New Hampshire is the most libertarian state in the country. It is the target state of the Free State Project because of that fact. Ron Paul is by far the most libertarian cadidate in the race. I predict he will get about 15% of the vote in New Hampshire and it will be trumpeted as a victory (despite being a third place finish). It will be by far the best finish he will have in any state and he will stay in the race long after he is viable.

The country, with our fine administrator Mike as the exception , is not libertarian.

Must be true what they say about great minds thinking alike, BoF. I voted for John Anderson in 1980 over the peanut farmer and Ronnie Ray-gun. Never regretted that vote for one second.

I hesitate to post this, but The National Review, has unleashed a scathing attack on Ron Paul charging that his newsletter, variously titled, Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, and The Ron Paul Survival Report contains material that indicates Paul is racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic and a anti-government paranoid.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=...15-4532a7da84ca

Decide for yourself if there is any validity to the The New Republic's claims or whether it's a smear job.

I did catch that nighttimer and it is a ferocious hit job. Here is Paul's response:

Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters


Here is an interview a couple hours ago by Reason Magazine:



And here is supporting blogger Lew Rockwell's response to Paul's supposed secessionist ties:



This is an issue that has been rehashed for years. The newsletter was written under Paul's name but was not the words of Paul himself. The only evidence that the New Republic author has is Paul's name at the bottom of the newsletter. There is zero evidence that the newsletter expressed the feelings of Ron Paul and it is in direct contrast to the individualist rhetoric that he has espoused for decades.

As someone who has written for mainstream, alternative and Black publications, I would not want someone to come at me and say, "Hey, Nighttimer writes for a publication that features ads in the back pages for escort services, gay chat lines and all kinds of kinky stuff. He must support that kind of thing or he wouldn't be in that kind of paper."

Guilt by association is a particularly odious way to go after someone's character. I can't look into Ron Paul's heart and know if he personally hates Blacks, Jews, gays or whomever. He has a voting record and that's the best way to scrutinize where he stands. I looked for something in The National Review where Paul himself actually said anything bigoted and I didn't see it. Some of his positions bug me and some of the people who support his candidacy really are out to lunch, but if there is a direct link between Paul and being a racist, homophobic, anti-Semite, I haven't found the smoking gun yet.

...and believe me, I've been looking for it. That's not to say there's nothing there, but I don't find the linkage that The National Review is implying exists.

Ron Paul must be scaring someone because the viciousness of the attacks against him seems to be growing, not ebbing. If he finishes ahead of Huckabee in New Hampshire, that's just going to up the ante.

Well the numbers are coming in, and It's interesting to see Ron Paul not even break into the top 3 in a state with such a strong independent presence. A week ago, even I expected him to do better their, I'm not sure what percentage Ron is pulling off yet but Huckabee took third, instead of the 6th place finish he was expected to get just a couple weeks ago.

I predicted before the Iowa votes came in that Ron would fail to win in a single state anywhere in the country, and this only strengthens my beliefs. He may take a third or second place somewhere eventually, but I doubt a win. If I'm wrong in that prediction, In any case he will lose by a landslide.

Raise your hand if you predicted that Paul will win a state. Raise your hand if you predicted that Paul would win anything.

Don't count Paul out yet, for a third place finish. He's tied for fourth with 9% with Guliani, behind 12% for Huckabee, with 20% of precincts reporting.

This according to the link I am tracking.

Link

Well hes close to Rudy, but is actually running in 5th as of now in NH. We'll see but I very highly doubt he jumps up to 12% or higher to take third at this point.

Rounded off to the nearest whole number, Ron Paul got 8% of the vote in New Hampshire - not 10% and certainly not 15%. He didn’t end up 3rd or 4th, but 5th.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NH-R.phtml



You are moving the goal posts. I don’t think any of us are trying to demonstrate that Paul won’t win a primary or be the next president. That’s obvious. Your thread asked if Paul would "surprise anyone" in the Republican contests. That hasn’t happened and I don’t look for it to.

Nighttimer, this is the second time you've cited the wrong publication. It was The New Republic that did this hit piece, not The National Review. It was a left wing hit job, not a right wing one.

By the way, it seems TNR has pulled that article from its website.

As for Paul's performance in New Hampshire, I will admit I thought he would do better. Paul cannot garner more than 8-10% of Republicans anywhere. He is polling at 3.7% on average in Florida, 4.7% in South Carolina, 4.3% in Michigan.

For comparison, most people realize that John Edwards is irrelevant on the Democratic side and he is polling at 3 times the numbers that Ron Paul is. Ron Paul is simply not a factor.

My bad. Thanks for the correction, Amlord. Got my "TNR's" mixed up. I hate when that happens.

We do agree though that it was a hit job though. Just coming from the left side instead of the right.