Skip to comments.Are Ron Paul Supporters Real?
Posted on 11/07/2007 5:54:10 AM PST by theothercheek
Second-tier presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) pulled off a first-rate fundraising coup, netting $4.3 million in online contributions from 38,000 donors in a single day, bringing his total haul to $7.3 million in 4Q 2007. No other Republican comes close to Pauls 24-hour feat, but Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has him beat at $6.2 million.
Paul supporters flashed their cash in honor of Guy Fawkes Day, which commemorates the would-be assassin of Englands King James I on Nov. 5, 1605. Guy Fawkes was also the inspiration the novel-turned-movie "V for Vendetta," in which the lead character takes on a fascist government in England. In several GOP presidential debates, the libertarian Paul has all-but called George W. Bush a fascist taking issue with the Administrations policies on domestic spying, for instance.
So does this mean Paul has a shot at the nomination? In a word: Nah. The Stiletto agrees with WaPo political blogger Chris Cillizzas: take:
Paul was widely seen as a political gadlfy when he entered the race, but through skill, luck or a little of both he has built himself into an Internet phenomenon.
It's not yet clear that Paul's online national community can deliver actual votes for him. While Paul is at the center of a national movement, it won't help him in Iowa or New Hampshire if thousands of people from California or Illinois are backing him.
There has always been a pot of money that exists for unconventional candidates who believe the system is fundamentally broken and are only tangentially affiliated with a party.
[H]is money and his message make him a actor in New Hampshire ... he remains a decided longshot ... the excitement and attention he is drawing would seem to be a perfect lead up to a third party candidacy if and when he loses the Republican nomination.
The Houston Chronicle reports that Jonathan Bydlak, the Paul campaigns fundraising director posted a message on the candidate's Web site that the ka-ching means just one thing: Ron Paul is for real." Maybe. But it appears his supporters are real (second item).
Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog.
Ron Paul was ALSO right when he endorsed Ronald Reagan for President...in 1976.
Okay...let's say many Freepers are right, and that Paul's irresponsible foreign policy results in an invasion of America by hordes of fundamentalist Muslims. With Paul in the White House; we would STILL HAVE OUR GUNS to defend ourselves. Not so with Hillary or Rudy.
I think, for the most part, they are looney lefties trying desperately to screw up the primary which will, in turn, screw up the general election.
Well, im not a drug user, although i experimented around age 19 and 20. But ima believer in the free market, and part of that implies that i believe in market solutions.
Prohibition of drugs has all of the same issues that prohibiton of alcohol had, and we saw fit to repeal it, i think the same is due for recreational drug use.
Any fool can go to a doctor and be proscribed an anti-depressant that is far more dangerous than marijuana these days and its strictly legal. In my opinion current drug laws are a government propped monopoly far more so than anything to do with public safety or welfare.
But i respect your right to a different opinion.
Nah, i’m with you on that to some degree, it’s a pretty radical approach, but i believe it will work just fine for us. For me, the pull of paul is the rest of the platform.
Free market, low taxes(way low), private education, small government, right to privacy, etc.. that’s straight from the conservative playbook, and what appeals to me most.
If you’re a single issue voter, and your single issue is the WOT then i totally get why you can’t be for the guy.
If you’re not a single issue voter then you really can’t have an excuse.
What other candidate is going to work on monetary policy, lower taxes, and protect our personal liberties like paul?
Guiliani is a nonstarter, Romni is as fake as the last opinion poll. Hunter is solidish but cant beat rudi, Thompson IS what every dumbass democrat claimed that Reagan was.
Face it man, other than foreign policy, paul is the only reagan republican in the bunch. I think Reagan was masterful in his dismantling of the USSR and his brinkmanship, i just don’t think remaking the M.E. in our image is going to pan out for us.
I think that in the long haul, we’ll isolate ourselves from the rest of the world and go broke trying to fix everything out there thats jacked up, in much the same way that the USSR did.
So let’s be Reagan and not Kruschev
Yeah, he likes the earmarks just fine.
Texas congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul who is campaigning as a critic of congressional overspending has revealed that he is requesting $400 million worth of earmarks this year.
The Wall Street Journal reports Paul's office says those requests include $8 million for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to pay for research into shrimp fishing.
Having a little trouble buying the "fiscal savior" routine there.
Libertarians don’t get effected by the ethics of the issue IMO, so people for drug abuse are likely to donate to Paul’s campaign, along with Soros who figures splitting votes helps Hillary (which it does).
I’ll address it personally.
To be sure you understand the process, an earmark is a distribution of money already appropriated.
For example, a 100 million dollar farm subsidy is approved. 100 million(at least) is getting spent.
What Paul has done:
Once the money has been spent(appropriated) he has absolutely gotten earmarks in for his constituency.(I’m sure you can supply a list of those if you’re feverent enough)
What Paul has not done:
Paul has voted consistently against the bill in my above example, vote plays out and passes, now that the money is (spent) appropriated, he has certainly represented his constituency. to not earmark the already spent money would be to fail his charge of duty.
If you’re going to take issue with appropriations then Pauls not a good target for you, although i am heartened that the muds starting to get slung a bit, it verifies the traction the campaign is getting.
Bring me your worst, by all means.
The democrats think that paul running a third party campaign will ensure a republican victory because hillary is seen as far more pro-war than paul, and they are afraid that paul will pull off a lot more anti-war democrats then pro-market republicans, so i don’t agree it’s as nearly so cut and dried as you do.
Not true, they figure a Republican known as Ron Paul would shed some of the votes from Republicans in favor of Hillary.
You almost got that right!
I have a feeling you’re not very well read man, if you believe that.(respectfully) Popular sentiment among the dems is that a third party paul candidacy destroys their chances of winning.
Their conspiracy is that Paul is going to go third party and is being funded by the bush family neocons. They feel that Pauls antiwar, anti CFR, anti-patriot act, will pull a decent chunk of thier base.
Now i personally think that paul is running because he wants to be president, but my point is that its not nearly as clear cut as you pretend it is.
Libertarians would all vote Republican while the Democrats vote for Ron Paul?
Who are you going to make believe that one my friend?
Don’t “fix” it. ANSWER it... But if you have no answer, you gotta “fix” it, right???
Do you mean, ‘Do I have a grammar book’? Well, yes I do. Looks as though a minor writing technique was just a little over your head. I’ll try to dumb it down for you.
If Hildebeast wins the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the GOP for, among many other failings, being unable or unwilling to field a legitimate conservative candidate.
And they’re still stuck on the nameplate that the candidates have below their names.
Guiliani is no conservative...neither are any of the other middle of the roaders in the race.
We’re done. I’m just gonna vote for Hillary and sit back with “I told you so” on my answering machine. I'm tired of being a sheepdog. I say if they're stupid enough to court the wolves, let them get eaten.
I always get a kick out of these type things. Since my writing and spelling skills are not the best, I have had my share of such posts. Usually, it comes back to bite them in the arse. I think 99.9%, of the people posting here, recognized the you wrote that way deliberately to make a funny type point.
The best one I remember was when a person made a big point correcting my spelling of a certain word. However, I had copied the spelling of the word from one of her previous posts because I knew I was bad at spelling. She was a bit embarrassed when I pointed that out to the forum.
OTOH, I have seen people debate a person, who’s spelling and grammar made me look like Shakespeare, strictly on his ideas. Not a single person corrected or even made any comments about his horrible writing skills.
In general, when people stoop to the tactic of correcting posts in that way, they can’t debate you with intelligent arguments.
You have missed President Ahmadinejad and his “Israel should be wiped off the map” road show...
I guess you have missed out on the stonings of young women in the very “progressive” Muslim culture of theirs.
Most of all I guess you have missed the Iranian arms and personnel that have been reported in Iraq, keeling OUR men and women.
Of course in Ron Paul world that’s ok, they are just defending themselves...
If you want to go visit your go Iranian buddies and sing songs and pass out daisies knock yourself out, be honest it would not surprise me...
Beginning in October 2000, three East County men went on a six-month crime spree, robbing at least 20 gas stations and convenience stores in the San Diego area. Armed with semi-automatic weapons, they burst in, assaulted clerks and customers, and cleaned the stores out of cigarettes.
Why did the thieves take cigarettes and not the Twinkies or the razor blades or just the cash?
The answer, of course, is taxes. Federal and state cigarette tax hikes have turned a pack of cigarettes into a gold mine for criminals, spawning a massive black market that makes it easy for thieves to quickly unload stolen cigarettes for cash.
The San Diego group's luck ran out with an arrest in April 2001, but similar gangs across California and smugglers all over the world are eagerly awaiting a Yes on Proposition 86, which would double, triple or quadruple their profit margins.
In addition to encouraging theft, high cigarette taxes have led to staggering levels of cigarette smuggling into the state and casual tax evasion by consumers. The Board of Equalization has the tough assignment of enforcing cigarette taxes, and it admits that about 300 million untaxed packs are sold in California each year despite requiring elaborately printed tax stamps to be affixed to each pack.
When deciding whether to vote Yes on Proposition 86 to raise the state's cigarette tax from 87 cents to $3.47, the nation's highest rate, Californians should weigh the severe law enforcement problems that come with being the preferred destination of cigarette smugglers.
...continued at link...
As far as the rest, the marque and reprisal bit has done in these pages again and again.
If mercenaries would work it would have been tried. there is a$50 Million bounty on the guys head.
There are also tactical considerations that maybe in play as well. Again this is 21st century warfare.
Well there is the foaming at the mouth...
“If youre a single issue voter, and your single issue is the WOT then i totally get why you cant be for the guy.”
It’s not about being a single issue voter. It’s about priorities. Fiscally, Paul has good ideas THAT I GUARANTEE WILL NEVER PASS. The presidency isn’t a dictatorship.
On the other hand, we have the most important issue in this campaign that Paul is clearly on the wrong side of. And even worse...he believes we should pull out of every country where we have bases. That is irresponsible and why he will fail.
70% of independents and 35% of Republicans agree with him on his non-interventionist view of Iraq. Does that look like math that adds up to a win for Guiliani?
We’ll keep you safe since you are a citizen and all that.
Soros thought he could buy the presidency for Kerry, he was wrong. Money doesn't guarantee you'll get anywhere, especially when your candidate is an assclown.
You have missed President Ahmadinejad and his Israel should be wiped off the map road show...*****
No, I didn’t miss that. As I understand he meant the state of Israel, not the people. Nor was it meant in a way that Iran was going to nuke it out of existence.
*****I guess you have missed out on the stonings of young women in the very progressive Muslim culture of theirs.****
No, I am appalled by all brutality. Neck tieing with burning tires, crucifixions in Sudan, China shooting down the protesters in T Square, killing the monks in Burma, etc.
*****Most of all I guess you have missed the Iranian arms and personnel that have been reported in Iraq, keeling OUR men and women.*****
No. That has been part of the beating of the drums for war against Iran. However, what I have heard is that most of that is coming from a rebel group that controls a lot of the area of western Iran. A group that may have been supported by our CIA in order to over throw the present government. As far as I know, it has not been connected to the official government.
I do know that most of the foreign fighters caught in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia. Do you know what we do with them after we catch them? We send them back to “posh” re-education camps in S.A.
A few questions because according to you Paulinati I am “small minded”
The man wants to wipe out just the “State” of Israel? How does that work exactly? The state is wiped out and the Israelis just hover over where it was?
The man has said death to the US also, so I guess I am ok since here in Mississippi I won’t have to hover as high as say the folks in Denver...
Also your answer on the Iranian weapons is interesting. Again, I am “small minded” but to me the reports of Iranian weapons are quite clear. I also have some second hand knowledge of such from several very close friends who have actually been on the ground there. So are you saying this is a CIA plot or at least blaming them, or am I missing something...
nice example :) , but dont forget, when it comes to ignorant vice taxes, paul’s more conservative than any other candidate, and even with californias tax stupidity, in no way does it equal blackmarket drug crime.
That’s a cool story though, i hadnt heard it before, just another example of the unintended consequences of government gone wild.
You cant pretend to know that. We have potentially alienated what may have otherwise been someone or some organization that would have sold out quite nicely prior to the invasion.
Paul suggested 1 billion, which is substantially more than 50 million, and still would have been much cheaper in the long run.
As far as 21st century warfare, on our side it is, but the taliban is still using mid-cold war weapons.
yeah it does. 70% of independants is a much larger population base than the remaining 65% of republicans.
70% of independants is larger than 100% of republicans. follow?
Intellectual cop out, with an ad hominem, and without substance, followed by an appeal to the status quo. In other words, save the electrons for when you have something to say. Anything at all.
He came damn close, and that with backing a candidate that had all but declared war on american citizens.
Paul’s in the liberty game, and it has much stronger appeal.
I’m not saying Paul can buy an election, I’m saying if he can overcome the establishment doing their damnedest to keep him from winning, and be judged on merit that he will win.
Let me get this straight, he call’s me small minded and I am in the wrong....
I was right in the other thread just now, where one of your Paulinati buds got the zot, you guys do live in Fantasy Land...
Enjoy the ride...
The picture is a snapshot of Ron Paul's support, and it's quite real. LOL!
respectfully, i feel that’s a cop out.
Your argument is in essence:
I’m not a single issue voter, but on the single issue im judging by i disagree.
On the economy:
I agree in fiscal conservatism, but only as a motto, never in reality, plus he can’t actually effect any change.
I’m not going to debate you on the issue of war. I will say i was for both afghanistan and iraq, and that i believe our interests in iraq are best served by an orderly withdraw over the next year. I believe we won roughly the moment Saddam’s neck snapped, and are suffering now from not properly defining the conditions of victory.
I fully support our troops, having a brother that is a navy seal and deployed in iraq currently, and a long tradition of military service in my family. I’m not an anti-american blame america first loon.
So much power has been coopted by GW to prosecute the war that it’s frightning. I’m a long time conservative, I doubt seriously Bush is going to do anything that’s seriously going to effect an average americans ability to function on a daily basis.
But the reality is in the next year or so, someone else is going to be holding the reins and no later than 8 years after that, someone else. Will they be trustworthy with this accumulated power?
Do you trust Hillary to use the powers of the patriot act in defense of the country, or will it be more likely a tool against the american people? I know where i fall on that spectrum, and people like me will be a target for her administration.
Do you support Hillary having the right to use warrantless wiretaps on american citizens? I damn sure don’t.
We are a military force unlike any in the history of mankind, in our power and force projection. We don’t need to slowly become a police state internally to prosecute an effective war. Especially when we have more dangerous domestic threats to our liberty.(as i believe hillary, and the national ID and the implant a chip like the mark of the beast crowd is.)
Make no mistake, if the republicans nominate a pro-war president, the democrats will win. Rudy will not beat hillary. Guiliani is no conservative, he’s pro abortion and pro-gun control, he’s more liberal than clinton ever was.
Paul is not only consistent with conservative values, he can win. All it takes is for self labeled “conservatives” to vote their values, and listen to what the candidates really stand for.
Paul’s not a pacifist and im damn sure not either, you don’t have to be to support him.
On the economy:
Will Paul eliminate the IRS? I hope he can, but it’s not likely. What is likely is that the senate and congress will be controlled by democrats, and a democrat president on top of that will mean a sad day for the united states and her people.
Paul can veto the hell out of the ignorant bills likely to come from the legislature, and he will. They don’t call him Dr No for nothing.
One thing he’ll do is deconstruct all of the executive powers Bush has accumulated over his terms, like it or not, you’ll thank him the day that a democrat president is in office.
He will also have a huge sway over monetary policy, and he can effect a very positive change on our economic situation solely through vetoing out of control spending and limiting real inflation.
The dollar is crashing as i type this. China is funding our M.E. expedition, and they just announced they were going to diversify their holdings, which means they’re about to start buying euros. People keep talking about “acting like a superpower”, we are, we’re acting like Rome in it’s last days, “as the currency goes so goes the empire”, i believe that was Plebius.
We are making the same mistakes of the soviets, every day moves us closer to socialism, our currency is on the ropes, and we are spending blood and treasure in other countries to impose our vision of government.
We are better than that. We used to be, and we should remain so.
As before, you refer to someone else, and somehow think that relates to me. Are you personally responsible for every conservatives shortcomings? Does that mean(since you must blindly believe rudi is the gops man per the party line) you support cross dressing? Of course it doesn’t
I’m right here. Speak to me.
No question, it’s a big tent. Liberty’s a damn big tent man.
Do you think everyone that supports rudi is a God fearing conservative with integrity and moral fortitude? I doubt that seriously.
Israel has more nukes than all its neighbors combined. Israel will be fine. No one supports stopping the arms sells to Israel, Paul supports stopping the foreign aid, and Iran having a nuke is not the end of the world, the Paki’s have plenty of them and they’re quite a bit more likely to “go nuclear” than the persians.
If we continue to prop up these backward nations then they will never be forced to reform their government. If you honestly believe in the american vision of freedom then support it, and quit endorsing paying other countries to maintain their oppressive socialist policies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.