If Rand doesn't win Iowa or NH, is his campaign over?
- Thread starter YouKnowNothing
- Start date
timosman
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 29,090
How relevant is this information given what we are supposedly doing here ? We must win in Iowa. If we can not win, we should start packing.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,443
Tin foil hat time,
The party isn't splintered as much as they want you to think. There are two major player types of candidates and they are fielding 6 candidates minimum each. The neocon players are Walker, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Santorum, Graham.
The Coch wing is pushing Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Christie, Trump, Kaich.
Both of the candidates types have a defacto alliance against Paul because they represent different republican kingmakers and the enemy of my enemy is an ally. They are all significantly designed to make the republican party big enough to win in the general election.
The coch group have already announced their plan ahead of time, they plan to pick a winner sometime during the primary season so they can prop them up enough to beat the neocons. We need to make sure that our coalition is the biggest, and that's why we will need to reach out to people who wouldn't normally vote because that market is fair game.
I think at one point, our guy tried to con the koch group by getting the leader of the koch party Bitch McConnell reelected. This is why he was getting fair coverage on Fox news for so long. At one point though Rand realized that they were playing him- he also dropped this patriot act bomb on their faces. Maybe was the plan all along to catch them off guard.
The party isn't splintered as much as they want you to think. There are two major player types of candidates and they are fielding 6 candidates minimum each. The neocon players are Walker, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Santorum, Graham.
The Coch wing is pushing Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Christie, Trump, Kaich.
Both of the candidates types have a defacto alliance against Paul because they represent different republican kingmakers and the enemy of my enemy is an ally. They are all significantly designed to make the republican party big enough to win in the general election.
The coch group have already announced their plan ahead of time, they plan to pick a winner sometime during the primary season so they can prop them up enough to beat the neocons. We need to make sure that our coalition is the biggest, and that's why we will need to reach out to people who wouldn't normally vote because that market is fair game.
I think at one point, our guy tried to con the koch group by getting the leader of the koch party Bitch McConnell reelected. This is why he was getting fair coverage on Fox news for so long. At one point though Rand realized that they were playing him- he also dropped this patriot act bomb on their faces. Maybe was the plan all along to catch them off guard.
Last edited:
timosman
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 29,090
I find it funny to think if Rand did start running a real campaign he could not take them all. Why does not he talk to Koch brothers ? These guys love money more than anything else and I am sure they would be delighted to talk to somebody who gives them a continuity option without getting us into WWIIII.
JohnGalt23g
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2010
- Messages
- 1,256
No, but it becomes a helluva lot more difficult.
Try to remember, Bill Clinton won neither IA nor NH in 1992.
Try to remember, Bill Clinton won neither IA nor NH in 1992.
Peace&Freedom
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,123
But when you're the elite-selected favorite you're in a different position than when you're the outsider. You can lose many early contests, as Clinton did in '92, Dole in '96 and Bush in '00, but the MSM will still talk you up as viable. Your campaign could be dead momentum wise, and out of money going into the first contests, as McCain was in '08 or Santorum in '12, but the MSM will claim you are 'surging' from out of nowhere, pick your carcass up and carry you over to victory.
Non-establishment contenders are positively not allowed to fail upwards. When/if Rand does not establish early he can win a caucus or primary, the media will bury him, period. Their marching orders are not merely to blackout coverage at crunch time, but to completely prevent Rand from picking up momentum anywhere. Just as with Ron, their job is to put out his fire as much as they can. I'm even beginning to think that the reason there are 18+ GOP candidates, is to keep Rand from breaking out of the pack---some insiders may have analyzed the race and concluded Rand could more easily succeed in an under 10 candidate field.
Last edited:
JohnGalt23g
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2010
- Messages
- 1,256
You should probably get your history straight.
Dole won IA in 1996. Bush won IA in 2000. And Clinton was a bumpkin from AR, hardly an "elite-selected favorite". That title likely belonged to a man who never entered the contest: Mario Cuomo.
Oh, and blaming the "establishment", before the first votes are cast? Just another excuse for losing...
JohnGalt23g
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2010
- Messages
- 1,256
dp
anaconda
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 19,403
Yes.
Peace&Freedom
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,123
I didn't say Bush or Dole lost Iowa, a contest which is felt to not really matter depending on who you talk to. Buchanan won four states before Super Tuesday in '96 including NH, but was never treated like a serious candidate by the MSM. McCain won NH in '00 and other early contests before SC, yet despite his better momentum saw donations accelerate for GW Bush, not for him.
The outsiders have to fight uphill, and are not treated the same as the anointed, that's the point. AR is not an elite preferred STATE, but their favorite Bill had been in the batter's box since '88. As we've seen in two past cycles, the establishment is to blame, rigs the game, and matters before, during and after the votes are cast.
Badger Paul
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,718
It would be pretty much dead, which is why if I'm Paul, I declare that I will compete in the Iowa Straw Poll. Not only will this please the party stalwarts who want to keep the straw poll, it will force Scott Walker into a corner and force him to decide whether to compete or not and if he does compete and Paul does as well as his father did four years ago, Walker could be dealt a harsh blow.
Why would you say that? I would say the odds are very high considering how many candidates are in the field and how divided the vote will be. The problem for Rand will come when it eventually gets down to a 1 on 1 race against someone like Rubio or Walker. If I had to give a realistic assessment of what will happen, I think that Rand will win Iowa and New Hampshire but still end up losing the nomination.
He id going to win for the same reason he won the Ketucky Senate. He'll get to the debates and argue that the others are intellectually dishonest. He has no preference on who he faces.
alucard13mm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,454
"the established backed candidate" can afford not to win idaho or new hamshire.. An outside like Rand needs to win or at least be top 2 in order to keep momentum imo...
How well Rand does will have a lot to do with who drops out
and where their support goes
and where their support goes
Most likely yes it's realistically over. Maybe strong seconds in both he could make it until super tuesday, but after that he would drop out if there wasn't a good showing.
IMO, he's not going to win the nomination this time around, but will be well placed for next time.
IMO, he's not going to win the nomination this time around, but will be well placed for next time.
Ronin Truth
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 22,510
Not really in much of an enviable position. 
Similar threads
