MEET THE PRESS: Ron Paul

[NoStateofMind]

I have to say from what I've seen so far, Ron Paul looks good except for one part. Ron Paul seemed flustered when Tim Russert pressed him on the issue of earmarks. Still watching. Anyone else?

On NBC.

^^ This link also has some video clips.


After watching it, I think he came away pretty well in his responses save the "earmarks" issue. I have to give it to Tim Russert, he's a tough cookie and does his homework.

 

[Pabster]

Haven't seen it yet, will watch the podcast later.

I hope Russert was every bit as tough on Paul as he was with Romney and (especially) Giuliani.

 

[covert24]

yea tim def. didn't hold back when it came to his facts. but ron paul held up well and didn't hesitate much. would like to see how it plays out in the caucus

 

[BoberFett]

He was tough on Paul, but it was a good interview from the clips I saw online.

 

[Lemon law]

I saw the whole thing on meet the depressed. I also agree that Ron Paul totally flubbed the ear mark issue, saying in effect, other congressmen exploit it so I try to grub my fair share. But it does not matter anyway, my ear marks don't actually get funded.

And no, I can't agree with the Ron Paul's regressive tax stance. And as we near the actual primaries, its time to see if Ron Paul can win any delegates or even crack 10% of the
vote in any State.

Other than that, on the Republican side, Giuliani is losing support, and that support is not going over to Ron Paul. But I will say one thing for Ron Paul, he had the honesty to correctly point out that Ronald Reagan was a big government deficit spender as is GWB. And also said that GWB was planning to invade Iraq long before 911. And he gasp actually used the term neocon with the ample derision the name inspires.

But the question Ron Paul somewhat ducked is the question of running as a third party candidate if he fails to win the Republican nomination. Since I think its almost certain Ron Paul will not be the GOP nominee in 08, the question is what will Ron Paul do with his huge bankroll of donated money? It could finance a third party run or give any existing other GOP candidate a huge shot in the arm.

 

[cpmer]

Good interview though i thought the part about the earmark stuff made paul look bad. It was definitely quite different than the beck interview. Some of the time the host just seemed to cut him off to make him look bad. Ive never watched meet the press so im not sure how this tim russert guy usually conducts his interviews. If hes always on the attack then i guess its alright and somewhat fair.

 

[Legend]

CNN is really, really trying to make Paul look like a racist:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/category/ron-paul/

During the Sunday interview, Paul criticized the Civil Rights Act, pointing out that Barry Goldwater opposed it. But he would not say he whether would vote against the legislation today. "I get more support from black people than any other Republican candidate, according to some statistics," he added.

Paul also contended that the Civil War had been unnecessary because the United States would have gotten rid of slavery ?eventually.?

Reasons why it is obvious that this is intentional:

1. Paul didn't say that slavery would just go away eventually. This was done to suggest that Paul didn't care about civil rights. Paul very clearly explained a highly relevant example that is easy to grasp: The British Empire bought the freedom of its slaves. He opposes Lincoln's absolute power, and he opposes the deaths of 600,000 American citizens. Just who the fuck is "for" that?
2. Paul explained clearly that he opposes the Civil Rights Act because of property rights. You can quote him saying that he had no problems with the human rights part of it. He just didn't want the government to be able to seize property. The article was crafted with the intention of making it look like he doesn't care about human rights.
3. The White Supremacist article below. Who the fuck cares if out of 100,000 donations, he took $500 from a racist. That's the headline?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Legend
CNN is really, really trying to make Paul look like a racist:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/category/ron-paul/

During the Sunday interview, Paul criticized the Civil Rights Act, pointing out that Barry Goldwater opposed it. But he would not say he whether would vote against the legislation today. "I get more support from black people than any other Republican candidate, according to some statistics," he added.

Paul also contended that the Civil War had been unnecessary because the United States would have gotten rid of slavery ?eventually.?

Reasons why it is obvious that this is intentional:

1. Paul didn't say that slavery would just go away eventually. This was done to suggest that Paul didn't care about civil rights. Paul very clearly explained a highly relevant example that is easy to grasp: The British Empire bought the freedom of its slaves. He opposes Lincoln's absolute power, and he opposes the deaths of 600,000 American citizens. Just who the fuck is "for" that?
2. Paul explained clearly that he opposes the Civil Rights Act because of property rights. You can quote him saying that he had no problems with the human rights part of it. He just didn't want the government to be able to seize property. The article was crafted with the intention of making it look like he doesn't care about human rights.
3. The White Supremacist article below. Who the fuck cares if out of 100,000 donations, he took $500 from a racist. That's the headline?

Ron Paul is clearly in the"fight" stage isn't he?

 

[RaiderJ]

I liked the interview - throwing hardball questions at Paul and seeing his responses makes him seem that much more genuine.

I think the whole "racist" bit will go away when they find it doesn't work against him. He has consistently said that the drug war unfairly targets minorities, especially blacks.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Legend
CNN is really, really trying to make Paul look like a racist:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/category/ron-paul/

During the Sunday interview, Paul criticized the Civil Rights Act, pointing out that Barry Goldwater opposed it. But he would not say he whether would vote against the legislation today. "I get more support from black people than any other Republican candidate, according to some statistics," he added.

Paul also contended that the Civil War had been unnecessary because the United States would have gotten rid of slavery ?eventually.?

Reasons why it is obvious that this is intentional:

1. Paul didn't say that slavery would just go away eventually. This was done to suggest that Paul didn't care about civil rights. Paul very clearly explained a highly relevant example that is easy to grasp: The British Empire bought the freedom of its slaves. He opposes Lincoln's absolute power, and he opposes the deaths of 600,000 American citizens. Just who the fuck is "for" that?
2. Paul explained clearly that he opposes the Civil Rights Act because of property rights. You can quote him saying that he had no problems with the human rights part of it. He just didn't want the government to be able to seize property. The article was crafted with the intention of making it look like he doesn't care about human rights.
3. The White Supremacist article below. Who the fuck cares if out of 100,000 donations, he took $500 from a racist. That's the headline?

Ron Paul is clearly in the"fight" stage isn't he?

Haha, yeah actually I'm beginning to think so. Getting out of my work/sleep routine and going halfway across the nation has shown me that Paul's popularity is increasing. I saw Paul signs on my way to the Austin TX airport, and driving around in the Nashvile TN area, I'm seeing lots of signs. He really does have a solid backing behind people that don't typically vote.

While he's reported polling at 8-9% nationally (10% in NH now apparently) it is among "likely Republican voters." He's polling almost 10% among previous Bush supporters! That's huge. When you consider that these 10% of voters will be out there to vote, whereas Hucklebees 25% voters are armchair voters -- not as likely to actually vote, and you consider states like NH are 50% Independent, and independents love Paul, this guy has a shot of winning.

John Kerry was polling half of what Paul is doing, and he won. Pat Buchanan polled something like 5% in NH, and he won there. You have to take a look at these polls in context.

 

[RaiderJ]

He's gaining support and momentum every day. Raising more money than the other candidates, polling higher, much more grassroots support - I'd love to see a huge turnout of new voters all vote for him just to see everyone's reaction.

 

[Capitalizt]

Paul did much better than Giuliani last week.. Rudy completely lost it and stared giggling like a little girl..

http://video.google.com/videop...&type=search&plindex=6

 

[Pliablemoose]

Sooo... RP supporters understand that even if he's elected (unlikely) he won't be able to enact a single one of the reforms he's supporting, right?

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Sooo... RP supporters understand that even if he's elected (unlikely) he won't be able to enact a single one of the reforms he's supporting, right?

Just getting a President that vetoes Congress's nonsense and reducing the power of the Executive branch back to normal levels would be fantastic.

 

[GrGr]

Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

 

[nageov3t]

interesting interview.

I wasn't aware of Ron Paul's magical theory that pulling all troops in from overseas will solve America's debt... unless he's planning on firing them all?

seemed like every domestic question that Russert asked, RP brought it back to the war.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

Ron Paul certainly has the money to go fairly long in the primary process, but he is going to have to get some early strong win delegates counts or he is going to be one of the missing as the GOP contenders for President field starts to thin. And as various candidates drop out, Ron Paul must get their supporters to transfer to him, or he will again get buried as a GOP front runner starts to look inevitable.

So the question somewhat becomes, which dropping GOP contenders supporters would be attracted to Ron Paul as a second choice? And in terms of money bombs, corporate GOP money has yet to weigh in, but almost none of that would ever go to Ron Paul.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

The polling methods are flawed and therefore aren't indicative of the true support for Ron Paul.

 

[RaiderJ]

Originally posted by: loki8481
interesting interview.

I wasn't aware of Ron Paul's magical theory that pulling all troops in from overseas will solve America's debt... unless he's planning on firing them all?

seemed like every domestic question that Russert asked, RP brought it back to the war.

Considering it's a massive yearly expense, it would be a big first step in solving our debt problem.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

The polling methods are flawed and therefore aren't indicative of the true support for Ron Paul.

Good luck with that theory.

Paul will be lucky to top 10% in Iowa. If he does better than 6th place he will have acheived a victory.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

The polling methods are flawed and therefore aren't indicative of the true support for Ron Paul.

Good luck with that theory.

Paul will be lucky to top 10% in Iowa. If he does better than 6th place he will have acheived a victory.

Its true. Call it a theory and bury your head in the sand if you feel so inclined, why should I care?

 

[ProfJohn]

In just over a weeks time we shall see how much support Paul has, although it will take Michigan or South Carolina before we really get a good idea of his support.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
In just over a weeks time we shall see how much support Paul has, although it will take Michigan or South Carolina before we really get a good idea of his support.

Fair enough.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

The polling methods are flawed and therefore aren't indicative of the true support for Ron Paul.

Good luck with that theory.

Paul will be lucky to top 10% in Iowa. If he does better than 6th place he will have acheived a victory.

Why are you so against fellow GOP Ron Paul?

What GOP candidate do you support, you don't have anything in your sig other than your hate of a Democrat.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: GrGr
Ron Paul is now one of the top 3 repub candidates for President

That's sure to get some republicans' panties in a twist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where in the world do you get Ron Paul in the top three? McCain in now rising up from the dead and polls place him at 20% or better, Giuliani is losing support and still doing better than McCain, Romney and Huckabee are also viable and both command around 15% or better poll numbers. And even the sinking Fred Thompson is still double digits. Leaving Ron Paul a somewhat distant 6'th place. With today's Meet the Press figures for Ron Paul at 8% poll numbers.

The polling methods are flawed and therefore aren't indicative of the true support for Ron Paul.

Good luck with that theory.

Paul will be lucky to top 10% in Iowa. If he does better than 6th place he will have acheived a victory.

Why are you so against fellow GOP Ron Paul?

What GOP candidate do you support, you don't have anything in your sig other than your hate of a Democrat.

weird, not everyone supports everyone in a political party they identify or vote with

personally, I think John Edwards is a total douchebag and would probably vote for giving GW a third term before voting for him.

could also be the fact that Ron Paul is so completely and totally unelectable in a national election there's not even a word for it... sometimes I wonder if the Ron Paul hype machine is being masterminded by the DNC in an attempt to help the GOP nominate a candidate who might help the democrats get a 50-state victory.