Three weeks from tonight, the citizens of Iowa are going to brave the cold weather and vote in the Iowa caucuses. The talking, debating and guessing will be over. The real election will be underway.
Looking at Iowa three weeks away, there is a real possibility of a surprise winner in Iowa.
Who could that be?
Unfortunately, it could be Ron Paul.
It is unfortunate for several reasons. First, I personally want Newt Gingrich to win. If Gingrich wins Iowa, either wins or comes very close to Romney in New Hampshire, then wins South Carolina and Florida (he is leading significantly in both states), then the Republican primary is basically over. If Newt can do this and basically lock things up before Super Tuesday, then he as the presumptive nominee can start on attacking Obama and raising money for the general election.
Barack Obama has said he would raise one billion dollars for the general election. That does not count the money that will be raised from other sources nor does it count the illegal contributions that always go to the Party of Treason. The sooner the GOP primary is over, the sooner the nominee can start raising money for the general election..
The worst-case scenario for the GOP is a primary season that stretches into the summer, where the candidates are forced to spend even more money on the primary and not against Obama.
An Iowa upset by Ron Paul is a real possibility for a couple of reasons. First, because Newt was behind for so long, he was the last candidate to formally open an office in Iowa and the ground team Newt needs in Iowa is being built in a hurry.
The caucus system in Iowa requires a strong campaign infrastructure because the caucuses are all about getting people out on January 3.
This is Ron Paul’s strong point. I have repeatedly said, stuffing ballots is what Ron Paul’s campaign does best. He wins straw polls at places like CPAC because he gets his people (usually college students) to the events in large numbers and they overwhelm the real vote.
If Gingrich wins Iowa, he could be set to run the table. Michele Bachmann has gone all in in Iowa. Polls have her at 9% and a poor performance will end her campaign. The same can probably also be said for Santorum and Perry. If Romney cannot win in New Hampshire, which is a virtual home state for him, then his race comes to an end too. The primary contests prior to Super Tuesday are not winner take all races so all of the candidates will end up with delegates. If Gingrich takes the first four primaries, he wins a different race.
He will win the money race and the contributions for all other candidates will come to an end.
The problem with Ron Paul is a victory by him in Iowa simply extends the primary season and the winner from a longer Republican primary season is Barack Obama.
Now I am getting upset. Research the Paul site and many interviews on the web along with his writings and record.Also at least read the Constitution at best study it and other founding documents.
He is pro life, pro man/women marriage and anti fighting every ones battles. He leaves life and marriage at the state level because the Constitution does. Not intervening is different that isolating and taking care of our business instead of messing with others again is how the Constitution decrees it also.
Newt may be good at history and debate but he does not appear as I study him to be any where near a Constitution or Tea Party candidate. We need to vet deeper than the campaign. Start thinking about day to day doing the job. Who do we want doing what?
As I hang around the Tea Party blogs I am seeing more and more the importance of our keeping the Constitution front and center of every issue.
Yeah but, I would still take Paul over the usuper; at least Paul is eligable to be President according to our Constitution which was afirmed by a Supreme Court decision in 1875. At least Paul would attempt to opperate within the confines of our Constitution.
Our best choice was and is Sarah Palin but, we still have individuals of among us that have a malfunction in their cerebrum.
When you show me the nail scars in YOUR hand, then I'll give credence to your blatherings.
MULTIPLE infidelities? You need to read http://www.dennisprager.com/columns.aspx?g=90a1ba2c-1d3e-4037-83da-... and determine whether you want another moron like Carter who was probably faithful to his wife all his life and until Obama, was the WORST president in history. On the other hand, who among the unfaithful is always touted as the best Presidents ever...? Kennedy, Clinton, et. al., Assuming for sake of argument that Obama has always been faithful...how is that working out???
I'll take a brilliant unfaithful man over a grossly incompetent faithful man when it comes to leading our country. Clearly, there is no correlation between marriage vows and presidential vows. God forgave David B IG TIME and used him in extraordinary ways...
If God can forgive, well, down South we say...take a hint!!!
To all the PERFECT folks, why don't YOU run for President if it's perfection you demand.
Dave I think you may be mentally impaired. None of us are looking for any nail scared hands. You sound like the posters on the msm threads.There are no grossly incompetent candidates in this field. That is the reason some are having a hard time sorting them out. I still believe we can back the person with the most experience of conservative leadership and win the general election. A true conservative will most likely be a Christian, with 1 marriage and a history of fidelity. They will support Life at conception,etc. If we have this morally honest person with at least an ability to articulate their conservative plan to begin a recovery, They will not need an extraordinary debate presence. obama doesn't really want the debates to get too heavy, he is on the defence, and his position is jepardized.
I must have missed something, because Kennedy didn't have time to be a great president, and I don't recall that many people being in love with clinton.
You can not possibly be comparing newt to King David because that progressive would have talked God out of the blessings intended for Israel so he could share them with Saul and build a bigger empire. Puhlease.
I have enough sense to know I wouldn't have the skills to be president, but I do most certainly know no one is perfect. Especially newt.
I 100% agree with Don Folkers and Peter Esposito's comments. Why would you possibly be such an advocate of Newt given his record of dishonesty. Please read this article and let me know why you do not believe this, and his association with the CFR isn't of GREAT concern?? http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/12/12/Newt-Gingrich-15-... . I am sincerely a bit shocked and disheartened that you would not advocate for the best candidate, which, imho, is most certainly not Newt. I WAS leaning his way, until I started researching more. Have you really done the "vetting" required to so blatantly endorse Gingrich? I WILL vote for him, I think, if it comes down to him or Obama. But it will be with a heavy heart and conscience if that is the case.
I love Valeries !!! (My wifes name so dont get too excited ...lol) Are you a blondie too? hahaha
I will back Bachman or Paul. I do not believe in the false choice of either Newt or Romney. Stay true to your values and don't be decieved by the false choice put upon up by the media, The Demoncrats and the ESTABLISHED REPUBLICANS. Obama may not even be in the race.http://obamaballotchallenge.com/dnc-served-with-ballot-challenge-in...
With Cain gone Paul is the only one in the race with enough votes to have a chance to win their primary who is not a progressive. It is that which makes me willing to entertain becoming a libertarian!
Stuffing ballots... Unfortunately...? Thats absolutely ridiculous. I've worked very closely with the campaign and those who support Paul are some of the most dedicated hard-working CONSERVATIVE people I've ever met.
Ron Paul is the ONLY one that can beat Obama. He is the only one who Americans can TRUST to abide by his oath to the Constitution which is something not very popular in America today.
Paul is not the problem. Those who want big government at any cost, handing over American troops to the United Nations because they are somehow convinced that policing the world while collapsing economically is beneficial, uncontrollable government spending with deficits over $15 trillion and over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities... I could go on... THAT is the problem. Until Republicans are willing to take a hard look at their party and make the necessary adjustments instead of waiting for a Dem to take office to point the finger for what BOTH parties have done the GOP is doomed to a humiliating failure.
Go ahead and support flip-floppy unreliable Newt or progressive big government Romney - and get another John McCain candidacy.
You want Newt to win? Are you kidding me? You, sir, need to go back and do some more homework!!!