So it looks like the the online Paultard-ary will be renewed for another two months. Ron Paul scored second place in Nevada, which will likely fuel another round of conspiracy theories, delusions, and accusations of media censorship.
- Although Ron Paul managed to score second, it's the least impressive second place in the entire race, but in terms of raw percentage, and in terms of the difference between first and second place. Mitt Romney earned nearly four times as many votes as Ron Paul, so it's not as though Ron is nipping at his heels.
- Turnout was low. Really low. To put it into perspective, Mitt Romney barely earned more votes in Nevada than what Dennis Kucinich earned in Michigan. Ron Paul received half as many votes in Nevada compared to what Bill Richardson earned in Nevada. Which just goes to show, Paultards tend to do better in the races where other people don't catch up, because those are the ones that are the easiest to spam.
- Because of the predicted low turnout, the other candidates didn't bother to make an effort. Ron Paul had radio and TV advertisements almost entirely to himself.
- In terms of raw percentage, 13% isn't that much of an improvement compared to how well Ron Paul has done in other races.
8 comments:
Call me an asshole, but I'm going to do the opposite.
I'll tell them that Ron Paul's second-place finish is irrefutable proof that he has a solid chance at winning the nomination, and they should tell everyone they know about why they like him.
It means that they'll have to explain away those newsletters even longer, and there will be more moneybombs for them to waste their money on.
Sounds good to me!
It will be fun to watch the Paulbots explain these results in SC.
Paul 15,773 4% 0
As a Democrat, I find [haveintercoursewith]ronpaul's suggestion appealing for a further reason. The more money Paul's hypnotized cult members shovel his way and the longer they keep him convinced he's viable, the more likely it is that he'll launch a third-candidate campaign and split the conservative vote (or the more loony fringe of it, anyway).
This comment is not for publication (because you only have the spine to print anti-Ron Paul comments -- ha ha, you only got 3!)
I've seen your denigrating comments about the good Dr. Paul before. Jealous much? Got an agenda?
Better make plans now to leave the country because we're going to have a president your mind is too tiny to comprehend... Dr. Ron Paul!
Get used to him winning because this is just the beginning. So put up or shut up. We're taking over the country.
And... cue the brown shirts.
Ron Lawl, that fourth commenter will please be billed for replacement costs for one keyboard. I lost half a mouthful of soda over it -- though I'd much rather have some of whatever he was smoking when he wrote that hilarious self-deluded babble.
"This is just the beginning." Yes, 10% in Iowa and 4% in New Hampshire and 14% in an almost-uncontested caucus with negligible turnout -- among Republicans, many of whom are loopy enough to actually vote for Huckabee -- is just the beginning! Paul will go on to get 4% and 2% and 5% in state after state! And on to the general election! If Bush could win the Presidency in 2000 with only 49.5% of the popular vote, Paul should be able to do it with 1%!
Honestly, the Paulloons are starting to sound like the Black Knight in that Monty Python movie, who had his arms and legs cut off one after the other and kept insisting it was just a scratch and he would fight on to victory.
Meanwhile, today's "moneybomb" is apparently more of a wet firecracker--at least, to everyone but the guys at ronpaulgraphs.com, who are selectively omitting data points to make it look like this is the best day ever.
But Nevada is obviously more important than South Carolina to the Republican nomination!!!
Post a Comment