Why isn't Ron Paul doing well?

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-
Fern

That's a nice well reasoned post there, Fern, but I don't think it explains the fervent nut case reaction from so many. He would just be an unknown who doesn't attract much attention but I see him being demonize. I have to conclude that PR is some kind of threat to a lot of people's interests, financial or emotional or ideological, etc. The vehemence of the reaction tells me he's some kind of danger.

Thanks. And yes, he's a threat to many different parties.

All the way from gov employees to the military industrial complex and lobbyists.

H3ll, he's a threat to the SCOTUS even. His concept of reducing the federal gov, and empowering the states should have everyone in DC and all their syncophants (e.g., MSM) fiercely opposed to him.

If he stays in, I'll be voting for him in my state's primary in May.

Fern

 

[Sinsear]

And today's winning quote from the Ron Paul forums:

I'd vote for Hitler if was a means to an end to get Ron Paul as President.

 

[WildHorse]

))

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: scott
I'm convinced that Thomas Jefferson would vote for Ron Paul!

No, he wouldn't.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: scott
I'm convinced that Thomas Jefferson would vote for Ron Paul!

No, he wouldn't.

He would too!

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
And today's winning quote from the Ron Paul forums:

I'd vote for Hitler if was a means to an end to get Ron Paul as President.

Well with the other candidates the Rs and Ds have put forward this year, it appears they'd all happily vote for Hitler as well.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: scott
He's a man FAR ahead of his time.

He's a higher-consciousness person, while the masses are still complacently steered by the media, still eating up that obsolete old time slimy machine politics of Clinton and most of our negligent Congress.

As we gradually progress through time, in maybe 200 years what Ron Paul represents will be the mainstream, if our COnstitution survives. The dumbed numbed masses just aren't ready yet.

I'm convinced that Thomas Jefferson would vote for Ron Paul!

smoke much? seriously, do you kids ever tire of being RP's fluffer? does he at least pay you, or cuddle afterwards!?

 

[WildHorse]

()

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

And the fact that you think the issues we face now are different than what was faced 200 years ago is ignorant. Please, for my amusement, name one issue that is brand new that the founding fathers could not have foreseen and thus requires the abandonment of their archaic views.

the industrial revolution?

 

[blahblah99]

Originally posted by: Duddy
I don't get how Ron Paul can seem soo incredibly popular on the web and in the military, but somehow only has 16 delegates right now.

I really don't understand, is his campaign manager a marketing genius? Could he replace Steve Jobs?

Why doesn't his massive internet support translate into votes? It doesn't make any sense at all.

McCain is hated soo much on the web, and everyone I talk to hates his guts, how the f*** is he winning by such a large margin?!


Are people just lazy?

I need a serious answer please for the love of all that is Holy!!!

He's not doing well because he's a LOON.

 

[WildHorse]

{}

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

And the fact that you think the issues we face now are different than what was faced 200 years ago is ignorant. Please, for my amusement, name one issue that is brand new that the founding fathers could not have foreseen and thus requires the abandonment of their archaic views.

the industrial revolution?

Way to be vague. What exactly did that revolutionize which the human race has never seen before? Means of production? Yeah, we've never seen any increase to that before the industrial revolution. :roll:

Try again sparky.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

And the fact that you think the issues we face now are different than what was faced 200 years ago is ignorant. Please, for my amusement, name one issue that is brand new that the founding fathers could not have foreseen and thus requires the abandonment of their archaic views.

the industrial revolution?

Way to be vague. What exactly did that revolutionize which the human race has never seen before? Means of production? Yeah, we've never seen any increase to that before the industrial revolution. :roll:

Try again sparky.

Exactly. In many ways, the world is much the same as it was 2000 years ago. There are many things in the world of political philosophy that automobiles, nukes, and the internet have not changed.

 

[0roo0roo]

people tend to hear one aspect of his platform that they like and push for him.
like on drugs.
or on anti war.
ignoring the rest of him which is nuts.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
people tend to hear one aspect of his platform that they like and push for him.
like on drugs.
or on anti war.
ignoring the rest of him which is nuts.

The one aspect of his platform I liked best was "freedom."

 

[xj0hnx]

Why isn't Ron Paul doing well?

Because his positions do not fit in easily digested 20 second soundbytes, and with the virtual media blackout on him since right before Super Tuesday, all the prospective, less informed voters are left with are the lies and misrepresentations of his detractors. McCain and the Huckster get free airtime all day long, Ron Paul gets mentioned in passing if at all. If he does well, it is either spun away from him, or completely ignored. Hell, I've even seen pictures of a paper ballot from New York with his name scratched off. There's also the problem that a lot of the time people like to associate him with his more fanatical supporters, especially the 9/11 truthers, these people are not representitive of Ron Paul, or his political views.

Popular Ron Paul myths:

1. He wants to legalize drugs.

? No, he does not. He wants to end the failed "War on Drugs"?, and make legalization a state issue, not a federal issue. The federal government has already proven it is a dismal failure in this arena.

2. He is an isolationist.

? No, he is not. He is a non-interventionalist, there is a huge difference.

Non-interventionalism is not interfering with other countries affairs either by force, or threat of force to compel, or prevent actions.

Isolation is a policy of national isolation by abstention from alliances and other international political and economic relations.

Ron Paul has said time, and time again that he wants to maintain open trade, diplomatic relations with everyone, and avoid making enemies like we have been by siding with one country one week, and another the next.

Huge difference, yet people still parrot their uneducated garbage.

3. He wants to dismantle all the alphabet agencies, and law-enforcement.

? No, he does not. He sees that there is a lot of bureaucracy that makes a lot of government agencies inefficient, financial suckholes. Not too mention in todays climate of fear, have steadily been over reaching their authority in the name of "national security". He would trim them down into lean, mean terrorist catching machines, without treading on Americans civil liberties.

4. He supports 9/11 truthers conspiracies.

? No, he does not. While he does support their right to say and believe as they wish, he has publically disavowed any conspiracy theory about the US government being involved in 9/11, and often times quotes from the official 9/11 Commision report to back up his views on terrorism.

5. Ron Paul blames the US people for the 9/11 attacks.

? No, he does not. He blames our foreign policy, and uses facts to back it up. Poeple may not like those facts, but it doesn't change them.

 

[OokiiNeko]

New Hampshire election fraud for starters (stole momentum).

Media manipulation and brainwashed masses (look no further than P&N).

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: OokiiNeko
New Hampshire election fraud for starters (stole momentum).

Media manipulation and brainwashed masses (look no further than P&N).

What do you think are Paul real poll numbers?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: scott
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

in·ane /?'ne?n/

?adjective

1. lacking sense, significance, or ideas; silly: inane questions.
2. empty; void.

Your post conforms to this definition.

This thread has been brought to you by the word inane. Alright boys and girls, can you use the word inane in a sentence?

Originally posted by: scott
Your putdown namecalling is inane.

VERY GOOD! I knew you could!

Originally posted by: scott
Therefore, you sir are in this instance lacking sense, significance, or ideas; and you are silly

Well, I'm certainly silly...

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
people tend to hear one aspect of his platform that they like and push for him.
like on drugs.
or on anti war.
ignoring the rest of him which is nuts.

Right, because most of the people backing Billary, Obama, McCain and Huckabee aren't one issue voters. :roll:

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: OokiiNeko
New Hampshire election fraud for starters (stole momentum).

Media manipulation and brainwashed masses (look no further than P&N).

:roll:

 

[Dufusyte]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: OokiiNeko
New Hampshire election fraud for starters (stole momentum).

What do you think are Paul real poll numbers?

In the Caucus states, Paul regularly gets about 15%, while in the Poll states he gets about 5%.

I believe Caucus votes are accurate, and voting polls are rigged. Specifically, voting machines are rigged. Remember how much better HRC did in New Hampshire districts that used voting machines versus hand counted ballots.

It's no accident that HRC lost the recent string of Caucus States; it's basically impossible to rig a caucus.

You decide which system is more accurate, and what Paul's real numbers are.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Dufusyte

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: OokiiNeko
New Hampshire election fraud for starters (stole momentum).

What do you think are Paul real poll numbers?

In the Caucus states, Paul regularly gets about 15%, while in the Poll states he gets about 5%.

I believe Caucus votes are accurate, and voting polls are rigged. Specifically, voting machines are rigged. Remember how much better HRC did in New Hampshire districts that used voting machines versus hand counted ballots.

It's no accident that HRC lost the recent string of Caucus States; it's basically impossible to rig a caucus.

You decide which system is more accurate, and what Paul's real numbers are.

you REALLY need to go read this post:

Originally posted by: Drakkon
Well today was the day of the NV caucus and I set my sites on a candidate and decided to go down to see what all the hubub was about. Now I'm on the outskirts of LV so instead of casinos i got to go to a high school.

Well soon as I got there there were only 2 candidates with supporters there. Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. NO other candidates supporters came out. That will come important later on. Anyways as people arrived they stood around. No signs telling anyone where to go. No people giving any sorts of instructions. Finally a lady spoke up (who supposedly was the coordinator) and said find your precinct on the sign. The sign was a sheet of four pieces of paper tapped together with pencil writting on it. The precinct was linked to a room where you would go and sign in. My number said 'cafeteria' so i walked away and stood around because i was an hour early and apparently i was alreayd in the right place.

Now as more people arrived they didn't have their precinct number with them. Stupidity on their own parts and they were getting PISSED. The candidates people couldn't tell them where to go as that would violate election rules so they were stuck with not knowing where to go at all. Many people left because of this. Then about a half hour before things were to kick off a guy brings in a laptop and holds up a phone number saying call this line to find your precinct number. Well unfortunately his computer ran out of juice 20 or so people in and the phone number he was giving out was the RON PAUL HOTLINE which really made a lot of people angry (especially the romney folks looked like).

So 10 minutes before everything was supposed to start i hear my precinct number mentioned. They dont have loudspeakers so everything is done throuh one lady yelling but her message barely makes it out over the few hundred or so people in this cafeteria and no telling if it reached the 1000 or so outside. Well turned out my precinct room has been changed. To an upstairs location. Where there are no functioning elevators (the school had turned them off for some reason). This sucked for the old people that were there (if they could figure out where they needed to go - which many gave up and didnt as they were confused by finding their precinct number).

So i get to the room and it is a small 30 or so student classroom filled with 50 or so people. The guy there (who supposedly is an assemblyman) has no clue. Hes reading off a sheet what to do and seems to have very little clue what the rules are or how to proceed.
In NV we elect DELEGATES not candidates - people to go and vote at the conference on Feb 23rd where NV selects who it will be sending to the national convention - Well in our room out of 50 people we needed to choose 15 to be delegates. Well as you can imagine as mentioned before people form the Paul and Romney campaigns chimed right in. Most people in the room were older or parents so they couldnt be delegates. So who got to be delegates? Well at first we didnt have enough people wanting to be delegates (only 11 out of the 15 - all of whom where either paul or romney supporters) - finally a few others chimed in and we had our 15 (otherwise we would've lost those votes so thank goodness for those folks). But since we filled those 15 there was no debate over the delegates. We didnt get to hear their position, who they were voting for, or even whether or not we wanted them voting for us. Just since they agreed to be delegates they get to go.

Then it was 2 minute speech time. Now i thought it was going to be or supposed to be each candidate sends a rep to the room and speaks on their behalf. No it turned out they were just going to let random members of our precinct give half assed unprepared speeches about who they are voting for and why. Agian the Ron Paul support was strong and actually 1 girl stood up and had prepared a pretty well thought out 2 minute speech for him. A first guy tried to get up and act all professorly and support ron paul as well but for some reason he wanted to answer questions during his two minutes which was really stupid and asinine. Then a couple random guys who were pissed that Paul was getting all the attention tried to say something For Guiliani and Thompson but again so unprepared and half-informed seem like it was just a stupid ramble at times.

Well the grand finally was our 'straw poll' - where we get to choose a candidate but it really means nothing as the people who were selected as delegates will choose regardless. Given a sheet with bubbles to fill in then put the paper in a box. Well we needed to get this done quick as the democrats were arriving at the same location for some reason and they were scheduled back to back.

I had arrived early and when i parked parking lot was empty. Well now parking lot was FULL. and for some reason on the same day the high school had allowd a offroading club to use part of their parking lot. So people were parked off sidewalks, down the street, etc. It was a mess. No one could get in or out.

I feel like my vote was futile but it was good to see the process and how screwed up it was. Its clear none of the candidates really cared about Nevada except for paul and romney, at least in my area. I wish i would've taken pictures or reporters were there to cover how bad it was but didn't bring my camera and never saw anyone capturing the cluster#@ that was the proceedings. Well from now on I'm only voting in primaries or where there is a paper ballot that actually goes towards a candidate.

Caucuses are the most screwed up and unbalanced portion in our entire election system. In other words, your little conspiracy theory is flat-out wrong, and your idea that caucuses > primaries is a fvcking joke!

shocker.

 

[Rainsford]

There was a very interesting editorial in Wired last month that I think summed up the answer to the question "Why isn't Ron Paul doing well?" perfectly. The problem with the Ron Paul campaign is...Ron Paul. As a metacampaign, that is, a campaign about campaigns, he's doing remarkably well. He's raised an unbelievable amount of money and attracted a huge amount of attention despite being unpopular and relatively unknown. He's shown that the Internet is a powerful tool for campaigning and has shown that there is a decent sized group of people out there who are ready for something new.

The problem is that Ron Paul's campaign is, at the end of the day, about electing Ron Paul himself President. And that's where the wheels come off his campaign. Because while he's running a pretty impressive campaign (considering what he's got to work with), most people don't like what he's actually selling. His campaign is very interesting and entertaining, but Ron Paul himself comes across like a moonbat. It's not even his rather extreme libertarian views, it's how he presents them. I am, and I think most people are, willing to listen to even the most out there ideas...but only if they are backed up by a convincing and reasonable argument. Ron Paul does not have that argument, so to most people he comes across like someone who couldn't run a Taco Stand, much less the entire country.

In other words, "It's time for a change" is a message that resonates with a lot of people...but eventually people realize that we'd be changing to Ron Paul...and suddenly his campaign doesn't look quite so good. In some respects Ron Paul's campaign is a lot like Apple's marketing. Lots of flash and noise and promises of being cool and different, but it works for Apple because they actually HAVE a good product that people like...Ron Paul's campaign missed that particular step.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
His campaign is very interesting and entertaining, but Ron Paul himself comes across like a moonbat.

QFT. :thumbsup: