland.  That’s what ronpauls foreign policy would lead to.  Elementary!

        • Jamermorrow

          Which enemies? If you are talking about terrorist than you need to realize that the wars have nothing to do with terrorism. We can take out any country with the push of a few buttons. Do you think our presence in other countries might have something to do with people not liking the U.S.. I am sure you would love having a UN base or Chinese base in the U.S..

        • Sp

          Just admit you prefer a hawk populist
          and not a republican.  Or a nominal republican only.

    • Brenarlo

      Are you a dog?  I thought only dogs could hear high-pitched whining like Levin’s. 

      Watch this video…  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NhRPo0WAo&feature=share

      You see, Levin has a bit of small man syndrome where the only way that we can ever possibly survive is if we flex our muscles all over and beat up on the small kids.  What his pea brain doesn’t understand is that people – fairly or unfairly – resent us being in their countries. 

      I also want you to watch this video that talks about what it would be like if China had a military base in Texas… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY&feature=share

      It’s also pretty interesting that Ron Paul receives more campaign cash from active military personnel than all other Republicans combined.

      • Jamermorrow

        People in the military know the wars have nothing to do with terrorism. People in the military also have many friends who have been killed or maimed in the war. Ron Paul is extremely popular with people who live our foreign policy. I forget what war did Levin fight in? 

      • intheknow

        Brett, you really are clueless aren’t you.

        • Jamermorrow

          Aww, resort to intellect comments when somebody challenges you. By the way please tell me you have been fighting in the wars and are not an American Armchair Warrior. Please don’t tell me you are too old or have flat feet. 

        • Brenarlo

          Watch the first video… these are people who know what they’re talking about.  The former head of the bin laden unit of the CIA… the guy who has researched every single suicide terrorism act… and people who are actually fighting in the wars.

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        Thanks for those videos.
        Everyone should watch them.

    • http://twitter.com/michaelbain S Michael Bain

      Mark Levin is Zionist he’ll say anything to keep Israel on the teat. 

      This is a great article from Ron Paul’s own mouth. 
      http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-israel-support-wead/2011/12/07/id/420247

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        The majority of Conservative radio pundits have a bias towards Israel because of their ethnicity.  America first.

        • HG

          The majority of liberals are against Israel because of their ethnicity.

          I thought to type that to demonstrate the absurdity of your comment, but their is too much truth to what I wrote for it to work. 

          Oh well.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            You make a fool of yourself so I don’t have to.  Thank you.

            ..but their [sic] is too much truth to what I wrote for it to work.

          • HG

            Not bad, H.  You’ve been cracking a dictionary and attempting to sharpen your tongue.  Don’t give up, another year or two and you just might be ready to engage in a sensible discussion on at least one issue.

      • HG

        Why do liberals dislike Israel so much?

        • Jamermorrow

          Please explain what you have done to help Israel personally. I think you should donate money to Israel rather than using other peoples money. I know it is so much easier to have others do it for you.

          • HG

            If you’d like me to answer your question, at least try and answer mine.

          • Jamermorrow

            Love Israel went on vacation there a few years back. Beautiful women by the way. I don’t think our government should get involved in the middle east. Israel can defend themselves. Israel has nukes, a great airforce, and navy. I don’t think we should give foreign aid to anybody. People can donate whatever they want. 

          • HG

            Are you a liberal?

          • Jamermorrow

             classical style

          • HG

            So you were answering as a classical liberal. 

            I’m wondering why modern liberals dislike Jews so.

          • Brenarlo

            He answered your question… answer his.

          • HG

            I’m not advocating financial support for Israel.  I do believe we should back Israel against enemies bent on wiping out all Jews. 

          • Brenarlo

            OK, so you’re a conservative and you’re for eliminating foreign financial aid to Israel?  Breath.  Of.  Fresh.  Air.

            But let me be you a few hours ago: why do you hate Israel?

          • HG

            You must have missed the second sentence in the comment you responded to.

        • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

          We just don’t like throwing away our tax dollars HG.  We believe in a more responsible government.

          We didn’t bomb Israel, we don’t need to defend them either.

          • HG

            BS.  You libs throw money at everything.  Try again.

          • Jamermorrow

            It is conservative to take somebody’s tax dollars and give it to another nations government? Sounds like theft to me.

          • HG

            And liberals don’t do that?

          • GIL

            Tell that to the dem congress that was in power for the last 2 of Bush and the first 2 of obama.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            We believe as our Founding Fathers did, HG, and understand the governments role to take care of our country and not be the world police and also their role to make roads and put the fires out if our house catches a blaze.

            It’s not our job to fund our allies after we have taken land for them to build a nation.  It’s not our job to fund wars across the globe, we are a responsible smaller government type thinking people who care about America first.

          • HG

            So you libs dislike Israel because America has historically backed Israel?

            I agree America shouldn’t police the world or export democracy via military intervention.  I’m wondering why you libs despise the Jews so.  The anti-semitism on the left is abundant.  Just take a listen to the OWS’ers.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            The right always accuses the left of racism when we talk about being fiscally conservative with our money going to fund the military of another country, so much so that the accusation has lost all meaning.

            If being anti-nation building is racist position then so be it.  The Liberals and Founding Fathers are racists.

          • HG

            BS.

            How the hell do you interpret the disdain for Jews among liberals as anti-nation building?

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Nobody has disdain for Jews, we just don’t want to keep them a welfare state.  They are doing quite well and can take care of themselves thanks to all of our help.

            Give them a chance to get off the right-wing plantation.

          • HG

            Sorry H.  Not buying it.  Nothing you’ve offered explains the chorus of anti-semetic jargon coming from the OWS’ers and others on your side of the isle.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Nothing can shake your commitment to denial and silly belief systems.

          • GIL

            Take the Mexicans off the left wing plantation. They’ve already got enough U.S. dollars, they can take care of themselves.

          • GIL

            Brahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!  You are nothing but talking points.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            The American voters and tax payers aren’t laughing at the desire to fund war and continued funding of Israel’s military.

            Americans are voting and Tea Party nonsense is being rejected.

          • GIL

            Are going to defend Yemen?

        • $8194357

          Because God chose them, and their father the devil hates them as well..

      • Jamermorrow

        oh yes, the ZOG machine. 

    • $8194357

      National security he sucks IMO…Domestic Constituionalist, no one holds a candle to him…Gingrich would be better than 4 more years of Barry as he would at least put a bandaid on the bleeding while IMO Bachman/Palin/ Paul are the “true” America first politicians. We are stuck with “anointing by collective media comittee” and “anyone” who would stand up for the Constituional America we use to know will get run out of town on the propaganda media rail..

  • http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

    I hate Iowa.  The fact that they have a major influence on the nominees shows that the primary system is all screwed up.  The smoked filled rooms at the political conventions were better at picking a good leader than a bunch of Iowans showing up at their caucuses.

    • Sp

      I agree.

    • Jamermorrow

      IOWA, Idiots Out Walking Around.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Excellent point.  One would argue that the reason why the ethanol boondoggle has hung around so long is because presidential candidates start their campaigns in Iowa.

  • Sp

    All of my sensors are currently indicating that it will be Gingrich.  As I stated a year and a half ago at the beginning of this long, expensive, distracting shit show full of pandering populists, ninnies, sexual harassers, and adulterers.

    • http://twitter.com/michaelbain S Michael Bain

      Hmm, well Gingrich does fit each of those.

    • GIL

      Sounds just like the dem campaign before the 2008 election.

  • SigFan

    Paul may win Iowa, though I doubt it.  He could possibly win in a couple other states as well.  But he can’t win enough to get the nomination, nor would he beat Obama if he did.  Whomever does unseat Obama could do much worse than to make him Treasury Secretary, but I don’t imagine that post would satisfy his ego.  Nevertheless, primaries are for people to vote for the candidate they like the best, not necessarily the best candidate.

    • Dr.

      Ron Paul has an ego? Oh come on. He’s the least egotistical of the entire bunch. However, he’s principled and not going to flip-flop. If this gives you the impression he’s got an ego – you’re the one with the problem.

      • SigFan

        If you are naive enough to believe that anyone that attempts to obtain the office of POTUS doesn’t have an ego you’re probably naive enough to believe in Santa Claus. Everyone has an ego and Paul’s is just as large as any other candidate.

        • Dr.

          If you are referring to his “ego” to follow the constitution and end-up on the losing end of dozens of 434 to 1 votes – then ok. He’s got an ego. If you’re referring to not pandering to special interest groups, never changing his message regardless of who he speaks to – then ok. He’s got an ego. If you are referring to his non-stop assault on corruption in government and never giving up the fight – then ok. He’s got an ego. I could go on and on “exposing” his “ego”. If that’s the definition – ok. He’s got an ego – and thank God he does.

          • SigFan

            Here’s a simple little test.  Find an incident or article where Ron Paul has admitted he was or is wrong.  I couldn’t.  Anyone who believes he is right 100% of the time has an ego larger than life. 

            And FWIW – I happen to like his fiscal/domestic policies, agree with his stance on Constitutional issues for the most part, agree that we can and should pull back the size of our military abroad (but not completely as he would) and as I said think that he would be a fine Treasury Secretary.  I do not believe he has the capability to win either the nomination for or the office of POTUS. 

          • Dr.

            Why would he need to be proven or should he admit he’s been wrong? No one is perfect – what is he wrong about that is the currently implemented under his constitutional and monetary philosophy where he’s wrong?

          • SigFan

            We were discussing whether or not Dr. Paul has an ego – he does, you do, I do, everyone does. I merely point out that anyone who does not ever admit to being wrong has a larger than usual ego. That description fits most of the candidates BTW – and is especially appropriate at describing the current resident of the WH. As to what I believe he is wrong about – his foreign policy would weaken our national security IMO. At one time he was aligned with 9/11 truthers – haven’t heard him walk that back or apologize or admit he was wrong. He has made more than a couple blatantly anti-Semitic statements that I find morally repugnant. And as I said in my last post, I agree with his domestic and fiscal policies, but they are not the only issue that faces the country – a large issue to be sure – but not the only issue.

          • Dr.

            There are plenty of active and retired military personal as well as government leaders – that want a new investigation into 9-11. I have no problem with truthers – as the legitimate ones are asking legitimate questions. The “co-opted” Truthers are a completely different issue. This is the same for the Tea Party. The legitimate groups I support – the co-opted heavily funded neocon groups is a completely different issue. His foriegn policy is supported by the troops as they “understand” he supports a strong military defense – not a military used for corporate greed and “nation building”. Anit-Semitic? Are you kidding me? He’s the only one that fully stands behind Israel’s right of sovereignty. He’s one of the only ones in congress who supported Israel’s right to attack Iran in the 80’s. I suggest you look a little deeper into the truth of Ron Paul’s positions – it might change when you find out the truth – not the propaganda.

          • SigFan

            Clearly you, as have all the true-believer Paulites, swallowed the kool-aid. Paul is right on some things, dead-wrong on others IMO, and I believe that currently the majority agree with me. Feel free to support whomever you want, just don’t be surprised or bitter when he loses.

          • Dr.

            The only Kool Aid swallowed are by those who keep supporting the status-quo and are afraid of being exposed for the lying and cheating thieves they are. Those like yourself that continue to support them in delusion are the danger to this nation. You’re nothing but blind sheep or Lemmings. Take your pick. One man stands above all of them and is running on his record – not from it and is according the Reagan – “the most honest man in Congress”. That is Ron Paul. I don’t have time for sheep any longer.

          • SigFan

            I rest my case – in your eyes and those of your fellow Paul worshipers he can do no wrong – and you are wrong.

            BTW – Nothing I said in the previous comments would indicate in any way that I support the status quo or any of the other candidates at this point. You are assuming facts not in evidence.

          • Dr.

            LOL! Nice Try!

          • SigFan

            Better than a nice try – the truth. Try to prove me wrong.

  • mikemc1970

    Unless Pauls goal is to get his own talk show, like Huckabee, on FOX News, I believe Iowa is going to count for the same as the last GOP primary.

    • Brenarlo

      You could very well be right.  But Ron Paul will do way better than Huckabee ever could in New Hampshire.  That’s a key difference. 

  • Spartacus

    Paul may win Iowa but as the Republican Presidential candidate he’d lose in November. The only possible reason anyone would push so hard for Paul as a candidate is they must REALLY like Obama.

    • Jamermorrow

      or they are sick of Republicans making government bigger.

    • Brenarlo

      I’ve seen polls that show approximately 15% of Democrats would vote for Paul over Obama.

      • Dr.

        What most – who seem to have a problem with Ron Paul fail to realize – is that Ron Paul wins the Independents, the anti-war, the small government vote in the general election. His toughest competition (aka corruption) is within his own party. This is all but admitted by all “players-involved”. No one gets less coverage than Ron Paul no matter how well he does. No one gets less positive coverage in the media than Ron Paul. People wonder why his supporters are passionate. Then they call us names. They get upset at the “Teabagger” names – but it’s fine to call Ron Paul and his followers (who started the Tea Party to begin with) names. What just frosts me the most is this guy (RP) is the only candidate in decades that is not bought and paid for. He actually represents the citizens and what’s best for the “rugged individual”, the “free market” and etc. These are things that the “blow-hard” bloggers and radio host claim to support, but in reality they’re just talking points as actions speak louder than words. There is not a single candidate in recent history that can walk the walk even close to Ron Paul. This scares the current system of Mafia members of both parties.

        • Jamermorrow

          What you need to realize is that Republicans favor big government just in different areas than Democrats. Many Republicans benefit from the status quo. For example defense contractors, police departments, CIA, FBI, border patrol, TSA, etc… Government never shrinks under Republicans it just does not grow as fast. The last president to shrink government was Truman. 

          • Dr.

            Oh, I’m way ahead of you there. This is as stated – corruption. Crony Capitalism. This is why the people need to wake-the-hell-up and realize RP is representing them – not the status-quo. Again, that’s what forsts me.

  • Neiman

    While I reject his isolationism, it is his belief in moral anarchy that would absolutely keep me from voting for him and his jack booted disciples don’t help.

    • Jamermorrow

      Yea nobody can match Neiman’s morality. You truly are a saint. God worships Neiman that is how moral Neiman is. 

      • Neiman

        Why do you have to be so rude and nasty about my comments? Don’t I have a right to my opinion? I have never made any claims to having any moral superiority. I only claim based on god’s word to be saved, that is the sum total of my claims.

        So please tell me why you had to be So rude about my very modest comments?

        • Rattail

          Because Jamie is an asshat with delusions of kissing wRong Pauls ass.  Your typical Paultard.  
          http://theconservativemonster.mobi/2011/12/13/ron-paul-tards-defend-iran-for-a-reason-they-are-spreading-propaganda-for-moscow.aspx

          • Dr.

            Rat: what exactly is Ron Paul wrong about? Please, be specific,

          • Rattail

            Please click on the Conservative Monster link I provided for your enlightenment.  http://theconservativemonster.mobi/2011/12/13/ron-paul-tards-defend-iran-for-a-reason-they-are-spreading-propaganda-for-moscow.aspx

          • Jamermorrow

            You are right I was just in Moscow last week. I am getting paid to defend Iran. You caught me sherlock holmes. 

          • Neiman

            It Is not a matter of rIght versus wrong, it involves opposing political philosophies. For most it has to do with his isolationism and/or his belief in moral anarchy.

          • Jamermorrow

            I am assuming since you don’t like RP’s foreign policy that like an interventionist foreign policy. Please feel free to inform us about the wonderful work you have personally done in the name of fighting terror. Please describe examples of what you have personally done to help Israel and hurt Iran. Thanks.

          • intheknow

            Wow, you Paultards are a bit touchy aren’t you!  I agree with rat, ronpauls foreign policy is bad news bears.  Want proof, google it my friend.  I assume you will not be that lazy to ask me to research for you.  Put on your bigboy pants.  Now flame away.

          • Jamermorrow

            How can I google what you have personally done to help Israel? I just want to know that you lead by example and that you are not asking others to do your work for you. Please give specific example of how you Personally have helped Israel. thanks

          • intheknow

            I will give you this link though as you seem to meet several criteria.     
            http://ronpaulexposed.wordpress.com/paulbot-playbook/ 

          • Jamermorrow

            You can copy and paste links congratulations. 

          • intheknow

            Why thank you Jamie.  You are too kind. Ta Ta for now.

  • Lmlucier

    That person on PAul’s platform minus his foreign policy is Michele BAchmann. Why is that not obvious and more supporting her?

    • Jamermorrow

      Bachmann has talking points about the economy. Ron Paul is an accomplished economists and actually understands the problems. In face he predicted most of it ten years ago. Has Bachmann apologized yet to all the people she put away for not paying taxes? Nothing says conservative like a prosecutor for the IRS.

    • Brenarlo

      Not exactly.  She supports a federal marriage amendment, Ron does not.  She won’t end the war on drugs, Ron would.  She said she’d build a fence 8 billion feet high on the border, Ron would not.

      There are many differences.  Bachmann wants to be like Ron, but doesn’t quite understand Ron.

  • Jimmypop

    if he wins it will be a fluke a rigged election or something.

    ok, back to reality…pauls not going to win. i wish he would, but its not reality. i could see a second place or very close third. and i just hope all his winning is starting to get you big government mcsamers woken up to the fact the people want a SMALL government.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    There is a cabinet position out there for Ron Paul in the Gingrich Administration.

    I’d like to see a Gingrich-Huntsman or Gingrich-Bolton ticket. That would shake things up and send the left deeper into their psychosis and the corrupt Democrats would wet themselves.

    • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

      Mr. Mouse, the former is interesting, the later would lose in a laughable landslide.
      Why not put Rubio or Christie on you list.
      Newtie/Marco would be a tough nut.

    • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

      You really think a Serial Adulterer/Plato’s Retreat Ticket is viable?

      • mickey_moussaoui

        You had no problem supporting a serial rapist aka Bill Clinton or a serial liar aka Barack Obama

        Hello pot, meet kettle

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          Actually, I did.

          Hello pot, meet your smoker.

    • $8194357

      Gingrich-Bolton ticket.
      Better than most alternitives likly, IMO…

      • Neiman

        I think it will be Obama by a good margin and a GOP controlled Congress, but not veto proof and thus four more years of stalemate. Could be good or bad.

        Our resident child of hell – Gay Bob stumbled, accidentally, upon a truth: We had solid limited government, fiscally responsible, family/moral values candidates and they did not get conservative support. We will get the candidates we deserve and I fear none can make the climb to the top.

        • $8194357

          I think your right Neiman as far as how far down the sewer hole America has fallen. collectivly as a nation we are without moral footing and we are reaping what we have sown for so long. I believe we are closer to the final days than “most” understand…God Bless and Keep you and yours Brother. One world domanince can’t be avoided as the Lord said these things must indeed take place before His return…Maranatha Lord Jesus…Even so Come Quickly…

          • Neiman

            Everything is falling into place now at breath taking speed. Our global economic crisis needs a global leader, one who can promise to save us from ourselves, but to make it work, he will demand we cannot buy or sell without a special identification number to make sure we play by his rules. Oops, guess what we are falling into that worldwide economic pit now.

            All the world must focus on Israel, a 200 million man army will come from the East, who else but China is that big? A great army from the North will also come, both to protect their need for oil/energy. One army will come from the West to protect Israel and they have only one friend in the world.

          • WOOF

            My End of Days T-Shirt
            The day came and went.

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          And you said we couldn’t agree on anything.
          Merry Christmas, Old Pal!

          (corrected, sorry about that, Old Pal)

  • Ratbite

    Heck I’d support Paul if he weren’t such a nut job on foreign policy BUT if it comes down to Barrack Hussein Obama , Mitt Romney or Ron Paul I’m voting for RON PAUL cuz he’s got more conservatism in his little finger than Barrack, Mitt, & all the beltway elitists combined.

  • reverendyo

    When you consider the two faced Newt sucking up to Arafat (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/gingrich-met-yasser-arafat-150943604.html) and who will run his foreign policy, America is due a change to the policy of Reagan and Goldwater, both who practiced substantially more of a neo-isolationalist policy than any republican since him.  Reagan only committed troops twice in two terms of office, Grenada for 2 days with 600 men and the 1986 bombing of Libya.  Reagan was closer to Paul’s foreign policy than any other candidate running today. 

  • mickey_moussaoui

    Any way you slice it, when it comes to smarts, Obama is no match for Gingrich.

    The phony reaction on the left about Gingrich’s former marriages is laughable considering Clinton’s sexcapades. And to say Newt has a temper, well, Obama acts like a little bitch when he doesn’t get his way. Just more lib hypocrisy on display. All I can say is that four more years of Obama and we will be a second class country

    • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

      Mr. Mouse,  do you think Newtie’s phoney reaction while he was doing an intern at the same time he was impeaching Clinton for saying he wasn’t doing an intern is laughable?

Top