February 14, 2012

Maine madness.

Paulites hold out hope.

26 comments:

Henry said...

My parents voted in the Maine caucuses. They are well informed, but not political junkies by any stretch of the imagination.

My mom reported that the Paul contingent near the polling place was much more enthusiastic than Romney or Santorum supporters and (to her) surprisingly young.

This seems to hold true to the stereotype.

Shawn L. said...

The real "winner" of the delegates to the national convention is something that has yet to be determined. Which turn depends on who has been voted as delegates to the Maine GOP convention. (Don't know the date off the top of my head, but its sometime in April.)

The haggling over the straw poll is secondary to wether or not the delegates from those late/early municipal caucuses will be seated. Which I suspect that they will be.

traditionalguy said...

Maine Madness?

Maine has a developed a case of Mitt Madness that seems to go wherever Mitt Money goes first.

Let Mitt Money come forth and receive the winning trophy.

edutcher said...

Captain Tin Foil is the Jesse Jackson ("Keep Hope Alahve") of the Republican Party?

Whoda thunk?

Kirby Olson said...

I don't think anyone much feels about Romney the way Paulites feel about Paul. If only we all had one candidate over whom we could sing along with the rock band Smith, Baby It's You:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6atUODsWGs&feature=related

Mark said...

These caucuses are a joke, one after another.

Probably not the message the GOP should be sending.

Methadras said...

Again, the dirty little secret about Paul's 'young' voting bloc is that they are democrat tools. Very simple.

Methadras said...

Again, the dirty little secret about Paul's 'young' voting bloc is that they are democrat tools. Very simple.

Carol said...

much more enthusiastic than Romney or Santorum supporters and (to her) surprisingly young.

They got their share of old ponytailed graybeards too. The GOP here went gaga over all the youth, hoping to get them into the rank and file but they were not interested. They cared only about RP, and when he lost they said they wuz robbed.

What they don't get is, the other caucus goers are activists too, keep their own counsel, and don't take direction from the ponytails.

Kirby Olson said...

I know a number of Paulites. They are sincere Republicans who want smaller government and want less foreign adventures along the lines of Iraq and Afghanistan: same stuff Paul wants. There used to be a huge wing of the Republican party that was against foreign involvement -- they were the dominant force in Republican politics in the pre WWII era. They survive in an attenuated form, and they really dislike the saber rattling of a Santorum.

Henry said...

@Kirby -- I think you're right. I also know very sincere Obama supporters who think he's the man to make the government an effective force for good. In both cases, it is the credulousness that jumps out, not the politics.

ricpic said...

There's no dirty little secret, Methadras, the young know that they're thoroughly screwed no matter which establishment wins in November. Only Paul's radical surgery might save the young from a futureless future. Not will but might. With either Obama or Romney they are no hopers and they know it.

Penny said...

Paul supporters are Democratic tools, Methadras?

If I were a campaign operative for the Democratic Party, the last thing I'd want is an enthusiastic group of kids out there carrying a banner that says "Smaller Government".

"Smaller Government" has been a rallying cry for Libertarians and for Republicans. Democrats, on the other hand, just can't get enough of that big "G".

shiloh said...

If the Rep party can't run a frickin' state primary caucus lol ie IA/ME, should one of their own be considered for C-in-C? Rhetorical.

And this after (8) years of cheney/bush incompetency/ineptitude/corruption. Again, all I ask for is consistency. :-P

Jess said...

ricpic has it exactly right.

Cedarford said...

Methadras said...
Again, the dirty little secret about Paul's 'young' voting bloc is that they are democrat tools. Very simple.

=================
Keep in mind what fat drug addict Rush calls RINOS, the Reagan Democrats (inc. Reagan) were once a pack of stinking union blue collar ethnics that did treasonously vote what Clown Prince Pundit of Purity Hannity calls Demoncrats!!

I am happy there is more to the Republican Party than 6,000 year old Earth believers and the Southern descendents of KKK members.

Big tent.

If Ron Paul can attract new, younger people that believe in liberarian Republican values and don't believe in endless trillion-dollar Neocon wars of adventure - good!

Big tent.

If people exist outside the Deep South and rural areas and want to be Traitor RINO moderate Repunlicans and they elect Traitor RINOs like Christie, Pawlenty, Scott Brown, Romney, Mitch Daniels that fail one or more conservative purity tests....good!
(Even Santorum and Gingrich - which both talk a good social conservative game but had pasts where they love Big Government spending like Obama does - which Rush and the other clown entertainers in conservative media overlook because their audiences are bored with deficit talk, but energized about gays in the military)

Big tent.

Lem said...

If the Rep party can't run a frickin' state primary caucus lol ie IA/ME, should one of their own be considered for C-in-C? Rhetorical.

Your rhetorical suggest a weak presidency as opposed to a frickin' Obama/Chavez like strong one is much preferable.

I, for once, agree with you.

Fen said...

They are sincere Republicans who want smaller government and want less foreign adventures along the lines of Iraq and Afghanistan: same stuff Paul wants

Paul has an ignorant foreign policy that will get us all killed.

But an argument can be made for isolationism - why spend American blood and treasure for gains that will be trashed once a Democrat gets back into office?

Methadras said...

Kirby Olson said...

I know a number of Paulites. They are sincere Republicans who want smaller government and want less foreign adventures along the lines of Iraq and Afghanistan: same stuff Paul wants.


I'm a sincere conservative that wants smaller government. I agree with a lot of Paul's sentiments for actually shrinking government, but his foreign policy is a crock of absolute dog shit. I'm tired of our national defense being called adventures. Adventures implies that you are going on a trip in the hopes of having a fun time. I don't think war in our national defense is a fun time, do you? Paul's usage of that word along with nearly every leftard democrat I've ever met seems to like to use that word.

Paul wants to create fortress America, which buries our heads in the sand and ignores our role as a global leader for american values and essentially shirking our friends and allies for his foreign policy retreat while our enemies grow bolder and will gain power and threaten us at our doorsteps. Force projection through our military is a solid expression of peace through strength. Laxity in vigilance is what he is advocated for saving a buck. While I admire his frugalness domestically, he is dead wrong on it internationally.

His monetary policy along to wanting to shift us back to the gold standard is short sighted and dangerous.

Methadras said...

ricpic said...

There's no dirty little secret, Methadras, the young know that they're thoroughly screwed no matter which establishment wins in November. Only Paul's radical surgery might save the young from a futureless future. Not will but might. With either Obama or Romney they are no hopers and they know it.


I know I was screwed when Jimmy Carter was voted into office and I wasn't even of voting age. We are still screwed from his idiotic policies and namely his complete fuck up in Iran is here to come back to bite us today. I'm sure the 60's generation felt they were fucked too when Kennedy was assassinated which in my opinion we are still dealing with the shock waves of that murder.

Revenant said...

They cared only about RP, and when he lost they said they wuz robbed.

Well, yeah. The current Republican field consists of Ron Paul and three variations on "pro-war big government borrow-and-spend social conservative".

Which isn't to say that Obama's better, just that there's no reason to assume a person who (for example) favors limited government and an end to unproductive foreign adventurism is going to see much point in voting for Santorum, Gingrich, or Romney. The best case you can make for any of them is that they'll make things worse more slowly than Obama would.

Revenant said...

Paul wants to create fortress America, which buries our heads in the sand and ignores our role as a global leader for american values and essentially shirking our friends and allies for his foreign policy retreat while our enemies grow bolder and will gain power and threaten us at our doorsteps.

The people who actually do the promoting of American values, the assistance to our "allies", and the protection of our doorstep are giving Paul more political donations than the rest of the field gets.

Just an observation.

Methadras said...

Revenant said...

The people who actually do the promoting of American values, the assistance to our "allies", and the protection of our doorstep are giving Paul more political donations than the rest of the field gets.

Just an observation.


So what? Fat lot it's doing him in any primary he's been in regardless of how many times he will perpetually run for president. I'm not a big fan of foreign aid. I'd like to see it curtailed if not eliminated, but at the very least no foreign aid to our devout enemies like the fake people called Palestinians, or to Egyptians, etc. And I seriously doubt that even if Paul was ever to be elected he would be able to stop it.

Revenant said...

So what?

So it is odd that a person whose position on use of the military is "absolute dog shit" would be the most popular candidate WITH the military. When's the last time you heard of a candidate who wanted to slash funding to a government agency being popular with people who work for that agency?

Fat lot it's doing him in any primary he's been in regardless of how many times he will perpetually run for president

I didn't say it was a good way to win elections. I don't know about you, but I haven't noticed any correlation between "being elected" and "knowing what you're talking about". Exhibit 1, our current President.

Carnifex said...

All the Republicans left are flawed in some manner or other. Paul by his isolationism, Gingrich by his actions and attitudes towards AGW and big government, Santorum by HIS big government affiliation, and Romney for being a country club republican. That said, "ANYBODY BUT OBAMA!"

Kirby Olson said...

I don't like Ron Paul's foreign policy either as it leaves Israel hanging and basically says that universal human rights should only belong to Americans.

But, many Americans sincerely believe we should stay out of other cultures.

Personally, I think we should stand up for North Korean Christians, and for Chinese Christians, Vietnamese Christians, etc., around the world.