Monday, December 19, 2011

Ron Paul now leads in Iowa

Read it at Zero Hedge
Ron Paul Takes Lead In Iowa
Submitted by Tyler Durden

The hedgies are tickled pink.

Interestingly, Ron Paul's support is not the GOP base.
Paul's base of support continues to rely on some unusual groups for a Republican contest.  Among voters under 45 he's at 33% to 16% for Romney and 11% for Gingrich.  He's really going to need that younger than normal electorate because with seniors Romney's blowing him out 31-15 with Gingrich coming in 2nd at 18%. Paul is also cleaning up 35-14 with the 24% of voters who identify as either Democrats or independents. Romney is actually ahead 22-19 with GOP voters.  Young people and non-Republicans are an unusual coalition to hang your hat on in Iowa, and it will be interesting to see if Paul can actually pull it off.
This is actually good in that it will force a vetting of Ron Paul's ideas, including his Austrian economics. This should getting interesting, since until now the traditional media have paid scant attention to him in spite of his credible showing.


Matt Franko said...

Seems to be making a big splash with these folks Tom,

(Check out the "Precious Metal" ads in the side columns)


PS Romney surging! ;)

Tom Hickey said...

I foresee a split coming in the GOP between the Paul people, who absolutely despise the GOP Establishment, and the Establishment, who will do everything in their power to make Romney the nominee, and who have the money and savvy political operatives to do so. Moreover, sadly, I suspect that many in the US are not ready to vote for a Mormon. There's a huge subplot unfolding in what should be a relatively easy win for the GOP over a weak president who is unpopular with a significant segment of his own base.

But the reason I am happy to see Paul getting attention is because I think that the country needs to have it out over Austrian economics. Too many people are falling for simplistic arguments, unaware that voting for imposed fiscal and financial austerity would be disastrous for them.

Matt Franko said...


I think the gold sellers are funding a lot of the Paul's (Rand and Ron) operations of advocating a metallic convertability/base for the USD.

Also, they sponsor a lot of the conservative talk radio, so they get that part of the GOP base on board with the "gold standard" type rhetoric.

You can see Beck, Hannity, Levin, etc.. right on the banner ad. and they pump the gold all day long on the AM radio at current very high prices.

These types of funding levels in support of gold in general make it hard to advocate against gold for those who understand how limiting it is or would be....


Anonymous said...

I think this is a good development. Although I strongly oppose Paul's Austrian laissez faire approach to economic policy, and his monetary theories, if this guy could somehow get the nomination we would actually have a very interesting, paradigm-breaking debate in 2012 with a lot of intellectual ferment and realignment.

GLH said...

To me Ron Paul's people are like religious fundamentalist, you can explain economics to them and what a balanced budget would do and they will shake their heads yes and still go on talking about how great Ron Paul is. To those people it isn't that people need to take control of the government from the corporations, but that the government needs to be ended. It is unbelievable that anyone with such a distaste for government would want to be in control of it.

dave said...

GLH, thats not just with paul, that is with the entire gop, especially when its pounded into their heads 24-7 by faux "news" it really is sad

Danny said...

I've been trying to find the most suitable name for Ron Paul supporters. Paulbot and Paulite are unoriginal. Paultard is unoriginal and offensive. Paulitical Prisoner holds some promise. But after some consideration I decided to go with Paulestinian. Just like (some) of their namesakes, they believe they're fighting a Holy War, and display the devotion and blind loyalty of religious fundamentalists.

Unforgiven said...

Paulocks would also be offensive, so that's out. Paulbearers? Meh, economically accurate, but not the right "ring".


SchittReport said...

dear matt & tom,

i hope this post is not in any way an endorsement for ron paul - he is the worst candidate out of all the GOP contenders and that includes the molester drop-out and michele bachmann.

p.s. anybody willing to take an interview with alex jones is by definition a loony

Tom Hickey said...

SR, I am in general a political agnostic. The only candidacy I have publicly endorsed is Warren Mosler's because he is the only candidate I have encountered that I think gets it, can be trusted, and could actually get things done.

While I completely disagree with Ron Paul on many things and agree with him on a few things, he is apparently a person of principle and his own man, something not usually found among the political class. For this reason, he has no chance of getting the GOP nomination.

Ryan Harris said...

"I foresee a split coming in the GOP between the Paul people, who absolutely despise the GOP Establishment, and the Establishment, who will do everything in their power to make Romney the nominee"

Ron Paul has the under 35 crowd -- something like 62% in the last poll I saw.
Romney has the old folks by something like >50%. There is your split in the party. Paul's social libertarian issues appeal to younger voters, I suspect.

Tom Hickey said...

Those are the things I agree with, and I'm 72. Young at heart, though. Paul himself is 76.

The electorate does seem split along the generational digital divide — the analog generations v. the digital generations. From some reason, Ron Paul seems to be able to bridge that divide.

Clonal said...

Johnsville just linked to your comment Tom - Obama v. Ron Paul = A Good Debate

beowulf said...

"Paulocks would also be offensive, so that's out."

LOL, that's hilarious.

Paul is definitely a throwback. In terms of foreign policy and civil liberties he'd be first rate. His monetary and budget policies would be crazy.

A point in his favor is that he is most trustworthy in those areas where the President has unilateral power. The areas where he is dead wrong fall squarely under Congress's power of the purse. He can't make any change to the Fed or the size of government without Congress's approval.

Unforgiven said...

Say what you will, I doubt the President will be:

1. Any flavor of over 70. Or 60.

2. A Mormon (not that there's anything wrong with that)

3. A fat guy with white hair.

I think I just saw a Dark Horse out of the corner of my eye...

Kevin Fathi said...

I am switching parties and voting for Paul. I despise the Rothbardians but I despise fascism even more. Glenn Greenwald's coverage of the Obama assault on civil liberties has convinced me there is no other option.

SchittReport said...

dear tom,

i would disagree with the point that ron paul is a man of principles. men of principles do not own and publish newsletters with racist and homophobic content (and making hundreds of thousands dollars per year in the process). they do not take business that is medicare/medicaid paid while trying to abolish these programs for others. make no mistake, he feeds from the trough too - it's just that he does it in an unconventional way - that is, he arbitrages off the masses and their ignorance and stupidity.

the real issue at stake here is WHY a person who is clearly fringe and "way out there" in terms of his policies and platform, is actually a live contender for the GOP nomination?

this should tell everyone something is disastrously wrong with the US and the political process.

is this what the US has come to - a freak show where crazies can be real contenders for the highest office in the country?

if so, then i see little hope for any change for the better for the US. you can also kiss any notion of MMT becoming mainstream relevant goodbye. well, maybe if you set it up as a cult (with human sacrifices etc.), it might work.

Tom Hickey said...

SR: is this what the US has come to - a freak show where crazies can be real contenders for the highest office in the country?

if so, then i see little hope for any change for the better for the US.

Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

The US may have to experience the consequences of this craziness in order to get beyond it.

I think that Ron Paul is a person of principle as a politician, What I means is that he will actually do what he says on the campaign trail. None of the other candidates woud come close to even trying to do this if elected. They are all opportunists pursuing fame, fortune and power, and they would therefore follow the path of expediency. I think that Paul actually believes (mistakenly) that his policies would benefit the entire country.

The other candidates are bought and paid for and would serve their masters if elected. In this sense, I think Paul is his own man. As far as his beliefs, well, that's another question. I think that he is just crazy on that score.

The only candidates in the GOP side that aren't bat-shit crazy are Romney and Huntsman. Romney has no principles. He is an empty suit. And Huntsman hasn't a chance.

SchittReport said...

thanks tom.

i guess you are an optimist and i am a pessimist?

romney is a true original bainie - they all look, think and act alike - neat trimmed hair, white or light blue shirt, dark suit, fit and 'right' physique (height, proportions etc.), elitist (the firm has changed since the original crop retired or left. bill bain used to hate people who were out of shape - one day he came back to the office and someone had hired a fat receptionist - the blood drained out of his face, he freaked out and demanded the HR director put in a 'never hire out of shape people' directive. hence, mitt romney never misses his work outs. in person, he is pretty uninspiring - even the PE deals he did were all pretty bland and plain vanilla.

having said all of this, maybe the US needs more bainies than paulites.

Tom Hickey said...

SR. my bet at the moment is that Romney takes the GOP nomination and the election is very close but Obama takes it. But a lot of things can happen between now and november, and Romney could conceivably win. If the GOP nominates anyone else, Obama definitely wins, perhaps even by a comfortable margin in the popular vote.

Obama and Romney are both suits, so I don't see too much difference between either of them, other than that the winner will have to reward the base and that would produce quite different policies and appointments in significant ways. But overall, both Obama and Romney would stick to status quo US policy.

However, I think that whoever wins there is going to be considerable and growing push-back from the increasing number of ordinary people, especially youth, who are getting left behind or thrown under the bus.

These people think that Ron Paul speaks for them. See, for example, an interesting push for Democrats to register as GOP to make Ron Paul the GOP candidate, so the presidential campaign will be about the issues that Paul represents — anti-war, social liberty, corruption, cronyism, debt peonage, and reining in the Fed. These are the issues that youth especially are concerned about, since it is about their future. They don't necessarily want Paul, but he has zeroed in on what they feel is important to them.

Bob Roddis said...

I love you MMT guys. Just keep telling people that the government can spend money into existence and does not need taxes to pay for stuff. People don't believe me when I tell them this. If they understood, they would be properly appalled.

Yes, let's have this debate because you guys are going to lose.

Mario said...

I haven't read any of the comments here.

However I do want to say that I'm considering changing my party to republican just so I can vote for RP in the primaries and I honestly do hope he gets elected President.

And I know MMT and I completely disagree with so many of his notions. So why do I say this?

B/c he's different and I want something...anything different. Only RP can repeal the latest crimes against our constitution. And honestly I'm willing to take a hit in agg demand for a smaller military. I know that RP won't amp spending anywhere else so it will be a net loss...however I am willing to take that hit in this case.

We need serious change in our politics and I am willing to give RP a shot at it. Do I trust him? No of course not. I trust no one now after Obama. I trust people to do what they do. Period end of statement.

Personally I think us MMT folk should be busy constructing models of how a gold standard or limited fiscal spending can work for our economy. I am serious about this. We are better off creating the best straight jacket you can find at this point, b/c when MMT can build the best gold model economic policies out there....we earn everyone's respect and trust and credibility. Maybe at that point they will start to listen to what else we have to how things can be different if we want it to be.

The good thing with RP is that he's all about cutting taxes....I am just not sure where he stands on corporate taxation and corporate governance and regulation, etc. However like I said, I honestly don't care anymore. Everyone else is bought out and corrupt and I refuse to vote for any of them, b/c I don't care. I'll vote for RP simply on principle to see what happens.

He's open to tax cuts so that's good for MMT. And perhaps with a gold standard there will be less booms so there will be less busts...we'll just have to live in a stable deflationary malaise. So how can MMT work within those constraints? What models are best and how can we "work around" it all?

And seriously who knows...perhaps MMT is discounting too much the old adage that "mother is the necessity of invention." Perhaps more small businesses will rise and if RP can really end the Fed or curb big banks and economic rent then perhaps more small business will be able to rise up in a more "perfect market."

I am willing to give it a shot, b/c of his constitutional views, his statesmanship, and his vehemence for the military industrial and banking complexes. That's a start. And let's face it...NONE of them will be doing MMT anytime soon. So time to hedge your bets folks as far I can see.

So Tom, Matt, Beo, how can we work best under gold standard constraints? Talk amongst all of us please!! Cheers!!

Tom Hickey said...

@ Bob R.

We've already had this debate (MMT'er v. Austrians) at different places. It's obvious that we reject each others' key fundamentals. So what more is there to say other than that we disagree over what is basic. Our respective universes of discourses are incompatible.

Tom Hickey said...

@ Mario

Everyone and everything has advantages and disadvantages.

10 Reasons Not To Vote For Ron Paul

Mario said...

@ Tom

I know it and I've read them before. But I figure it's all bound to happen with one of these guys one way or another....might as well see if we can get things rearranged and perhaps take a few hits along the way....but it's all about winning the war not just a battle. And sometimes the best way to win a war is to lose in a key battle. ;) We shall see. I'm kind of more like a kid with finger paints at this point, willing to try and see anything that might have some mileage and potential with it. It's kind of fun and exciting to approach politics like this. I guess it's a form of calculated civil disobedience. Who knows and who cares!!! We shall see how the cards all fall one way or another. LOL Geronimoooo!!!

Tom Hickey said...

SR: "dear tom, i would disagree with the point that ron paul is a man of principles. men of principles do not own and publish newsletters with racist and homophobic content (and making hundreds of thousands dollars per year in the process)."

'Fraid you are correct, S.R. I am going to have to retract my previous statement about Ron Paul.

Ron Paul and Libertarianism's Dirty Secret -- Pandering to Racist "Rednecks" to Get Ahead

Pretty damning evidence. Ron Paul is now up to his eyeballs in this.