Romney: Oh, you’d better believe I’d vote for Ron Paul over Obama

posted at 7:45 pm on December 28, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, a predictable contrast to Gingrich’s ambivalence yesterday. Newt needs a win in Iowa or a close second to boost him in South Carolina and right now Paul and Romney are making that unlikely. He has to attack. All Romney needs is a decent third-place finish or better behind Paul and one of the lightly funded social-con candidates like Bachmann or Santorum who pose no real threat to him nationally. He’s right on track. Why say something critical that might give undecideds in Iowa pause about Paul and might give Paul fans even more of a reason not to hold their nose and vote Romney down the line against Obama? He refused to even mention Paul by name this morning when criticizing him on Iran, in fact, even though Paul’s new ad unloads on him for being a serial flip-flopper. It’ll be amusing to see how far he’ll let Paul go in attacking him without responding as the early primaries play out. And unlike 2008 when McCain and Huckabee played nice with each other after they emerged as the two remaining viable candidates, Paul will attack.

New Hampshire’s an open primary, don’t forget, so if Paul wins big in Iowa via Democratic and independent support and Romney finishes worse than expected, Romney may have to start firing back whether he wants to or not. Maybe we should do a pool on when he flip-flops on his intention to support RP over The One. Exit question: Santorum also said today that he’d support Paul over Obama, however grudgingly. Er, why would he say that? He badly needs a win in Iowa and this would have been a powerful grenade to toss at the frontrunner — who, don’t forget, almost certainly won’t end up supporting the eventual GOP nominee over Obama when he’s asked to choose.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

His third wife is a banth, though.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:34 PM

Don’t know what that is, but Newt’s wife is one scary looking broad. Androidish, in a way, her hair like a helmet of some kind, her face Zombie-white, her eyes cold, expressionless. I just get a bad vibe from her, perhaps unfairly. But, would I rather have her in the East Wing than a water buffalo, of course.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

By supporting Paul, you’re revealing yourself to be mentally unbalanced, and that’s not hyperbole. If you hear a freak spout one paranoid conspiracy after another, and respond “Cool, he’d make a good President,” then you’re constitutionally defective.

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

But, would I rather have her in the East Wing than a water buffalo, of course.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

How is Michelle these days?

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:49 PM

I’d vote for a dead cat before Obama.

Russ86 on December 28, 2011 at 8:53 PM

Jailbreak

Ed and Allah allow this hate speech because HotGas is full of haters and they dont want to lose 75% of their audience. Any decent blog-site would ban haters like that…dont expect it to happen here though

I’ve blogged here since day one.. Believe me the troll hammer is always close by. Also, dont impune people for ther people’s comments.

EricPWJohnson on December 28, 2011 at 8:53 PM

It looks like Mitt is trying to pick up the Paulite vote when it becomes apparent that Paul will not get the nomination. There is no other reason. As much as I cringe at voting for Obama and his Marxism, community organizing, crony capitalism, palling around with terrorists and Jeremiah Wright, and narcissism, the thought of our country imploding under a Ron Paul administration and its accompanying conspiracy-theorism domestic policies and international isolationism REALLY gives me the heebie-jeebies.

Elric on December 28, 2011 at 8:53 PM

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:28 PM

Maybe you’d better do a google search of the name Vor Daj.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Even I could not heal such as this BCrago66.

RasThavas on December 28, 2011 at 8:54 PM

You must be kidding. Obama more than doubled the number of American troops in Afghanistan and Paul would have pulled them all out. And that is just one example.

Did you read the rest of my post, and have you forgotten the 2008 election? Obama was the anti-war candidate who won a Nobel Peace Prize because he was so not George W. Bush. Once in office, reality forced him to turn into GWB faster Lon Chaney turned into the Wolfman. The same transformation would likely occur during a (not-likely) Paul administration. And as Paul correctly states, it is Congress that has the power to declaire war, so it could act in defiance of Paul’s wishes and still be acting according to Paul’s principles.

Mr. Arkadin on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Obama Derrangement Syndrome on public display as usual

residentblue on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

I’ve blogged here since day one.. Believe me the troll hammer is always close by. Also, dont impune people for ther people’s comments.

EricPWJohnson on December 28, 2011 at 8:53 PM

Fair comment but there are number of posters, Dr. Tesla, Porlandia (or whatever his name is) and others that seem to have license to bring in their disregard for Mitt’s religion on a pretty damn consistent basis. How do they get away with that? It is condoned…thats how.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

It looks like Mitt is trying to pick up the Paulite vote

Well yeah. We know he panders to liberals as well, lol

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Newt stated fact for fact why he was concerned if Ron Paul became the nominee and why…

… mainly because Ron Paul is to the left of Obowma on defense and Israel, and according to his writings, he has some issues with minorities.

Mittens will change his tune as soon as Paul gets close in New Hampshire…

… then let’s see how he answers that question.

Seven Percent Solution on December 28, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Well yeah. We know he panders to liberals as well, lol

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Every one of the 7 people on the debate stage said all of the candidates were “vastly superior” than Obama. I guess Mitt just is consistent…he just doesnt flip flop like the Fannie/Freddie historian who was a previous big supporter of individual mandates.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:59 PM

dont expect it to happen here though.

Go here then. It’s not a tongue and cheek thing either. I’m serious.

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Fair comment but there are number of posters, Dr. Tesla, Porlandia (or whatever his name is) and others that seem to have license to bring in their disregard for Mitt’s religion on a pretty damn consistent basis. How do they get away with that? It is condoned…thats how.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Exactly. Nobody calls them on it, and it’s obviously the real reason that they’re so deranged about Romney that they’re willing to either sit home or vote for Barry over him.

Truly an embarrasment to the party.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM

I guess Mitt just is consistent

pffft. Give me money now, that beverage is going to damage my computer.

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Fair comment but there are number of posters, Dr. Tesla, Porlandia (or whatever his name is) and others that seem to have license to bring in their disregard for Mitt’s religion on a pretty damn consistent basis. How do they get away with that? It is condoned…thats how.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Some her prefer a Muslim to a Mormon.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM

dont expect it to happen here though.
Go here then. It’s not a tongue and cheek thing either. I’m serious.

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Bite me. And thats not a tongue in cheek thing, I’m serious.

Exactly. Nobody calls them on it, and it’s obviously the real reason that they’re so deranged about Romney that they’re willing to either sit home or vote for Barry over him.

Truly an embarrasment to the party.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Yes, it is and it should be an embarrassment to Allah/Ed for what goes on with HotGas but I guess they cater to their audience and/or they simply agree with the hate-speech sentiments.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM

Mitt loves everybody!……….until, he doesn’t!

KOOLAID2 on December 28, 2011 at 9:03 PM

he just doesnt flip flop like the Fannie/Freddie historian who was a previous big supporter of individual mandates.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Don’t forget Gingrich was also for VAT before he was against it.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Don’t forget Gingrich was also for VAT before he was against it.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Excuse me Carthoris. We only talk about ROMNEY flip flops. On HotGas, the others are consistent conservatives.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Yes, it is and it should be an embarrassment to Allah/Ed for what goes on with HotGas but I guess they cater to their audience and/or they simply agree with the hate-speech sentiments.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM

Attacking Muslims ist verboten, but attacking Mormons is hunky dorey.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Dear god this is the first time I am thinking about sitting this one out, I just can’t take it anymore.

kmr1964 on December 28, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Attacking Muslims ist verboten, but attacking Mormons is hunky dorey.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Well, it certainly is OK here. Not sure you could get away with it in polite society. I can guarantee that if somebody made a “I hate that Mormon” comment at work, he would be pink slipped pretty damn fast. But, its somehow different here. hmmmmmmmmm

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Excuse me Carthoris. We only talk about ROMNEY flip flops. On HotGas, the others are consistent conservatives.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Gingrich doesn’t seem to be even able to remember any of all his flip flops, so I guess we aren’t suppose to notice them.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:08 PM

On HotGas, the others are consistent conservatives.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

You know.. you might like frum forum.

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 9:08 PM

Gingrich doesn’t seem to be even able to remember any of all his flip flops, so I guess we aren’t suppose to notice them.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:08 PM

He even forgot that his first wife didnt want the divorce…unlike the lie that Newt currently tells. Those damn court papers!!!!

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 9:09 PM

I have toyed with this idea as well if i can support Ron Paul against Obama,

My main concern of course is that Ron Paul doesn’t give a rats behind about israel, And about Iran having nuclear, And i am not in to his “we don’t care what other nations do shtick” Because that’s how that monster Hitler was created,

However after carefully going over Obama’s actions in the last 3 years, From his support for the Muslim brotherhood, To Israel should go back to the 1967 borders, I have to wonder if a lot of radical crap that Obama hasn’t done yet is related to first winning a second term, and then he will really upload the real ****

Where is the proof that Obama is going to be teh awesome on foreign policy when there is no reelection to worry about??

If Paul will stop at least one bill from congress, it would be an improvement over Obama

For Romney to say now he won’t be supporting Paul against Obama is just politically suicide, Once again he proves that he actually has a plan how to win, and not insult other candidates supporters

OrthodoxJew on December 28, 2011 at 9:09 PM

Dear god this is the first time I am thinking about sitting this one out, I just can’t take it anymore.

kmr1964 on December 28, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Cheer up, the worst is yet to come.

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:09 PM

No We Can’t

Newt: Can’t be trusted.
Perry: Can’t be articulate.
Romney: Can’t be conservative.
Bachmann: Can’t be ready.
Paul: Can’t be sane.
Santorum: Can’t be inspiring.
Huntsman: Can’t be Republican.
Cain: Can’t be faithful.
Palin: Can’t be running.
Reagan: Can’t be alive.

Obama: Can’t be reelected.

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Um, who does that leave? Don’t even say Mrs Pantsuit.

msupertas on December 28, 2011 at 9:10 PM

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

You are a truly terrible person. Stupid, dumb, and probably ugly. Don’t take that wrong, but you are.

Aquateen Hungerforce on December 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Dear god this is the first time I am thinking about sitting this one out, I just can’t take it anymore.

kmr1964 on December 28, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Exactly. I might feel bad for Romney when he’s done actually

Flapjackmaka on December 28, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Dear god this is the first time I am thinking about sitting this one out, I just can’t take it anymore.

kmr1964 on December 28, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Buck up, will you? This is nothing, just a bunch of pols bickering. Do what I do: Close your eyes and think of England. It worked on my wedding night.

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 9:12 PM

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

You are a truly terrible person. Stupid, dumb, and probably ugly. Don’t take that wrong, but you are.

Aquateen Hungerforce on December 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM

So are you saying that BCrago66 is Michelle Obama?

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Ron Paul is like a crazy uncle. You don’t disown him in public (like Gingrich did) but instead try to show the love so his friends will still think favorable of you when it comes time to stand up and count. Romney was wise not completely dissing Paul because his followers are dedicated and would be more likely to support a guy that gave their guy respect publicly.

That said, Paul is as crazy as a mad-hatter.

wcwindbag on December 28, 2011 at 9:14 PM

You are a truly terrible person. Stupid, dumb, and probably ugly. Don’t take that wrong, but you are.

Aquateen Hungerforce on December 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM

It’s Wednesday, don’t forget to turn your underwear inside out.

BruthaMan on December 28, 2011 at 9:14 PM

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

That’s pretty good

OrthodoxJew on December 28, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Iowa Senator and Bachman’s Iowa chair, defects to Ron Paul:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2011/12/michele-bachmann-chair-defects-to-ron-paul-108965.html

In a shock announcement Wednesday night, Iowa state senator and onetime Michele Bachmann campaign leader Kent Sorenson declared that he is now supporting Ron Paul for president.

Sorenson made the announcement at a Paul rally with veterans here in Des Moines, telling the crowd: “I believe we’re at a turning point in this campaign.”

Calling the decision to abandon Bachmann a painful one, Sorenson said he felt obligated to join Paul as the “Republican establishment” tries to undermine his campaign.

“I thought it was my duty to come to his aid, just like he came to my aid during my Senate race, which was a very nasty race,” Sorenson said, pledging to go all-out for Paul over the next few days.

To cheers from the crowd, he continued: “We’re going to take Ron Paul all the way to the White House.”

PS. All of these comments calling Paul crazy, etc, sound canned…could they be coming from the DNC trolls?

Puma for Life on December 28, 2011 at 9:17 PM

That said, Paul is as crazy as a mad-hatter.

wcwindbag on December 28, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Indeed. And Ron Paul is in dire need of a publicity firm.

BruthaMan on December 28, 2011 at 9:17 PM

In a shock announcement Wednesday night, Iowa state senator and onetime Michele Bachmann campaign leader Kent Sorenson declared that he is now supporting Ron Paul for president.

That does it. I can’t help it–I’m jumping on the bandwagon. Take that, you Neocon Illuminati!

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 9:21 PM

I’m new here and I have a question. Some of you refer to the president as “Barry.” Why? I would have assumed that it’s a reference to the name he went by when he was young, but if you’re trying to be derogatory or dismissive of the man –and it looks like most of you want to be– how does calling him “Barry” qualify for that? Can someone explain why calling him by his old name is supposed to be a dis?

Drew Lowell on December 28, 2011 at 9:24 PM

OrthodoxJew on December 28, 2011 at 9:09 PM

Paul is not going to happen as the R nominee, but you and I are on the same page as to Obama’s complete garbaging of Israel and how he will continue his assault on the economy and culture here going forward.

If, on the off-chance Paul could get the nomination, there’s no question he would be my choice against someone whose very life has been devoted to the destruction of the USA. Paul’s foreign policy positions could ultimately have that effect, of course, but he is far more likely to listen to reason than Obama, since Paul does not start with the proposition that the country must be destroyed.

Then again, if our choice were to be Paul and Obama, it would be a kind of Russian Roulette kind of thing, but with the latter there’d be five cartridges in the cylinder, instead of one or two.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 9:29 PM

Iowa Senator and Bachman’s Iowa chair, defects to Ron Paul

Puma for Life on December 28, 2011 at 9:17 PM

More proof that Iowa should be removed from first in the nation primary. Does anyone actually think that Ron Paul can get anyone beyond his 10% of the population at large?

Iowa… if it’s not the anti-Semitic “Jews, Jews, Jews, Jews… JEWS!” then it is the “pure” Christianity non-sense of Perry.

Who wants this kind of campaign?

wcwindbag on December 28, 2011 at 9:32 PM

The Republican nomination process has derailed before it even started. So sad. Obama must be laughing all the way to the golf course.

MrX on December 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Yep, that’s our GOP! Again.

We need to tear it down, clear away the rubble and start over.

PatriotGal2257 on December 28, 2011 at 9:32 PM

I’m new here and I have a question. Some of you refer to the president as “Barry.” Why? I would have assumed that it’s a reference to the name he went by when he was young, but if you’re trying to be derogatory or dismissive of the man –and it looks like most of you want to be– how does calling him “Barry” qualify for that? Can someone explain why calling him by his old name is supposed to be a dis?

Drew Lowell on December 28, 2011 at 9:24 PM

I, for one, have never referred to him as “Barry”, though he was called that when growing up and in college and in law school. I prefer to call him Obama or President Obama or, to be brief, SCOAMF.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 9:35 PM

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

By supporting Paul, you’re revealing yourself to be mentally unbalanced, and that’s not hyperbole. If you hear a freak spout one paranoid conspiracy after another, and respond “Cool, he’d make a good President,” then you’re constitutionally defective.

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM

You fail to understand.

I wouldn’t support Ron Paul… unless it was with a trebuchet… to send him over a sanitarium wall.

I think you mistook satire for some bizarre form of advocacy.

Paul is a crank who would give America the shaft.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Some of you refer to the president as “Barry.” Why?

I call him 0dumbo (or variants). But, here are my theories:

1. I don’t want to call him President, he disgraces the title.

2. “Barry” harks back to his mysterious past; it’s a subtle dig at those who never vetted him (especially the MSM).

3. “Barry” fits for a man-child (no experience, no wisdom, economically and historically illiterate).

mockmook on December 28, 2011 at 9:43 PM

I’m new here and I have a question. Some of you refer to the president as “Barry.” Why? I would have assumed that it’s a reference to the name he went by when he was young, but if you’re trying to be derogatory or dismissive of the man –and it looks like most of you want to be– how does calling him “Barry” qualify for that? Can someone explain why calling him by his old name is supposed to be a dis?

Drew Lowell on December 28, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Isn’t it like the Libs calling George W. Bush “Dubya”. It meant something to his supporters, but they only meant in a snide way.

Calling Obama “Barry” is not a big deal.

wcwindbag on December 28, 2011 at 9:44 PM

This is why I am not a Rombot…they want you on tape anyway they can get you saying that heck yeah i loves me some ron paul. thereafter, whatever kooky shit Ron Paul says means you agree with him. Is this not in the campaign manual?

Why answer at all, governor? Why give a seconds thought to answering such a stupid inane set-up question like this?

His one and only answer should have been words to the effect:
“You are an idiot small-minded reporter and that is a stupid question. Next.”

Imo, a man who would be President must have the capability of gracefully but forcefuly deflecting inanely stupid beltway set-up questions like this. Error. Error. Faulty.

Sacramento on December 28, 2011 at 9:44 PM

You are a truly terrible person. Stupid, dumb, and probably ugly. Don’t take that wrong, but you are.

Aquateen Hungerforce on December 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Look who’s back. The dips**t who, just a couple of weeks ago, called everyone on HA racist. Did you run out of pages in your coloring book, sweetie?

MadisonConservative on December 28, 2011 at 9:50 PM

Good for Romney. He can recognize that Paul would still be light years ahead of Obama. I can’t say the same thing for the one issue foreign policy hawks that write and comment on this website.

Jerry Bear on December 28, 2011 at 9:57 PM

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Why don’t you worry about yourself and let our hosts do their job?

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2011 at 10:23 PM

Why don’t you worry about yourself and let our hosts do their job?

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2011 at 10:23 PM

Why dont you worry about yourself and not worry about me?? How bout that?????

If I want to mention the blatant hate-speech allowed on here, I will damn well do so.

so there, Cindy Munford.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM

so there, Cindy Munford.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Thanks for the laugh!

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2011 at 10:41 PM

Fair comment but there are number of posters, Dr. Tesla, Porlandia (or whatever his name is) and others that seem to have license to bring in their disregard for Mitt’s religion on a pretty damn consistent basis. How do they get away with that? It is condoned…thats how.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

It’s okay because we get to respond by calling them bigots. The beauty is that their opinion on another persons faith is simply an opinion, whereas their bigotry is on display for all to see.

It works out quite nicely.

csdeven on December 28, 2011 at 10:43 PM

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM

csdeven is correct, you can point out rudeness and bigotry to the offenders, take the people on, just remember that people are allowed to be wrong, rude and bigoted. The hosts have their criteria.

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2011 at 11:04 PM

I wouldn’t vote.

nicktjacob on December 28, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Atta boy, Mitt. Play the angles. But I would vote for a botulism-infected can of hash over either one of them (Barry or Ron Paul).

minnesoter on December 28, 2011 at 11:43 PM

I wouldn’t vote.

nicktjacob on December 28, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Oh, I’ll vote all right. I will vote against every Democrat pinko on the ballot. But for president I would write in my original choice: Sarah Palin. Nobody’s taking MY vote away.

minnesoter on December 28, 2011 at 11:46 PM

If the GOP nominates Ron Paul, it will be committing suicide.

I’d be hard put to vote for him, mostly because of his willingness to allow Iran to get nukes and to withdraw from the world, but given the choice between him and Obama, my nightmare scenario, I’d probably pick Paul because I know he’d cut spending and because I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Obama, but I would expect Obama to win.

flataffect on December 28, 2011 at 11:49 PM

Anecdotal as it may be, here’s a story. I have just talked to my daughter’s friend. He’s a gay pothead who used to be a liberal Democrat (kinda goes natural with being a gay pothead) but is now fully coopted into Ron Paul’s cohorts. He says there are hundreds like him in the campus, and likely hundreds of thousands nationwide. Even if he exaggerated, his statement gave me a pause: coul dit be that Ron Paul’s third party run will actually harm Democrats more than Republicans?..

Archivarix on December 29, 2011 at 12:50 AM

Archivarix on December 29, 2011 at 12:50 AM

It will hurt everyone, I have two conservative/libertarian non pot heads who think Paul makes more sense than not. They think “mind your own business” is a swell foreign policy.

Cindy Munford on December 29, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Ron Paul is what happened to the traditional pre 1980 southern democrat. His followers are blue collar white people.

pc on December 29, 2011 at 3:02 AM

Well Randy Weaver did live only a stones throw over the railroad tracks away from the Romney family compound in Utah. So there’s that connection.

pc on December 29, 2011 at 3:24 AM

By tomorrow morning Mitt will have changed his mind, this is not newsworthy. Is anything Romney says at this point news worthy? In 15 minutes he’ll change his mind.

JB-STLMO on December 29, 2011 at 4:37 AM

Paul’s majority supporters are lafteingers who like Paul will never support a real republican candidate for President. Hence Paul supported socialists for the top office Obama and Nader over McCain. How that makes Paul a conservative is a mystery. Hence there is no upside to not dissing Paul. His supporters will hold it against the eventual winner that it wasnt Paul as the nominee and they will then vote for either Obama or some third party loser rather than the repub as they’ve always done in the past.His supporters don’t need to be mollified or appeased but need to be ostracized from the party. There is no tent big enough to encompass this man’s vile anti americanism whose views make Obama’s opinions of America seem tepid by comparison. It is not hip to support a vile racist antisemite truther. It shows you are insane and an arsonist against republican and conservative principles. A Paul ticket would be great for dems pitting evil racist antisemite against noble uniter Barack Obama. It is a dem dream come true.

eaglewingz08 on December 29, 2011 at 6:25 AM

PAUL 2012!!!

76United on December 29, 2011 at 9:32 AM

Romney gives the right answer, and Gingrich gives the wrong answer, though he wasn’t even asked the question. Gingrich is just a loose cannon.
Ron Paul I thought was at least an honest man —now not so much, but I wouldn’t have to think twice about voting for him against Obama. If we can’t be REPUBLICANS long enough to vote against a socialist like Obama, we may as well hang it up; we’ll just be Obama’s little lap dogs.

claudius on December 29, 2011 at 9:36 AM

This post is just full of Hot Gas. Romney is not going to flip on this because Paul is not a threat to Romney’s nomination. Even if Paul were to win Iowa AND New Hampshire Paul is not a threat to Romney. No third candidate will emerge because no one else (other than Mitt and Ron) is organizationally prepared to run in every state. And if it seriously comes down to a two-man Mitt/Ron race, Romney will not feel threatened by that.

Every day Allahpundit seems to advance two or three theories about how Romney could lose this race. This is the best one I’ve seen in weeks, and it is, I’m sorry to say, a pretty juvenile attempt.

rogaineguy on December 29, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Maybe we should do a pool on when he flip-flops on his intention to support RP over The One

Hatred for Romney oozing through in every post! You guys who are actually considering not voting for Romney in the general need to wake up, he is conservative! Of course he would vote for Paul in the general over Obama. Oh and flip-flop terminology is growing tired to the point of losing any real bite it may have once had.

kmalkows on December 29, 2011 at 11:33 AM

AP, in your world, does a politician ever say something because they believe it?

You have a very bad habit (shared by Ed) of constantly telling us what people are thinking. How do you do it?
You find it strange that I or anyone else would speculate about a politician’s strategic motives? With the most important primary of the 2012 race six days away?

No, you’re right. Obviously Romney’s only saying this because he means it. That’s also why he’s not attacking Paul, who leads in the polls, but has been unloading on Gingrich for weeks. It’s because he just likes Ron Paul.

Allahpundit on December 28, 2011 at 8:03 PM

I really think it is possible that Romney would vote for Ron Paul over Obama because he thinks Paul would be a better president than Obama. I would and I think Paul’s close to psychotic and in need of medication. But Paul might prevail on domestic policy and actually do something about the defecit. There can be no upside to another 4 years of Obama.

That said, I can’t see Paul getting the nomination.

talkingpoints on December 29, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Ron Paul does not advocate a “hard left” foreign policy. Paul’s foreign policy is very much in line with the “Old Right”; it is the foreign policy of Calvin Coolidge, Robert Taft, and Howard Buffett. It is not “looney” in the least, being the policy that actually focuses on the defense of the nation rather than crusading around the globe to “spread democracy” (and can the latter effort be any more pollyannish?).

A policy of perpetual war is the truly looney, unworkable, preposterous, and counterproductive one. We will wear ourselves out fighting imaginary and minor threats, and when a real threat comes (which will probably be economic rather than military in nature–we’re following in the footsteps of the USSR in that regard), we won’t have the resources to deal with it.

But I don’t expect a passel of Wilsonians to understand any of that.

cavalier973 on December 29, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Let’s be honest Paul supporters. Do you really think both the House and the Senate will let Paul do anything if he becomes president. He’ll be as useless as a bottle of Viagra in a house full of lesbians. Gingrich is at least being honest. Romney’s just trying to appeal as the 2nd choice of the Paultards. It’s so transparent, it’s laughable.

Pcoop on December 29, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Romney gives the right answer, and Gingrich gives the wrong answer, though he wasn’t even asked the question. Gingrich is just a loose cannon.
Ron Paul I thought was at least an honest man —now not so much, but I wouldn’t have to think twice about voting for him against Obama. If we can’t be REPUBLICANS long enough to vote against a socialist like Obama, we may as well hang it up; we’ll just be Obama’s little lap dogs.

claudius on December 29, 2011 at 9:36 AM

“I would vote for Ron Paul” is never the right answer. That Romney would say it undercuts his whole pretense of being the calm, levelheaded, safe choice.

This is just one more stupid thing Romney says that his supporters will try to spin as brilliant. Like pretending that Romneycare was conservative.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 30, 2011 at 1:23 AM

Fair comment but there are number of posters, Dr. Tesla, Porlandia (or whatever his name is) and others that seem to have license to bring in their disregard for Mitt’s religion on a pretty damn consistent basis. How do they get away with that? It is condoned…thats how.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:56 PM

It’s allowed because all religious based attacks are… witness the often vicious (though always entertaining) food-fights between Christians and atheists over evolution. A fun exercise would be to try to count the times Christians and Atheists compare each other to the Nazis. Of course, it would quickly get old after the first few hundred.

Attacking Muslims ist verboten

Carthoris on December 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Your screen-name looks familiar, but based on this comment, this is either your first day reading the comments, or your first day waking up from a deep, deep coma. So, Welcome to Hot Air! (Or, Welcome Back?)

RINO in Name Only on December 30, 2011 at 7:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 2