how will rp do in ky after rands wins?

[muzzled dogg]

:confused:

[MRoCkEd]

It doesn't matter because the nominee will be decided way before Kentucky's primary rolls around.

[muzzled dogg]

touche

[Ethek]

It doesn't matter because the nominee will be decided way before Kentucky's primary rolls around.

Not touche, its true. Most supporters ready for Rands run were holdouts in stasis from Rons 2008 run. It was a non- event there.

I would say if Rand wins in KY Ron can win anywhere in the country. KY is as about as socially conservative as they come.

Ron has to be better at acknowledging the anxieties social conservatives have or he must at least take the tract that Rand has a simplify talking points.

[Jeremy]

Maybe as well as Ron did in his own district in 08?

[devil21]

touche



Not touche, its true.

Off topic....please look up what touche' means.

[erowe1]

We have to assume every state will matter. If the nominee is decided as early as usual, then there's no possible way it will be RP. The only way he wins will be to have a long drawn out primary season with multiple establishment candidates staying in the race to the bitter end without conceding. And even if that happens, the odds would be greatly against him, but it's still the case that the longer the race continues the better it will be for him to get people to pay attention to his message.

Every RP supporter should make a point to own their home area and start laying the foundation for him to do well in their own state's primary, no matter how late in the season their primary is. Obviously Iowa and New Hampshire will be of preeminent importance, as they always are. But local activists shouldn't sacrifice opportunities to build support in their areas where they can make a big difference because they only care about the early contests where, aside from donating money, they can't do much. The "All politics is local" maxim is true.

That said, does Rand winning in KY mean that RP can win there? Absolutely not. In a full Republican presidential field, many of Rand's supporters will vote for someone other than RP. The argument that "If Rand can win in a socially conservative state like KY, then Ron can win anywhere." is a non sequitur. Rand is running as a very socially conservative candidate, and social conservatives are not Ron's biggest hurdle anyway, it's the more socially liberal neoconservatives who are.

I'd say Rand has warmed up KY voters to make RP be less marginalized there, and will win him some votes. Ron may even be able to break 15% in the primary there, but not by much.

[Sola_Fide]

The better question is:

"If Ron Paul paved the way for the Liberty candidates of 2010 by running in 2008, how much better will the Liberty candidates do after he runs in 2012?"


Ron Paul's 2012 run means that Liberty candidates are going to have a whole new well of strength to draw from in 2014.

[Austin]

The better question is:

"If Ron Paul paved the way for the Liberty candidates of 2010 by running in 2008, how much better will the Liberty candidates do after he runs in 2012?"


Ron Paul's 2012 run means that Liberty candidates are going to have a whole new well of strength to draw from in 2014.

Fascinating thought. Ron Paul must run in 2012.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I don't think it'll matter. I think most people see them as two different individuals. Otherwise I can't see how Rand Paul got almost 60% in Kentucky while Ron Paul got 6% in Kentucky.

It might have some bounce though. Ron Paul did get 18% in his own district in 2008; compared to 4.9% of the vote in Texas overall.

[randolphfuller]

How do you think Huckabee carried Iowa? It was all of those social conservatives. They still stand like a lion in the path!Somehow, they must be won over. If Ron loses Iowa(and it was his best state last time) it is all over as far as he is concerned.I like the strategy someone suggested of announcing early and raising a ferocious amount of money to keep out sweet Sarah, Not sure it would work. Gingrich is such a phony, I refuse to worry about him or consider the possibility GOP primary voters will be taken in by him.

[randolphfuller]

Don't be so negative! That is my department. If Ron can win Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, he can get the nomination. I see no way not to give Michigan to Romney. I do think if Iowa is lost, all is lost.

[erowe1]

If Ron loses Iowa(and it was his best state last time) it is all over as far as he is concerned.

Iowa wasn't his best state or even close to his best.

[erowe1]

Don't be so negative! That is my department. If Ron can win Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, he can get the nomination. I see no way not to give Michigan to Romney. I do think if Iowa is lost, all is lost.

The primary schedule is not the same as it was in 2008. Iowa an New Hampshire are still first, but Michigan is pretty late, I don't know about South Carolina.

But I don't think the right strategy is to look just state-by-state anyway. In Michigan and many other states a portion of the delegates are awarded to winners of congressional districts. So RP could concentrate on certain key districts, while conceding the others, and come away with some delegates despite losing statewide.

In Michigan I see a three districts worth considering for special attention: Justin Amash's district, where we could piggy back on his success and hopefully his endorsement of RP; the district that includes Hillsdale county, where Hillsdale College is--RP got around 20% in that county last time--; and the Detroit area, where the demographics are heavily Democrat and the Republican primary will have a very small number of voters, and thus where the winner will need to get fewer votes to win than anywhere else in the state, and also where we can hope for some major Democrat crossover, assuming that Obama will not be opposed in his party.

[KurtBoyer25L]

How are neoconservatives socially liberal? In what sense?