Oh snap....Veta's back!

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/12/paul-leads-in-iowa.html

Just for you deadcode.

Also this annoys the shit out of me: http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg.

Yeah New York Times polling now has Paul on top in Iowa too.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

But don't get too ahead of yourselves. There is still a lot of time between now and the vote. And you know the GOP is going to start attacking Ron Paul if his numbers start getting any better. Personally I believe when they do attack Ron; it won't effect his numbers; maybe even make him go up. We will just have to wait and see.

deadcode... I find you're thinking processes a tad dichotometric at times, if not rather often. Shit is rarely so neatly laid out in black and white. Geopolitically even less so. I'm not suggesting that in "no uncertain terms" Ron Paul represents an unelectable candidate. (I'll admit my honest opinion says, unlikely with a margin of stranger things have happened.) That said there's simply far too many reasons why I feel that way to go into here. In any case I remain aligned with Veta's suggestion that perhaps 100 years ago Ron Paul would have been a spectacular president. A few more Ron Paul's back then might have even served to protect us from our current situation. It didn't happen. Quite the contrary in fact and you have to ask yourself why.

I've been saying this for decades now. The fucking KEY lies in a soundly educated voting constituency not to be confused with a high school diploma supplemented with an MBA in IT. Oddly enough some of the talking heads are finally beginning to press this issue saying exactly that and furthermore pointing out that in spite of throwing GOBS of more and more money at a public educational system it continues to fail horribly and in doing so we arrive at the "simple minded" and erroneous conclusion that... huh, public education at the elementary levels does not work. Nonetheless what's finally being recognized is that throwing money at a..."model", that is totally FUBAR'ED is completely insane. In every realm of scientific application be it molecular science, structural engineering or psychology if you do not continue to vigorously and religiously "update" the model with an almost iron clad discipline the slippage between the map and the territory you apply it upon begins to immediately widen as does the the margin of error increase. The average young adult by the time they leave public high school should have under their belts at the very least a solid, fundamental understanding of the nature of the social structure and it's ENGINEERING, yes, engineering, that is if we hope to produce high percentages or "majorities" of individuals able to reside and function within that society at the highest level of efficiency available to him personally, without having to rely upon shit like affluence and/or a bit of luck.

We are discussing governance. Which implies a hierarchy of the few overseeing the functions of the many add making available the overall development of it's achievements available to the generations to come. Caretakers if you like. We done a piss poor job of that particular angle. You have to ask yourself. What is your aim, or goal. Self interest - fuck the rest?. Well we got that part down pretty good and it served us well. Shit however is evolving rapidly as it has been for a very long time. A key differential as it applies to our species is that we are THE ONLY organism on this planet that gathers, stores and makes available, passes down, the vast experiences and useable knowledge of previous generations in a package like fashion that resembles something closer to being EXPONENTIAL. We also function strongly as a "symbolic organism" in ways like none other. A quick survey of the following items ranging from your basic STOP sign out on the street to items such as monetary currency, to your national flag, to mathematics and last but not least language itself are but a few minor examples. The key lies in how closely the representations "match" the territory. In some cases rather well. Bridges rarely collapse, proving themselves...reliable. In other instances not so much. Take the verbal representations of our candidates, elected officials and so forth.... and their actions. The disparity immeasurable. Factor in the fact that the average voting constituent has little or almost no understanding or recognition of his internal structure as it applies to his own nervous system and how both the cortical and limbic areas are subject to the incoming stimuli at both the "objective" and subjective level, easily manipulated emotionally with highly developed tactics not withstanding simple sloganeering when the above is taken for granted or as in most cases blatantly ignored. Hence additional reinforcement to the statement... those who control the symbols shall in fact control the masses.

I'm sorry about the rant but Veta makes a strong point. Your posts/ efforts here do seem to show signs of blinded "cheerleading" when the issues are in fact rather complicated. Kim Jong Il croaks and the markets and various power structures experience fluctuations. Crackpots hoping to maintain their hold on power remain subjugating their own people via fear and ruthlessness. Russia, China, Britain, Saudi Arabia, the United States seemingly co-operative on some levels, dangerously at odds on others. South America continues to form its own coalition in response to having been at the mercy of both the IMF and other foreign operations often sinister in nature, most often conducted by yours truly the United States. The Arab spring, OWS represents dissatisfaction with our governing bodies and we want them replaced, understandably, but replaced WITH WHAT... As it stands absent any real knowledge there's no common reference aside from plenty of incoherence. Oh yea, let's not forget.. the nukes. A fact that WILL NEVER go away...ever. It's simply a matter of how well we "manage our behaviors" when it comes to that sample of reality as a species, globally.

You're perfectly entitled to rant and rave about Ron Paul all you like, but there is no magic bullet. It's a different world out there. I've recently stopped following the debates because I can't bear to consider the prospect of either our volatile and unstable Newt Gingrich or plastic Mitt Romney becoming the next leader of what's currently the most powerful nation on earth. With all of the brightest minds I know exist out there it literally baffles me that THIS is the best we can hope to look forward to and quite frankly this really has me worried. As an alternative I admit Ron Paul as president doesn't scare me near as much. At least the ensuing train wreck will be a lot more contained... I think. I could be wrong about that too.

For any of who found this tl;dr... fuck you, I don't care.

These are professionals dead, they get paid to make people's numbers go down. If they value their livelihood they'll figure out something to sink Ron.

Now you can argue "but Obama, this and Obama that," all you want - but there's a glaring distinction you're not making. Obama had the backing of the national party - and generally, few enemies - as opposed to hillary which was at odds with howard dean, among other influential democrats. By the time of the actual election all his dirty laundry(if you could call it that) had been aired by hillary clinton's campaign - not to mention nobody wanted another Republican in the white house after 8 years of Bush. So that's why nothing stuck to Obama. I'm not sure the circumstances are such that Ron Paul could survive professional character assassination - by influential members of his own party no less.

I like Ron Paul's sincerity, but sincerity doesn't make you a good leader. I like Kucinich's sincerity too but I'm confident both would similar to Carter in their style of governance.

Stop posting at the same time as me gangstr :)

I understand your reasoning Veta; and I also agree that it is too early to predict anything. However I do see promise. Ron Paul was attack by Gingrich and other candidates in the last debate. His responses were great; and it is widely considered his best debate (4 million in fundraising during one day online event after debate). This gives me confidence that he will be able to fight off attacks and possibly even turn them into increases in polls like he did in the debate. But that is all speculation on my part; a lot can happen when the knives come out. Kinda like how kdice volatility goes up when you play more aggressive (miscount etc).

After considering the above here is where I think you and I don't see eye to eye on this; you under-estimate the impact that cultural changes have on elections.

You also are missing the significance of the Tea Party and the OWS. These are very motivated voters. They are primarily disenfranchised DEM/GOP voters and independents.

These voters choose Ron Paul has a likely candidate at a much higher rate than any other current candidate.

Ron Paul's platform is the only platform that unites the common principles behind the tea party and the OWS. Because of this; I think you are largely under-estimating the amount of votes he will receive from these highly motivated crowds.

Remember; politics is about motivation and momentum. Ron Paul has both of these at the moment.

Also another point; political analysis has been talking about how Ron Paul's ads in Iowa have been very effective; more effective then other candidates. This was even mentioned in the last debate.

Ron Paul's web / media arm is way more powerful then his opponents IMO. The GOP may have more mainstream news outlets on their side. But Ron Paul, on the other hand, has an online network that makes any ad he makes viral almost immediately upon release.

Personally I think you are under-estimating him; although I think some where deep in your heart you have an inkling that I'm right.

That inkling will continue to grow.

analyists*