Wow. Good day for surprises. First, Mike Huckabee shoots up the polls and into the top tier. Then, when you least expect it, MSNBC puts two, count ‘em two, articles up about the Ron Paul phenomenon. Front page, highlighted.
Whatever you think about Ron Paul, his politics, his chances, his whatever, the truth is that he has not gotten coverage consistent with his financial or individual contributor support. From the mainstream media. I assure you that he has been covered by Lonestartimes.com.
What are they saying? In the first article linked:
Four college pals, John Lindley, Jeff Shipley, Brad Jahner, and Daniel Krauss, got a chance to whoop, holler and raise the roof Saturday. The four boisterous Iowan guys cheered on their hero, Republican presidential contender Ron Paul, as he addressed a rally in Des Moines.
“I think he’s probably the only candidate who can make big enough changes in our government to save us from economic breakdown,” said Lindley after hearing Paul.
“I was looking at Obama as somebody I was thinking about supporting,” Lindley recalled. Then his friend and roommate Krauss told him to look into Paul’s views.
“I looked at his policies and they made a lot more sense than anybody else’s.”
What did I tell you guys about a third party?
They include traditional Christian social conservatives and homeschoolers, and fresh-faced fervent college students such as Bofferding, who embrace his free market ideas and an anti-interventionist foreign policy.
Yep, who said that again?
What about the second article linked above?
Rip Van Winkle slept for 20 years and woke to find the world had passed him by. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, woke up one morning recently to find that perhaps America has caught up with him.
Paul, 72, has had a 32-year career in the House. But some voters have just now discovered Paul’s constitutionalist, individualist, “just bring all the troops home” creed.
“There is something rather amazing about the Internet,” he told his Ames supporters, about two-thirds of whom appeared to be under age 25. “I’ve been used to delivering a message very similar to what I’m delivering tonight for many, many years and not getting a whole lot of responses. And all of a sudden, there’s a whole generation of people now very excited about hearing about the message of freedom.”
Dr. Ron Paul, 72, Internet user. There’s a lesson there.
“If we don’t want the government running our lives and we get to run our lives, then we have to assume total responsibility for what we do,” he told the Ames crowd. “We have to suffer the consequences. But the great thing about this philosophy is that if you believe in life, liberty, and the right to pursue your happiness, you also believe you get to keep all of the fruits of your labor.”
Hence Paul would scrap the income tax.
“We don’t have to put anybody out in the streets,” he said. “We can just let young people —whoever wants to take care of themselves — get out of the (Social Security and Medicare) system,” he said.
Another lesson. That message is going to continue to resonate with a certain portion of the electorate. Could Little Mike be right about a November surprise?
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
37 Responses to “Another October Surprise - Ron Paul Gets Mainstream Attention”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
College kids love to have a candidate but traditonally do not get out of bed to vote.
Paul continues to attract the same groups, and they seem to be mostly represented in the article:
1. The die-hard constitutionalists.
2. Elements of the anti-war left
3. Those who think our foreign policy amounts to imperialism, particularly, those who want us to stop supporting Israel for whatever reason
4. Social liberals who can appreciate Paul’s libertarian views but don’t necessarily want welfare (a pretty small group, if you ask me)
5. Troofers, conspiracy buffs, anti-Bildeberger types
6. Stormfront and other racists who don’t think that full on Nazis will ever be elected but that Paul might just have a chance
A motley crew if there ever was one.
And no, I don’t think this gives Paul a chance in he!!
bigjolly — Thanks for the continuing Ron Paul coverage.
Everyone else:
Ron Paul just raised another 2.5 million dollars in October, putting him over 10 million for the campaign.
Ron Paul now has over 60,000 volunteers in over 1,000 Meetup groups around the country.
These are top tier numbers — especially if Mike Huckabee is now considered top tier.
Will Ron Paul’s younger supporters turn out to vote in the primaries? Check out his Republican straw poll record on his campaign website — they are already turning out, at much higher rates than the supporters of other candidates.
Are Ron Paul’s supporters a bunch of kooks? Watch some of his rally videos on YouTube, or attend a Ron Paul Meetup in your area. Most of the people there are responsible, hard-working, patriotic Americans. Does he attract a few fringe elements? Yes — he is so trustworthy and honest, even paranoid conspiracy theorists trust him.
Hey jimb,
I’m a registered Republican Naval officer supporting Dr. Paul, so which group do I fit in? Dr. Paul gets more military money than any other candidate, so where do my brothers-in-arms fit in? Are we rascists, conspiracy buffs, or commies?
Nice smear job.
The liberal media is trying to disrupt the Republican primary by giving Ron Paul some camera time and media print. The liberal media still thinks they control your thought process and some cases they do. That’s why there are so many Dimwits out there.
#4 - Not knowing you any better than what insights your post gives me, I’d imagine that you would fit into category number one (the die-hard constitutionalists). Does that offend you?
Besides, what is a smear job about what I wrote? What did I write that was inaccurate about the groups attracted to Paul’s campaign? I admit that the categories I came up with may not be an all-inclusive list, but I don’t think that any of them are patently false…
#4 - Oh, by the way - I am pretty sure that “commies” aren’t a group that would be attracted to Paul’s campaign.
Nor do I recall mentioning commies.
Is that anectodal or documented?
Texan engineer here from big D. I know numbers and Ron Paul adds up. Go get em Doc. You have more and more support every day in the Lone Star State.
That JP contributes is anecdotal. That Paul has more military support (donations) that any other candidate is documented.
Support Our Troops!
Support Ron Paul!
Jimb, it’s well documented in the FEC reports. The order goes:
1. Ron Paul - $63,440
2. Barack Obama - $53,968
3. John McCain - $48,208
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5223477.html
By the way you forgot about the Anarchists.
So three hours ago, bigjolly posts a thread that is not only not critical of Ron Paul, but is complimentary. Three, mind you, three Paul supporters show up and one with a chip on his shoulder. Not one comments on the positive spin here. Not one says, “Hey, thanks LST”. I would guess Mr.Paul is far more of a gentleman than his followers, the Neanderthals who come here wildly indignant because we might choose to criticize their candidate. What a bunch of losers they are.
#10 WillRogers
No, it is not documented. The data is simply not available to offer conclusive and accurate figures for military service members for any candidate.
texpat, I’m very happy to see the article, but just before I read it I saw the little Ron Paul shrimp symbol on the front page so that was a bit of a counter-balance.
Nonetheless, thanks LST for the nice article.
Sarge pointed out the other day “military employees” could mean people from any number of civilian jobs. Did not see a breakdown.
GJT
Read this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/10/the_fantasy_of_ron_pauls_milit.asp
Michael Goldfarb of The Weekly Standard responding to Andrew Sullivan’s posting about the Chronicle article:
“So yes, Andrew, those tasked with fighting this war do get it, which is why they aren’t donating to Paul. The only real report we have on political contributions from active duty military in this election cycle has Paul taking in just over $19,000, and that’s only counting donations larger than $200. So, maximum, we’re talking about 90 active duty soldiers who we know have actually contributed to Ron Paul’s campaign. The rest is pure speculation, and the Chron’s tally of $63,440, with its average of $500 per donation, is unlikely to be populated by many of the guys who are “actually fighting this war.” But you gotta bang out 30 posts a day, right?”
heh
karti
Your gratitude and graciousness have not gone unnoticed. You are welcome, but the kudos go to bigjolly, not me.
Shame on you jimb.
#8 jimb
Just saw that comment - good shot, very funny.
Goldfarb’s interpretation of the data doesn’t erase the fact that, on paper, Ron Paul received more contributions from individuals who chose to identify themselves as military than any of the other candidates — Democrat or Republican.
Hey, I saw you guys were talking about Ron Paul again.
He is my guy. We show support for him in my town. So when the party self destructs and the country shifts to a global order; I will be smiling, because, man, I tried. But they wouldn’t listen.
#23
Yes, you are correct. However, that does not translate to strong, superior or overwhelming financial support by members of the military for Ron Paul. Paul may, in fact, be the most popular candidate among the service members, but we should wait until, or if, we can ever compile that sort of data.
It would appear that jimb is out on a limb sawing on the side closest to the tree.
The media have been pushing RG and now they are pushing RP to counter balance to make it appear as if FT or MH are not the front runners; they want to stir the pot now for ratings and have RG as Pubby candidate later, thus assuring our descent into hell.
The data isn’t complete enough to permit a breakdown, although it should be noted that a large number of civilian jobs with the military are filled by ex-military - especially ones who obtained the prerequisite security clearances when they were enlisted. I don’t see how a former enlistee who now works in a civilian military role is any less patriotic or qualified to speak on behalf of the military than a current enlistee who’s only difference is happening to be at an earlier point in his or her career.
To put it another way, civilian job postings from the military don’t exactly draw lines of left wing hippie applicants. Viewed in sum, Paul’s military support is genuine and impressive.
You mean like this?
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=21152891
#18 - Why is a retired soldier any less qualified to represent “military opinion” than a current enlistee?
I don’t care if Paul’s donors are current or retired. Military is military, whether they fought in Iraq, the first Gulf War, Granada, Vietnam, Korea, WWII or anything else in between. What matters is the fact that they served, and that’s more that can be said about most of the Rudyphile chickenhawks at the Weekly Standard.
#18 -
One more thing about that Weekly Standard link. The article they got the $19,000 figure from was over a month old at the time Goldfarb wrote, and preceded the September 30th filing quarter.
http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=300
Posted September 13, 2007
That article also included the caveat that Paul had recieved “at least $19,250″ from active military and pointed out that he led every other Republican at that time as well.
To put it mildly, Goldfarb is being willfully deceptive.
You don’t even know the half of it…
#21 - DJ - All I can say is don’t sweat my comments too much. They’ve got a liberal dose of snark for a reason.
Thanks for the piece, Big Jolly.
“Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, woke up one morning recently to find that perhaps America has caught up with him.”
Nothing more for me to say.
This was a great piece BigJolly. I love the indifferance in it’s composition. You should write for the MSM, you do a beter job at being objective than they could hope to.
Please support Ron Paul this November 5th. On that day thousands will flock to Ron Paul’s official website and contribute $100. It is hoped to register
100,000 supporters to raise $10,000,000 in one day.
If you support Ron Paul then go to this website and register:
http://thisnovember5th.com
“. . . the truth is that he has not gotten coverage consistent with his financial or individual contributor support.”
And why is that, exactly? If what they are proffering were valuable, you’d think they’d do well in a free market.
There’s something more than money at stake here.