Ron Paul takes CPAC presidential straw poll - Palin pulls in only seven percent.

[jefferson_dem]

Source: CNN

Ron Paul takes CPAC presidential straw poll
Posted: February 20th, 2010 06:23 PM ET

From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby

Washington (CNN) – Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a stalwart foe of government spending, won a blowout victory Saturday in the annual Conservative Political Action Conference presidential straw poll.

With participants naming "reducing the size of federal government" as their top issue, the 74-year old libertarian hero captured 31 percent of the 2,400 votes cast in the annual contest, usually seen as a barometer of how the GOP's conservative wing regards their potential presidential candidates.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney finished second with 22 percent of the vote, ending a three-year winning streak at CPAC. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin finished third with 7 percent of the vote, followed by Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty at 6 percent and Indiana Rep. Mike Pence at 5 percent.

They were followed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who tied at 4 percent. Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Dakota Sen. John Thune and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour rounded out the results.

Five percent of participants voted for "Other" and six percent were undecided.

The announcement of Paul's win, a surprise victory unlikely to have a major impact on the 2012 presidential contest, drew a volley of loud boos from the CPAC audience.

That discontent could be seen in the poll results: A majority of participants said they wished the Republican Party had a better field of candidates to choose from.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/20/ron-paul-takes-cpac-presidential-straw-poll/?fbid=B63NQ7tPGZw

[Political Heretic]

1. The unrest that is fueling even conservative "movement" is more populist than Republican.

That's what's scaring the shit out of them.

Yes yes, I do understand that its a libertarian strand of populism, and that it has its own problems. Ron Paul sucks. We're all on the same page there.

But there's a lot of unfocused anger in the country right now of an anti-establishment populist flavor, and right now Republicans are the only ones even trying to provide some focus to that anger.

They're finding it difficult to do so, because they discover that a lot of the people they are reaching out to don't like their corporate-fucking positions anymore than anyone else.

That's where WE should be stepping in. Where WE means sincere economic and social justice advocates who desire to rebuild the Democratic Party into a People's party - since we can't often count on our currently elected Democrats to be there for us these days. :(

[ShortnFiery]

3. Both right wing libertarians and us liberals agree on de funding the Military Industrial Complex as

well as support the decriminalization of marijuana. Hey! That's a start as long as they are NOT racist, we could form coalitions on certain KEY issues?

[FreakinDJ]

4. WTF - RATpubliCONs ARE the Corporatist

RATpubliCONs never met a corporation they could not advocate a Tax Cut for

Granted we need to "Weed Out" the Dems - but electing RATpubliCONs because you are justifiably angry at Corporations is lunacy

[Political Heretic]

25. I'm not asking to elect republicans. Im asking to elect principled candidate that side with workers

to the Democratic Party.

And I'm saying that our efforts to do that aren't going to be scared off by the standard "If you don't support corporate capitulating Democrats then republicans will get elected" canard.

[girl gone mad]

15. I agree, but wonder why Romney would poll so well.

Mitt's about as anti-populist as a politician can get.

[jmowreader]

24. Mitt's electable and not stupid

[No Elephants]

27. He's a neo theo. Granted, not the flavor the evangelicals like, but, still, a neo theo.

And, they think he has economic savvy.

If the U.S. needed to have its component parts sold off for two cents on the dollar, they might even be correct. That's what Mittens does best. (Or so I'm told. I have no first hand knowledge.)

[wisteria]

28. He pays a lot of eager people to work the events he attends like this one. n/t

[warm regards]

40. Are you kidding me? He's a pretty boy...

[scentopine]

38. Fox News is fanning the flames, as for Democratic Party...

it is part of a monopoly. The two mainstream political parties are like the mainstream media - flush with money and. at the same time, intellectually and morally bankrupt. Change will never come from within the democratic party. The democrats have been moving to the right wing year-over-year to the point that our famous "stimulus" and wall street "rescue" could have easily been designed by Donald Regan, trickle-down style.

Keep in mind, some would say the democratic party has been rebuilt - into something resembling the 70s/80s neo-cons chock full of free-market faith and vodoo. If we should ever have movement left of the right wing precipice, it will only be because of pressure from a third party. Otherwise there simply is no incentive to change.

I got yet another call from democratic party asking for $100. Normally I would contribute - but this time I asked myself "as a liberal democrat, do you have any expressed representation in this government?" The answer is no. I used to laugh at third party votes- I finally get it. It took 30 years, but I finally get it. A third party terrifies republicans and democrats.

[ShortnFiery]

2. Well, at least most of us can agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy ... most all his other

views are right wing libertarian crazy.

[FreakinDJ]

5. "libertarian crazy" - to the point he can't be taken seriously

[ShortnFiery]

10. Yeah, there's that.

:blush: At least we can find a couple topics to chat with the "Ron Paul Type Crazies" so when they go-off, they just may not take us with them. ;)

[abelenkpe]

7. Ron Paul

is dangerous. He's right about not policing the world and completely insane about everything else. Beloved by bigots. Nuff said.

[SoxFan]

22. Speak for yourself

This Democrat is in no hurry to disband the UN, withdraw from NATO, end foreign aid, abolish the Peace Corps, and sever all forms of medical, humanitarian, and economic assistance to developing nations.

[NoFace]

35. I agree with you, 'big government' and our international policies don't bother me all that much. NT

[jefferson_dem]

23. Embracing an "à la carte" selection of Ron Paul's loony policy positions.

DU Gone Wild! :crazy:

[hisownpetard]

6. The announcement of Paul's win...drew a loud volley of boos." Who are they boo-

ing - themselves??!

Evidently, in CPAC circles, the vocal 7% can drown out the 31%.

(Like we didn't already know that, right?)

[karynnj]

46. If 31% voted for him - 69%, not 7% didn't

It could be that a large proportion of that 69% really really does not like him.

[Don Caballero]

8. Ron Paul and his Paulbots are very dangerous

Their goal is a divided country based on race. This is very troubling.

[deadmessengers]

9. In other words:

31% of CPAC attendees don't care that Ron "95% of black men are semi-criminal" Paul is a hateful bigot.

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Care, Hell. They agree.

The whole bunch of them are a gaggle of racist shitheads.

[Bigmack]

11. And the freepers are calling CPAC "rinos"... shiiiiit! nt

[jefferson_dem]

19. Hilarious. They are even slamming the John Birch Society as being too weak.

:rofl:

“What do you expect when the Birchers are a co-sponsor of CPAC.”

Might I ask when the John Birch Society went ppro-gay, or open borders?

Just askin’.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2455858/posts?q=1&;page=351

[grantcart]

37. GOProud should note the homophobic reception that the freepers have for them

[hay rick]

12. Wishing for a better field of candidates to choose from.

They're looking for somebody intelligent who agrees with them on the issues. It's oxy-moran time.

[No Elephants]

29. LOL. Good one.

[Jefferson23]

13. My gosh, I do so love watching them self- implode.

The Fractured Fairly Tales Party continues.

[AlinPA]

14. I was really off; my thoughts were that Palin would swamp any other rpig at CPAC.nt

[Jackpine Radical]

33. Yeah, that would have been my guess.

Boobs, no brains. I thought that would be a winning combo for sure.

[karynnj]

47. What surprises me more is that their new hit wonder boy, Brown,

seemed to have not gotten even the 4% like that big group that they listed as tied. Sounds like, he might want to consider voting in a way that MA might like. You would think after all the hype, he would have at least gotten that much.

[Arkana]

16. It genuinely surprises me that in a room full of the most racist, xenophobic, backwards nutjobs

in the country, Palin only earns the support of 7%.

[Journeyman]

17. Yeah, that's what they need: A 77 year old candidate in 2012 . . .

8 years older than the eldest man to take office.

Gotta say this: It would guarantee they would get what they truly desire -- a do-little administration.

[livetohike]

20. I posted a similar thing in another thread, but I just thought

of something. McCain was 72 years old in 2008 - also older than Reagan!

[warm regards]

41. Funny, I always thought do-little was a Thomas thing.

"The government is best which governs least."
~Thomas Jefferson

"That government is best which governs least."
~Thomas Paine

[Journeyman]

42. The quote is not attributable to either man. . .

Though the sentiment is in keeping with Thomas Jefferson's ideals, the Jefferson Library at Monticello has no record of this statement in his writings. Nor is the quote found in Paine's work. In fact, it doesn't appear in print until near three decades after his death.

Though it is more commonly attributed to Henry David Thoreau, in the opening line of "Civil Disobedience," even there it is not original with him. The Thoreau Society, in its comprehensive variorum edition of his seminal essay, attributes the quote as a modification of the slogan "The best government is that which governs least" from the masthead of the Democratic Review, a periodical to which Thoreau occasionally contributed.

That said, the sentiment is not in keeping with my comment. Where the editors of the Democratic Review sought limits to government that would restrict it to only those acts favorable to the greater good, electing a near-octogenarian president -- indeed, wasting time and opportunity to even nominate one -- especially in such a swiftly developing world as today's, would not serve the needs of any, not even the most rabid libertarian.

[warm regards]

48. I suppose that statement is so generic that many people have said

something like that or something similar.

But if you really consider the statement, it really comes down to how well man governs himself. For the man that governs himself best, is the man that needs to be governed the least.

[Journeyman]

18. I agree with them on one point: I too wish the Republican Party had a better field of candidates...

I have a decidedly different definition of "better" however and desire change for considerably more concrete ideals, but that said, I do agree with the sentiment. Just disagree on the solution.

[FarLeftFist]

21. The same Ron Paul that writes for a racist tabloid? No surprise.

[LatteLibertine]

26. Mitt's

much more electable than Palin or Paul. He's the only one out of the three that would concern me.

[Blue_Tires]

30. Paul's more batshit insane than Palin

so it's no wonder the nutbars gravitate to him...

I personally think Palin's nuttiness and wacked-out views are more of a con show to keep her in the news and keep the donations flowing in...Paul actually BELIEVES the shit he constantly spouts...

[yurbud]

31. they'll have to rig a lot of votes to keep Paul from being a top tier candidate

[era veteran]

34. This sure isn't Buckley's CPAC

I don't think he broke bread with the Birchers.

[alfredo]

36. It appears that the Libertarians were out in force.

[chelsea0011]

39. So CPAC likes two guys who already ran and lost?

[Warren Stupidity]

43. Yes but Teh Stupid will vote for The Queen of Dunce big time.

So I expect Palin to run and win far more delegates than Paul, who consistently runs and loses in the primaries. Palin vs Mittens? Palin takes 96% of the stupid vote and splits the remainder 40-60 with Romney.

[and-justice-for-all]

44. CPAC!!! LOL!!!

I Have never seen such a concentration of clowns in one spot before!!! hilarious!!

[truthisfreedom]

45. Seriously. I'm so thrilled that the rethugs have no hope of finding a candidate.

It's amazing. They suck worse than anything.

[old mark]

49. I hope the RW search for their ideal canididate continues - I want to see

a long line of RW contenders, each taking time effort and money from the rest.

The GOP will lose big again in 2012, and I expect them to not do well in the elections in November, either. I think we will actually gain seats.

Funny thing - Palin got 7% of the vote and Undecided got 6%...She's pulling ahead.

mark

[HughBeaumont]

50. Judging by this, I expect 2012 to be as big a landslide as Reagan/Mondale.

They got NOTHIN'. EVERY time they take office, no matter WHO they pick, the voting public gets Cherry/Lemon/Barred. Snake eyes. 8-Ball Scratched. EVERY time. Peddling the same stupid pie-in-the-sky failed ideas over and over and over again; now THERE'S a strategy for success!

No way does this country go SIX times stupid (Reagan 2x, BewshI, BewshII 2x). Then again, the fact that they went stupid 5 times is bad enough.

[warm regards]

51. Well, at least Palin only got 7%.