So what happens if Ron Paul wins Iowa and New Hampshire?

[Yelnoc]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

[Oakvale]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

Has anti-semitism ever referred to anything else, though? IIRC the phrase was invented solely to refer to bigotry against Jews.

[Badger]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

Lol! Mbd once again demonstates the difference between the common 'paulite' vs a 'paultard'.

[Хahar 🤔]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

No, that's not what it means in any view, because nobody refers to Arabs as Semites.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

No, that's not what it means in any view, because nobody refers to Arabs as Semites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semites

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oops!

-----

I'm not being entirely serious here, before you ask. I just find it amusing that we spend several pages (possibly from a different thread, but still) distinguishing "Anti-Zionist" from "Anti-Semite", whereupon I say mean things about Zionists and am classed an anti-Semite.

[Хahar 🤔]

I'm not sure where I claimed speakers of Semitic languages don't share common ancestors.

[Eraserhead]

I'm not sure where I claimed speakers of Semitic languages don't share common ancestors.

When this is the first post on a new page, I take it as a sign that the thread has gone a bit off-topic.

[Badger]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

No, that's not what it means in any view, because nobody refers to Arabs as Semites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semites

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oops!

-----

I'm not being entirely serious here, before you ask. I just find it amusing that we spend several pages (possibly from a different thread, but still) distinguishing "Anti-Zionist" from "Anti-Semite", whereupon I say mean things about Zionists and am classed an anti-Semite.

Hey, as long as we're quoting Wikipedia as authority:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Usage

Specifically:

"Despite the use of the prefix anti-, the terms Semitic and anti-Semitic are not directly opposed to each other. Antisemitism refers specifically to prejudice against Jews alone and in general,[4][5] despite the fact that there are other speakers of Semitic languages (e.g. Arabs, Ethiopians, or Assyrians) and that not all Jews speak a Semitic language.

The term anti-Semitic has been used on occasion to include bigotry against other Semitic-language peoples such as Arabs, but such usage is not widely accepted.[6][7]"

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Before you lecture us Paul supporters, come to where I live in Florida. Tons of Zionist and Neocons. Thats not anti Jewish. Thats a fact. We have a large Jewish population, overwhelmingly Republican, and overwhelmingly pro Israel. Pro Israeli people dont like Ron Paul because he is not willing to send soldiers to die for Israel, which, frankly, picks a majority of their fights in the Middle East. I like to remind people, that if you love Israel that much, your free to go and join the IDF. America does not have to do it for you. Rahm Emmanuel did it.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

This isn't very likely but it is probably at least worth discussing at this point. If Romney loses New Hampshire, it would be a massive body-blow to his campaign and the sense of inevitability he has shrouded himself in.

Would this provide an opening for Newt, Perry or someone else to make a comeback in South Carolina and Florida? Would Paul finally have a shot at taking one or two of those states himself?

There's no way how Paul could win South Carolina. However, a glimmer of hope for the Florida primary could rise.

He has a far better chance at South Carolina than Florida. Florida is full of neo-cons and Zionists, neither of whom have a very good view of him. South Carolina is full of evangelicals, government workers, and pro-gun rights supporters. He could probably win over enough evangelicals and gun-rights people to win South Carolina under the right circumstances, but I don't see him winning of the neoconservatives and Zionists short of endorsement from the Likud party.

Wow.

Thought the Paultards were currently trying to prove that they are NOT anti-Semites. Guess you missed the memo.

Obviously we aren't anti-Semites, that would imply a hatred of Arabs (which just about every other Republican has, ironically enough).

That's not what "anti-Semite" means.

From a literalist view, yes, that is what anti-Semite means.  But obviously in modern discuss the term refers only to those who hate Jews.

No, that's not what it means in any view, because nobody refers to Arabs as Semites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semites

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oops!

-----

I'm not being entirely serious here, before you ask. I just find it amusing that we spend several pages (possibly from a different thread, but still) distinguishing "Anti-Zionist" from "Anti-Semite", whereupon I say mean things about Zionists and am classed an anti-Semite.

Hey, as long as we're quoting Wikipedia as authority:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Usage

Specifically:

"Despite the use of the prefix anti-, the terms Semitic and anti-Semitic are not directly opposed to each other. Antisemitism refers specifically to prejudice against Jews alone and in general,[4][5] despite the fact that there are other speakers of Semitic languages (e.g. Arabs, Ethiopians, or Assyrians) and that not all Jews speak a Semitic language.

The term anti-Semitic has been used on occasion to include bigotry against other Semitic-language peoples such as Arabs, but such usage is not widely accepted.[6][7]"

He wasn't disputing the use of "anti-Semite", he was disputing the characterization of Arabs as "Semitic", which is entirely wrong regardless of what "anti-Semite" means.

Again, I wasn't being especially serious. We've covered the difference between anti-Zionists and anti-Semites in the past, I don't much feel the need to reiterate every time an Israel-Firster makes an accusation.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Forum will be invaded by Paultards.

Even worse. The internet would collapse is he wins either IA or NH.

[King]

Sirhan Sirhan

[Lief 🗽]

Sirhan Sirhan

Nah, they'll just destroy him politically (have all the candidates drop out and endorse Romney "for the good of the party", full court Fox News + CNN onslaught, plant drugs in his one of his campaign offices, etc.), though they might consider offing the old man at some point as well, just to send a message.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

The winner of SC will become the last ABR and slug it out all the way to the convention. Paul may take enough states to cause a brokered convention.

[Mechaman]

IIRC the Wikipedia article on Florida's demographics says that there is like an only 3% Jewish population in the entire state of Florida.  Outside of a few urban areas there isn't a lot of them (according to the research).  I don't get the whole "OMG Florida is Jew Heaven!" talk.
If the population of Florida is 18.8 million that means only 564,000 Jews in the state.
I wouldn't really call that enough to sway a Republican primary, much less an accurate depiction of Florida.

In fact, you would be better off calling Florida Paddy Land, according to the population figures.
Still a gross mischaracterization, but less so than what seems to be the stereotypical depiction of Florida I hear too often.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

IIRC the Wikipedia article on Florida's demographics says that there is like an only 3% Jewish population in the entire state of Florida.  Outside of a few urban areas there isn't a lot of them (according to the research).  I don't get the whole "OMG Florida is Jew Heaven!" talk.
If the population of Florida is 18.8 million that means only 564,000 Jews in the state.
I wouldn't really call that enough to sway a Republican primary, much less an accurate depiction of Florida.

In fact, you would be better off calling Florida Paddy Land, according to the population figures.
Still a gross mischaracterization, but less so than what seems to be the stereotypical depiction of Florida I hear too often.

Zionists, not Jews. A lot of the most rabid Zionists are evangelical Christians.

[Mechaman]

IIRC the Wikipedia article on Florida's demographics says that there is like an only 3% Jewish population in the entire state of Florida.  Outside of a few urban areas there isn't a lot of them (according to the research).  I don't get the whole "OMG Florida is Jew Heaven!" talk.
If the population of Florida is 18.8 million that means only 564,000 Jews in the state.
I wouldn't really call that enough to sway a Republican primary, much less an accurate depiction of Florida.

In fact, you would be better off calling Florida Paddy Land, according to the population figures.
Still a gross mischaracterization, but less so than what seems to be the stereotypical depiction of Florida I hear too often.

Zionists, not Jews. A lot of the most rabid Zionists are evangelical Christians.

Before I continue on with my response I was more addressing everybody in the thread.  Not just people who said that Paul would lose in Florida because of "Zionists".

Second, I understand that Zionists are in good number in Protestant denominations.  However, again I like to emphasize that there are 18.8 million people in the state of Florida.  According to the page........Evangelicals are the second largest denomination.....

Oh sh*t, you might be right.  Paul may be f***ed one in Pubbie Primary after all.

[/self-failure]

Hurr.....rurrrrrr