http://www.uncoveredpolitics.com/20...-carolina/

I don't know if I'd trust many polls in our state right now with regard to Obama vs Romney.  I mean, HERE'S a little info on a poll showing Romney leading Obama.  Last Elon University poll I saw (may have been one after the one I saw...not sure) also showed Romney in the lead currently.

North Carolina, in my opinion, will go for Romney and will remain in the republican fold this year.  Could I be wrong?  Fer sher....but don't think so.

What is your point, actually, Tea?

How in the world do you say that Romney is going to win NC with any confidence? NC has always split Dem for Gov and GOP for Pres. Then 4 years ago NC went Dem both ways for the first time in I don't know when. Here you have a non-inspiring Romney as the GOP candidate, and Gov. Johnson already polling at 6% in this swing state, which is 3 times the difference that Obama and Romney are apart right now. What if all those libertarian voters that are going for Johnson would have been motivated to vote for the Republican instead? How many other swing states will this play out in?

Do you see my point now?

I believe that very scenario playing itself out all over the country is unfortunately probably what is going to end up being required to complete the transformation of the GOP. If it is completed, then and only then will you see the unification. It will be the difference between Rubio as the nominee or Rand Paul as the president in 2016.

That scenario your presenting will tank America and there'll be nothing to get it to come back.

I don't agree with what you're saying here, TEA. Once we're in an entitlement state, nothing will bring it back to a state that has people that work to be responsible for themselves. If you think so, you're not thinking straight.

Psst...hey Dap...don't look now, but America has been the Welfare/Warfare state for 50-60 years. A reelection of Obama is not what did it, my friend, and it is disingenuous to suggest that would be what's responsible for a condition that has been true for longer than I've been alive.

An election of Romney will not fix it. It wouldn't even alter it. If you think so, not only are you not thinking straight, but if that is what you think then you could be accused of not thinking at all.

The mastermind of Obamacare, coming to the rescue of conservatives, saving us from the evil Obama. What did I just say?

Posted By dap916 on 5-21-2012 09:31 PM
Of course I realize that we've gravitated in that direction for many a decade now. Just suggesting that I don't see that, Tea, is condescending and I think you know better than that.

Romney isn't going to "fix" the horrible slide away from fiscal and social conservativism in this country. My belief is that he can stop the steep slide. You believe that only libertarianism and a truly libertarian leader can make this country what is used to be. And, anything or anyone other than that just won't do for you.

Spending.  That's what got us (and the entire EU, for that matter) in the situation we're in.  You're so dead on Choo, it's pathetic.  I mean, I love your humor about it and such.  But, the truth in what you're saying about how if we suddenly got a MASSIVE increase in revenue into the FED, it wouldn't be used to pay down the debt and to balance the budget....it'd just be used to find ways to spend more.  It's what has happened for eons and what is going to continue to happen....save a miraculous Teaparty/libertarian influx into our legislatures (House and Senate). 

Isn't it just so sad that this is the case?  I mean, the money behind it is what drives the decisions.  First of all....all of the legislators must make sure that spending in their districts/states is solidified so as to shore up their campaigns...you know, saying "we got this done and that done...."   Second, we must continue our wars and overseas involvements so as to make sure we don't have any enemies, don'tyaknow?  I mean, we can buy friends in a big way...and have been buying foreign friends for like GENERATIONS.  So, more money into the FED means more buying of influence in foreign lands and more "taking care" of their needs and suffering.  The belief is, if we take away our foreign aid...which is just SOOOOO significant....then we'll see those countries being enemies.  So, we must "buy" their allegance. 

Spending should be done only for America in our current global situation.  We owe absolutely NO ONE a free lunch.  We don't owe anyone our taxpayer's money.  We owe our OWN people that...and no one else.  And, no more waste within our GSA and within our military expenditures.  That has to go.  We could fund Europe with what we waste in wasteful American government spending, for Christ's sake.

I'm done here.

I think you're getting ahead of yourself there:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...aul/53336/

http://campaign2012.washingtonexami...ney/588321

Rand's announcement means that he heard something he liked in his conversation with Romney. His "endorsement" will amount to few votes, however, as these articles illustrate. It certainly did not get mine.

Romney has already stated he has no interest in looking at the Fed. This pretty much means that Rand is being expedient as opposed to being principled. This will not help him earn the support of the rEVOLution, on the whole. I predict now that many could end up losing interest in the GOP altogether.

I don't think this helps Rand at all, or the GOP now or in the future. This was a mistake, any way I slice it.

Dap, we shall see in November. We will know by whether Gov. Johnson covers the difference in the swing states. If he does, and Obama wins those states again, then I will be proven to be right. If not, then I will be proven to be wrong. It will be that simple.

Of course, we'll never know how many wrote in Ron Paul's name. In states like NC they throw away write-ins, even though our state constitution clearly says that anyone eligible to vote and of the age requirement is eligible to be a candidate and receive votes and have those votes counted.

I don't want Obama to win. Period. I've said this to you before many times, often in correction of what you just said here. My point has always been that the difference between the not-Pauls in the GOP and the Democrats is nominal, at best. Why do you continue to ignore what I'm saying, and continue to ignore what they are?

In any case, Paul's campaign blogger Jack Hunter, "The Southern Avenger" of Charleston, SC, made a video about this very topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...RI52UndhE4

I still don't like it, but at least this video better helps me understand it. I suppose I could be called naive by some for not already understanding the "why" of this move, but then again as a Paul supporter how could any of us expect an endorsement of RomneyCare, RomneyWar and RomneyFed?

Those of you who like Rand but skeptical of Ron, pay close attention to the "perception" part of the video above.