Comments about ‘The rift between Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich — and how it helps Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman Jr.’

Ron Paul is the only candidate in either political party who is guided by the principles of liberty and the belief that individual states, communities, and families know what is best for them.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who predicted and clearly understands the economic crisis that began in 2008. For 30 years, Ron Paul has warned the public of the growing power and abuse of the Federal Reserve System. Now, other candidates are jumping on the bandwagon to audit and control the Federal Reserve. For his entire career and again in 2008, Ron Paul voted against all bailouts (Romney, Gingrich,and Obama voted in favor) stating they would actually prolong the economic slowdown.

Once again, Paul was right. The bailouts were ineffective, politically motivated, and were used to secure votes on each side of the aisle. Paul knows true capitalism allows every individual, partnership, and corporation to succeed and fail on their own merits.

I agree with nearly everything Ron Paul says, there are a few things I don't agree with, but I will take honesty and consistency over political pandering, lies, and flip-flops any day. Ron Paul and no other has my vote.

Only Ron Paul Can Beat Obama!

If, Ron Paul gets the GOP nomination: Ron Paul gets the following voters:

(A) 2008 Obama voters who thought they were going to get 'Change'
(B) 2008 Obama voters who voted to end the wars.
(C) The VAST majority of the Independent vote,
(D) The entire GOP voting block who dislikes Obama enough to vote for Ron Paul instead.
(E) Ron Paul supporters coming out to vote in DROVES.
(F) Same-sex couples who want to be set free.
(G) Democratic, disillusioned Anti-Drug war voters.
(H) Libertarians.

Ron Paul and America wins!

No other candidate can get all these voters! Only Ron Paul!

So, if you want Obama out of Office, you only chance is with Ron Paul!

Veterans For Ron Paul 2012

The token daily article about someone other whan wonder boy.

So just to make sure I have this right, if Ron Paul wins in Iowa, it's a victory for Mitt? Let's examine this logic further.

According to the article:
"Paul, like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee in 2008, has far less obvious appeal in the states beyond Iowa and would likely struggle to build his caucus victory into a broader national campaign"

Far less obvious appeal, huh? In New Hampshire and Ohio, two battleground states that Obama won in '08, Ron Paul was the only Republican to lead Obama among independents. All other Republicans trail him among that important demographic, but Ron Paul is the one with "far less appeal"?

A recent ABC news poll found Dr. Paul to be the most "trustworthy" of the candidates, but that couldn't be what voters are looking for, could it?

Ron Paul recieves more donations from active duty military than all the other Republicans put together, but he's the one with that crazy foreign policy, right?

Honestly, if Ron Paul were given a fair shake in the media, he would have a chance to really contest the nomination, but I still believe he can do it without them.

Why do these articles even mention Jon Huntsman? He clearly has no chance at winning any state, much less the Republican nomination. I liked him as governor, but I'm super tired of him in the presidential race.

Nothing against Paul personally, but have you seen his Iowa TV ad? Whew! Sure, no problem cutting a TRILLION dollars from the budget in his first year as president. Just cut out about half the Cabinet level departments altogether. What could go wrong? It reminds me of the old saying - For every complex problem, there's a simple answer that's WRONG.

In reality the rift is between Gingrich and Romney, not Dr. Paul. As argument goes though, a Gingrich debacle may help Romney but absolutely nothing can help Hunstman.....That is too funny.

Lets face it; the lamestream media dislikes ANYONE who thinks outside the box!

The media appreciate "sameness" because they're quite shallow in the first place!
Ron Paul represents a threat to the political landscape as they know it so they haven't a clue how to report it!

The most important thing for ALL VOTERS to do is to study the candidates positions on their own. Don't let the media persuade you.

BTW - I happen to believe the media is doing the best they can to praise the LEAST ELECTABLE GOP candidate to face Obama. Currently thats Newt! If Newt falls behind they'll be singing the praises of Huntsman.

I support Ron Paul for exactly the same reasons "monkeyspider" above does. But I'm waiting to see what else happens.

IF Newt is the GOP nominee, Obama wins. Newt hasn't a chance of beating Obama (too much historical baggage)but I can picture the GOP nominating him because SOME of the GOP would like to get back to "business as usual -pre- 2008".

Even if Obama wins I suspect some of the GOP stalwarts would appreciate the "sameness" he would bring.

I don't understand something here, even if Ron Paul won the Presidency, how would he get anything done. In all his years in the Senate he hasn't passed much, he has just been against most bills. He would quickly lose the support of the republicans, and don't count on any democrates backing him up. His presidency would be even less effective than Obamas has been, even if he has the best intentions in the world he is too extreme!

glad to see the eternal optomist, ms molli's inane comments. thanks for not letting me down.

@bricha
One man cannot do it alone, you are right. But he is bringing up the issues, starting discussions on the debt, endless wars, the fed etc. There is a reason he votes against most bills, because most bills are unconstitutional! How is being a constitutionalist extreme? He, as president, could do one of the biggest things to help our country out right now and that would be to bring all of our troops home! There is no declaration of war therefore he could bring all of our troops home as soon as he got into office, saving us trillions of dollars and stimulating the economy (Troops spending their money at home). Your logic is what confuses me, would you rather continue the status quo and expect change? That is in itself the definition of insanity.

@ Monkey Spider

No I would want a leader that can get other people to follow him what is the use of an idealist if he can't get other politicians to come to the same conclusions. I have said it before and I will say it again, Ron Paul's ideas make perfect sense in a philosophy class, but in the real world some of these ideas are just scary!

The rift is clearly helping Paul. According to the poll via Public Policy Polling, he is 1 point behind Gingrich in 2nd! He is an aggressive 2nd moving into 1st. That is the best place to be if you absolutely love America and want more freedom and less government.

Ron Paul is the logical choice for the GOP. A guaranteed defeat for Obama and a guaranteed win for the American people.

Fact: Internationally, the entire world supports Ron Paul. What does that tell you about perceptions on his foreign policy? The world supports the good doctor because they know he will save America, and by doing that, he will save the world.

Bringing all our troops home will inject an energetic and ethical workforce and all their dollars come home with them to spend and boost the economy.

Stock/faith in America will dramatically rise over night.

The world is watching.

Ron Paul 2012

Ron Paul will not beat Obama. The only candidate with enough appeal to independent voters like me is Jon Huntsman. If Huntsman is the nominee, Obama will have to move back to Chicago.

..Newt Gingrich sounds like a bully when he says, "I will be the nominee." He used to be the best to be had in the Grand Old Party.

Looking for a new flavor of the month, are we? John Huntsman? REALLY? He is so unpopular he wasn't even invited to the last debate.

How about retitling this piece of bias to "the rift between Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich helping Ron Paul?"

The American people are wise to your brainwashing propaganda. We are tired of the media trying to tell us who to vote for.

Ron Paul is in it to win it... for Ron Paul!

"bricha" checks and balances are important. Nobody is advocating eliminating them. I think that's what you're alluding to.

The "power of the presidency" i.e. being able to go on T.V. for a press conference and/or fireside chats would help move an immovable entrenched congress.

Particularly if the President has good leadership and/or speaking charisma.

I think Ron Paul has those skills if anyone ever gave him a chance they could see it. Unfortunately, the debate moderators don't ask him much.

Lets face it; we need to try someone different for President, and I'm not just referring to Obama!!

Representative Paul has been a dedicated servant for his district and his desire to do what is right is evident. However, he has enough of a following, he could potentially do what Ross Perot did in 1992 when we ended up with William Jefferson Clinton as President for 8 years. Ron Paul knows the dealings of Newt Gingrich almost the best of anyone running for the GOP President candidacy, as he was there at that time and the government shutdown when Newt and the President beat heads together. Who won? Newt and the Tea-Party will not lead to a stable country as there are too many factions to bring together. The Tea-Party has many good ideas and positions, they just need to unify them and Newt is not that bonding agent for them and the rest of the Republican party. Newt has too much "I" problems in his past which speaks for his future. We need someone who will dedicate himself/herself to the role of President and Commander-in-Chief for 4 years and not continue to make our nation a second-class or even third-class nation for eternity.

I would love it if Ron Paul got the nomination (I'm an Obama supporter). However, I think Paul winning Iowa only means Gingrich falls back and Romney (the second most likely to beat Obama behind Huntsman) will get the nomination.