 |
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Unofficial "Official" Drudge Poll Gives Romney Double-Digit Win
This Drudge Report internet poll with a large voting sample finds Mitt Romney the winner of tonight's debate by some 11 points, double digits. Bad news for Newt, and inexcusable for the President of the Moon. Keep in mind, the Drudge Report is the unofficial "official" page of the GOP Establishment. Hey, I did my part; I voted for Newt, though I know Mittens won. (Ron Paul is the control; he didn't win, not on the merits; and he needs to get a proper fitting suit.) Count me among the +/- sampling error. Just too many wingnuts, too few of us to skew the results.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
of you have sat, and perhaps thought, with us!
2 comments:
You're a political blog, but you didn't post why you thought Mittens won, or why you voted for Newt despite thinking he won. Nor did you refute the points that Ron Paul made.
In fact, you didn't mention anything about the debate! This article does little to sway my decision in the election, which was very recently swayed to wholeheartedly supporting a candidate I don't agree with on some points.
I Think Ron Paul won the debate because he gave the best response to how his religion would affect his term as president, he understands that the cuban embargo only helps the castros and hurts the people of cuba, and that free trade would help our trade relations and the economy of latin America and the americas. He was also on point in saying that we shouldn't pick dictators in other countries as part of our foreign policy, we should leave them alone to govern themselves. I lived in Europe for a time and many people asked me why the United States did some of the questionable world policing things that Ron brings up throughout the debate. At the time I brushed it off, (Since this was many years go when I was a teen), but now I realize how telling it is about how the rest of the world views us.
Why do we need to control the governments of other nations? Why don't we spend more resources securing our own border instead of the one between afghanistan and other middle eastern countries?
As always Ron Paul opened and re-opened my eyes to many issues in this debate while the other candidates repeated the same trite that the GOP has been hashing out for years. Maybe that's the point of the Republican party, but I think someone has to speak out against war an point out the flaws in our current foreign policy.
nar, if you're a Ron Paul supporter, he told you what you wanted to hear, and hence "won" the debate. But Paul is not going to win the GOP nomination, much less the Florida primary. So he's irrelevant, except as a vote-splitter or spoiler. Even there his impact is minimal, considering Paul supporters are pretty much a breed apart.
I posted in the previous blog why I thought Gingrich lost, by raising the white flag and calling for a truce. It was obvious to anyone watching that Mittens landed the most punches against main rival Newt, the consensus giving Mittens the win. Newt's failure to respond, to my mind, sealed his fate in Florida and handed Mitt the nomination. Like it or not, it's a two-man race now. Santorum did well, attacking Romney, but at best he's a spoiler splitting the conservative vote in Mitt's favor. And Paul seems to be pursuing a delegate-collecting strategy to have some sway for his ideas at the convention. He will never be president, and he knows it. He's all about trying to build his movement.
Post a Comment