Primary results are negated if the establishment candidate is beaten
Paul Joseph Watson
Friday, December 16, 2011
The Iowa primary is widely acknowledged as a hugely influential indication of who the eventual victor will be in the Republican race. Two of the last three winners have gone on to become the successful nominee. But according to Fox News pundit Chris Wallace, if Ron Paul wins on January 3rd – it doesn’t count.
“The Ron Paul people are not going to like my saying this,” said Wallace. “But to a certain degree, it will discredit the Iowa caucuses because, rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he’s not going to end up as the nominee. So therefore, Iowa won’t count.”
From ignoring him, to making fun of him, to attacking him, the establishment media has bumbled from one failed approach to another when it comes to denigrating Ron Paul’s campaign. We’re still being force fed with endless editorials about how “Ron Paul can’t win” even as his numbers climb week after week. Now he has a genuine chance of winning in Iowa, they’ve resorted to ignoring the outcome of actual primaries if they don’t like the result.
Paul campaign spokesman Gary Howard quickly shot back; “Saying that Iowa would be discredited if Ron Paul wins is an insult to Iowans who truly care about where our country is headed and want an end to the status quo of elitist Washington, and those who would say such a thing only prove that they’re on the side of keeping the status quo.”
Of course, it goes without saying that a Ron Paul win in Iowa will be hugely influential and would provide the Congressman with the kind of momentum he needs to claim overall victory.
As the Daily Iowan points out, “The Iowa caucuses do hold weight. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee was the first person (Republican or Democrat) to win the Iowa caucuses and not secure his party’s ticket since 1992.”
Indeed, this year’s primary is seen as even more influential than usual because Florida has move their state’s presidential primary more than a month forward.
Perhaps if Ron Paul does eventually secure the Republican nomination that won’t count either?
Perhaps we should just hand Obama another four years right now and save a lot of time and bother with the whole “democratic process” thing, eh Chris?
In reality, polls have consistently shown that Ron Paul has the best chance out of all the candidates of beating Barack Obama.
Just last week an NBC News/Marist Poll found that among all competitors for the Republican nomination, Ron Paul has the best chance of defeating President Obama in a head-to-head race. Indeed, Obama defeats all the GOP competitors except for Ron Paul in a hypothetical matchup
“There’s actually a legitimate statistical argument that Paul would be the strongest GOP candidate against Obama, period,” writes Public Policy Polling in a tweet today, adding that if the GOP united around Paul he would have a better chance of beating Obama than Romney because of his strong support amongst Independents.
But none of that matters in the eyes of Chris Wallace, who seems to think that election results don’t count if the establishment pick doesn’t come out on top.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.
This article was posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 at 2:16 pm