Posted on 01/14/2008 2:28:06 PM PST by mnehring
It was supposed to be a revolution. Ron Paul was set to take America and the world by storm by winning primary after primary on his way to the White House. The supporters of the ten-term US Congressman from Texas were convinced that the money he raised would equal support at the actual ballot box. Now in the cold hard days of January, the truth has broken though.
So what has happened to Ron Paul? The answer isn't difficult; his support was never very large to begin with. It was magnified by a presence on the Internet (or the "Internets" if you prefer) and it would never push through into the real world of voting. This was never really anything more than an online revolution that could never come close to cracking the mainstream of political thought.
***
For a dark horse candidate, he made all that he could out of his Libertarian philosophies. He brought forward a whole bunch of young folks that didn't really understand the political process and they are now excited and involved. Of course, Iowa and New Hampshire slapped many of them across the face and Michigan and New Hampshire will do the same. Come February 5 even the staunchest Paul political supporter will have to realize that it isn't going to happen.
The problem that many didn't really understand is that Paul wasn't preaching anything new. This was the same Libertarian Party line that had been regurgitated over and over in one form of another for election after election. I'm not certain why so many thought it might be "magical" this campaign season.
***
There is a reason that the Libertarian Party exists in relative obscurity. Though many of us hold several of the ideas of the party dear to our hearts and believe them fully, once the movement of the fringe takes hold it is too much to bear for most people.
Many scoffed at the "mainstream" and believed they didn't need them as their man Ron Paul would rise above and dominate. They didn't believe the polls that showed little support and the true believers don't even believe the votes that have been cast at the ballot box. I'm not certain if Paul and his supporters will go away quietly, but one thing is certain, they won't win this election or even come close enough to move the political debate.
What about it? I broke up the monotony of another Paul bashing thread by injecting some sanity, and off with my head per you?
Of course I will. It is no different then my constant critisism of Cindy Sheehan, Murtha, Clintons, Reid, Al Qaeda, Nutmenajob, etc.
Banned/suspended people can still get pings, n00bert.
I think Ron Paul is the reincarnation of Pat Paulson.
For you youngsters, Pat Paulson was a comedian that every year tried to get on the ticket for President.
He was quite a funny guy and I looked forward to his kooky platform every year.
Unfortunately, Ron Paul is not a joke.
Your boy Bush just came out of the closet as a gun-grabber. I wouldn't go advertising that you're so fond of him. Most Freepers pretty much can't stand him any more.
I would figure you weeble would waddle to the defense of a ping list. If they are suspended yes (I am sure you know that, huh.) Not banned. It means their account is gone.
And you would know this how, exactly?
Without a doubt, Jim runs this forum on his worse day way better than I could in my best days with lots and lots of training.
Some Ron Paul freepers are lucky, others not so lucky. I hope that when the time comes, I can in any way influence the mods to permanently zot Paultards from this forum, even if it is one Paultard at a time.
I'm a patient man (which is another reason I'm not a Paultard).
Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics
And I've only been suspended once in my entire career for the record, for coming on here $hitfaced drunk and telling that crazy chick "nopardons" to f#%& herself. That was a fun night.
Yeah, your probably right. But hopefully the anger by the far left at the Democrats like Hillary for voting for the war, renewing the Patriot Act, ect.. will cost the Democrats in the general election, and Ron Paul can siphon those votes from them.
Sounds like troll activity to me. Forgive the "spam" comment, I should have said, "Ron Paul Trolls".
Ron Paul Trolls should be banned permanently IMO.
Nothing, his views have simply been exposed to a wider audience.
Typical Paultard diversionary tactic.
This is any of your business...how?
Yeah, so did I.
Obsessed is putting it mildly. Did you happen to read this one.
Having a senior moment, I first mistakenly checked the National Journal's roster of writers. At least they have a few well-known journalists, though they are mostly liberals like Jonathan Rauch and Richard Cohen.
This National Ledger rag appears on about the same level as the National Enquirer for legitimacy.
But that won't stop the determined, will it?
Because Paultards are forum proxy trolls for Al Qaeda and we don't like it here on Freerepublic.
You're unintentionally insulting the FR moderators by saying this. It's obvious who supports Paul. You're claiming that the mods are negligent in their duties by not paying enough attention to them and allowing them to fly below the radar. In reality, with an exception of the Bushbot Holocaust of '07, you get suspended/banned based on your behavior. People like me, Triple E, GovtistheProblem, etc, are nice guys (really freaking good looking too) and for the most part stay civil.
There must be money to made in running for president.
Pretty obscure people do it and they must be able to profit from it.
“You see, the vast majority of Americans want the war to wind down and most of these folks are supporting Paul. “
Yeah, most of the vast majority of Americans are supporting Paul. Please. People want to win, not cut-and-run.
He's way ahead of you:
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.