How is it that Ron Paul who runs as a Republican, but is thought of as a Libertarian could win the Presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) for the second year in a row last week?
What does that say about the attendees of the conference? Even though I agree with some of what Ron Paul says, I wouldn’t want him to be our President. I suspect that all the individuals who were contemplating a run said some things I might agree with but most probably wouldn’t get my vote either. The candidates who are thought to have a chance in the real world finished up the track in the straw poll. The talking heads in the Republican Party give some chance to Mitt Romney but I doubt many would bet any money on him. The problem with the straw poll is that the viable candidates fared so poorly.
I guess my concern about CPAC is the fact that there is clearly a disconnect between the attendees and the mainstream conservative voters so why should we care what happens there? If I were a serious candidate, I might pass on an event that didn’t reflect what is happening in the real world.
If the American Conservative Union expects to be relevant to Conservatives they need to clarify the mission of the conference. If Ron Paul supporters can skew the straw poll two years in a row, the conference is either not drawing real conservative attendees or Ron Paul is an authentic conservative and those other guys are pretenders.
I am not a member of the American Conservative Union, but I agree 100% with their stated Principles and the supplementary Sharon Statement. So I am a little disappointed that a renowned event like CPAC even bothers with a straw poll. Maybe a better idea would be to let the speakers have their say and just leave it at that.
Posted on February 17, 2011 at 7:36 am in Partisan Politics, Political commentary | RSS feed
|
Reply |
Trackback URL
No Loss for Words
How can CPAC Pick Ron Paul?
by Steve DanaHow is it that Ron Paul who runs as a Republican, but is thought of as a Libertarian could win the Presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) for the second year in a row last week?
What does that say about the attendees of the conference? Even though I agree with some of what Ron Paul says, I wouldn’t want him to be our President. I suspect that all the individuals who were contemplating a run said some things I might agree with but most probably wouldn’t get my vote either. The candidates who are thought to have a chance in the real world finished up the track in the straw poll. The talking heads in the Republican Party give some chance to Mitt Romney but I doubt many would bet any money on him. The problem with the straw poll is that the viable candidates fared so poorly.
I guess my concern about CPAC is the fact that there is clearly a disconnect between the attendees and the mainstream conservative voters so why should we care what happens there? If I were a serious candidate, I might pass on an event that didn’t reflect what is happening in the real world.
If the American Conservative Union expects to be relevant to Conservatives they need to clarify the mission of the conference. If Ron Paul supporters can skew the straw poll two years in a row, the conference is either not drawing real conservative attendees or Ron Paul is an authentic conservative and those other guys are pretenders.
I am not a member of the American Conservative Union, but I agree 100% with their stated Principles and the supplementary Sharon Statement. So I am a little disappointed that a renowned event like CPAC even bothers with a straw poll. Maybe a better idea would be to let the speakers have their say and just leave it at that.
Rate this:
Share this:
Related
Posted on February 17, 2011 at 7:36 am in Partisan Politics, Political commentary | RSS feed | Reply | Trackback URL