Why the Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous

NewsBull ^ | November 11, 2007 | JB Williams

[PlainOleAmerican]

I hate wasting this much press time on Ron Paul. But the Paul campaign is becoming a real threat to the Republican primary process and if allowed to continue, he will take votes away from the most conservative Republican candidates in the party, not the most liberal. This is bad for the party and the country.

(snip)

So, how Republican is Republican candidate Ron Paul?

If he’s funded largely by anti-war leftists, from Democrat stronghold districts and counting on Democrats, Libertarians and members of the Green Party to win the Republican nomination, not very…

[Puddleglum]

I bet you won’t see Paulers with the freepers supporting the troops on veteran’s day

That little nugget falls into the category of over-general. Some folks support the vets in their own families or churches, like we did this morning, and my family did all during my dad's retirement and illnesses.

People with a thirst for real change or revolution need to hear from some voice other than the Ted Stevens "tax apologist/spend and promise" wing of the Republican party. There is no Republican out there challenging the status quo except Paul. If there were, he would not even be the blip on ther radar he is. Everyone else fits the Who's addage of "Meet the new boss/same as the old boss." Kids' thirst for change is something very useful and would be a boon to a party that sincerely want to lessen the weight of government on everyone.

[listenhillary]

“People posting this on Free Republic are making this site look ridiculous.”

I think that we are looking pretty good. With all of the RP spam for months on end, 90% of freepers know a charlatan and a dangerous choice for president when they see one.

It makes me think 90% of Freepers are above average intelligence.

[JerseyHighlander]

You ask why Republicans are freaking out over Ron Paul’s nurturing of new campaign contributions sources that were previously untapped by Republicans. Here is your answer:

http://www.nysun.com/article/53420

Clinton and Obama Raiding Donors Who Backed Bush

By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 30, 2007

As senators Clinton and Obama crisscross the country seeking the Democratic presidential nomination and sharply criticizing President Bush, they have been collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from donors who funded one or both of Mr. Bush’s campaigns for the White House.

In the first quarter of this year, more than 150 former Bush donors pitched in for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, while a similar number anted up for Mr. Obama, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission data performed for The New York Sun by the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics.

The motives of those who lend financial support to candidates with divergent views are difficult to assess. For some donors, personal ties to politicians or their top fund-raisers transcend partisan politics. Executives at businesses susceptible to government regulation regularly straddle the field, even supporting multiple candidates in the same race. Some contributors find that their politics change over time or that the politicians they formerly supported failed to follow through on their promises.

---

Since April the number of large donors who have switched from Republican to Democrat has continue to increase.

[michigander]

The only thing I see here is a tired, paternalistic old party feeling threatened that the kids might be listening to a message Dad doesn't approve of... ;)

LOL! That's perfect!!

[GOP Poet]

Your picture says it all right there. Thanks for the contribution.

[Puddleglum]

In the weeks that our responses would take to show up on the Free Republic forum by mail, the moment would be lost!

granted!

And computer have made all our lives easier and freedoms more secure. Right?

It will not take long for the Big Momma Taxation Apologistd to come out of the woodwork and say "Yeah, but everything changed after [The Maine, WWI, Pearl Harbor, 9-11, fill in the blank]. You need to have your life run by a superstate now, and heck that costs munny! So bend over and kiss the picture of Trent Lott on the floor while we perform this year's withdrawal."

And you wonder why Ron Paul attracts any attention - it's because the Republican Party welched on its promise of more freedoms and less government.

[Ultra Sonic 007]

You might want to ping the list, as this article appears to base much of its information off of the testimonies of Eric Dondero...who, if I recall from earlier this year, was shown to be a suspect source of information.

[svcw]

No, I was thinking more about yellow fever, dyptheria, no antibiotics, typhoid, small pox, polio, lack of sanitation, running water, electric lights, no movies, internet, phones, easy travel, mail service, no ironing, washing machine, shaving my legs, no long skirts in the summer, wearing pants, bras not corsets, abundance of fresh food and water.......
you know stuff like that.............

[darkwing104]

Ron Paul Zombies

[rob777]

"Upon investigation, it appears that Mr. Dondero is exactly right. Much of Ron Paul’s money is not coming from mainstream Libertarians or Republicans. Although he is running as a Republican, he actually has very little support from rank and file Republicans, as every national Republican poll confirms. But it turns out that he has very little support from mainstream Libertarians either. As Dondero pointed out, “Ron Paul is only attracting support from the leftwing side of the libertarian spectrum, virtually none of whom are Republicans.”


Apparently, a more thorough investigation is in order. A good deal of the grass roots organizing for the Ron Paul campaign is coming from rank and file members of the Republican Liberty Caucus, which is the libertarian group within the GOP. The local groups seem to almost shut down any activity not associated with the Ron Paul campaign. Below is from an RLC discussion board and is a response to a poster who was upset that the RLC had not formerly endorsed Ron Paul:

RLC and the Ron Paul campaign II
On November 2nd, 2007 pblumel says:

Joe, I recently called EVERY chartered state affiliate of the Republican Liberty Caucus to see check on activity regarding Ron, among other things. Without exception, every RLC affiliate is mobilized for Ron -- even in those states (there are two or three) where the leadership is split on the question! RLCers were among the first to form Meetups in Florida where I live and, frankly, most all RLC activity nationwide has come to a halt outside of Paul campaigning. This is quite natural, as Ron was the national chairman of this explicitly libertarian Republican organization which has always endorsed and funded Ron's Congressional races! Effectively, the RLC is an extension of the Ron Paul campaign much like the Meetups with which the RLC is intertwined. For legal reasons, this is not and cannot be official. Additionally, the national RLC by-laws make a presidential endorsement nearly impossible. In spite of this it might happen anyway. Just last week, the Florida RLC excom became the latest to nominate Ron for the national RLC endorsement. I, too, have met an RLCer here and there who is not on board the Paul train. This is not a reflection on the RLC. In fact, these folks are natural prospects for the Ron campaign and we should reach out to them. Check out www.rlcfl.org for some recent Florida RLC activity on behalf of Ron. To join, see: http://www.rlc.org/Pay/Dues.asp?ref....

[Paperdoll]

Since Paul isn’t included in FR polls anymore, I wonder if his supporters are voting for FDT to keep him ahead of the one true patriot, consistent Conservative, Duncan Hunter these days. Just a thought.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

44% of all DUmmies support Ron Paul, over even Queen Hillary herself.

That ties in perfectly with the following info, from this article:

What we have here is a candidate trying to win the Republican nomination by raising money from liberals across the political aisle.

This is why his fund-raising is not translating to improved poll positions.

His donors are not Republicans. So no matter how much money he raises, it is not translating into Republican support in the polls. He remains at or below 5% support in every national Republican poll, no matter how much money he raises.

[JerseyHighlander]

That’s a hoot.

Thanks.

[Paperdoll]

Since Paul isn’t included in FR polls anymore, I wonder if his supporters are voting for FDT to keep him ahead of the one true patriot, consistent Conservative, Duncan Hunter these days. Just a thought.

[ricks_place]

Ron Paul embraces the nutroots.
...
He voted against the Patriot Act.
...
He voted against the Iraq war.
...

[Route66]

Fred was winning these polls consistently when Paul was included. He’s still winning now. I know you will keep beating the Hunter drum until the end, but I hope some of those who read here will decide to get behind Fred before Rudy takes the prize.

[Hammerhead]

Ron Paul is the new Lyndon LaRouche.

Whack job.

[Puddleglum]

No, I was thinking more about yellow fever, dyptheria, no antibiotics, typhoid, small pox, polio, lack of sanitation, running water, electric lights, no movies, internet, phones, easy travel, mail service, no ironing, washing machine, shaving my legs, no long skirts in the summer, wearing pants, bras not corsets, abundance of fresh food and water....... you know stuff like that.............

Oh well, I'll back you up on most of those, though I don't shave my legs or wear a bra. But I think private industry brought us most of those, not the taxes I listed.

[darkwing104]

Since Paul isn’t included in FR polls anymore,

Hard to tell. I get the impression that the Paulestinians are either nominate "Ron Paul or I am going home" I don't believe they voted.

Look for them, in a few months, to transform into Conservatives, Republicans Vets, or Libertarians for Hillary. In may analysis, it fits the hissy fit mentality that the they have.

[PlainOleAmerican]

Exactly