no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

What Did You Really Think Would Happen if Ron Paul Won Iowa?

January 3rd, 2012

I wanna know what you expected to come out of all this Iowa nonsense.

Ron Paul addresses Supporters after Iowa defeat

Ron Paul addresses Supporters after Iowa defeat

Did you really think that a caucus win in Iowa was going to awaken the masses and inspire an electoral revolution? Revolutions are neither started, nor won, at the ballot box. Ideally, it does not come down to the ammo box. Remember that 70% of the electorate is so disenfranchised that they don’t ever bother to vote on anything. Ever.  The other 30% either believe that the system is actually designed to serve the public interest (it ain’t) or they are naive enough to believe that playing by the system’s rules can actually effect real change (it can’t).

Did you really think that the entrenched political interests would not have used such an “anomaly” as a Ron Paul victory to discredit the caucuses? Or that the mainstream media which has ignored Paul’s candidacy thus far would give a fair and balanced report?  They practically telegraphed this tactic the last few days, every major news outlet reading from the prepared script that a Ron Paul victory would be meaningless, and that it would only serve to undermine the importance/significance of the caucuses anyways (of course, when an establishment candidate wins, all of these arguments are left behind and the people are none-the-wiser, because they swallow everything the mainstream media forces down their collective gullets.

Did you really think this was going to change a damn thing? The system is so incredibly, indescribably, unimaginably corrupt that no amount of tinkering, no amount of swapping basically interchangeable cogs stamped with “R” or “D” but at the same time indicative of no real or measurable differences, up to and including the figurehead role of “President”.  And all this, of course, is to say nothing of how this system is per se illegitimate.

So tell me what you wanted out of this.

As far as politicians are concerned (fuck the whole lot of ’em, in my opinion) he is certainly among the least-objectionable and although there are certainly issues I take with some of his positions, the Republican field is an absolute nightmare compared to Paul. I’m not saying I wasn’t pulling for the guy.

I just want to know what other people’s expectations were. Mine were not very high, although I’ll admit to feeling a little giddy when I saw some of the early polling results.








  • Dan Z says on: January 3, 2012 at 11:24 pm


    If he took Iowa we would have woken up to find out that Iowa doesnt matter. The story would have been who finished second and third and how Iowa does not represent the Country. The real problem is politicans dont represent the people.

    • Kim Moore says on: January 4, 2012 at 5:20 pm


      You Got That Right!

  • kerfwango says on: January 3, 2012 at 11:39 pm


    I guess for me it would have been like dropping a turd in the punch bowl at a party I wasn’t invited to.

  • Kim Moore says on: January 4, 2012 at 5:28 pm


    I have always known that change would require many decades.

    The Good Ole Boys operating for the elite are old, and have one foot on a banana peel, the other in the grave.

    The time has come, I believe the 18-40 something crowd can have an impact if they get involved.

    As far as “Lame Stream Media’s Talking Head Sock Puppet Asshats” are concerned, well we all know what’s up there.

    I sort of feel sorry for them. Can you imagine what it’s like to face your friends, family, and neighbors after standing in front of a camera while lying to your country all day long? and for who? and for how much? Yeah it sucks to be them!

    Needless to say wise people don’t get their news from Lame Stream Media. They might get their leads there, but they know how to do their research… The Day Is Coming!

  • John says on: January 6, 2012 at 4:07 pm


    I am basically still a Ron Paul supporter and wanted him to win. More specifically, I wanted him to do well enough to stimulate more (positive) discussion among MSM and laymen who didn’t know much about him. I think his chances of winning the nomination are unfortunately still very low, so as in 2008, maybe his main goal is/should be running against the presidency, not running for president.

    For that goal, success could be defined as using the incredibly, indescribably, unimaginably corrupt democratic system to spread a libertarian message subversive to that system. If people think there’s something immoral about voting, or about voting for anyone who is less than 100% perfect according to one’s morals, then it seems to me that they must concede that it’s okay to use a presidential candidacy and its inherent exposure for the sole purpose of spreading ideas and exposing uninformed people to those ideas, without the purpose of getting elected and controlling the criminal Leviathan that is the State.

    The average non-libertarian voter does not read libertarian web pages or go out of their way to expose himself to much of anything out of the mainstream. Therefore, I think success for Ron Paul would be making a large number (whatever that means) of people think about the issues that only he brings up and convert some substantial proportion (whatever that means) of those people to the cause of liberty. For him, two presidential campaigns against a bunch of basically interchangeable cogs stamped with “R” or “D” are the best way to expose and convert people, and I think he’s doing a pretty good job. I hope he continues to improve in accomplishing those things.

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics