techPresident - Ron Paul: Online Natural, But Doomed Candidate - Comments

Ditto! Ron Paul is Repubs only chance!

rtester — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 14:07:18 -0400

Ditto, rg123, I totally agree with you! If any of the other guys take the Rep nomination, they won't stand a chance against the Dem nominee....because we've had Bush for 8 years and people are fed up with everything, especially the war. Any hardcore Repubs out there who want to give their party a chance against Hilary or Obama in 2008 better get behind Ron Paul!

Great post Adam If Ron gets

rg123 — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 23:38:10 -0400

Great post Adam If Ron gets the nomination. The Dems could be in a real poor position because Hillary will not be able to campaign
against the war or a true republican position currently she is only campaigning against Bush over and over again. But the problem with that is she will not be running against Bush. She would be running against the only anti-war candidate and a real conservative republican not a neocon. I think Ron could really school her on government she is not in his league. She loses her I'm more expierenced position. Ron Paul is the only way the Republicans can win.

Point By Point: You Are Way Off! Ron Paul will win.

adamkuehner — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 20:48:41 -0400

I find it interesting that no one has to waste their time telling us that "Howard Dean, Paul Tsongas, Jerry Brown, Ralph Nader, Steve Forbes, Alan Keyes and Gary Bauer" don't have a shot. Let's face it: the fact that you submitted this post proves that the Ron Paul Revolution is on the rise and coming to a primary near you (check local listings)!

Your conception of a "web candidate" is flawed, to say the least. First, you continue to cite past examples in a scenario in which THERE ARE NO PAST EQUIVALENTS FOR COMPARISON. The internet is today what it has never been in any previous election. With blogs, YouTUBE, MySpace, and Meetup in full swing, the internet is an absolute election machine. About the only political comparison I can make is to JFK's ability to harness Television media in the 1960 election with Nixon. The idea that a candidate is flawed simply because he has mastered the greatest election tool in American political history is patently absurd. (I suppose JFK was just a "TV Candidate.") All this will become clear when Ron Paul shocks the world in Iowa this Saturday.

I will now respond to each of your major points in order.

1. It's not the "web" that loves "libertarianism." Rather, it's the average American who is attracted to the platform and persona of Ron Paul. Stop attempting to portray the "web" as some sort of abstract entity... (this is no time for allusions to 2nd rate Sandra Bullock movies.) The web IS PEOPLE, as any marketing major is aware. And people ARE VOTERS, as any political science major is aware. Not only that, but it is not that the web-surfers are intrinsically drawn to Libertarianism in general. If that were true, then we would be hearing more about Libertarian Presidential Candidate George Phillies (who?). No, this is not about abstract entities or general tendencies. It's about people. 70% of Americans to be exact. And they're all against the Iraq war... tired of hearing double-talk from dozens of candidates from either party who ALL ORIGINALLY SUPPORTED THE WAR. It is the consistent voice of reason that attracts people to Ron Paul, and it is for this reason that he is about to reach 3 million YouTube views before any other candidate in the field. It is for this reason that he leads all candidates in donations from military personell and veterans. And it is for this reason that Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate to have already won a Straw Poll, receiving a whopping 65% of the vote in New Hampshire in a field of a dozen candidates. Oh and by the way: those weren't E-VOTES! They were actual people who attended the event and voted.

2-4. No substantive disagreements on these points.

Your presumptuous declaration that the Paul campaign is doomed strikes me as both shortsighted and rash. You forgot a very important factor in all political campaigns, a factor which will bring home the electoral bacon for the Ronvolution in 2008. That factor is ENGAGEMENT. By engagement, I mean the QUALITY of support a candidate receives from his professing allies. Everyone wants to talk about QUANTITY of support these days. That's why we continually rely upon opinion polls. "What percentage of American voters supports so and so?" But this is to neglect the fact that half of American voters consistently stay home on election day. Moreover, only 6% of voters traditionally participate in the GOP primary. Thus, the fact that Rudy McRomney happens to garner a large QUANTITY of support from POTENTIAL VOTERS WITH LAND-LINE PHONES who participate in PASSIVE POLL INQUIRIES THAT REQUIRE NO EFFORT WHATSOEVER means very little if a majority of these folks stay home on election day. And from what we see so far, no other candidate in the GOP field has anywhere near the engagement of the Paul campaign, most of whose supporters are willing to go the extra mile to get this man in the oval office.

Think about this, all you naysayers: (Keep in mind that only 6% of Americans actually vote in the GOP primary) Let's say Giuliani garners 25% of the opinion poll, but only 10% of those polled actually make it to the voting booth. Now, let's say that Ron Paul garners a meager 5% in the opinion polls, but 80-90% of his WILD AND CRAZY supporters cast their votes (If the internet is any reliable gauge, this is not far-fetched). Given those figures, Paul can continue to lag in the polls (though I do not believe he will) and still win the nomination. Let's face it... the deck, (which now includes a huge number of very excited, formerly disillusioned non-voters), is heavily stacked in his favor.

In addition, you forgot to mention the fact that their are potentially TWELVE CANDIDATES in the GOP field. Given the fact that ELEVEN of them are PRO-WAR and at least FIVE of them will probably have the money to persevere through the primaries, THE PRO-WAR VOTE WILL SPLIT! This will allow someone like Dr. Paul to rise to the head of the class almost entirely on the basis of his uniqueness as a candidate, since the pro-war GOP voters will be divided into at least 5 or 6 other candidates. Thus, Dr. Paul could conceivably win the primary with less than 30% of the vote. Then, once he has the nomination, the Neo-cons will be forced to support him in order to keep Hillary out of the oval office. Moreover, with no other major candidates offering a consistent opposition to abortion, the pro-life vote will flock to the Paul corner like the salmon of Cappostrano.

Moving on, let's not forget that anyone who faces off against Hillary (the likely Democrat nominee) starts with about 45% of the vote based upon her polarizing public profile. With Paul's uncanny ability to amass huge amounts of support on very scanty mainstream media coverage, imagine what he will be able to do in a National Election! And consider the advantage he has over every major Democrat: HE DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE WAR. The fact that the Democrat nominee will have to assume a hawkish posture, while the GOP nominee argues consistenly for immediate withdrawal from Iraq is a combination that spells success for Ron Paul. Rather than relying on the WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT, Dr. Paul will benefit from the support of the ANGRIEST SEVENTY PERCENT who want this war to end and want it to end NOW! Call this a "niche candidacy" if you will, but when 70% of the American people say that a particular "niche" is the issue of the decade, a "niche candidacy" is precisely what the doctor ordered... Dr. Paul, that is.

Thanks for your time.

PS - I didn't catch your alternative prediction as to the GOP Standard Bearer in 2008. Hey, maybe Ann Coulter will run.

Ron Paul CAN win the nomination!

rtester — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:04:26 -0400

I find it so amazing how many people dismiss Ron Paul's chances so easily. Well, we are all entitled to our opinion.....so here's mine: Yes, Ron Paul CAN win the Republican nomination, and here's my reasoning to back it up. The American public is fed up, disgusted, and very concerned with the federal government and the way things are going in our country today. They are tired of empty promises and rhetoric from career politicians. They are tired of having their lives run by a bunch of bureaucrats, special interest groups, and powerful corporations in Washington, DC. They are looking to take their country back, restore America to the great nation it once was, and to regain their freedoms which have slowly been eroded away over the last 100 years.

Many folks don't normally vote. Why is that? From personal experience, I think it's because they are fed up but they don't feel like voting for the lesser of two evils will change anything. Well, Ron Paul is different. He is a true, humble statesman with incredible integrity and principles. He has intelligent, practical, and common-sense solutions for all of our problems, and the word is getting out! People realize he's different when they hear his message. They believe that supporting him CAN make a difference, and therefore they are thrilled to do so! They are rallying around him in droves. It's not just an internet phenomenon. Look around you!

Ron Paul represents what America is all about, and his freedom message is bringing Americans together again all over the country, instead of dividing us like all the other political rhetoric we hear. I think we are witnessing a new revolution in American history--it's called the RON PAUL REVOLUTION! That's why I believe he can win the nomination and become the next president! Everyone who dismiss his chances and write him off now.....well, they are entitled to their opinion, but I think they are going to be very surprised at how things play out over the next year.

Doomed? An old Catch 22 that the web can fix

bcmiller — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:45:13 -0400

It used to be the case that the media could deny us the selection process and give us a false choice in the election process. The saying was something like vote your heart in the primary and the lesser of the two evils in the election.

This doesn't have to be the case anymore. Ron Paul is not a niche candidate. He is standing on the shoulders of the founders and other great men in our history. You sited Goldwater as an example against Ron Paul. Dr.Paul has a voting record that Goldwater would envy and he is against the war in Iraq, where Goldwater wanted to fight harder to end the Vietnam war and not withdraw. Kusinich is promising the moon and the stars but we can't afford them. He is a believer and a straight shooter but he doesn't have history and the constitution on his side.

Peace, Freedom, Liberty, Sound Money, No IRS, removing the incentives that promote the scapegoating of illegal immigrants and the Government out of our wallet; off of our backs; and out of our bedrooms.

These are not niche issues.

www.ronpaul2008.com

Howard Dean

xita321 — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:31:33 -0400

Howard Dean would have been the party nominee and probably would have won if not for that total meltdown he had that made him look completely crazy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5FzCeV0ZFc

No one wants a nut with their finger on the nuclear button.

Making a prediction that Ron Paul won't get the nomination doesn't make you look bold or insightful. He's a 7-1 underdog to get the party nomination . .. but that's up from more than 100-1 a few weeks ago (according to sportsbook.com).

http://www.sportsbook.com/betting/2008+Presidential+Election-betting-odd...

A much more interesting article would be "Why the Revolution is Real" with a more bold prediction touching on distributed, decentralized networks and how this election cycle will be the one that changed American Politics forever.

Doomed or not, I'm working my butt off for him

JiveDadson — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 04:14:47 -0400

One thing that gives me hope is the fact that the phenomenal support he is getting all began with the May 15th debate. It was people watching TV, not cruising the internet who got it started. It's easy to verify that Dr. Paul had very little support online prior to May 15th. Then on the 16th, the charts take a hockey puck shaped turn. In four weeks, he's gone from 2000 subscribers on YouTube to almost 17,000. Mitt Romney has gone from 2000 to 2280. The others have not done so well. I looked at the YouTube home pages for about 100 of those subscribers. They are real people, and they are not kids.

Best regards,
Jive

Ron Paul: Online Natural, But Doomed Candidate

Colin Delany — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:50:50 -0400

By many accounts, Republican candidate Ron Paul has become an online political phenomenon: despite polling in the low single digits nationally, as of today he has more Facebook supporters than McCain, more MySpace friends than Romney, more YouTube views than Hillary Clinton and more Meetups planned than any other candidate.

Though many observers have been fascinated by his apparent rise, it really shouldn't come as a surprise: his positions and his background make him a perfect Web candidate. But, they'll also ultimately doom his candidacy. Here's why he's an online natural: