13 Jul 09 Is Ron Paul the only Republican candidate who can beat Hillary in the General Election?

He outflanks the Democrats on the war (against the Iraq, Iran, and Sudan Wars). He outflanks the Democrats on economic populism (he is anti-IRS and anti-Federal Reserve). He outflanks the Democrats on Health Care (he is a doctor and therefore can tear apart Hillary with his support for Capitalism). He also is pro-national sovereignty (anti-open borders, North American Union, NAFTA, CAFTA, NATO, UN, WTO, IMF, and World Bank) unlike the Democrats. He outflanks the Democrats on civil liberties (he voted against the Patriot Act, unlike Hillary and has been a consistent supporter of civil liberties, including being anti-censorship).

Is Ron Paul the only candidate who can beat Hillary? Can any of the pro-aggressive war, anti-civil liberties candidates beat Hillary?
G-Man: It is absurd to blast the character of the most honest man in Washington (which isn’t saying much, though he’s one of the most honest people at home as well). He has a plan for Iraq. We just marched in and we can just march out.

Steven C: The one thing that does appeal to the Republican base is beating Hillary and that is what he can do. Besides, he appeals to the base on the economy, immigration, and some social issues.

JC H: You fail to mention that they limited the votes to former delegates and purposely excluded a bunch of his delegates. Anyways, 16% is far more than what he gets in the scientific polls.

just plain jim: Clearly, you’re part of the Daily Kos crowd. You fear that Ron Paul can beat your beloved Hillary, as do all the commies at the Kos.

mstrywmn: The only people in denial are the Ron Paul Deniers, those who delude themselves into not taking him seriously.
Jim H: I already dealt with the Victoria Advocate’s fraudulent claims. And I am definitely not paid, as unlike Fred Thompson, Ron Paul doesn’t blow his campaign funds on astroturfers (every Ron Paul supporter is sincere, unlike most supporters of other candidates, which makes him extremely dangerous to you paid astroturfers)

Phil: He has more cash on hand than McCain because he is spending his money wisely and saving it for right before the primaries when the electorate will be paying attention. He is now polling 4-5% in the Rasmussan polls (the most reliable of late) and Rasmussan recognizes that there is no clear GOP frontrunner (Thompson will be done when people recognize he isn’t a true Conservative, Giuliani isn’t electable, and Romney won’t beat Ron Paul in New Hampshire; McCain is currently collecting welfare to stay in the race, which won’t help him win, so it is wide open for Ron Paul)
Cinner: This comment was entirely nonsensical. Ron Paul isn’t crazy and isn’t going to go away.

Elway_the_Cat: Firstly, Republicans don’t have to like a candidate to support him. Otherwise, they never would have nominated and elected a pro-amnesty candidate like Bush. Secondly, Ron Paul has disagreements with the voters in his party, but agrees with them on alot more than the frontrunners do. Thirdly, it is absolutely absurd to claim that Hillary could beat him in the debates. She is intelligent, but so is he, and he’s the one who is sincere and truly interested in the best interests of our country.

Joseph, II: Possibly Bush has poisoned the waters, but I’d hope that most of the electorate is willing to listen to both sides and pick the candidate who makes the most sense. If that is the case, Hillary has no chance.
Sageandscholar: I don’t know where to begin. Firstly, he is drawing a consistent 4-5% from Rasmussan. Secondly, polls don’t matter this early (Bill Clinton was 2-3% this time 16 years ago and Jimmy Carter was in a similar situation 32 years ago and the Democrats had no clear favorite either time, as is the case in the GOP this year).

Ice: Nice try, but Fred Thompson isn’t actually for federalism (read Richard Viguere’s expose of him @ http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=2438CMSCategoryID=19 ) and Ron Paul actually has more real support (as opposed to media-manufactured support). Ron Paul draws 1000 people to his rallies anywhere in the country, most of all candidates. Thompson draws just about nobody (as has been reported repeatedly). The Fred Thompson campaign has been astroturf, whereas Ron Paul’s support is legitimate and grassroots, as clear evidence shows. Ron Paul is clearly more legitimate than Fred Thompson right now.