Ron Paul and the Iowa Straw Poll

The Iowa Straw Poll was held on Saturday, and Michelle Bachmann (an Iowa native) won with 29% of the vote. Rick Perry (the Governor of Texas) stole some of the headlines by making his Presidential campaign announcement in South Carolina on Saturday. What is barely making headlines is that Texas Congressman Ron Paul came in second with 28% of the vote in the Iowa Straw Poll.

In the 2007 Iowa Straw Poll, Mitt Romney won with 31% of the vote (he put a lot of money into Iowa in 2007, only to lose the Iowa Caucus to Mike Huckabee). Speaking of Gov. Huckabee, he came in second in Iowa with 18% of the vote in 2007.

As I recall, it was Governor Huckabee who received most of the media attention after the Iowa Straw Poll, but this year the media is barely mentioning Ron Paul. It seemed pretty obvious that Bachmann would win Iowa since she is from there and since she has practically been living there for the last few months. Only 152 votes separated Bachmann (4823 votes) and Paul (4671 votes), and yet Bachmann and the media are paying no attention to Ron Paul. Mitt Romney by the way received 567 votes … I guess he decided putting money into Iowa just wasn’t worth it after what happened in 2007-08.

As of now, I still haven’t made my final decision about who to support for President. Unless Mike Huckabee changes his mind and jumps in the race, whoever I support will be someone from the great state of Texas, with the initials R.P.  I will say this though, Rick Perry is going to have to do a lot of work to convince me that he is not just another game playing politician. For now, I continue to lean heavily toward Ron Paul.

Congratulations to Ron Paul for his amazing finish in the Iowa Straw Poll. Though the media won’t give him his due, Ron Paul is as much of a top-tier contender as Michelle Bachmann in this GOP field. 

OneMom

26 Comments:

  1. Very well said, Kerry. Ron Paul is being completely ignored by the media, as they refuse to give him credit for being a legitimate candidate for President.

    Honestly, I like a lot of what the man says, but he does trouble me with his apparent naivety about Iran. He really doesn’t seem to see them as a threat and I worry about that. Other than that, I really like his economic views, mainly because they seem to make sense to me.
    LD Jackson recently posted..The Campaign To Smear Rick Perry

    • Not only are his economic views rational, his commitment to the right to life, for homeschooling, and for smaller government are spot-on. I’m not sure I agree with you about Iran … I like Paul’s positions that the United States should not be the world police.

      • I would be more worried about Iran if they had an army or an air force. But the main way RP would increase our security vs. Arab nations is by reclaiming our sovereignty & ability to declare total war if threatened by them. If our military is not held back by NATO or the UN as Obama allows it to be, we could easily destroy Iran’s military, infrastructure & weaponry in less than a week. I agree with Dr. Paul that Iran is not suicidal enough to throw one or two bombs at at the USA at the cost of immediate & total annihilation.

    • It’s not that Ron Paul is naive when it comes to Iran, he just puts the threat of Iran into perspective (for example, by comparing it to the threat of the former USSR, which had thousands of nuclear weapons) in order to wake people up to the fear-mongering and propaganda that the U.S. govt uses as a pretext to wage war where little to no threat exists.
      The Iraq War is the perfect example of this, where intelligence was manipulated to instill fear that there were terrorists in Iraq and that Iraq possessed WMDs. All done with the intent to garner the necessary public support to go to war for ulterior motives.

      Watch Ron Paul’s CNN Interview Where He Clarifies His Position: http://bit.ly/nw3SOY

      Think about it from Iran’s perspective: They are surrounded by two countries with significant U.S. troop presence; Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet another, Pakistan, is being bombed heavily by U.S. Drone attacks and to top it all off is a nuclear power. What would you do if the world’s only superpower surrounded your borders (imagine how the U.S. might have responded if Mexico & Canada were invaded by the former USSR during the Cold War)? You would look to create an incentive against the invasion of your country and the subversion of your national sovereignty/government (something Iran is familiar with) by a foreign power. This incentive comes in the form of a deterrent (nuclear weapons), with the assurance that if they experience unwarranted aggression from a foreign power, they CAN and will strike back; Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.).

  2. LD: I don’t think Paul is naive about Iran. He feels that we underestimate the ability of other regional powers to keep them in check.

    That said, Paul is being wilfully ignored by the media. My favorite paper – the WSJ – dismissed his strong showing with a one-sentence parenthetical that said he has no chance. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy. If he has no chance it’s because the media is burying him and the GOP establishment is undermining him.
    Country Thinker recently posted..How the Eleventh Circuit Saved ObamaCare

    • Hi Ted – I thought Governor Huckabee was ignored in 2007/08, but Ron Paul comes in ~150 votes short of media-darling/Iowa native Michelle Bachmann and they barely utter his name. Just as I was in the last election, I am very tired of the media determining the Presidential outcome. Whatever happened to reporting the news and leaving personal opinion out of it. The national media should not be cherry-picking what they want to report.

      • Oh, how I agree with you about the media, Kerry. They did a vastly poor job in 2007-2008 and they have picked up where they left off with Huckabee.

        I often wonder what the Republican establishment would do if Ron Paul were to actually win the nomination.
        LD Jackson recently posted..The Campaign To Smear Rick Perry

      • The Republican establishment will do (and is doing) everything possible to minimize Ron Paul. It is a shame that when we have a candidate who actually thinks, tells the truth, and hasn’t swayed from his convictions in 50 years, that candidate is unacceptable because too many of our citizens “can’t handle the truth” (to quote Jack Nicholson).

    • You may be right, Ted. However, his words during the last debate trouble me, nonetheless. Please understand, I am not trying to bash Ron Paul.
      LD Jackson recently posted..The Campaign To Smear Rick Perry

      • Not concerned you are bashing Congressman Paul. These are the discussions all Americans need to have to really understand the candidates – unfortunately most of the candidates are nothing more than empty soundbites and there is nothing to talk about. Even more unfortunately is that the media and too much of the public only have attention spans for soundbites and not for substance.

  3. Cindy, Jethro, Rugs, Oz and Harriet

    You might be interested in this interview that our local abc station here in Houston had with Ron Paul…
    http://abc13local.go.com/ktrk/video?id=8309942
    If it doesn’t work let me know. I couldn’t copy it so had to hand type it in.

  4. Cindy, Jethro, Rugs, Oz and Harriet

    Well, I don’t think that link is going to work. I e-mailed it to you Kerry.

  5. If you want Ron Paul to win… I’d start looking for a new job if yours is federally funded.

    • David – I am federally funded, and I know that having a true fiscally conservative/smaller government president would likely cost me my job. It is why I am constantly looking for another job and for other ways that I can take care of my family without the money coming from a government grant program. Also, grant funding is a very unstable way to live – even with the democrats in charge, my funding is not certain on a week to week basis.

      I won’t be one of those people demanding that the government make cuts and then saying not to cut me.

  6. I’ve made up my mind about supporting Ron Paul.

    Rick Perry was starting to rank higher in my opinion . But then I read he mandated the HPV vaccine for girls in TX. And then just this week he said it was a mistake. Well, that just seems convienent he admitted its a mistake right after throwing his name in the hat. I am not anti-vaccine at all even though I do follow a modified vaccination schedule for my children and do not give vaccines that have human diploid cells as an ingredient. But the HPV vaccine is not something I want my daughter getting. I want her to abstain. Just like I dont want her to get condoms at school.

    • Hi Abbey – wow, I didn’t know he had mandated HPV vaccine. That is the one vaccine that really riles me. One, I get tired of it being promoted as the “cervical cancer vaccine”; two, you are exactly right that the best prevention is abstaining (don’t anyone even start to tell me that it’s too much to expect teens to abstain from sex). Thanks for the information Abbey … that is a bit of evidence regarding Rick Perry’s philosophy about government control in our lives and whether he thinks parents should be the foremost decision maker for their children.

      • So what happens if your daughter abstains and get HPV anyways, since half of men are carriers of it?

        You have no problem objecting to Perry/the government forcing people to get vaccinations… but if someone is doing something your religion doesn’t agree with (but isn’t illegal)… you want the government to stop them from doing it? Confused with the logic on that one.

      • The NCI-funded study involved more than 1,000 adult men aged 18 to 70 years old that lived in the United States, Brazil, and Mexico. All men were HIV-negative and had no history of cancer. The average age of the study participants was 32. The men were examined and tested for signs of a genital HPV infection every six months for an average of more than two years.

        Researchers noted a high rate of HPV infection in men across all age groups. The finding suggests that men are at a high risk for catching new HPV infections throughout their life.

        Cancer-causing types of genital HPV were more likely in men who had multiple sex partners, regardless of sexual preference.

        Men who had sex with more than 50 female sexual partners were 2.4 times more likely to have a cancer-causing HPV infection than men who reported having only one or no sexual partners.
        The chances of cancer-causing HPV infection was 2.6 times higher among the men who had anal sex with at least three men compared to those who had no recent partners.

        Most HPV infections usually go away on their own.

        I don’t understand your point in the last statement …

        but if someone is doing something your religion doesn’t agree with (but isn’t illegal)… you want the government to stop them from doing it? Confused with the logic on that one.

        if you’re referring to abortion, just because the government has declared something “legal” doesn’t make it moral or right. The government makes bad decisions everyday, and “legalizing” the murder of millions of innocents is the worst ever made.

    • Actually, Rick Perry didn’t actually mandate the HPV vaccine. There is more to that story than the media is telling. Please visit the link below and look for Gardasil. It will give you a little more insight as to what took place.
      LD Jackson recently posted..President Obama – We Need More Spending And More Revenue

  7. Be sure to pledge and donate for Ron Paul’s Birthday Money Bomb here http://www.ronpaul2012.com/pages/mbpledge.html

    He needs the money to continue to help people discover liberty!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *

CommentLuv badge

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.