Ron Paul Campaign Attacks GOP Rivals, Prepares to "Surge in South Carolina"

Manchester, N.H.—After a strong second place finish in New Hampshire last night the Ron Paul campaign will move on to South Carolina, Florida, and Nevada. Yet despite his success in both Iowa and New Hampshire, people are still asking Paul when he will drop out of the race and whether he will run as a third party candidate. Jesse Benton, Paul's national campaign chairman, thinks these suggestions are pure hogwash.  

"We wouldn't be doing this if we didn't think we could win. We're gonna surge in South Carolina like we did in New Hampshire. Then we're on to the caucuses," he said.

Benton also confirmed that the campaign is reevaluating its Florida plans because the state may make changes to the way it awards delegates that would help the Paul campaign.

"We have strong organizations in Colorado, Minnesota, Maine, Nevada, Kansas, Missouri, Washington state, and Arizona. We're going to win some of those caucuses," Benton said as victory music and chants of "Ron Paul" punctured the air.

One of the other places where the Paul campaign has exceeded expectations is ballot access.

"I think deadlines have only passed for about half of the states but we're on all the ballots where deadlines have passed and we will be on all the ballots," said Benton.

Benton also criticized Paul's opponents for failing to make the ballot. "Jon Huntsman isn't on in Illinois, Virginia, or Arizona. That's pretty disgraceful actually. Arizona has the easiest ballot laws in the country; that means they're not serious. Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, not on in Virginia. If you're not on the ballot in those states you're not a serious candidate."

Benton summed it up quickly before moving on to other interviews: "This race is coming down to two candidates now. There's Mitt Romney who's a nice guy and he represents the status quo, and there's Ron Paul who represents real change. We're in this thing to win it."

For additional Reason coverage of Ron Paul's campaign, click here.

Comments

[R C Dean]

Flickers of hope. Must. Stomp. Out.

[rho]

Who is it that damns Paul for infecting people with his optimism?

I'm with that guy.

[*]

TWC

[sarcasmic]

I hope a Texan will do better than a Yankee Mormon in the South.

[Pro Libertate]

Paul would do better if it were only between them. That's why his campaign is trying to pressure the other candidates to drop out.

[Tulpa]

"pressure"?

[robc]

The press release calling on them to drop out. It is tiny amount of pressure, but I think it qualifies.

[Pro Libertate]

Of course it does. I didn't say it would work; I'm just saying that calling them out as running pure vanity campaigns benefiting Romney at this point is pressuring them to withdraw.

[tarran]

I took it as an attempt to gin up controversy and hence free publicity.

[Pro Libertate]

If Paul had any significant support at the RNC level, such pressure might work. But they fear him like Dracula fears a cross.

[OWS-VPS]

United Steelworkers Report Offers Six Ways To Build A Progressive Economy

By Erik Loomis

We all know the economy is a disaster. Globalization and free market capitalism have created long-term unemployment, a political climate poisoned against progressive taxation, and a general unwillingness to tackle the structural problems facing the United States. The Republican Party exists to further the interest of the mega-rich while much of the Democratic Party follows suit. Meanwhile, the standard of living of average Americans declines.

With the lack of real leadership from Washington, we need progressives to stand up and offer meaningful policy solutions to reshape the debate. Led by Leo Hindery, chair of the Smart Globalization Initiative at the New America Foundation and Leo W. Girard, president of the United Steelworkers, the Task Force on Job Creation has released a report providing an excellent framework for revitalizing the American economy.

Entitled "A Vision for Economic Renewal: An American Jobs Agenda," the report argues, "Our national leadership is responsible for tackling such crises, and President Obama has shown a willingness to reform health care and regulate the financial services industries. Today our nation needs that same passion and commitment directed at job creation." It then presents a six-point plan with short- and long-term policy proposals. By and large, these are sensible ideas that, should we follow them, would bring America back from the brink of disaster.

1. Manufacturing

Noting, "Manufacturing is essential for our nation's economic recovery and long-term health," the report suggests three immediate goals. First, the government should focus on domestic procurement, buying goods with at least 75 percent of the content made within U.S. borders. Second, it would spur domestic manufacturing with a 10 percent investment tax credit for renovating manufacturing facilities. Third, it would require those bidding for government contracts to file Employment Impact Statements that would factor into winning those contracts. In the longer-term, it asks President Obama to create a new Works Progress Administration-like program that would directly employee Americans to rebuild the American economy, create a President's Council on Manufacturing Policy, and promote research and development in new technologies.

These ideas strike at the heart of the economic crisis: national policy currently encourages cutting workforces and sending jobs overseas through corporate tax breaks for companies investing overseas rather than creating jobs in the U.S. We cannot put the economy back together again unless we have people making things in America. Manufacturing work has an essential role to play in any successful economic recovery package. Without it, we will continue with our rapidly growing income inequality problems. The report's recommendations provide a valuable starting point for dealing with these problems.

2. Trade and Globalization

Rightfully noting globalization is undermining the American economy through the rapid acceleration of outsourcing American jobs and decimating labor and environmental standards around the world, the report urges President Obama to eliminate tax incentives that rewards corporations for outsourcing jobs overseas, promote producing military goods at home, enact temporary tariffs that would allow the nation to deal with trade deficits without violating trade agreements, and create a new division within the Justice Department to enforce trade agreements. Long-term goals include government promotion of vocational and technical training and developing strategies for technology-based planning that would provide national control for technologies key to future consumer needs.

Again, the report provides a fine road map for battling against the worst aspects of globalization while also encouraging business-friendly policies such as tax reforms that could convince them to keep jobs in the United States. Given the enormous military-industrial complex, the report's emphasis on spurring domestic defense manufacturing makes a great deal of sense; no other sector could put so many people to work so quickly. I am nervous about embracing military spending as the solution to any crisis. But if our goal is to put Americans back to work, it is better to employ Americans in defense production than shipping the jobs overseas and leaving many young Americans with no choice other than joining the military. Reforming America's relationship with globalization would be fraught with problems. No nation did more to promote it and no nation's capitalists have benefited more. But if we are going to deal with its employment problem, redefining our relationship with globalization must happen.

3. U.S.-China Trade

The report paints China as a nation declaring war on the American way of life through its hostile economic policies and secretive political institutions. It seeks to undermine China's growing influence in the world in several ways. First, the U.S. should place pressure on China to reform its currency devaluation, a major reason it has attracted so many manufacturing jobs. Second, China needs to respect intellectual property rights and engage in more transparent practices in trade policy. If China resists these demands, the report encourages the government to bring World Trade Organization suits against it.

This seems the most difficult part of the report to implement. American corporations are deeply enmeshed in China. They have little discomfort with its lack of democracy. Corporations find that dictatorial regimes are often better for business?no tricky labor unions, populist movements, or environmental regulations. Corporate investment in China has not resulted in greater freedom for the Chinese or American people. China's devalued currency has led to massive corporate profits at the expense of American workers. Increased Chinese investment in the United States and its growing sphere of influence in the developing world make it a major threat to U.S. interests in coming years, but for these very reasons create a situation difficult for American policymakers to resist. However, recognizing the very real role the Chinese government has in undermining American employment is important and should be a major part of our foreign policy toward that nation.

4. Infrastructure Crisis

The report points to the nation's crumbling infrastructure as a major source of potential jobs. Physical infrastructure such as bridges and roads are falling apart while the nation lags behind in building infrastructure for broadband service and other new technologies. The report urges policymakers to create a National Infrastructure Bank, which Senator John Kerry and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro have proposed. This would be an independent institution dedicated to providing bonds and loans for infrastructure projects. In the longer term, the report suggests federal guarantees on municipal bonds for infrastructure and the creation of a White House Office of Infrastructure Investment.

I thought the I-35 bridge collapse in Minnesota would make Americans serious about rebuilding its infrastructure. Alas, Americans have short memories and the Tea Party-inspired anti-government fervor that has overtaken Washington and many state capitols undermined legislative action to invest in infrastructure. Perhaps it will take another deadly disaster to wake us up, but I'm skeptical. However, the report correctly identifies this as a both a national crisis and a way to stimulate employment. These are superb ideas. A nation with serious politicians would listen to these recommendations. Unfortunately, we live in the United States in 2011.

5. Jobs in the Green Economy

The report notes that "we lack a comprehensive policy of clean energy and economic development," and that given the problems of limited fuel sources and climate change, the government needs to prioritize creating a green economy. It calls on the government to extend grants and expand tax credits and loan guarantees for renewable energy production. In the long run, it urges a sped up process for approving green energy manufacturing.

President Obama tried to center green jobs in the early months of his administration, but had to give it up in the face of Republican belligerence over every move he made. We do need heavy investment in green jobs, not only for the current economy, but also for the future stability of the Earth. That said, while I am supportive of speeding up the process of deciding on Environmental Impact Statements for green manufacturing, we need to make sure that green energy has a negligible negative effect on the land. Rushed regulatory agencies often make bad decisions. I'd like to be as sure as possible that a solar energy installation isn't going to create localized pollution and that the chemicals used in the creation of solar panels are properly disposed. We need jobs, but also need safe and healthy human beings. The authors of the report know this, but it's also important to slow down and build a green economy that is safe for the ecosystem and human bodies.

6. Youth Unemployment

Youth unemployment has skyrocketed during the economic crisis. The report explores connections between early unemployment and long-term poverty, noting, "young people who do not have a successful work experience by age 25 are at a greatly increased risk of lifelong poverty." Even college graduates are in danger; those who have to take low-wage jobs early in their careers earn 30-40% less for life than average college graduates. The report urges the government to address this crisis by creating jobs programs for in-school youth, providing vouchers to stimulate demand for young workers, and extending the Work Opportunity Tax Credit.

I applaud the report for focusing on this serious problem. Millions of unemployed youth is a recipe for societal instability. During the Great Depression, young, unemployed men provided the shock troops for fascist regimes throughout Europe. In the United States, commentators of the day feared that the young and unemployed could take the U.S. toward either communism or fascism and fretted about both possibilities. Franklin Roosevelt, whose New Deal clearly inspired the report's authors, recognized the potential destabilizing effects of angry young people with nothing to do and put them to work in the Civilian Conservation Corps, Works Progress Administration, and other federal agencies. If anything, I'd like to see the report call for even greater emphasis on employing the young through direct government employment.

Despite a few small quibbles, in particular over policy toward China and my hesitation about undermining regulatory agencies by pressuring them to speed up green infrastructure project approval, I find the Task Force on Job Creation report a compelling document that provides a clear roadmap for a rejuvenated American economy. Although nearly each of the recommended policies make a great deal of sense, many will prove difficult to enact in the poisoned atmosphere of Republican extremism. However, liberals need powerful voices pushing for sensible policies that steer this nation back to serving the masses rather than the fat-cat elite. The ideas in this report are a great start for any progressive politician or economist looking to get this nation on track.

I want to especially credit the Steelworkers for its involvement in this report. At its best, labor isn't just fighting for the short-term interests of its members, but is at the forefront of a radical vision of social democracy that speaks truth about working-class lives to corporate and political power. Few if any American unions have done that so effectively over the past decade as the Steelworkers. This is leadership for the future, not only in this report, but also in labor and progressive politics more broadly.

Erik Loomis is a professor of labor and environmental history and a blogger at Lawyers, Guns and Money.

[RedDragon6009]

Labor unions killed my father and raped my mother!

[tarran]

For the confused; RedDragon6009 (and everyone below this point on this branch of the thread) is responding to a post that was deleted where USWA wrote approvingly of England's economic policies in the 1950's. That post having been deleted, we al look deranged; we are not. Except for Warty.

[Tulpa]

Someone's discovered that Reason is less-policed than Wikipedia.

[anon]

I think everywhere is less policed than Wikipedia.

[OWS-VP Superstar]

LOOK AT ME!!! I just figured out how to copy/paste, I'm an Internet GOD now!

[Kromulent Kristen]

And italicize with HTML! WOOT!

[anon]

tl;dr

[Montani Semper Liberi]

I saw the USW's idea of a progressive economy up close. Pittsburgh in the 80's. The city is just now starting to recover.

[o3]

missing something? like Y2K? those excessive contracts are looong gone.

[Tango Mike]

I lived through that, too. (Now we get to watch a replay in Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo...)

What I can't quite figure out is how Pittsburgh turned the corner* with the clowns we've had running the show. I find it very difficult to think our politicians have anything to do with it.
------------------------------

*For example, several wins as Most Livable City (Rand McNally [twice] and Forbes), National Geographic Best of the World (http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/travel/best-trips-2012/#/botw-main-gallery-pittsburgh_41334_600x450.jpg), G8 conference, and on and on...

[KDN]

I put this in the morning links a few months ago where it was appropriately mocked. Please try and keep up.

[DesigNate]

I bet you don't even realize that an investment tax credit would help those damn dirty one percenters make even more money.

[Dr. Fu Manchu]

The report paints China as a nation declaring war on the American way of life through its hostile economic policies and secretive political institutions.

How did you discover my most inscrutable plans? Guards, after him!

[Dekedin]

Why does the left complain that conservatives are too patriotic and nationalist when unions are some of the most nationalist people around? You can't have international cooperation without relatively free trade. Protectionism leads to conflict, it's been that way since the earliest days of mercantilism.

[.]

Erik with a 'k' huh? I smell a commie.

[Suki]

+1

[R C Dean]

I'm sorry, but if you're commenting on "Jobs in the Green Economy" and you don't mention Solyndra, you are a shill, a useful idiot, a tool.

[Barack Obama]

Solyndra only failed because of the Chinese producing panels cheaper. If we just imposed a higher tariff on China it would have worked!

[robc]

Is Florida considering proportional? I could see them changing to avoid giving all the delegates to Romney (thinking this change benefits Newt/Santorum, but it really benefits Paul)?

South Carolina, btw, is 2 delegates to the winner in each of the 7 congressional districts and 11 to the overall state winner. So winner-take-all, by state and by district.

[k2000k]

It benefits Paul insofar in that he will grab a portion of the delegates if its proportional. He won't necessariyl be in the majority, which is strange given where he is from and his personal beliefs the south should love him, but he will get a few. It makes no sense though to campaign for 50 delegates when it isn't likely he'd take first. Frankly that state is also a Romney gimme. I think Ron's real strength lies out west. He is the best chance for republicans to win the entire the left coast since Reagan.

[robc]

Some is better than none. Letting Romney walk away with 50 delegates vs holding him under 20 is a good thing.

[P Brooks]

United Steelworkers Report Offers Six Ways To Build A Progressive Economy

When I think of economic growth, the Steelworkers are the guys I turn to first for ideas.

[anon]

Yup. The ones in China sell it really cheap, allowing me to sell my parts even cheaper!

[Citizen Nothing]

I was in Youngstown last week. Man, they did a number on that town.

[OWS-VPS]

The midwest was destroyed by corporate raiders and the top 1% who shipped our jobs overseas, not by unions.

[DesigNate]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[R C Dean]

Which is really weird, since the midwest began its decline in the '70s, before overseas outsourcing of heavy manufacturing really caught on.

Most of those Detroit car-building jobs, BTW, didn't migrate overseas. They migrated to non-union states.

[John]

Corporate raiders from Indiana.

[OWS-VPS]

Non-union states where workers, instead of having secure employment at a middle class wage, are temp workers paid $12/hour with zero benefits and a fire-at-will policy. Great.

[John]

My whole family are non union workers. They seem to like it.

[OWS-VPS]

Doing what?

[John]

Healthcare, manufacturing, telecommunications.

[Occupy Wall Street VPS]

What state do they live in?

I gaurantee the poverty rate (especially childhood poverty) is higher than say, Michigan, the median income lower, wages lower, and education stats worse.

Ex. Texas has the highest childhood poverty number in the country, and the state with the most uninsured.

[Montani Semper Liberi]

Woah, a state on the border with Mexico flooded with illegal immigrants has more childhood poverty and uninsured than a state in the midwest. Fuck me, now THAT is a revelation. Do tell me more.

[Occupy Wall Street VPS]

Blaming brown people for something "free market" policies did. Gotta love that white privilege.

[John]

Yeah because millions of people showing up with nothing but the clothes on their backs would never affect the poverty rate.

They are migrating to Texas because that is where the better life is. If unionism worked, they would all be going to Detroit.

[Occupy Wall Street VPS]

They're migrating to Texas because NAFTA destroyed their farming jobs in Mexico by flooding Mexico with cheap American corn.

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblo.....the-ground

That's the real story behind illegal immigration--NAFTA did it.

[John]

Cheap food. No quicker way to destroy poor people than selling them cheap food. It is just criminal.

[Occupy Wall Street VPS]

It destroyed their jobs and your casual dismissal of it only underlines your white privilege.

[End Child Unemployment]

So it's racist to sell poor people cheap food and want to allow poor people to immigrate to your country so that they can try to become less poor. Also, being exposed to competitive pressure destroys jobs. Thanks for setting us straight.

[anon]

It destroyed their jobs and your casual dismissal of it only underlines your white privilege.

Time to pack up guys, there's no arguing white privilege.

[DesigNate]

God damn you are stupid. And you can't even make a cognizant argument without resorting to the race card. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[Geotpf]

Most Detroit car building jobs migrated to robots. Robots (and other technological improvements) are much more responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs than foreign imports OR unions.

[Barack Obama]

ATMs and the internet killed more jobs than robots though!

[John]

Odd they left places like Houston and Jacksonville alone. They must have really hated the upper midwest.

[anon]

Protip: When trolling, try not to be so obvious.
0/10

[Mob]

thx

[John]

I don't think Paul would be well served by the others dropping out. If the others stay in, especially Santorum who seems to have a lock on the SOCON vote, they could all prevent Romney from getting 50% and force a brokered convention. That creates a lot more opportunities for Paul than a one on one race with Mittens.

[Citizen Nothing]

I'm with you, John. I just don't see Paul getting more than 30% in most primaries, so he needs that divided field.

[robc]

I think Romney's cap is 30-40 percent. The idea is that Paul can draw the anti-abortion and "true" conservative vote that Romney cant.

[John]

the SOcons will never go for Paul. They love the drug war too much.

[robc]

Santorum got over 40% of the vote in Iowa and NH of people who considered abortion the #1 issue.

If you are those voters, are you voting for Romney or Paul? WoD doesnt come into play, abortion is all that matters. I mean, they voted for Santorum, they clearly arent thinking about too many concepts at once.

[John]

Maybe if Santorum endorsed Paul and dropped out. But I can't see that happening. What Paul needs is some big religious right figure to endorse him. That would keep people from claiming he is crazy.

[robc]

This is why I said last night that Paul needs to run some commercials in SC (and FL, if they change to proportional) stressing his pro-life positions. He doesnt have to change anything, just reorder what he is stressing for the different audience.

[k2000k]

It really depends, I could see the socons go either way. On the one hand Pauls stance on states rights, abortion, Romneys liberalism, and personal relgious beliefs help him. On the other Romney is viewed as more electable, and has better hair.

[End Child Unemployment]

Romney...has better hair

Well, there goes any hope we had for a return to constitutionally limited government. Dukes!

[Tonio]

Don't forget the gays. Most of the anti-abortion crowd also hate the gays. I see SC going for Frothy Boy because of this.

[o3]

but will john admit voting for romney?

[John]

One of these days I am going to come on here and post a bunch of pro Romney rants just to watch you and MNG and Tony have orgasms only to say "no didn't mean a word of it".

You can mark this post down as my warning so you there is no doubt you are being trolled.

[Mainer]

As a frequent reader and occasional poster at this blog, you are one of my favorite commenters. So I say this with love and respect, just because someone dangles the bait doesn't mean you have to take it.

[Tango Mike]

Umm...you LIKE watching other guys have orgasms?!

TMI. WAY too much TMI.

[John]

And we know you are going to vote Obama because civil rights and closing GUITMO were fierce moral urgencys, Right?

[o3]

no actually i'm voting for obama because i have no capacity 4 indipendent thought

[Realist]

The media should be asking the dumbest fuck in the room, "when he is going to drop out?"

[John]

But Mittens won the primary.

[jj]

+1

[cynical]

Confusing, since once you introduce the media into the picture, it's hard to say whether a GOP candidate is actually the dumbest fuck in the room.

[P Brooks]

The people on Bloomberg are actually talking about Ron Paul. And they are not actively disparaging him.

Amazing.

[rho]

The day is young, and cocaine's a helluva drug.

[k2000k]

I know I was watching the Fox after report and Hannity amazingly kept his mouth shut for the most part. I think whats going on is that certain members of the media are realizing that Pauls support, even if it isn't a majority, is a large portion of the nation that goes beyound an extreme fringe. Their gonna tone down their rhetoric in hopes of acquiring new viewership share. I mean even Maddow said this last night

"I think the real story is the Paul supporters, we need to bottle that up and store it because it might be a harbringer for things to come" or something to that effect.

The vipers in the nest are starting to shed their skin in hopes that we won't notice that they are still snakes.

[End Child Unemployment]

I'm actually a tad afraid of Paul winning the nomination. I've been able to find kind of a detached peace with politics, acceptance that government will always be perniciously large. I've also come to accept the idea that 95% or so of the population will just remain woefully ignorant on economics and the way business works. If it were Paul v Obama, I feel like I might not be able to maintain this detachment anymore, and go back to being incredibly angry at people who I disagree with.

[robc]

Dont worry, a Paul presidency will be a big disappointment. We will only get like 20% of what we want.

Federal spending will, at best, still be over 15% of GDP.

[End Child Unemployment]

Are you kidding me? I would be fucking ecstatic to have federal spending at 15% of GDP. Sure it's not ideal, but far far better than anything I would hope for.

[robc]

thatsthejoke.jpg

[anon]

20%?

You vastly overestimate congress.

[robc]

I figure some can be done without them. Like pardoning everyone convicted of a non-violent drug crime would go a long way towards that 20%.

[End Child Unemployment]

I think aggressive use of the veto power is a fairly credible way to stop spending.

[robc]

Eventually, they get the 2/3rds to override the veto, but yeah, I think it helps.

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be nice to see our 535 useless shits get 2/3 and do some of their Constitutionally-appointed business rather than punting to the Executive branch or a regulatory agency.

[anon]

I don't see pardoning drug offenders as viable politically, and Ron Paul is still a politician.

[robc]

It might be a last day in office type of thing.

Early on would involve shutting down the WOD.

[Tonio]

He could do this on day one. I don't see him running for a second term, so he wouldn't have to worry about re-election fallout. He's already old and the burdens of office are really stressful.

[Joe M]

Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, not on in Virginia.

That's pending:

Judge halts printing of Virginia ballots

[robc]

Goose/Gander. Those laws were created to stop the LP and other 3rd parties. Im loling at the GOP candidates getting bit by them.

[robc]

Also, Perry is absolutely right in his challenge, but its still hilarious.

[Tonio]

Uh, why?

[Warren]

Except that they won't get bit. Because those laws were created to stop the LP and other 3rd parties. Therefore they don't apply to major parties.

[PIRS]

The "L"P you mean? The "L"P nominated Bob Barr in 2008. Is that the party you mean?

[Warren]

Yes, that's the party we mean. And having fucked, the LP without realizing any of the promised gains. The reformers have largely packed up and gone home. The inmates are once again in charge of the asylum.

[Warren]

We're gonna surge in South Carolina like we did in New Hampshire.

Yeah a three percent bump after a three percent dip does not a surge make. You are toast in SC and FL. Romney will go 4-4-4 and lock up the nomination. He can turn his sites to Obama now.

[Tonio]

I see Santorum doing well in SC, possibly winning there. Also, Perry and Huntsman will probably do better there than Romney. Romney has the worst anti-abortion bona fides, plus the Mormon won't play well with upstate baptists and evangelicals. Santorum will also pull some Catholic votes in the coastal area.

[Warren]

Also, Perry and Huntsman will probably do better there than Romney.

Not a chance. Romney is polling 3x higher than Perry and Huntsman put together. Perry is already dead and Huntsman's third place finish in NH means not pulling the plug on his candidacy only prolongs the suffering.

[joe]

@warren

in your dreams elder warren

[Warren]

In my dreams Ron Paul was elected POTUS in 88

[rob]

Ron Paul 2012

And yes, I'm voting for him if he's the GOP nomination, a 3rd party candidate, or even as a write in. Tired of the same BS you'd get from Barrack Romney & Mitt Obama.

[Warren]

You would do better to vote LP than write-in for Paul. Write-in votes aren't even counted and cult of personality doesn't go very far towards lasting political change.

[Old Mexican]

Re: Warren,

You would do better to vote LP than write-in for Paul.

As long as the LP endorses and nominates RP for POTUS.

[GroundTruth]

If the mainstream media were focusing on delegates awarded, the situation might appear very different. CNN reports that Paul has 10 to Mitt-the-Twit's 12 (and Prick Sanctimonium with 8). Hardly a clean sweep for the front runner.

[Warren]

Link? Counting delegates is not so easy. Every state has their own rules, and in the end the delegate votes for whomever she wants. I'm not sure that Miss Cleo couldn't do better.

[LoVeLiBeRtY]

We know Ron Paul understands economic policy better than anyone out there See here; (On youtube again, " Ron Paul's 2002 Predictions all come true")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... . And finally, he is 100% correct in his foreign policy views & Foreign Policy Experts agree with his views, (You like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy?)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

[womanforpaul]

Ron Paul, a patriot, who has honorably served his country, defends both the constitution and civil liberties, and is for peace and prosperity. Dr. Paul has the wisdom, foresight, honesty and integrity to be president.
Dr. Paul believes spending and deficits are destroying this country. Besides the spending cuts, there are other issues of importance to conservative voters. In fact, Paul scores highly on all of them: Second Amendment protection, pro-life record, right-to-work, pro-business, anti-tax, and states' rights.
Dr. Paul also believes America should have the strongest national defense on earth ? which he believes begins with not trying to constantly police the earth. Right now, our government puts our best and bravest in harm's way on a regular basis for questionable reasons and with no discernible notion of victory. This is not supporting the troops. It's abusing them. Dr. Paul wants an end to this absurd, costly policy.
The voters have declared Dr. Paul the alternative to the liberal, flip flopping Mitt Romney. The other candidates are simply irrelevant. In the New Hampshire Primary, Dr. Paul received more votes than all the supposed Anti-Romney (Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry) candidates combined.
The question for Republican voters is not whether they can afford to vote for Dr. Paul - it's whether they can afford not to.
America Needs Ron Paul.