Was the fix in?

The first clue that there was something odd about the results of the straw poll at the “Values Voter Summit” was Ron Paul’s strong, third-place showing. Paul emphasized his opposition to abortion rights during his speech on Friday, but he also garnered a smattering of boos when describing his libertarian worldview.

When the results were published, though, there was Paul with 15% support. How’d this happen? As it turns out, the straw poll wasn’t actually a straw poll — the event’s religious right organizers made it easy to stuff the ballot box by allowing online voting.

The official tally, which included over 5,000 votes, showed Mitt Romney on top with 27.6% support, followed by Mike Huckabee with 27.1%. Paul was third with 15%, and Fred Thompson was fourth with just under 10%. But if you limit the results to people who were actually in the room for the far-right gathering, you get an entirely different set of results.

1. Mike Huckabee – 488 votes – 51.26%
2. Mitt Romney – 99 votes – 10.40%
3. Fred Thompson – 77 votes – 8.09%
4. Tom Tancredo – 65 votes – 6.83%
5. Rudy Giuliani – 60 votes – 6.30%
6. Duncan Hunter – 54 votes – 5.67%
7. John McCain – 30 votes – 3.15%
8. Sam Brownback – 26 votes – 2.73%
9. Ron Paul – 25 votes – 2.63%

That’s a huge difference. Huckabee goes from a close second to an easy first. Romney goes from the big winner to a distant second. Paul goes from third to last. John McCain … well, he’s still unpopular with this crowd no matter which results you look at.

Apparently, conference attendees had to vote in-person, but the Family Research Council let online visitors register a vote for as little as $1. Romney’s campaign recognized the opportunity in advance, and sent a mass alert to its email list on Thursday: “Let me tell you how simple this is! Just go to www.frcaction.org and click on the large banner ‘Participate in the 2008 American Values Straw Poll.’ ”

Of course, the discrepancy between the official straw-poll results and the opinion of those activists who showed up raises a few pertinent questions.

First, are we seeing a schism between religious right leaders and the religious right rank and file? Dobson, Perkins, and others are mad as hatters, but they’re also savvy political players. They perceive Huckabee as right, but uncompetitive and unelectable. Romney, in the eyes of many evangelical leaders, is the credible anti-Giuliani. It’s possible the event organizers set up the system this way on purpose, in order to get the desired result. It suggests the movement’s foot-soldiers are not necessarily on the same page as those at the top.

Second, can Huckabee actually capitalize on his strong showing? He did well in the Ames Straw Poll several weeks ago, but it didn’t translate to a boost in fundraising and/or endorsements.

Third, Romney may have “won” the straw poll, but isn’t he the big loser out of this? He showed up, brought along plenty of supporters to fill the room, and delivered his best pitch. But for those who heard him speak, he got 10%. Will he win over Dobson, but not Dobson’s acolytes?

And finally, if the religious right leaders do consider abandoning the GOP if Giuliani gets the nomination, might Huckabee be a possible candidate? The former Arkansas governor told the faithful that they should never negotiate on core principles. “Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody’s politics,” he said. “Not now. Not ever.”

“I don’t want expediency or electability to replace our vales. We live or die by those values,” he said. “I want to make it very clear that I do not spell with ‘G-O-D,’ ‘G-O-P.’ Our party may be important, but our principles are even more important.”

In other words, the party isn’t as important as the issues. Sounds to me like someone who might balk at supporting Giuliani and might consider taking a principled stand on a third-party platform.

Stay tuned.

Ron Paul RULES. No on else in this race has a scintilla of morality.

  • Does this really surprise anyone? The Republican Party, for the past 12 years or so, has been violently, vehemently anti-democracy in the United States. Voter suppression and voter fraud has become an accepted tactic to elect Republicans. Why should their own primary process be any different?

  • People were booing at Ron Paul? Odd. I watched this with my own eyes and don’t hear anyone booing. Maybe you did under your breath, but lost your courage when you saw others were not agreeing with you.

    What I saw were lots of people clapping when Ron Paul spoke, especially when he talked about Iraq and the Just War Theory.

    You can watch it for yourself on youtube.

    Make stuff up much?

  • What this really shows is that the “summit” was more a fundraiser than a substantive event. Someday the religious rank and file will tire of being used to generate wealth for a handful of charlatans who lead them.

    And Scott, even if you are right that no one booed, it is pretty clear that Ron Paul was not a big hit at the summit. Ok, except for with 25 people.

    How this should work is that the MSM run corrections, noting Huckabee won and making Mitt look bad for manipulating the result. But that would require them to eat crow for jumping the gun last night with no attempt to scratch the surface, so it will never happen and as far as the world knows, Mitt wins again. Huckabee can’t buy a break. Mitt will try to buy anything.

    And CB, can we have a moratorium on use of the words “Ron Paul,” since they all seem to track feeds and blog swarm to say highly intellectual stuff like “RON PAUL RULEZ!” (And JKap, I will expressly make an exception for you, since you are a day-in-and-day-out substantive participant). Threadjacking gets so tiresome. Maybe we can use a term that sounds similar. . . Darth Maul?

  • The Spew Paul campaign can’t help but get their panties in a bunch. They got caught stuffing the ballot box, and their candidate doesn’t even have name recognition to fall back on. Thankfully, their extinction event is coming….

    Better still is the Romney stunt. Pumping out email elert on a nationwide basis to stuff the ballot—and he could only garner what—an additional thousand or so votes? That doesn’t spell “resounding victory” to me. What it does, say, however, is that Romney is beginning to run out of steam. He only managed to get a thousand or so to cough up a lousy buck to vote for him.

    Maybe if he had spent his own money on the stunt, he could’ve picked up a few more “bought-n-paid-for” groupies. That is, after all, what his entire campaign is turning into—vote-buying.

    Romney and Paul are now both exposed as living examples that the Reskunklican “culture of corruption” is alive and well….

  • Like all political systems it’s always power over principle. Huckabee might be pushing his principles, but only to get more power, just like Dobson, Perkins, Bauer, and that whole insane crowd. God on their sleeve, but control in their hardened hearts. However, the foot-soldiers may be marching to a different tune. They may still believe in principle in their naive way, just like all the Democrats who think they belong to a party that represents their interests.

  • Ron Paul’s campaign neither sent out an email or posted on their website to vote on this online poll. In fact, the only thing they’ve asked us to do is vote in the primaries.
    If Mitt Romney sent out an email, and his winning hit the MSM echo chamber the way it did, that is your conspiracy or, at least, the biggest problem.
    If Ron Paul wins an online poll, it is either ignored or dismissed as computer hacking. If we wanted him to win the online poll, I assure you he would have. I personally stayed away from this one becasue I didn’t want the good doctor’s name sulllied by the bloodthirsty theocons.
    Give peace a chance.

  • I wonder if the fact that Romney used to have the never-gay Larry Craig on his team was a factor with the so-called value voter crowd in attendance?

  • Ron Paul is the only currently available candidate who can start the reEVOLUTION. The man makes sense to this retired, long time conservative. People are fed up with the current political landscape and direction of our country. Our US Constitution was the basis for our development as a great nation. Let’s get back to those basics before it is to late. History would suggest the eventual ‘Fall of the US (Roman) Empire’ due to our ‘Senate’ and other elected officials. I am a first time blogger as my WWII vet and patriot father would have been. ”I’m Mad as Hell and I just can’t take it anymore”. The Silent Majority

  • I second zeitgeist’s suggestion. HWSNBN and the resulting blogswarm from the paulatics really disrupts the comment threads.

  • Zeitgeist, it’s interesting how Ron Paul’s 25 supporters were so much damn louder when cheering him, than the other candidates supporters.

    I’ve watched the clips on Youtube, and heard massive cheers. At one point there were boos laced in with the massive cheers, as you will probably hear in the debate tonight when Ron Paul discusses Iraq.

    I didn’t vote in the online poll, as I didn’t know about it. I read later that it cost a dollar to vote, and I am opposed to that sort of thing, so would not have voted anyway.

    I think the real story here would be the apparent stuffing of the online ballot box by Mitt Romney to insure a first place win.

  • To marcus alrealius alrightus:

    I surfed in here from Google, not some blog, and I would imagine many Ron Paul supporters have as well.

  • Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. Principles don’t change. You have to stand for something and not change who you are based on the polls. That is what Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have done and all of the Democrats do it. Give me a leader that will stand by his principles anyday versus someone that stands for everything!!

    I know many Republicans and conservatives that will stay home if Rudy Giuliani is the candidate. He does not represent our values as conservatives, and never will. Millionaire Mitt Romney is a Republican-in-name-only (RINO ) that simply has everything else and nothing to do. “I guess I’ll just try to buy the presidency”. The White House isn’t for sale! Conservatives will simply stay home and the Democrats will pick up additional seats in the House and probably get the 60 seats in the Senate they need to completely destroy our Country. Nice picture huh?

    However, I think Fred can bring America back together, if that’s even possible. America needs a rebirth of patriotism and honor. Republicans also need a rebirth. President Reagan was our last rebirth and he can never be duplicated. Fred Thompson will bring his own down-to-earth common sense to this country. If a conservative runs as a conservative, he will win!

    Think of it this way: Eight years of another Clinton White House? Now if that is not a sufficient enough reason to pull together as a nation, and fight this socialist liberal takeover of our government, what is?

    Folks, we are in for the fight of our lives, just as our young men and women are fighting for our freedoms in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must fight for our nation right here and now! I truly believe Fred Thompson is the one man who can pull this nation back together! Rudy Giuliani will just tear us apart.

    Fred on the Issues (from http://www.Fred08.com)

    National Security
    The first responsibility of government is to protect the American people, the homeland, and our way of life. Today we face the urgent threat of radical Islamic terrorists. Al Qaeda is committed to attacking us here at home, and wants to use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to kill millions. We must never give them that opportunity. We must defeat the terrorists abroad, and that begins in Iraq and Afghanistan—the central fronts in this global war. We must show the world we have the will to fight and win. A weakened America – or an America that appears weaker – will only encourage further attacks. We must persevere. As Commander-in-Chief, the president must ensure the United States has the means to achieve victory. Presidential leadership requires talking to the American people about these stakes, mapping out a clear vision for success, and devising a comprehensive strategy for achieving it. I am committed to:
    * A larger, more capable, and more modern military that can defeat terrorists, deter adversaries, and defend the U.S. and our interests.
    * A missile defense system that can protect the U.S. and our allies from long-range ballistic missiles.
    * An enhanced intelligence community, with robust human-intelligence capabilities, focused on terrorism and proliferation.
    * A robust approach to homeland security that will protect our nation from terrorists and WMD, regardless of where they come from.
    * A strengthened system of global alliances to better combat terrorists, proliferators, and traditional threats to our interests.
    * A judicial system that deals with the realities of terrorists and unlawful enemy combatants.
    Federal Budget and Spending/Budgetary Reform

    In a few short years—not a generation from now—a fiscal tsunami that could imperil our security and economic prosperity will hit our nation and place an unfair burden of debt on our children and grandchildren. The tens of trillions of dollars in debt that will be accumulated over the next few decades will do immense harm to our economy. This burden is now estimated at $170,000 per person and $440,000 per family. Time is running out to address this looming crisis. We need market-based approaches to reform that guarantee benefits for those who need them and embrace personal responsibility and cost-effectiveness without raising taxes. Given the scope and urgency of this problem, and the burden it will place on our children, reform is not only an economic necessity, it is a moral imperative that requires action now. I am committed to:
    * Opening the government’s fiscal books on this looming crisis for all to see and understand.
    * Working with individuals of all political persuasions to develop a comprehensive solution to the pending fiscal crisis.
    * Leading and making the hard choices necessary, to include cutting wasteful government spending, to safeguard our security, promote our prosperity, and protect our children and grandchildren from fiscal calamity.
    Tax Reform
    The U.S. tax code is broken and a burden on U.S. taxpayers and businesses, large and small. Today’s tax code is particularly hostile to savings and investment, and it shows. To make matters worse, its complexity is a drag on our productivity and economic growth. Moreover, taxpayers spend billions of dollars and untold hours each year filling out complicated tax returns, just so they can send more money to Washington, much of it for wasteful programs and the pet projects of special interests. We need lower taxes, and we need to let taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned dollars—they know best where and how to spend them. And we need to make the system simpler and fairer for all. To ensure America’s long term prosperity and economic security, I am committed to:
    * Fundamental tax reform built on the principles of simplicity, fairness, and growth.
    * A new tax code that gets the government out of our citizens’ pocketbooks, while enhancing U.S. competitiveness abroad.
    Dissolution of the IRS as we know it.
    Healthcare
    Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some, however, choose not be insured; others cannot afford it. Every American should be able to get health insurance coverage that is affordable, fully accessible, and portable. Coverage should meet their individual needs and put them in control. Those who propose a one-size-fits-all Washington-controlled program ignore the cost, inefficiency, and inadequate care that such a system offers. Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available for all Americans without imposing new mandates or raising taxes. Current government programs must also be streamlined and improved so that those who truly need help can get the health care they need. I am committed to a healthcare system that:
    * Realigns programs and creates a system around individual consumers and patients by providing more information and more opportunities to choose affordable health care options that best meet their needs and those of their families.
    * Improves the individual health of all Americans by shifting to a system that promotes cost-effective prevention, chronic-care management, and personal responsibility
    * Modernizes delivery and administration of care by encouraging the widespread use of clinical best practices, medical information technology, and other innovations.
    * Increases competition and consumer choice while streamlining regulations through free-market solutions that benefit individuals and reduce costs for employers.
    * Promotes and speeds medical research and life-sciences innovation.
    Government Effectiveness
    Our government is outdated, inefficient, and wasteful. It is often unable to perform even the most basic tasks our citizens expect. It is no longer enough just to want limited government; the American people deserve more effective government. Given today’s challenges, we cannot afford—and shouldn’t accept—anything less than a nimble, effective, and efficient government that is able to focus its resources on the important issues facing our country. It must be able act on behalf of the American people and our national interests in a timely manner. The key to competent government is strong, committed leadership from the top. The key to good government is good people who are well-managed and put the national interest first. I am committed to:
    * Attracting and rewarding the best Americans to serve in government and ensuring they have the authority and resources needed to get the job done.
    * Fixing government accounting so tax dollars are properly spent and the American people know exactly what they are being spent on.
    * Improving government performance by making agencies accountable for accomplishing their missions on time and within budget.
    * Ensuring information technology systems are secure and that they give our government the capacity and effectiveness to get the job done.
    Building Strong Families
    Strong families are the bedrock of our nation and our culture. They are built around the sanctity of life and the institution of marriage, which is the union of a man and a woman. To counter coarseness in today’s culture that oftentimes victimizes our children and undermines the traditional values parents want to instill, we must not only protect but strengthen the institutions of family and marriage. I am committed to:
    * Using the Presidency to encourage policies that promote a culture of life, strengthen the institution of marriage and traditional families, and advance freedom of religion.
    * Returning authority to the levels of government closest to families and communities—the states—and then protecting states from further intrusion by the federal government, the judiciary, and other states.
    * Combating the spread of obscenity over TV and other media by making sure parents can better exercise their responsibilities.
    Immigration
    The United States is a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, legal immigrants have brought energy, ideas, strength, and diversity to our country, our economy, and our culture. This must continue. But in the post-9/11 world, immigration is more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, abrogates a fundamental responsibility. I am committed to:
    * Securing our borders and enforcing immigration laws. Amnesty is not an option and the toleration of “sanctuary cities” must end.
    * Reviewing our immigration laws and policies to ensure they advance our national interests.
    Uniting Americans by welcoming legal immigrants willing to learn English, assimilate into our communities, and become productive citizens.
    Education
    A well-educated citizenry is vital to our security, our economy, and our democracy. Despite the tens of billions of dollars spent on education by Washington each year, and the hundreds of federal education programs now in place, our children are still falling behind, particularly in subjects crucial to the global economy in which we live. At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. State and local governments are closest to the parents, the kids, and the schools, and best situated to implement changes and innovations that best educate children. I am committed to:
    * Giving parents more choices in education and schools less bureaucracy.
    * Reviewing federal programs for cost-effectiveness, reducing federal mandates, returning education money to the states, and empowering parents by promoting voucher programs, charter schools, and other innovations that enhance education excellence through competition and choice.
    * Encouraging students and teachers to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and math—fields that are crucial to our security, competitiveness, and prosperity.
    * Promoting transparency to assess performance, promote accountability, and share innovations in education at all levels.
    Appointing Judges Faithful To Our Constitution
    Activist judges across the country seem intent on legislating from the bench to promote a culture of abortion, redefine marriage, and undermine families—in effect re-shaping the values of our entire society without the consent of the people. We need judges who recognize their role in our democracy is to interpret, not make, the law. I am committed to:
    * Appointing strict constructionist judges who will interpret the law, not impose their views on us by legislating from the bench.
    Energy Security
    The energy challenges our nation faces today are real and significant. Our dependence on foreign sources of oil threatens our national security and puts our economic prosperity at risk. America must rise to the challenge and take the steps necessary to become more energy independent before this becomes a crisis. No one solution will solve the energy challenges we face; all ideas must be on the table. Greater energy security will enhance our ability to pursue our foreign policy and national security objectives. Increasing our energy independence and investing in alternative energy sources will also produce a healthier environment. And while we don’t know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce CO2 emissions without harming our economy. Overall, I am committed to:
    * A balanced approach to energy security that increases domestic supplies, reduces demand for oil and gas, and promotes alternative fuels and other diverse energy sources.
    * Investing in renewable and alternative fuels to promote greater energy independence and a cleaner environment.
    * An energy policy that invests in the advanced technologies of tomorrow and places more emphasis on conservation and energy efficiency.
    * Conducting research and development into technologies that improve the environment, especially the reduction of CO2 emissions.
    Second Amendment
    I strongly support the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Gun control is touted as a major crime-control measure. But some of the places with the strictest gun-control laws also have high violent-crime rates. Disarming law-abiding citizens does not prevent crime. The answer to violent crime is smart, effective, and aggressive law enforcement. The real effect of these gun-control measures is to place onerous restrictions on law-abiding citizens who use firearms for such legal activities as self-defense, sport-shooting, hunting, and collecting. I am committed to:
    * Strictly enforcing existing laws and severely punishing violent criminals.
    * Protecting the rights individual Americans enjoy under the Second Amendment.

  • Ron Paul is not promising to make a constitutional amendment and that is why I believe he only received 25 votes from the Value Voters. This organization is dead set on the idea that they can elect a candidate that will be able to garner 2/3 of the congress and senate to vote for this amendment. That’s unlikely and will only ruin the chances of saving millions of lives. Ron Paul’s idea of leaving the rights for the states to decide will make more sense and be easier to pass legislation at the state level. Everyone else can pander to the value voters all they want. George Bush has not got the amendment and neither will anyone else for that matter. George had the best chance with Majority House and Senate. Now democrats have control. Still getting 2/3 is almost impossible on this issue. Ron Paul’s way is more pausible and I hope people will wake up to the idea of the states rights so we can save millions of lives.

  • Lets face it, Straw Polls are just what it sounds like. If there was a TV channel solely for the Presidential Campaign then perhaps the polls would be changed dramatically. Without any Spins or preferential treatment of News Corps and the like, candidates like Ron Paul would jump higher in the Polls. People have a great tendency to for a candidate that is a household name regardless if there are candidates out there that have ideals closer to what they think. How many times have we heard someone say they voted for the lesser of two evils, or they voted for a candidate they thought had the best chance to win.

  • You might want to answer why Ron Paul’s numbers conflict with every other straw poll done in the last 3 weeks. The poll numbers you present are not the final tally at all. Online voting can not be the sole reason either, because you had to be a member of the FRC and donate money to vote. Your figures are simply misrepresented and are not the official figures as released by the FRC.

    The more the media lies about RP, covers him up, ignores or whatever, the LOUDER his supporters will become. RP stands an incredibly good chance of winning this election, he is certainly better than all the other flip-flopping candidates. How about being reasonable and taking another look at Paul and stop voting according to who you like, but who would more likely turn this country back to the Constitution.

  • Fred makes decisions based on principles. His own.

    Ron makes decisions based on the Constitution. OURS!!

    Ron Paul – HOPE for America

  • Always nice to see a candidate’s supporters–TV’s Fred, in this case–who are so, so much more interested than the somnulent candidate himself… has he actually yelled “LINE! LINE!” yet on the stump, or do we still have that to look forward to?

    As for Paul, I like that he doesn’t immediately jump to the “war is good politics and thus, always justified” conclusion that all other Republican candidates, and most of the Democrats, unquestioningly embrace, and that he seems to grasp that the Constitution is a source of American strength, not an obstacle to action… but he’s such a freakin’ nut on a host of other issues that I can’t take him seriously. And the cult-like fervor of his weird supporters is frankly scary.

  • Ron Paul doesn’t pander to the special interest groups like the rest do. His stances are for Americans as a whole. Isn’t it time to treat all Americans the same instead of giving special rights to special interest groups?

  • I can understand how some people might be afraid of change, especially those who believe in the Cradle to Grave concept.

  • Re: #13, Alan.

    I guess Fred is having problems remembering his lines. The man is too physically and intellectually lazy to be President, it’s just embarrasing.

  • I’m confused. These evangelical ‘values’ folks revere Jesus don’t they? Wouldn’t Jesus be against the global aggression and warfare that most of these candidates with ‘faith’, including Huckabee and Romney, continuously preach?? What a bunch of hypocrites!

  • Ron Paul is a superhuman dynamo that will cure all diseases, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, free the oppressed and bring liberty and justice to all. He is the messiah, the guru, the exalted one, our saviour and redeemer here on earth and later, after the Mothership arrives, on the planet Argon 5, in the Sirius constellation. Dr. Paul will legalize pot, hand out Playstations and free the slaves. Nothing is too hard for Ron Paul!! Google Ron Paul!!

  • Why on earth would the Dems play dirty tricks to keep Ron Paul from getting the Rethug nomination? That would be a Dem’s dream come true.

  • Yeah, the fix is in alright. Ron Paul wins numerous straw polls but none of them matter up until this one? How lame is that? The media is nothing but cockroaches. It’s sad, being a reporter or writer used to be a pretty prestigous job. Now everyone knows they’re nothing but shills for corporations. Wasn’t it just a week or two ago that Ron Paul won an evangelical poll? But the people will never hear ANYTHING about that one! What a joke!

  • Paul, you said:

    Zeitgeist, it’s interesting how Ron Paul’s 25 supporters were so much damn louder when cheering him, than the other candidates supporters.

    I don’t doubt it. I have never questioned the intensity or depth of Ron Paul’s support. But take it from a 2004 Dean supporter, while intensity is nice, it has practical limits. The most intense supporter can still only vote once, just like the most marginal supporter. In a pure numbers game, like an election, breadth of support if there is any depth to it at all will ultimately count more than depth of support that is narrow in coverage. All polling so far suggests that is where Rep. Paul is at: support that is intense but few in numbers. That will allow him to “outperform” expectations, but will not be enough to win an election.

    But my real point to the Paul supporters (and even more to our all-caps, 4-screen long text dumping FredHead) is that it really doesn’t move support or even encourage anyone to open their minds when a campaign blogswarms, threadjacks, or warposts non-substantive junk on someone else’s site. I’m not accusing you personally of this – obviously you have engaged in a substantive exchange (by name no less), and I already expressly excluded JKap, a Paul supporter who has been a solid contributor around here. But it seems that unfortunately there are more among the RP supporters who are not doing that but who are instead engaging in a version of spamming. And the FredHeads are even worse.

  • (sorry, “all-caps” in the above should be “all-boldface” – the effect is the same, however.)

  • I appreciate Zeitgeist appointing himself judge over what is and isn’t “substantive”. I may have otherwise given serious consideration to some of his opposition.

  • “Romney and Paul are now both exposed as living examples that the Reskunklican “culture of corruption” is alive and well….”

    Wrong. Romney’s campaign petitioned supporters to vote. If you want to complain about some of Paul’s supporters, that’s one thing, but only Ron Paul’s actions reflect on his character as a candidate.

  • Apparently, conference attendees had to vote in-person, but the Family Research Council let online visitors register a vote for as little as $1.

    Funny. The moment I read that sentence my first thought was, I guess that explains why Ron Paul didn’t ace it. (It’s obviously much harder for one person to vote 100 times in an online poll when there’s a fee involved.) That was before I clicked over to this page and read some of the comments posted here. LOL!

  • Wow, from the data provided in the blog post, you’d think Romney would be singled out for whipping in the first two paragraphs of the post, but instead we’re treated to an insinuation that Paul’s mobs stuffed the vote.

    Also, the faulty deduction that only those physically present at the event really mattered. Maybe a lot of people who would go to these things aren’t able to afford such a trek and so they participate in the only way they can– online. A lot of young people care about these things, and maybe their views don’t magically align with those of their more politically connected (and better heeled) elders… obviously those who had the time and the money to attend overwhelmingly supported Huckabee.

  • “Why on earth would the Dems play dirty tricks to keep Ron Paul from getting the Rethug nomination? That would be a Dem’s dream come true.”

    Not. The Dems’ dream come true is for their candidate to face a blatantly pro-war candidate. The result is a shoe-in victory for the Democrat. Ron Paul makes Hillary Clinton look like a war-monger. He puts their sure-fire win in jeopardy.

  • Ron Paul is the only logical choice if you have significant knowledge about the world, this country, and all of the issues.

  • bastiat (33), if you want to defend, for instance, #1 and #28 (and I could find other threads wih scores of similar posts from the RP brigade) as “substantive,” be my guest. it will tell us a lot about you. but hang around here a while and you’ll see those don’t cut it in this rather thoughtful community.

  • The simple mathematics shows that, out of 924 onsite votes, Ron “The Spawn” Paul garnered a whopping 25 votes. Less than 3%.

    The Republican nomination will not be decided by online voting; it will be determined by physically-in-attendance delegates. 3% will not get RP the nomination.

    But—given the fact that we’re discussing the factualities of simple Math, and that Facts are deemed by these maniacal misfits rallying around some guy who babbles like a frightened shrew as “a dirty trick—then yes, the “dirty trick” of reality will, indeed, deny RP the nomination.

    No—the Paul camp did not “directly” send out an email alert. But an alert was sent out, all the same. There are too many conservatives I know who got those emails. Some recieved a few; others received dozens.

    None support Paul—and thus did not vote for him.

    All received their email pleas from RP supporters. And those supporters, by default, are all members of RP’s “camp.” Since RP himself refuses to denounce the tactic, and since his campaign staff continues to tout the online vote as “a legitimization of his validity as a candidate,” then the simple truth of the matter is that Ron Paul seeks to gain from a deceitful, unethical act that makes the entire process illegitimate.

    Touting the line of “Ron Paul rules” now becomes a reference of how he—through his “groupies”—rewrites the rules for self-benefit. “Ron Paul rocks” seems to be nothing more than a “Jerry Springerism” in which stupidity is applauded.

    As with all of the other GOP candidates, RP is simply setting up his own little feifdom—a castle surrounded by frumpish little psychophantic peasants who go trolling about with their torches and pitchforks, spweing aloud about the need to “kill the beast.”

    In the end, they’ll simply wipe the entire GOP “movement” from the planet’s face.

    So I raise my glass and give a hearty toast to the coming extinction of the GOP—thanks in no small part to Ron Paul and his shrill little hench-poodles.

  • The most annoying to hit politics in the last 30 years, are the hordes of Paulies on the Internets.

    Jeezus, fan-boys, give it a rest.

  • I agree with Mitch C, “What a bunch of hypocrites!” How can you self appointed Christian leaders support pro-war candidates who will send our young men and women to die in a needless and undeclared war and then act high and mighty about being “pro-life”? My faith in this so-called “Value” bunch has disintegrated. Again, “What a bunch of hypocrites!”

  • It is with equal interest, if not more so, that when a Republican candidate gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar, and with his mouth full of cookies, and with his tight little fists full of cookies, and with a mountain of cookie crumbs surrounding him on the floor, he immediately blames those furthest from the cookie jar for his misdeed.

    Given that this “value voters” debacle consisted of an in-house audience, one would suspect that the tally of that audience’s opinions would reflect the political mood of that audience.

    That audience did not place Ron Paul in third place. This is now a known fact.

    Another known fact is that the audience, when polled, established that Ron Paul was worthy of less than 3% of their votes.

    Another known fact is that, by one means or another, a substantial number of individuals who were in no way connected to the “value voters” gathering voted online to “push” their candidate—that candidate being Ron Paul.

    And a fourth known fact is that the creators of this “summit” did not openly solicit those votes.

    Thus, the first question is: Who sent the vast numbers of emails soliciting online votes for Ron Paul? Let those who suggest “skullduggery;” let those who cut-&-paste vast diatribes in defense of the candidate; let those who post word-for-word tomes from the candidate’s website present an answer to that question.

    And—I’ll wager that there will be many more questions before this thing is over and done with.

    Finally, let the candidate himself—before a live audience, and before the microphones and cameras of the media—call into question the tilted results of this “vote.” If he chooses not to, then let him swing from the end of the political noose that is called “guilt….”

  • Comments are closed.