Ron Paul wins CPAC straw poll

[CatoMinor]

Paul just won with 31%
http://www.cpac.org/

Willard 22%
Palin 7%
Pawlenty 6%
Gingrich 4%
Huckabee 4%
Daniels 2%
Santorum 2%
Thune 2%
Barbour 1%

[TheGreatOne]

2,400 people voted this year, which is larger than last year. 

[You kip if you want to...]

hahahahaha, that's hilarious.

[Oakvale]

Please oh please let the Republicans nominate Ron Paul in 2012. That would be one for the ages.

[Phony Moderate]

hahahahaha, that's hilarious.

[xavier110]

LMAO. WHAT.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Please oh please let the Republicans nominate Ron Paul in 2012. That would be one for the ages.

Yeah, it'd be hilarious to see Obama lose to a 75 year old man.

[Mr. Morden]

link

Ron Paul 31%

Mitt Romney 22%

Sarah Palin 7%

Tim Pawlenty 6%

Mike Pence 5%

Newt Gingrich 4%

Mike Huckabee 4%

Mitch Daniels 2%

Rick Santorum 2%

John Thune 2%

Haley Barbour 1%

[CatoMinor]

hahahahaha, that's hilarious Amazing.

Fixed

[The Mikado]

Gary Johnson must be so pissed.

[Phony Moderate]

And there goes a lot of Ron Paul's credibility....

[You kip if you want to...]

And there goes a lot of Ron Paul's credibility....

I know. Paul must feel horrifically insulted. :/

[Mr. Morden]

Incidentally, here are the results from last year:

http://www.gop12.com/2010/02/ron-paul-shocks-em-wins-2010-cpac-straw.html

1. Mitt Romney 20%

2. Bobby Jindal 14%

3. Ron Paul 13%

3. Sarah Palin 13%

5. Newt Gingrich 10%

6. Mike Huckabee 7%

7. Mark Sanford 4%

8. Rudy Giuliani 3%

9. Tim Pawlenty 2%

10. Charlie Crist 1%

[Psychic Octopus]

I seriously just laughed so hard I almost cried. I guess more libertarians were in attendance then prior years, or something. It ain't a legit trend, that's for sure. Still funny though, Still funny.

Gary Johnson must be so pissed.

He didn't even make the cut, lol. Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty both epically failed here.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

[Oakvale]

Please oh please let the Republicans nominate Ron Paul in 2012. That would be one for the ages.

Yeah, it'd be hilarious to see Obama lose to a 75 year old man.

Ron Paul is probably the only potential Republican candidate that's less electable than Sarah Palin.

[The Mikado]

Please oh please let the Republicans nominate Ron Paul in 2012. That would be one for the ages.

Yeah, it'd be hilarious to see Obama lose to a 75 year old man.

Ron Paul is probably the only potential Republican candidate that's less electable than Sarah Palin.

Much as I don't like Ron Paul, an Obama/Paul general election campaign would be the most interesting thing in American Electoral History.  Move over, 1836!  See you, 1912!  Hasta la vista, 1968!  2012's in town!

[Oakvale]

Please oh please let the Republicans nominate Ron Paul in 2012. That would be one for the ages.

Yeah, it'd be hilarious to see Obama lose to a 75 year old man.

Ron Paul is probably the only potential Republican candidate that's less electable than Sarah Palin.

Much as I don't like Ron Paul, an Obama/Paul general election campaign would be the most interesting thing in American Electoral History.  Move over, 1836!  See you, 1912!  Hasta la vista, 1968!  2012's in town!

Oh it would certainly be interesting, I'll grant you that...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

Yes but Willard did beat Huck 5 to 1.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

Yes but Willard did beat Huck 5 to 1.

Obviously that's a bad thing, but Willard still didn't win and I guess that's what matters

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

Yes but Willard did beat Huck 5 to 1.

Obviously that's a bad thing, but Willard still didn't win and I guess that's what matters

Among those the candidates that matter he won. And he got more support this year then last.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Lord have mercy on the Republican Party. The only redeeming sign from this is that Palin got only 7%

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

Yes but Willard did beat Huck 5 to 1.

Obviously that's a bad thing, but Willard still didn't win and I guess that's what matters

Among those the candidates that matter he won. And he got more support this year then last.

*FACEPALM*

It's like everyone who's not Romney "doesn't matter" to you--especially if they're doing better than Romney

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hey, at least it's not Willard

Yes but Willard did beat Huck 5 to 1.

Obviously that's a bad thing, but Willard still didn't win and I guess that's what matters

Among those the candidates that matter he won. And he got more support this year then last.

*FACEPALM*

It's like everyone who's not Romney "doesn't matter" to you--especially if they're doing better than Romney

You are an idiot and you are confusing me with Tmth, NiK or Winfield.

Paul doesn't matter. Name me a singal primary where he came close to winning? Huck, Palin, Romney, and the new candidates running are the only ones that are relevant because they a large following or could get a large following.

[Jensen]

That's great, or something, but really... Really... I have a part of me [small part? possibly] that has me thinking... What Americans want a 75 year old man reminiscing about the good old days of George Washington and the Constitution to lead America into the future? The American populace is looking for progress and modernization. We want America to be vibrant and alive. Ron Paul just doesn't offer that. He's conservative on social issues meaning he won't even appeal to a lot of civil libertarians (as I would call myself). The only libertarian qualifications he is that separate him from the pack are opposing the war and PATRIOT Act and torture. These issues are simply not prominent concerns for Americans right now. Americans want to restore economic prosperity and finally reach equality. Paul just doesn't have the set of views that appeal to this group.