Is Ron Paul really the choice of internet users?

[ballz2wallz]

Time and time again we hear that Ron Paul is the choice of internet users, scoring high on internet polls and supporters flooding conservative forums and blogs.

But is this really the case?

To get a real idea of who the top internet choice would be among conservatives, it would be best to turn to who the conservative blogs support. It is likely that whoever they endorse, so too will their readers.

Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and other conservative icons have yet to suggest who they endorse, but when they do you can bet that many people will listen.

So who is the candidate that most conservative bloggers support? So far, that would be Fred Thompson. Can Fred pull a surprise lead and potentially be a winner? It's very possible. The conservatives may be hiding and waiting for their chance to win. The polls are too often not representative of how the majority of the country feels. They are likely only representative of the radically active supporters, a small fraction of any supporting group.

In blogger poll, after blogger poll it has been Fred Thompson hands down, despite the efforts of Ron Paul bots. Most conservative bloggers I know have either came out and endorsed him, or are rooting from him. Below are just a handful.

John Hawkins of Rightwing News, Erick Erickson of RedState.Com, Pejman of RedState, Eugene Volokh of Volokh's Conspiracy, Polipundit of Polipundit, Ala from Blonde Sagacity, Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, Kender at Kender's Musings, Gribbit at Gribbit's Word, Bill Quick of Daily Pundit, Misha of Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiller, Bob Krumm, Brandon at Conservative Superiority, Curt at Flopping Aces, Darrell of Alpha Patriot, Jimmie of the Sundries Shack, Justin Higgins of Right on the Right, Kim du Toit, MacRanger of Macsmind, Rick Moran of Right Wing Nuthouse, Mike Hendrix of Cold Fury, Rob Port of Say Anything, Stix of Stix Blog, TraderRob of Opinipundit, William Dyer of Beldar Blog, Nate of Irate-Nation, William Teach of Pirate's Cove, Kate of Ol Broad, Steve of Pencilnub, and though he is getting doubts…Ace of Ace of Spades. Plus many more.

With so many bloggers behind Thompson, and the trend of polls in Iowa, it makes one wonder if Iowa conservatives even read blogs.

With the Huckaboom hitting a wall called Rush Limbaugh, and the latest poll showing an up-climb, its far from time to give up on Fred.

I'm sure I missed other bloggers that are behind Fred. If I missed you, let me know in the comments with your name and blog url and I'll add you.

More: Steve of No Runny Eggs, KT Cat, Neil of Eternity Matters, Eric at Pool Bar, Martin at Conservative Blog Therapy, Arclightzero of Pro Patria, and Jim at Bright and Early.

And…More: Rightwing Rocker, Brain Shavings, Musings of a Political Wonk, and Good Boy's Nation

[motivez]

I don't think Ron Paul attracts the typical Republican to his campaign, instead he attracts people who don't want the government telling people how to live their lives (The complete opposite of social conservatives who think Christian morals should be shoved down everyone's throat through legislation and constitutional amendments), care about the constitution (Unlike the neocons), actually do care about fiscal conservatism (Unlike those the Republican mainstream has elected), and so forth..

So I wouldn't expect him to do well on some of the more mainstream Republican websites, and certainly not on blogs that cater to the more radical (and angry) wing of the party, like michelle malkin or ann coulter.

There's a number of blogs that are behind pretty much every candidate, and as far as this:

With so many bloggers behind Thompson, and the trend of polls in Iowa, it makes one wonder if Iowa conservatives even read blogs.

I doubt it very seriously, most of the traditional Iowa caucus goers are older and probably not very internet savvy.. which is also in line with why some of the Ron Paul fanclub folks think the polls are way off, many of his supporters are young an don't have cell phones or have never voted before, so they aren't being called and polled in the same numbers as those who might support Grandpa Fred or Huckabee and so forth.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't think Ron Paul attracts the typical Republican to his campaign, instead he attracts people who don't want the government telling people how to live their lives (The complete opposite of social conservatives who think Christian morals should be shoved down everyone's throat through legislation and constitutional amendments), care about the constitution (Unlike the neocons), actually do care about fiscal conservatism (Unlike those the Republican mainstream has elected), and so forth..

He and Fred Thompson are the same in those regards. Thompson didn't even say "Merry Christmas" in his Christmas ad, instead saying "Happy Holidays", unlike Paul. For those that don't like religion in their government (holidays), they should come to Thompson moreso than they should Paul!

[6SpeedTA95]

I like paul a lot more than thompson...Paul is pretty impressive, while I disagree with a lot of things he says I think he would be perfect for this country right now. Could you imagine the fallout if he were elected? Dems and reps would be shitting themselves because what is in reality a third party candidate getting elected.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

He and Fred Thompson are the same in those regards. Thompson didn't even say "Merry Christmas" in his Christmas ad, instead saying "Happy Holidays", unlike Paul. For those that don't like religion in their government (holidays), they should come to Thompson moreso than they should Paul!

Thompson talks the talk, then votes for big government.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by thomez

Thompson talks the talk, then votes for big government.

Based on what? He's the only candidate that hasn't 'changed his mind' ever.

[thomez]

Fred Thompson Rises to the Top!

[RMNIXON]

Funny that most of the people who keep telling me what Ron Paul is all about are so often die hard liberals very much committed to more and bigger government as promiced by the Democrat party (Run the Hilary Christmas comercial again........). All very much interested in telling us how to live our lives for our health, safty, and to save the planet because "We the People" don't seem to be able to make those decisions or even care without the force of law from those who know better!

I will frankly take my advice about what Republicans are doing wrong and what Paul is saying that is right from somebody else.

[motivez]

Are you referring to me in that post? If so, you don't have much of a point (since I'm not a "die hard liberal") and I'd challenge you to show me one thing in my post that's wrong.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by thomez

Fred Thompson Rises to the Top!

I don't know that he's denied any of that.

AND, if that's what we're down to (picking on what bills they signed or didn't) then I'd say both candidates are pretty dang good!

I think we're speaking of two types of "big government", and many of those things don't really give the sign of "big government".

* Agricultural subsidies (to dairy farmers, tobacco growers, livestock producers, peanut farmers, and others)
* Federal crop insurance
* Guaranteed subsidized loans to farmers
* Subsidized loans for rural housing, electricity and telephone service
* The National Endowment for the Humanities
* The National Endowment for the Arts
* The Peace Corps
* The Job Corps
* The Federal Railroad Administration
* Discretionary education spending
* School violence treatment and prevention
* The Commodity Credit Corporation (for the purpose of influencing production, prices, supplies, and distribution of agricultural commodities)
* The National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education
* The Smithsonian Institute
* The United States Holocaust Memorial
* The National Science Foundation
* The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development and its various community development initiatives

Out of curiosity, which of those would you like to do without?

[ballz2wallz]

I guess you won't like Ron Paul for this then?

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul, appearing on NBC's Meet the Press Sunday, defended his efforts in Congress to bring home money to his Texas district, despite his long-held aversion to big government and congressional votes to reign in federal spending.

"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.

"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."

It goes on...

For his home state, however, Paul has sought money for water projects, a nursing program, to expand a hospital cancer center and to promote Texas shrimp.

He must be for big government!!!

Oh look, perfect timing

[thomez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I don't know that he's denied any of that.

AND, if that's what we're down to (picking on what bills they signed or didn't) then I'd say both candidates are pretty dang good!

I think we're speaking of two types of "big government", and many of those things don't really give the sign of "big government".

* Agricultural subsidies (to dairy farmers, tobacco growers, livestock producers, peanut farmers, and others)
* Federal crop insurance
* Guaranteed subsidized loans to farmers
* Subsidized loans for rural housing, electricity and telephone service
* The National Endowment for the Humanities
* The National Endowment for the Arts
* The Peace Corps
* The Job Corps
* The Federal Railroad Administration
* Discretionary education spending
* School violence treatment and prevention
* The Commodity Credit Corporation (for the purpose of influencing production, prices, supplies, and distribution of agricultural commodities)
* The National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education
* The Smithsonian Institute
* The United States Holocaust Memorial
* The National Science Foundation
* The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development and its various community development initiatives

Out of curiosity, which of those would you like to do without?

everything in bold

[Brandon]

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']Thanks for including my site in this list.[/font]

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']I understand some of the appeal of Ron Paul, but the fact remains that he is drawing very little support. He is libertarian, not conservative in the Reagan model.[/font]

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']Fred by contrast is not a big government supporter. He was the lone voice on vast number 99-1 votes in the Senate. He is the only candidate that has put forth plans for immigration, homeland security, tax reform, healthcare, energy, the second amendment, judges, etc. See here[/font]

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']I urge people don't support Fred Thompson just because some blogger says so, don't support any candidate based on that or what anyone else says. We as voters have a responsibility to do our own research, learn everything we can about these candidates. For too long we have elected candidates based more on style than substance, and we have paid a high price for it. Look not just at what candidates say today but also what they have said throughout their life in public service, look at what they have been for and against in the past. Most of the time the candidate that has been consistent in his beliefs throughout his public life is the one that can be trusted to carry those beliefs forward into the White House.[/font]

[Brandon]

Thanks for including my site in this list.

I understand some of the appeal of Ron Paul, but the fact remains that he is drawing very little support. He is libertarian, not conservative in the Reagan model.

Fred by contrast is not a big government supporter. He was the lone voice on vast number 99-1 votes in the Senate. He is the only candidate that has put forth plans for immigration, homeland security, tax reform, healthcare, energy, the second amendment, judges, etc. See here

I urge people don't support Fred Thompson just because some blogger says so, don't support any candidate based on that or what anyone else says. We as voters have a responsibility to do our own research, learn everything we can about these candidates. For too long we have elected candidates based more on style than substance, and we have paid a high price for it. Look not just at what candidates say today but also what they have said throughout their life in public service, look at what they have been for and against in the past. Most of the time the candidate that has been consistent in his beliefs throughout his public life is the one that can be trusted to carry those beliefs forward into the White House.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by thomez

everything in bold

To me, 'big government' implies government control or regulation. How is subsidizing or funding the same as controlling or regulating?

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

To me, 'big government' implies government control or regulation. How is subsidizing or funding the same as controlling or regulating?

Because subsidizing falsely funnels money into an industry that the citizens wouldn't otherwise put into that industry, That is affecting the market in a HUGE way. It's hard to say that any one subsidy is better or worse than any one regulation, but the fact that both affect the market in ways that just cost citizens more and more money, not to mention reducing competition in the affected industry is just plain bad.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

To me, 'big government' implies government control or regulation. How is subsidizing or funding the same as controlling or regulating?

Anywhere the government spends money they are using it to control.

Govt: Oh, you disagree with these new.... FISA provisions (or whatever)? We'll pull your agriculture subsidies.

State: Oh fuck, I guess we have to give in because without the money we have grown used to, we'll be bankrupt.

Govt: That's what I thought, bitches. Anytime we give you money we control you.