I slept through most of the voting hours on primary day, so I wasn't able to go to the new Windham high school to vote. I wasn't planning on doing so anyway. My dad and my brother did though (my mother is a Canadian citizen so she isn't able to) despite the fact that they were both undecided up until they went inside the voting booth. As I figured, both of them voted for Ron Paul. My brother seems like he's very much caught up in the internet hype around the guy, and my dad is concerned about all the spending and debt the country is engaging in, so I wasn't surprised at all. Nothing surprised me about the results either: Romney received around 40%, Ron Paul received 22-23%, Huntsman came in third, and the others did so poorly no one gave a shit. Here is a chart with full primary results by town.
We know that things are going to go to hell, but not because of the actions of a few bad apples which one little election can fix. This entire system, culture, etc. that we live in isn't going to be instantly reworked in four or eight years and certainly not from the top-down. Let's forget the ballot box or the sign waves and look to each other for solutions instead.
The best part about today: all the campaigners and campaign ads/signs will be GONE.
3 comments:
I figured Ron Paul would win in NH. How the hell did he do better in Iowa? This has got to kill the whole new state project. Looks like they picked the wrong state.
It'll be interesting to see what the Ron Paul camp does at this point. I'm sure their hopes have been crushed. This is kind of reminiscent of Barry Goldwater. Most of those people became Republicans. Of course, Paul fans might move toward "anarcho"capitalism.
All the pre-primary polls (i.e. Real Clear Politics) were predicting Romney would win in NH by a landslide with Ron Paul coming in second. That much came true. What I don't understand is how even despite all the pre-primary polls some Ron Paul supporters contend that the voting was "rigged". I take it they must view every time RP doesn't win as some kind of conspiracy.
I was talking to a few friends of mine whom I met from facebook (friends of a friend, basically) a few hours before I followed them to the "Ron Paul party" the other day. A few of them are members of the Philadelphia chapter of Students for Liberty and they were all up in Manch to do work on the RP campaign. One of them told me he couldn't understand why the free staters chose this state to be their destination instead of a bigger state with a more independent economy (NH leeches off Mass quite a lot) that could manage to survive on its own if they were to secede. They brought up Montana as being a better choice in those regards. As well, they were actually quite surprised that Manchester isn't the "Hong Kong" of New England. I guess they assume low taxes/low regulations are automatic business magnets.
I wouldn't doubt your assertion that RP is the best thing to happen to "anarcho-capitalism". I've seen interviews on RidleyReport with free staters of all free-market persuasions who claimed RP was what made them turn to libertarianism, which then motivated them to move to NH with the FSP. Thankfully, I return to the Baltimore Area for school in ten days so I won't have to deal for another few months.
Also, this letter to the editor from the Concord Monitor does a decent job explaining why RP didn't win in this state. The newspaper has some vulgar mainstream liberal tendencies, but it's pretty legit for the most part.
Post a Comment