Should Paul attack Romney?

[boondoggle]

Romney's support, especially when there's members from Huck's Army going to the poll and Paul supporters going, is impressive. I'm talking about the AOL poll HERE. Romney is polling at 24% (2nd place) in New Hampshire, compared to Paul's 32% (1st place). That's good, considering he doesn't have that much online support.

Let's look at more:
Iowa: Romney-17% (2nd) Paul-44% (1st)
South Carolina: Romney- 20% Paul- 23% (tied for 1st with Huck)
Michigan: Romney- 26% (2nd) Paul- 32% (1st)
Wyoming: Romney- 19% (3rd) Paul- 27%

So, seeing this, it makes me nervous. Huckabee has online support and so does Paul, and, even with all of that, Romney is still up there and a competitor. Does this freak anyone else out? This really freaks me out . . . .

So, I ask . . . How bad would it be if Paul attacked Romney?

 

[Mark Rushmore]

If we assume that Romney does *not* have paid online support (consider FL straw poll) - then what his strength in this poll measures is still his strength amongst AOL users - because presumably if you aren't linked there by a fellow supporter, you are stumbling onto that poll via AOL.

I'm not certain how reflective of primary voters the AOL user base is - perhaps, perhaps not.

 

[yongrel]

No!

He is attacking our rivals for us!

 

[boondoggle]

No!

He is attacking our rivals for us!

What about late in the game? But I do think that's a good, good point. But what if there's a split of two states for Paul and two states for Romney in MI, SC, IA, and NH? Suppose the spotlight goes to Paul and Romney? Suppose Romney is Paul's only REAL threat?

 

[JGalt]

What about late in the game? But I do think that's a good, good point. But what if there's a split of two states for Paul and two states for Romney in MI, SC, IA, and NH? Suppose the spotlight goes to Paul and Romney? Suppose Romney is Paul's only REAL threat?

Be the better man. Mitt has already shown us that he won't.

 

[DJ RP]

AOL users are, as a stereotype that is usually true, the stupidest segment of society. The kind of people who would believe anything fox news says. AOL is a terrible internet service provider. Seriously.

 

[dircha]

I think at this point we just need to keep pushing our positive message through targeted advertising and door to door until we see the results of Iowa and New Hampshire.

The big unknown is what is Ron Paul's "real" support.

If we find after the results are in that Ron Paul really only has single digit support, then attacking might be the only way to get ahead.

But if he has much stronger support than he polls, it will mean it is support from voters new to the process or new to the Republican party, in which case going on the attack might hurt us more than it will help.

We'll know very soon.

 

[yongrel]

AOL users are, as a stereotype that is usually true, the stupidest segment of society. The kind of people who would believe anything fox news says. AOL is a terrible internet service provider. Seriously.

This

 

[InRonWeTrust]

No!

He is attacking our rivals for us!

He will attack our rivals no matter what! I actually think we could put together a great ad showing Mitt's "Best Of" lies..... NRA "Endorsement," Marching with King, Lifelong Hunter... etc.

 

[The Good Doctor]

I prefer Ron Paul going on the defensive after an attack. Like in most of the debates:

Giuliani - bitch slapped
Huckabee - bitch slapped
Romney - bitch slapped
McCain - bitch slapped

I don't think Hunter or Tancredo would attack Ron Paul as they like him.

I would like to see Thompson try and attack Ron Paul. I wonder how that would go?

 

[boondoggle]

If Paul doesn't, and it starts to look bad . . . Supporters should.

 

[pacelli]

I think Dr. Paul should just continue to speak against the policies which his rivals endorse.

 

[agape64]

Romney's support, especially when there's members from Huck's Army going to the poll and Paul supporters going, is impressive. I'm talking about the AOL poll HERE. Romney is polling at 24% (2nd place) in New Hampshire, compared to Paul's 32% (1st place). That's good, considering he doesn't have that much online support.

Let's look at more:
Iowa: Romney-17% (2nd) Paul-44% (1st)
South Carolina: Romney- 20% Paul- 23% (tied for 1st with Huck)
Michigan: Romney- 26% (2nd) Paul- 32% (1st)
Wyoming: Romney- 19% (3rd) Paul- 27%

So, seeing this, it makes me nervous. Huckabee has online support and so does Paul, and, even with all of that, Romney is still up there and a competitor. Does this freak anyone else out? This really freaks me out . . . .

So, I ask . . . How bad would it be if Paul attacked Romney?

While I think that in a sense it is good that our grassroots continues to infiltrate these polls and win them so as to further name recognition, obviously that completely devalues the poll. Oh and RP should not (and probably won't) attack Romney. It is one of the stated positions of the campaign that it is against those sort of political games.

 

[N13]

Just stick to the counter punch.

 

[Micahyah]

McCain is attacking Romney in NH.

 

[JAlli41]

As a Massachusetts resident, there would be nothing I would like to see more than for anyone to attack Romney, the guy stunk as a Governor and will likely be just as awful a President, he left every state worker including teachers, transit workers and correction officers without a contract for 2 years. I don't know how good a consultant the man was, but as a politican he certainly leaves a lot to be desired. The other embarrasing thing about Romney is how he is trying to latch on to the 25% of America who still like Bush to try to get their vote. I am a republican, my family are all military type Republicans and none of them are planning on voting for Romney. If Paul does not get the nomination the Republicans deserve to lose and this is coming from someone who is fairly partisan. They deserve to lose a lot for a few years until they remember how they got their power, that being said, I would sy anyone who wants to smear Romney should have a field day.

 

[robatsu]

One thing that has drawn people to the Ron Paul campaign is that it is relentlessly positive about how it promotes the message and the man and doesn't descend into the gutter. I'm against attacks on other candidates, which really are a signal of desperation. Sure a vigorous defense when attacked, RP has certainly shown an uncanny ability to turn the tables, judo like, against heavyweight attackers, but going on the offense against specific candidates, rather than policies, that is just out of character for this campaign.