Ron Paul wins Texas Presidential Straw Poll

[GALTGULCH8]

<<<"

RON PAUL WINS TEXAS PRESIDENTIAL STRAW POLL

12-term Congressman from the Lone Star State bests rivals in Tea Party-organized survey

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul defeated his rivals for the GOP nomination in a straw poll conducted by tea party groups in his home state.

The ‘Saddle Up Texas Straw Poll’ featured in-person paper-ballot voting in Houston as well as a text-in vote.

Paul took first place with 27.9 percent of the 707 in-person paper votes tallied, besting his GOP competitors – including incumbent Texas Governor Rick Perry, who placed fourth earning just 19.4 percent. Newt Gingrich with 23.8 percent, Rick Santorum with 21.2 percent, Mitt Romney with 6.6 percent, and Jon Huntsman with 1.1 percent came in second, third, fifth, and sixth place, respectively.

Paul easily won the majority of the more than 3,300 text-in votes with more than 54 percent of votes cast.

“This straw poll was a tea party event. Its result is further evidence of the tea party and conservatives nationwide coalescing behind one candidate, Ron Paul, as the one true challenger and conservative alternative to Mitt Romney,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton. “Ron Paul is the only candidate who can defeat Obama by energizing Republicans, tea partiers, independents, and disaffected Democrats.”

Complete results for both voting methods follows.

In-person voting results

Ron Paul 27.9%

Newt Gingrich 23.8%

Rick Santorum 21.2%

Rick Perry 19.4%

Mitt Romney 6.6%

Jon Huntsman 1.1%

Text-in voting results

Ron Paul 54.4%

Rick Santorum 15.6%

Rick Perry 13.3%

Newt Gingrich 11.9%

Mitt Romney 4.2%

Jon Huntsman 0.5%

For a news story on the straw poll results, please click here.

">>>

How embarrassing for Governor Perry who ought to follow Huntsman's decision to drop out, but he ought to endorse Ron Paul instead of flip-flopper.

[Selene]

Gulch:

This is just the typical awareness and presence of the "true believer" that inhabits Dr. Paul's network. All it means is that he has dedicated foot soldiers which is important in turning out the vote, but is not indicative of the depth of his support in the prime voter in the Republican primary contests.

And you know this.

Do you believe at any level that it is indicative of his electability?

Adam

[GALTGULCH8]

Adam,

the number of citizens who have become aware of the fact that the Founders meant for the central government to be limited to the powers granted in Article 1 Section 8 is growing. The question will be asked in every Senate race and every Congressional race from now on I trust: What will you do to keep your oath of office? Also What will you do if your party tells you to vote for a bill when you realize that the power being sought is not among the enumerated powers?

Despite the speed at which this awareness is growing I think it is still too soon to expect such knowledge to be sufficiently widespread. Not to mention that there are so many who are benefitting from entitlement programs.

Still Rand Paul did get elected to the US Senate in Kentucky which is encouraging.

I do think that Ron Paul is "electable." That does not mean that it will happen as some of us wish. But he has ignited the movement. Of course Ayn Rand also shed a most profound light on our situation and hopefully her ideas are spreading as well.Likewise the ideas of the Austrian economists is spreading too.

There is a certain urgency however and many of Ron Paul's supporters sense this and think it is imperative that Ron Paul be elected in this election fearing perhaps that Obama, if re elected will have four years in which to seal our fate, destroy our way of life, cripple the economy with all his fascistic regulations, czars, and agencies.

hence the success of his money bombs such as the one going on right now. But so many things would have to happen for Ron Paul to actually be elected despite the obstacles. I think it is within the realm of the possible and realistic but that would require that so many decisions be made in a rational way by so many people who have a choice in the matter, most of whom are not familiar with nor even aware of the facts necessary to come to the conclusion that a vote for Ron Paul is best.

So it may simply not happen at any stage. On the other hand events may unfold in a manner which would enable enough people to acquire the knowledge needed to make the correct decisions, in which case Ron Paul could become president.

Does that answer your question?

[BaalChatzaf]

Adam,

the number of citizens who have become aware of the fact that the Founders meant for the central government to be limited to the powers granted in Article 1 Section 8 is growing. The question will be asked in every Senate race and every Congressional race from now on I trust: What will you do to keep your oath of office? Also What will you do if your party tells you to vote for a bill when you realize that the power being sought is not among the enumerated powers?

Despite the speed at which this awareness is growing I think it is still too soon to expect such knowledge to be sufficiently widespread. Not to mention that there are so many who are benefitting from entitlement programs.

Still Rand Paul did get elected to the US Senate in Kentucky which is encouraging.

I do think that Ron Paul is "electable." That does not mean that it will happen as some of us wish. But he has ignited the movement. Of course Ayn Rand also shed a most profound light on our situation and hopefully her ideas are spreading as well.Likewise the ideas of the Austrian economists is spreading too.

There is a certain urgency however and many of Ron Paul's supporters sense this and think it is imperative that Ron Paul be elected in this election fearing perhaps that Obama, if re elected will have four years in which to seal our fate, destroy our way of life, cripple the economy with all his fascistic regulations, czars, and agencies.

hence the success of his money bombs such as the one going on right now. But so many things would have to happen for Ron Paul to actually be elected despite the obstacles. I think it is within the realm of the possible and realistic but that would require that so many decisions be made in a rational way by so many people who have a choice in the matter, most of whom are not familiar with nor even aware of the facts necessary to come to the conclusion that a vote for Ron Paul is best.

So it may simply not happen at any stage. On the other hand events may unfold in a manner which would enable enough people to acquire the knowledge needed to make the correct decisions, in which case Ron Paul could become president.

Does that answer your question?

In wars, the first casualty of battle is the battle plan. In governments, particularly republics, the first casualty is the constitution of the republic. So it happened with the U.S. One of Thomas Jefferson's major moves was the Louisiana Purchase, which was not constitutional. One of Lincoln's moves was suspension of habeus corpus which is not a power of the President. Several modifications to the Constitution completed the destruction of the original Federal Plan. The 17 th amendment making the Senate directly electable by the people. That cut States out of the loop. The Court's perverse interpretation of regulation of interstate commerce etc. etc. etc. The Constitution as the Founders wrote is dead.

We are fortunate to have enough of the Bill of Rights intact to not become a flat out Fascist dictatorship. Be thankful for the little that is left.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[syrakusos]

Ron Paul just won a Texas Straw Poll in which he came in first with 27.8% and Texas Governor Perry had only 19%!

Even before I moved here to Austin, I found the Austin Tech Republicans via LinkedIn. I goto the luncheons often. I assure you that Ron Paul is largely irrelevant to the Texas GOP. They are traditionalist conservatives, not libertarians. Their bggest concerns are:

• How to (a) secure the borders while (b) not losing Hispanic votes.
  
• How to (a) balance the federal budget while (b) not cutting welfare or defense.
  
• How to (a) crack down on crime without (b) surrendering civil liberties to a government they may not control next time around.
  

Rick Perry is their man. Ron Paul might be their "conscience" but only in so far as he echoes their common beliefs that

• life begins at conception, therefore abortion is always (or almost always) wrong
  
• marriage is God's institution and therefore only one man may marry only one woman (even if we let gays have bars).
  
• English is America's National Language.
  

Ron Paul is largely irrelevant. Like H. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, he only provides a theoretical interest, a diversion from the mainstream. Just as chocolate syrup, whipped cream, and a cherry to turn a dish of ice cream into a sundae, it is still just ice cream, and no one buys Ben & Jerry marischinos to eat by the quart.