Ron Paul vs. Newt Gingrich: The Agony of the Iowa Tea Party

Writing in the NY Times, Ross Douthat lays out the stakes for the Iowa Tea Party during caucus time:

[Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.)] represent two very different endpoints for the Tea Party movement. Paul, for all his crankishness, is the kind of conservative that Tea Partiers want to believe themselves to be: Deeply principled, impressively consistent, a foe of big government in nearly all its forms (the Department of Defense very much included), a man of ideas rather than of party.

Gingrich, on the other hand, is the kind of conservative that liberals believe most Tea Partiers to be – not a genuine “don’t tread on me” libertarian, but a partisan Republican whose unstinting support for George W. Bush’s deficit spending morphed into hand-wringing horror of “socialism” once a Democrat captured the Oval Office.

Iowa Tea Partiers face a choice. If the town hall crashers and Washington Mall marchers of 2009 settle on a Medicare Part D-supporting, Freddie Mac-advising, Nancy Pelosi-snuggling Washington insider as their not-Romney standard bearer in 2012, then every liberal who ever sneered at the Tea Party will get to say “I told you so.” If Paul wins the caucuses, on the other hand, the movement will keep its honor – but also deliver the Republican nomination gift-wrapped to Mitt Romney.

Whole thing here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

  • ||

    Damn rumors:

    UPDATE: Johnson has told a reporter that this is something he’s looking at and that he will be in New York tomorrow to do “as many media appearances as they can wind me up and send me in that direction.” But he said he wasn’t announcing the switch tomorrow.
  • Old Mexican||

    Re: rather,

    like him but all he needs is a good sex scandal.
    My ideas


    "Whore with a librarian, like I do!"

  • ||

    Hey Hi, OM!

  • ||

    I'm as big of a Gary Johnson fan as it gets. Have given him money, have a bumper sticker, etc.

    But I think he should drop out and endorse Ron Paul now. If Paul is within a point of Gingrich in Iowa, Johnson's voters might be enough to make the difference.

    I also think Johnson should run a parallel independent campaign, with the promise to suspend it if Paul wins, and which Paul can jump onto if he loses.

  • Tim||

    Newt Gingrich: Asshole.

  • ||

    Ya know, Ross has a point there. Newkular T should be anathema to the Tea Partay. If they break for him, they are dead to me, just another bunch of dupes coopted by the establishment.

  • Illuminati ||

    Give it up and go back to fly fishing. It always breaks our way.

  • Anonymous||

    Time to go home and be a family man! http://youtu.be/ZpUftAztHXU

  • ||

    You might want to start preparing for a funeral, then.

  • tarran||

    I remember the first bona-fide tea partier I met almost two years ago. He hated Ron Paul because he was certain that Ron Paul had said that it was good that Iraqi's were killing american troops. He was a young kid and very gung ho about going into the USMC.

  • ||

    "Tea Party" is just a euphemism for "TEAM RED but harder".

  • MWG||

    Sigh... This.

  • ||

    It is funny how Ron Paul gets more donations from the active duty military than all the other candidates combined.

  • tarran||

    Wow....

    I just spent five minutes typing up a huge reply - only to realize that I was making the comment that most people in the Tea Party suffered from 'false consciousness'. Yech.

  • anon||

    Yeah, it's really that second 8 ball that gets you going.

  • ||

    Tea Partiers already broke his way. But the independents may still hand the victory to Paul.

    Hence the reason I was never enthusiastic about the Tea Party. It was co-opted early on by the neocon/socon establishment and became an arm of grover norquist more than anything else.

  • anonymous commenter some guy||

    Tea Partier: "We need less government involvement in the economy, less federal spending and lower taxes. We need a government that respects the individual rights of it's people. But dont' touch my Medicare or Social Security. Keep fighting the War on Drugs too. And stay tough on criminals, terrorists and illegal immigrants."

  • ||

    Tea Partiers: "Less Taxes Now, Less government sometime when I'm not annoyed at everyone".

  • Gojira||

    Your translation there was not lost, it was spot-on.

    End socialism!...after I'm dead and don't need it anymore. For the children.

  • hazeeran||

    Depressing because it's true. Tea partiers I know are backing the subsidy, individual mandate and drug war supporting Gingrich.

    Because Dems are the big government party!

  • db||

    obama is still fighting the drug war and the war abroad.

  • hazeeran||

    Yes, and?

  • I, Kahn O'Clast||

    They'll choose Newt and prove themselves the phonies I always thought most of them to be....

  • Beloved Rev. Blue Moon||

    I cannot read that word without thinking of Holden Caulfield. And thinking of Holden Caulfield makes me want to punch babies.

    WHY DO YOU HATE BABIES, I KAHN?

  • ||

    From hell's heart, he stabs at thee...

  • I, Kahn O'Clast||

    The crying, shitting, stinking, sticky, wrinkled, little monsters? Why hate them? No idea.

    Holden Caulfield? Really?!?

  • ||

    That is one of the great benefits of being a lousy, lazy student. That abhorrent waste of text was one of the many books I didn't read in high school English class.

  • ||

    Johnson is the only sane one in the lot. I suppose Romney is too, but he sucks.

  • ||

    Ron Paul is crazy like a fox. Mitt Romney is sane like a...

  • ||

    Romney is playdoh. If only we could get our hands on him.

  • George W. Bush's Policies||

    FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!

  • Ken E.||

    The neocons will continue to attack Paul for as long as he doesn't embrace their Israel First foreign policy.

  • ||

    I think we really need a Belgium First foreign policy.

  • Gojira||

    Securing strategic stockpiles of waffles is a national security priority.

    Over the long run we do need to work on waffle independence, so that we no longer have to rely on the mercurial Belgians.

  • ||

    No, Jim. Beer.

  • Gojira||

    I'm actually not a huge fan of Belgian beer. Thus my disdain for allowing my taxpayer dollars to be used to subsidize it.

    Schwarzbier on the other hand...

  • ||

    You're an anti-trappite

  • ||

    Don't like Belgian Ale? How can this be??

  • ||

    That is because you are a Philistine and a horrible anti-papist bigot.

  • Gojira||

    It's really because I'm a very serious malt and roasted barley kind of guy.

    I love my beer to be thick, black, and chunky (insert gay joke), like liquid bread.

    Drink Stormking. It'll make a man out of ya.

  • ||

    Belgium Ale can be very thick. But it is also a bit sweet, which turns a lot of people off. I like Swarzbier as well. I would definitely take that or a good weisen over the over hopped American craft beer any day. The God damned hipsters and their obsession with hops have almost ruined the American craft beer industry.

    I think yours and my beer tastes are probably pretty close.

  • Gojira||

    Probably. I'm not big on weisen, but I do like the unfiltered varieties. Pyramid makes a decent one.

    I completely, 100% agree with you re: the crappiness of American craft brewers obsession with hopping the ever-loving shit out of everything. Nobody pays attention to crafting a good porter or stout.

    I've found the Lefthand brewing company to be pretty good in that regard. Their Fade to Black is one of my favs.

  • ||

    My favorite beer in the world is an unfiltered German wheat. You get that stuff over there and can drink it by the gallon and never have a hangover. It is Teutonic gift to the world.

  • ||

    My friend brews a really nice oatmeal stout. I love the hell out of it.

  • ||

    I'm on the "Back the fuck off on the hops already, you knobs" bandwagon.

    The variety of Belgian beers is astounding. Plenty of thick malty ones, although to my palate the distinctive flavor of Belgian beers is the sour note, rather than sweetness.

  • ||

    I always hated beer, but last summer forced myself to experiment. Pyramid's unfiltered Apricot Ale is the first beer I ever truly loved. Since then I've found a few more, but it's still my favorite.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    You have never had Westvleteren.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    meant for Jim

  • Gojira||

    You are correct. I'm willing to conceed that I may have simply been trying the wrong Belgians, but all the ones I've had were light, crisp, and either a little too sweet or bitter for my taste. But again, could just be sample bias.

  • sounds real good||

    Chocolate. It's Belgian chocolate we desperately need.

  • hazeeran||

    Why do you hate Botswana L. I. Translation?

  • ||

    Aren't they like the Lebanon of southern Africa. Probably influenced by those nefarious Zimbabweins.

  • hazeeran||

    This calls for a military base and droney skies.

  • ||

    Why aren't we bombing Zimbabwe? Still with the white guilt thing?

  • hazeeran||

    44 already sent troops to Uganda, so if he wins another term I wouldn't rule it out.

  • ||

    You might want to talk to the British about that. Their Belgium first policy didn't work out so well in 1914.

  • Fluffy||

    Meh, their policy really was "Kill Germany even if we kill ourselves in the process!"

    By that measure 1914 and seq. turned out splendidly.

  • ||

    If the Germans hadn't invaded Belgium the British would have stayed out of the war.

  • ||

    Once again, no one really gives a shit what happens to France.

  • ||

    Oh but the food there is so good.

  • ||

    Their desserts are. The main dishes (atleast outside of Paris) are too starchy. They love potatos.

  • ||

    Fois Gras baby.

  • ||

    Even Belgium doesn't have a Belgium First policy.

  • ||

    The funny thing is, the media doesn't really think Paul is personally crazy, they think the whole idea of smaller government is crazy. Paul just happens to be the only candidate promoting that message however, ergo...

  • ||

    Ron Paul is "impressively consistent". But "deeply principled", no. I can't identify any principle at all in his policies. He is a deeply religious person who happens to prescribe many policies that are consonant with Liberty. He also prescribes many policies that aren't.

  • ||

    He is a deeply religious person who happens to prescribe many policies that are consonant with Liberty

    But can he buy a vowell?

  • ||

    Seems like you need to sell a consonant

  • ||

    I like to keep spare ones for RC.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...but also deliver the Republican nomination gift-wrapped to Mitt Romney.

    Romney will have the nomination no matter what happens. It's his turn.

  • ||

    yes, romney is the man the gop want. he might loose (or win) vs. obama, but the banks won't care.

    the central banks seem to run the world now, and they just need a cheerleader in the white house.

    gingrich, i guess, might be the tea party's answer to romney, but like this page says, that choice is very short-sighted.

    paul on the other hand seems to be the future of the GOP. yeah, he's a bit much sometimes, but he reps the more interesting ideas, and stands for freedom (which seems to scare people these days.) but if the economy does in fact collapse, the paulian movement will just get bigger. paulites are also young, and i think once the neocon ideology fades (and it will; it's too paranoid to last) future republicans will have tweeked paul's general ideas, give him is just due, and restore the constitution.

    it might take a few cycles to get this done, but the structural problems facing america (FED, wages vs china) will not be solved by more welfare or wars. both parties are the walking dead at the moment, and it's the reason a 76 yearold outsider commands so much attention. if he wins Iowa...

    btw. there is nothing much israel or the usa can do to stop a nulcear iran. china and russia would flip. what the war mongering about is beyond me. there is no money left for war.

  • TrueConservative||

    Look, I agree with Ron Paul on ending the stupid government handouts to corporations, but he is just so wrong on so many things.

    First, it is stupid to legalize drugs. People get addicted to them and then they impose huge costs on the rest of us that we have to pay. I don't want my kids being able to get high at school because Ron Paul tells them its okay.

    Second, his foreign policy isolationist views are just crazy! I mean, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, then the whole world is fucked. Does he seriously think we would be able to avoid being involved in a war between Iran and Israel? Isolation has never been an efective policy.

    Newt is the only serious conservative candidate running, and we should all support him to avoid Owebama getting another term!

  • Beloved Rev. Blue Moon||

    Oh Em Gee, you must be made-up.

  • ||

    I give it a B. Not bad, but a little too obvious.

  • Anonymous||

    Yeah, I probably overstepped a little. I was hoping that the vets might stay away for a little while. Oh well, I'll hit that troll sweet spot later.

  • ||

    I'll grind your bones to my malt-o-meal, you!!

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    You messed up by making the appeal to your children too early in the rant. A true troll knows that is their strongest evidence, and saves it for the end of the rant. Hey, rookie mistake. Don't let it bother you.

  • Anonymous||

    Yeah, I was trolling the HuffPo comments section earlier. They are much easier, you guys are getting too hard to fool what with Dunphy et al. doing most of my job for me.

    Hopefully this site gets some fresh blood if/when Ron Paul does well in the primaries.

  • Gojira||

    It's pretty decent. I wish I'd come up with it.

  • ||

    It was good except for the drug part. The drug part was just warmed over Juanita.

  • Hot Carl||

    Hey, I love me some warmed-over Juanita.

  • ||

    First, it is stupid to legalize drugs. People get addicted to them and then they impose huge costs on the rest of us that we have to pay. I don't want my kids being able to get high at school because Ron Paul tells them its okay.

    Yes, because alcohol has been getting elementary students drunk in school for decades...

    Second, his foreign policy isolationist views are just crazy! I mean, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, then the whole world is fucked. Does he seriously think we would be able to avoid being involved in a war between Iran and Israel? Isolation has never been an efective policy.

    If Pakistan/China/North Korea gets a nuclear weapon the whole world is fucked...oh wait...and why are you so sure Iran and Israel are just about to fight a war that we'll for some reason need to get involved in.

    But then again, I forget. Convenient fictions and wild imagination is what this nation needs more than facts and logic.

    Newt is serious...as a fucking fiscal heart attack.

  • ||

    i think you got your facts wrong.
    Ron Paul does not want to legalize drugs. He wants it to be handled at the state level.

    Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist. Big difference. He wants to trade freely with all countries.

    And where is the proof that Iran is building a nuke? Remember all the "proof" of WMDs in Iraq?

    RON PAUL 2012!!!

  • ||

    God, fooled be a spoof, berated by a Paultard.

    I better start drinking early

  • ||

    are you saying that what I said is wrong? Go do some research instead of regurgitating what you read in the MSM.

  • tarran||

    And Gary, you might want to read what you are replying to instead of just writing a rebuttal to what you assume they are writing.

  • ||

    is that one sentence? did you proof read that?
    just kidding - haha

  • ||

    i swear, Paultards are becoming their own trolls.

  • ||

    hey, I'm not a Paultard, i'm a Paulbot

  • ||

    so is that like denying sentience or affirming it?

  • ||

    Does anyone else feel like they are covered in a thick layer of scummy slime after reading this comment?

  • ||

    yes, it leaves a slimy residue. Kinda like touching a salamander(newt)

  • hazeeran||

    Man, if we don't help overthrow Mossadegh, the whole world is fucked!

  • ||

    Unnecessary considering Holy Cow will be along any minute now.

  • anon||

    obvious team red troll is obvious.

  • Anonymous||

    You can catch me later teamkilling on MW3!

  • jerry||

    You listed detailed responses on Paul positions..his opponents don't do this...it is a dead giveaway. You have to say HES CRAZY OMG WE GONNA BE BOMBED.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: TrueConservativeSocialist,

    First, it is stupid to legalize drugs. People get addicted to them and then they impose huge costs on the rest of us that we have to pay.


    The same argument could be applied to just about everything we humans do. You're not arguing anything.

    Second, his foreign policy isolationist views are just crazy!


    Not wanting to send troops to some backwater shithole to kill brownpeople while we are extorted out of our money to pay for it is hardly an "isolationist" policy.

    I mean, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, then the whole world is fucked.


    Yeah, that makes sense - not that the country that actually USED nuclear weapons not once, but TWICE, fuck up the world by having them. Nah, it would have to be the mighty Persians.

  • TrueConservative||

    I hate when unpatriotic Americans try to push their morally equivalent progressive secular agenda onto the discussion. Iran is not anything like the United states and would not hesitate to use their nuclear weapons to wreak havoc!

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: TrueConservativeSocialist,

    I hate when unpatriotic Americans try to push their morally equivalent progressive secular agenda onto the discussion.


    Nationalistic jingoism is hardly a non-Progressive, non-morally relativistic stance, T.

    Iran is not anything like the United states[.]


    You're absolutely right - the US has killed far more people than the Iranians. They're certainly not equivalent.

    [...] and would not hesitate to use their nuclear weapons to wreak havoc!


    They don't have even ONE, let alone many, you nitwit.

  • poetry||

    much, much better than above

    96/100

  • db||

    never hear about the swiss having these problems. or canada for that matter.

  • TrueConservative||

    But the Swiss and Canadians are not responsible for the world being at peace the last 70 years! Can't you see our military keeps the world safe for commerce etc.?

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: TrueConservative,

    But the Swiss and Canadians are not responsible for the world being at peace the last 70 years!


    You're absolutely right. Neither is anybody else. Unless, of course, you want to tell me that Korea and Vietnam never happened.

  • TrueConservative||

    Korea and Vietnam were necessary but regrettable wars against communism-- now we have a new existential threat called fundamentalism islam that we have to take seriously if we want to survice as a civilization. But you probably think that we should just arrest terrorists and give them the same privileges we give citizens! What a joke!

  • Troll Evaluation||

    Started strong, but gave it away towards the end. No self-undermining sarcasm!

    78/100

  • k2000k||

    Well he is right, there has been a documented decrease in world wide conflicts since the US became the head honcho. It has nothing to do with us being morally surperior though.

  • k2000k||

    The reason the world has been less warlike now than in the past has nthoing to do with us being benevolent. It has everything to do with the fact that we would fuck up whoever upset the order that we created. Now knowing that, it means that whether or not we had troops in Korea, Germany, or Iraq wouldn't make a difference. As long as no one can rival us on the seas or in space there will be peace, as long as we wish there to be peace.

  • ||

    Gingrich a conservative! Ha that is the funniest thing I've heard all month. I've been responsible for convincing five independents and democrats to register as republicans just so they can vote for Paul. Imagine if every Paul supporter did the same. Who do you think will win? And my thinking is I haven't done enough.

    Ron Paul 2012

  • ||

    A newt is characterised by a frog-like body with four equal sized limbs and a distinct tail. They have true teeth on both upper and lower jaws, and external gills. They have the ability to regenerate limbs, eyes, spinal cords, hearts, intestines, and upper and lower jaws.

    Doesn't sound like presidential material to me.

    RON PAUL 2012!!!

  • Joseph||

    I happen to enjoy most of Paul's planks, but I get the feeling that most of the commenters on this site go more for the reasoning & exchange of ideas as opposed to the "shameless" RON PAUL 2012!! Might want to make the arguements and endorsements a little more subtle.

  • paulaholic||

    I agree. It seems almost redundant to plug Paul that way on a libertarian site.

  • free2booze||

    Oh my...

    Paul is all bone and sinew and nervous energy – an Ichabod Crane or a Jack Sprat, hunched and herky-jerky in too-large suits. Gingrich is broad and self-assured and faintly decadent, with a Cheshire Cat’s face and a body that looks like it’s ready for its toga.
  • ||

    They're practically saying "Gingrich = Fat Cat"

  • hazeeran||

    Look at that, me too.

  • hazeeran||

    Damn, replying to Tony.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Or Anonymous, or whoever that was.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Squirrels, squirrels, everywhere squirrels.

  • Metazoan||

    Even if choosing Paul means handing the nomination to Romney (I highly doubt this), it is still better than handing it to Gingrich.

    Anyway, choosing Paul means a very good chance Paul will win the nomination. And I'd take the small Romney-risk and decent chance for Paul over zero chance for Paul and a Gingrich nomination (even worse than a Romney nomination IMO).

  • paulaholic||

    Gingrich and Romney are one in the same

  • Tony||

    If RP wins Iowa, the Iowa caucuses will immediately be declared irrelevant.

    Given Romney's total inability to increase his likability and Gingrich's obvious issues, you guys might as well prepare yourselves for another Obama term. I'm always pessimistic but I just don't see a pathway for any of these goofs. Obama will simply be the superior choice to most voters.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Hey. I finally agree with Tony.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Or Anonymous or whoever that was.

  • Most Voters||

    Obama will simply be the superior choice to most voters.

    I like it on the bottom.

  • ||

    Here's hoping for GOP senate capture. Then we can really sit on our hands.

  • kinnath||

    I explained this weeks ago.

    Officially, the caucuses elect delegates to the county convention which elects delegates to the state convention which elects delegates to the national convention.

    The results that get reported caucus night are merely the results of a straw poll, . . . . . and we all know that Paultards over run straw polls and it really doesn't mean anything.

    See, it's easy.

  • anon||

    No way that's the real Tony. Someone forgot to change their handle after trolling.

  • ||

    Tony's delusions are nothing if not consistent and entertaining.

  • Tony||

    You on the Romney train yet John?

  • ||

    As I said above your delusions are entertaining and consistent if more than a bit pathetic.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony the you know what,

    If RP wins Iowa, the Iowa caucuses will immediately be declared irrelevant.


    Which will be an irrelevant act in itself - people will know that they weren't irrelevant; you can't undo history.

  • Tony||

    Since '76 half the non-incumbent Republicans who've won Iowa won the nomination, so it's not irrelevant. I'm just saying, a RP victory will be spun as a victory for Romney.

  • anon||

    To all the "conservatives" worried about their kids doing drugs...

    Do you seriously think it's -hard- to get drugs in a government school?

    AHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

    oh wow.

  • ||

    Do not break the text wrap. The squirrels will jihad us!

  • ||

    The consensus this morning on the morning links thread was that Newtcular Titties was in a free fall and done. Now I, gasp do some work and everyone is convinced he is going to take the Tea Party vote and march on to the nomination. Which is it?

  • kinnath||

    The poll that was referenced this morning had two big pieces of news (one of which was reported by Reason, one of which was not). The "for" Gingrich response dropped about 8 percentage points (a big deal but not huge). The "against" Gingrich response more than doubled. So, it indicates that the anti-gringrich ads being run by Paul, Romney, and unaffliated groups are have a huge impact on Gingrich's over all image in the state of Iowa.

    If this trend continues, Gingrich will flame out like Bachman, Perry, and Cain before him.

  • ||

    Which means that he won't capture the Tea Party vote making the hand wringing about the Tea Party going on above pretty moot.

  • kinnath||

    Yes.

    I'm not sure there is a real Tea Party in Iowa.

    The social conservatives (hard core conservative Christians) tend to dominate politics at the local and state level (at least on the Republican side). These people care deeply about the quality of life here in Iowa, mostly hate D.C., and have mixed emotions about the world. They are the voters that Bachman, Perry, Santorum, and Cain have been chasing for months. Santorum is getting nowhere, and the other three have flamed out. Mitt is never going to get them either. So they either hold their noses and vote for Gingrich, switch over to Paul, or stay home.

    I don't see the so-cons staying home, and I don't see how they stick with Gingrich as more blistering ads hit the airwaves.

  • kinnath||

    Also note that the Democratic party is dominated by blue-collar, union voters.

    This is why Iowa is schizophrenic and produces Senators Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin.

  • ||

    I hate the primary system. Why the hell are people in Iowa New Hampshire and Florida determining who I get to vote for for President?

  • kinnath||

    Well, the primary/caucus system was intended take the nominating process away from the career politicians that run the parties. Can't exactly say it's been an improvement.

  • ||

    I haven't changed my position. So if by everyone, you mean several people you were talking to in the previous thread, you are incorrect. I still think he's coming down.

  • ||

    I don't think you have. But assuming you haven't, you can't then say that the Tea Party is a bunch of sellouts who are going to go for Gingrich.

  • ||

    ..and why is a vote for Ron Paul handing the nomination to Romney ? Why is it not handing the nomination to Ron Paul ?

    The propaganda media is becoming nervous that Dr. Paul might actually win. He is the only repub candidate who can take Obama head on, because he is the only one who can take votes AWAY from Obama ( the disaffected Lib and Dem voters who like his anti-war stance ). He will also garner most of the independents.., and all of the ABO crowd ( anyone but Obama ), thus making him a formidable opponent.

    http://www.therightperspective.....ngest-a...

    'Newt-Romney' is nowhere near the stark contrast to Obama that Ron Paul is in terms of records, character, principles and the choice offered ( big government Obama vs small government Paul ).

    A Paul nomination will force the issues to be debated and will highlight the differences between he and Obama.., whereas 'Newt-Romney' will allow for personal attack politics to distract from the debate.

  • ||

    That is a good question. Last I looked a vote for a candidate is a vote for that candidate. Why can't Paul win the nomination? He has a ton of money and a huge base of support. I am hardly a Paulite. But I find the dismissing of his campaign to be downright pathetic.

  • tarran||

    But I find the dismissing of his campaign to be downright pathetic.

    Here, educate yourself! (I know you've read it; I just am messing with you)

  • ||

    Rush Limbaugh says we shouldn't be too picky when it comes to picking a conservative leader. Never mind the climate change, the lobbyist whoring, the Romneycare... No, according to Rush it is Ron Paul that is "nutty".

  • ||

    "Nancy Pelosi-snuggling"

    I don't believe I will ever stop vomiting.

  • Skip||

    So leftards hate Newt because he is secretly a liberal?

  • ||

    The leftards hate Newt for the same reason they hated Nixon, he beat them. The leftards should have loved Nixon. He ended the draft, and the Vietnam War, created the EPA and the EEOC, went for wage and price controls. Of all of the Republican Presidents after World War II, Nixon should have been the most acceptable to them. But they hate him more than any of them? Why? Because he had the termity to call Alger Hiss a liar and then beat Hubert Humphrey for the Presidency.

    Newt is the same way. Newt is and will always be the guy who took the House away from them. And the Left thinks it is their divine right to always be in power no matter how badly they fuck up. The will never forgive Newt for that no matter how many commercials he makes with Pelosi.

  • Tony||

    I agree that Nixon, the guy who was forced from office in disgrace, is a superior Republican to any in existence today.

    I actually like Newt over the other guys because he's interesting to watch, in the way that Hannibal Lecter is interesting to a psychotherapist.

    The people most horrified at the thought of him being president are Republicans who've served under him. That's interesting.

    But like Nixon, Newt is a Republican of a different era, a time when it was still considered necessary to speak English in a way that suggested they had no problem with 8th grade.

  • ||

    Tony,

    We currently have probably the least intelligent, least educated most crude thinking President in history. The age of Obama has ended any thoughts of left intellectual superiority.

    Our entire political class has degenerated. The Democrats have gone from Tip O'Neil and Danial Moynahan to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Moynahan wrote more books than Pelosi and Reid have ever read, assuming they can read and that is up for debate.

  • Tony||

    I'm sure the Obama you read about at Newsmax and wherever else you prefer to get your fire-breathing partisan bullshit is a moron, but here in reality he's one of the more intellectual presidents we've had. He's one of the best political tacticians I've ever seen, and (this is where I tend to part ways with other liberals) I admire his pragmatic impulses.

    Maybe you're right about Democrats but you're ignoring the log in your eye that is the party of dry drunk G.W. Bush, narcissistic moron Sarah Palin, insane freak Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry, whose unparalleled idiocy confirms all of my worst suspicions about Texans.

    If you're going to engage in a pissing contest at least come to it with something in your bladder.

  • ||

    I read Obama's speeches. He is a moron. There is nothing intellectual or intelligent about the crude Chavez style populism that he espouses. Read his speech in Kansas. It is crude and disgusting. That is why he has never been able to build a coalition and has had to pass things by crude force of numbers. He is just not very bright or articulate.

  • Tony||

    You're judging his intelligence on speeches (speeches considered some of the best of the modern era I might add)? If they've been criticized it's for being too professorial, but speeches aren't exactly supposed to be college theses. I will give you that he's not among the great deliverers of oratory unless he's practiced a speech a bunch.

    This particular strand of right-wing spaghetti really just doesn't stick. Nobody but Drudge zombies thinks Obama is a moron.

    Besides, the other half of the time you guys say he's an evil scheming tyrant. As long as it's an insult I guess that's all that matters.

  • k2000k||

    According to what objective standard Tony? Until I see our presidents IQ scores lined up I will dimsiss the intellectual and intelligent claims as so much PR bullshit. If you think that anything you see on TV about any of the politicans is actually what they are like behind close doors then get real. Its all a fucking act.

  • ||

    "here in reality he's one of the more intellectual presidents we've had"

    Honestly, what the fuck does it matter how "smart" the President is? Although I have an IQ that qualifies me for Mensa, I honestly don't care if the President has an IQ barely above the minimum for basic vegetative bodily function.

    I only care if they're an asshole who wants to tell me how to live and what to pay for, which covers just about all politicians.

    As sad as it is to say, self-proclaimed "intellectuals" like you tend to be drawn towards viewing everyone else as rubes than need paternalistic guidance to survive. In essence, you treat everyone as helpless retards and force all to accept your "compassion". Then you congratulate yourself on how brilliant you are, even when everything you've done is completely self-defeating and causes greater poverty.

    With the artifice stripped away, you're really just masturbating in front of a mirror.

  • ||

    And nothing Nixon did was any worse than the things Johnson and Kennedy did.

  • Fluffy||

    Leftards hate Newt because he tried to destroy Bill Clinton.

    Never underestimate the power of the personal.

    I like Ron Paul, but if I come home one day and he's fucking my wife I'm going to dislike him. All his policy positions and political history will mean nothing then.

    To leftards, trying to get Bill Clinton impeached is the equivalent of wife-fucking. It trumps everything else he ever did before or since.

    I also think you can't underestimate the institutional hostility on the left that attached itself to Gingrich when the Dems lost the House in 1994. The Dems had had the House for two generations. Lots of professional leftists had nice little House jobs that they never thought they'd lose. There is still anger out there that the GOP ever became a majority in the House.

    Compared to that, being willing to collaborate with Nancy Pelosi on chaining the rest of us with a cap and trade scheme is small potatoes to leftards.

  • ||

    We both said the same thing. The left hatred of Nixon stemmed from his destroying Alger Hiss. It was very personal, just like their dislike of Gingrich is.

  • Robert||

    In that regard, ever read how Howard Fast lampooned Nixon in The Pledge? Fast's distortions actually made me sympathetic to the witch hunters.

  • ||

    Newt is best known for his unreliability. Kinda like my going-to-be-ex-husband. His mother died just a little while ago. I went to her. He is unavailable in Saudi Arabia, because that is what he does, like all top-downers who need to control everything but take responsibility for nothing. And I have to talk to the kids myself, too. So, stick a fork in Newt for me, cuz I'm done.

  • ||

    what a ridiculous conclusion. Mitt Romney is definitely not getting the nomination. Neither is Gingrich. When the smoke clears in June, it will be Ron Paul standing. And the best thing about it, will be that he did it while being ignored and marginalized by the MSM

  • ||

    what a ridiculous conclusion. Mitt Romney is definitely not getting the nomination. Neither is Gingrich. When the smoke clears in June, it will be Ron Paul standing. And the best thing about it, will be that he did it while being ignored and marginalized by the MSM

  • ||

    Yes, they represent two different end points alright: Ron Paul the inception, Newt Gingrich the last nail in coffin.

    If you call yourself a tea partier and vote for someone other than Ron Paul, you are a fraud.

  • Neu Mejican||

    If you call yourself a tea partier and vote for someone other than Ron Paul, you are a fraud.

    I think Tea Partiers might prefer Johnson without being a fraud.

    That said, If you call yourself a tea partier and vote for someone other than Ron Paul, you are a probably a fraud.

  • ChrisO||

    The Tea Party was always an amorphous collection of various conservative factions. That said, none of the people I know who actively considered themselves Tea Partiers in 2009-10 are Gingrich supporters now.

    What happened is that it became unfashionable within the GOP to *not* call oneself a Tea Partier. Thus, you get barnacles like Newt Gingrich trying to attach themselves to the Tea Party hull.

  • ||

    Shouldn't be too hard for the Tea Party people. Newt wants big government/Police State.
    Ron wants Freedom and Liberty.
    Pretty easy choice for me.
    Ron Paul 2012

  • Neu Mejican||

    We currently have probably the least intelligent, least educated most crude thinking President in history.

    Least educated?

    Considering the number of presidents that had little formal education or no college, I think 7 years of college including stints at Columbia and Harvard...ignoring 12 years of teaching...makes this a hard claim to swallow.

    http://www.successdegrees.com/.....dents.html

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    I think he meant mis-educated like how Nazis were mis-educated with gibberish about Aryan superiority.

  • Mr. Mark||

    Right now, in the United States, there are exactly 8,231 practicing neurosurgeons. (I have no idea, but I wanted to try out that phony statistics tactic the Left uses so much.)

    In any case, there's a bunch of people who fix brains, do nuclear engineering, design new life-saving drugs, and other such things that involve thinking well and making good decisions.

    Exactly ZERO percent of them are running for president (that's actually a true statistic).

    Haven't some of you ever wanted to jet around on Air Force One? Don't some of you want to do some sightseeing around the world? Maybe you've played Diplomacy or Risk a few times and wondered about doing the real thing?

    I look at the boneheads running the government and I think...W T F ?

    Thank you for your attention. That is all.

  • ||

    Ron Paul will be sitting in the White House while they are still saying it does not matter.

  • Buzz Fisher||

    Let's all join the Christmas iTunes Bomb and get Golden State's "Bombs (The Ron Paul Song)" to #1! We can reach a whole new audience, and the proceeds will be donated to the Revolution Super PAC.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE30TH6Y7cI

    http://itunesbomb.com

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement