If ron paul wins Iowa then the MEDIA won't matter anymore

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

“The Ron Paul people are not going to like my saying this,” Wallace began. “But to a certain degree, it will discredit the Iowa caucuses because, rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he’s not going to end up as the nominee.”

“So therefore, Iowa won’t count,” he added. “It would certainly be a knock to Gingrich because, you know, right now he was the frontrunner — or a week ago he was the big frontrunner in this state so it would be missed opportunity for him.”

www.rawstory.com...

I think he has it backwards. If Dr. Paul wins won't that be what people want? Then the media can go out and actually do thier job. They should drop the agenda and report news.

I have a pretty straightforward view on Ron Paul as a candidate. No matter what your personal take on Dr. Paul is, there are certain things of which we can be absolutely certain:

- The MSM has gone to extraordinary, almost laughable lengths to marginalize, discredit and outright smear Dr. Paul in an attempt to prevent his campaign from getting traction. Polls have been manipulated, he gets a fraction of the other candidates' times during debates, YouTube has manipulated page views to keep his videos buried, his standing in polls has simply been skipped-over, Fox dubbed-in 'boos' in a Ron Paul pool piece, etc.

- His position on issues has been consistent for his entire political life.

- He practices what he preaches.


It would appear that TPTB are doing a full-court press to stop Ron Paul. So for me the answer is simple. No matter what it takes we get Dr. Paul elected. Few could disagree that the current 'system' is corrupt, failing and predating on the masses. Both parties are complicit and if we don't do a major Ctrl-Alt-Del there is a good chance we'll all be glowing by next year. What better way to stick it to 'Them' than put the last person they want in the White House. I fear for Dr. Paul if that happens but he undoubtedly understands the risk.

I say we do it. Stick it to the system. We'll write him in if necessary. If we don't end this insanity now it will be the end of us.

reply to post by jlafleur02


Yeah I read that too. Who the hell does Wallace aka "Mr. Wallet" think he is? Telling us that if Ron Paul won Iowa it wouldn't count. I should slap the taste out of his mouth for saying that. All because he wants to please Gingrich I bet. He is such a tool. Report news not BS.

reply to post by jlafleur02

- His position on issues has been consistent for his entire political life.

Here is an argument I always felt was invalid.

Someone who has gone through there entire career and "was completely right from the beginning and never needed to learn or change" is not something I have ever thought was a good thing. I like to think many politicians ponder their policies and political leanings. I like to think that, sometimes, they decide that there is a better way to go about things or that they were just plain wrong. Then adjust.

Of course, there are politician that do these things to garner votes. However, this is not as bad as it seems at first glance(though still pretty bad):

A politician who changes their stance"so they can get votes" Shows me a willingness to compromise with their ideals for a solution or to accomplish a goal. This can be bad or good(or advantageous) in a number ways. I suppose its a gamble. Its not as if they cant lead or anything. And its not as if someone that panders for votes is going to destroy the country. I am sure someone like this could be a good president. As long as they work to our advantage as well, I don't see a problem.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


What a flip flopping politician shows me is that they are nothing more than an illusion. They have no belief system. They have no morale compass. They have no decision making. Go along to get along as long as the bucks come along. It has nothing to do with compromise. It has everything to do with the fact almost all are lawyers with the ideology I don't care about guilt, right or wrong it all about getting a pay check.

reply to post by redrose123

Your argument is a bunch of Non-sequiturs. Also, you forgot to address my entire first paragraph.

To be expected from someone that supports Ron Paul.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


I disagree. Of course critical-thinking politcians change their assessments of situations and policies but changing principals is a deal-killer. If someone campaigns on an anti-war platform and we, The People, elect him/her on that basis, do they have a right to suddenly go pro-war once elected? That's bait-and-switch in my book. We only need go back as far as the Obama campaign to see where that nets out. You can't present one set of policies and values to the electorate and then pull a 180 once you get elected.