LOL @ Faux spinning spinning SPINNING right after their results.
GTS, what do you think is the long-term significance of the CPAC straw-poll, in terms of the 2012 Election?
(02-12-2011 09:34 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]GTS, what do you think is the long-term significance of the CPAC straw-poll, in terms of the 2012 Election?
Well, it use to be a source of media hype for months and months. Lots of free PR in the news. But apparently if you have been pre-marginalized by the media such as Ron Paul has, it only serves to prevent your opponents from enjoying that.
(02-12-2011 09:36 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Well, it used to be a source of media hype for months and months. Lots of free PR in the news.
Really? I must have missed that. I think, looking back on it, that Romney won the CPAC poll in February 2007 (the equivalent point of the last campaign), and I'm sure he got some juice out of it, but he still lagged in the polls for most of that year, behind Giuliani, Huckabee, Fred Thompson, and even McCain in most polls.
(02-12-2011 09:47 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]Really? I must have missed that.
Me too. Only Ronald Reagan and GWB have won CPAC and then gone on to get the nomination.
Past winners include such notables as Jack Kemp, Phil Gramm, Steve Forbes, Gary Bauer, Rudy, George Allen, Mitt 3 straight years and of course Paul. The streak will of course continue cause Paul won't sniff the nomination. I predict he'll do worse in the primary states next year than he did last time he ran.
Romney is just another McCain. He can't win.
(02-12-2011 09:47 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]Really? I must have missed that. I think, looking back on it, that Romney won the CPAC poll in February 2007 (the equivalent point of the last campaign), and I'm sure he got some juice out of it, but he still lagged in the polls for most of that year, behind Giuliani, Huckabee, Fred Thompson, and even McCain in most polls.
All I said was it offered a media and PR boost for quite some time as it comes during a relatively quiet campaign period. Unless of course the media has taken the time to pre-marginalize you.
You may have noticed in that clip Faux spent nearly as much time discrediting and downplaying the results as they did reporting them.
I agree Fox/Murdoch-based media is very hostile to Ron Paul.
Spin would be not reporting he polls well among his supporters.
Hummm... Ron Paul says it's not a national poll and has no significance. Guess he's spinning.
(02-13-2011 09:39 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]Hummm... Ron Paul says it's not a national poll and has no significance. Guess he's spinning.
That would be modesty.
Which is quite different from the lack of integrity displayed by Faux.
To paraphrase Faux: "Ron Paul won CPAC again ... this is non-scientific and a ton of Ron Paul supporters showed up ... it doesn't mean much. But OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Romney came in second wow great job by Romney look at his organization already Megyn Kelly said she wants to blow him."
Why are Ron Paul supporters such cry babies?
How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
(02-13-2011 02:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 09:39 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]Hummm... Ron Paul says it's not a national poll and has no significance. Guess he's spinning.
That would be modesty.
Which is quite different from the lack of integrity displayed by Faux.
To paraphrase Faux: "Ron Paul won CPAC again ... this is non-scientific and a ton of Ron Paul supporters showed up ... it doesn't mean much. But OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Romney came in second wow great job by Romney look at his organization already Megyn Kelly said she wants to blow him."
I'm not sure what you want FOX to say. They reported he won. You want a full stop at that point. That wouldn't be the full story. Polling RP supporters get good numbers for him and broadly polling Americans doesn't. Romney leads in most polls. That saddens me. There are many I would rather see get the nomination, including Paul, but I don't expect FOX to play down Romney on my account.
(02-13-2011 02:49 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
This shows how far away you are from getting it. Ron Paul doesn't endorse people because Faux has already ordained them to be "first tier". He endorses people for what they stand for. If you don't care what people stand for then fine -- you're just part of the problem, not the solution.
(02-13-2011 03:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 02:49 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
This shows how far away you are from getting it. Ron Paul doesn't endorse people because Faux has already ordained them to be "first tier". He endorses people for what they stand for. If you don't care what people stand for then fine -- you're just part of the problem, not the solution.
Yeah because letting Obama get elected worked out so well for the country.
I didn't say he had to support the front-runner. I said he should support someone else (and I don't mean Ralph Nader). Someone who could actually win, because everyone in here except you seems to understand that Ron Paul is not electable unless of course it is an online poll.
(02-13-2011 07:30 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 03:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 02:49 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
This shows how far away you are from getting it. Ron Paul doesn't endorse people because Faux has already ordained them to be "first tier". He endorses people for what they stand for. If you don't care what people stand for then fine -- you're just part of the problem, not the solution.
Yeah because letting Obama get elected worked out so well for the country.
I didn't say he had to support the front-runner. I said he should support someone else (and I don't mean Ralph Nader). Someone who could actually win, because everyone in here except you seems to understand that Ron Paul is not electable unless of course it is an online poll.
Ron Paul is a different type of politician. He pretty much refuses to endorse someone because they are the lesser of the two evils. He might have an R beside his name but he doesn't play it like they're his team.
(02-13-2011 07:30 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah because letting Obama get elected worked out so well for the country.
I didn't say he had to support the front-runner. I said he should support someone else (and I don't mean Ralph Nader). Someone who could actually win, because everyone in here except you seems to understand that Ron Paul is not electable unless of course it is an online poll.
Obama was only possible because of Dubya, who, might I add, was "highly electable", "mainstream", and took "uncontroversial positions". See how that worked out for ya?
(02-13-2011 09:26 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 07:30 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 03:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 02:49 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
This shows how far away you are from getting it. Ron Paul doesn't endorse people because Faux has already ordained them to be "first tier". He endorses people for what they stand for. If you don't care what people stand for then fine -- you're just part of the problem, not the solution.
Yeah because letting Obama get elected worked out so well for the country.
I didn't say he had to support the front-runner. I said he should support someone else (and I don't mean Ralph Nader). Someone who could actually win, because everyone in here except you seems to understand that Ron Paul is not electable unless of course it is an online poll.
Ron Paul is a different type of politician. He pretty much refuses to endorse someone because they are the lesser of the two evils. He might have an R beside his name but he doesn't play it like they're his team.
+1
He's a real man, with his own mind. Not a lemming like most of you on this board.
(02-14-2011 09:46 AM)cb4029 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 09:26 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 07:30 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 03:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ] (02-13-2011 02:49 PM)blah Wrote: [ -> ]How many times is this guy going to run and fail? Why not admit his time has past and be a team player. He has a chance to throw his support behind someone who can actually win and help the party, but he won't do that.
This shows how far away you are from getting it. Ron Paul doesn't endorse people because Faux has already ordained them to be "first tier". He endorses people for what they stand for. If you don't care what people stand for then fine -- you're just part of the problem, not the solution.
Yeah because letting Obama get elected worked out so well for the country.
I didn't say he had to support the front-runner. I said he should support someone else (and I don't mean Ralph Nader). Someone who could actually win, because everyone in here except you seems to understand that Ron Paul is not electable unless of course it is an online poll.
Ron Paul is a different type of politician. He pretty much refuses to endorse someone because they are the lesser of the two evils. He might have an R beside his name but he doesn't play it like they're his team.
+1
He's a real man, with his own mind. Not a lemming like most of you on this board.
Says the person that voted for an idiot who is 100% completely opposite of Paul.