Topic: Ron Paul
Change Yes, Ron Paul No The vast national desire for political change is manifesting itself through support for both Democratic and Republican change-candidates. Despite Paul being flush with money and having a large number of workers in Iowa, he was solidly rejected as the leading change agent.by Joel S. Hirschhorn
(Centrist Liberal Libertarian)
Friday, January 4, 2008
Ron Paul’s obnoxious supporters like more traditional political activists can spin and delude themselves about election results. But the Iowa caucus results could not be clearer: The vast national desire for political change is manifesting itself through support for both Democratic and Republican change-candidates. Despite Paul being flush with money and having a large number of workers in Iowa, he was solidly rejected as the leading change agent.
Even with a huge historic turnout of about 348,000 participants, Paul did not attract significant numbers of independents that could easily participate in the Republican caucuses. They went to Obama, Edwards and Huckabee.
On the Democratic side, of some 232,000 people that turned out for the caucuses, nearly doubling what it was four years ago, about 70 percent wanted change and went for Obama and Edwards, roughly 150,000 participants.
On the Republican side, of the 116,000 participants, about 40,000 change-voters went for Huckabee, compared to 11,600 that chose Paul, giving him fifth place. That 10 percent for Paul was very close to the 9 percent found in a Des Moines Register poll of likely caucus voters (margin of error 3.5 points). Interestingly, like Paul, Huckabee also wants to eliminate the federal income tax.
In both parties, change-voters totaled about 200,000. So Paul received just 6 percent of that large fraction, and just 3 percent of the total of all caucus participants in Iowa. Paul was first in only one county, Jefferson, with 36 percent
Edwards was absolutely correct when he summed things up this way: "The one thing that is clear from the results in Iowa tonight is the status quo lost and change won." With all the hoopla from Paul supporters about younger people being for Paul, that’s not what the Iowa results showed. Younger people seeking change and inspiration flocked to Obama, in particular. There was no demographic in Iowa that overwhelmingly went for Paul. Sure, Paul beat Giuliani, but Paul’s effort in Iowa was much bigger than Giuliani’s. None of these results will impact Paul’s supporters nationwide.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson wrote a great article on Alternet.org: "Ron Paul is Scary, But Those Who Cheer Him Are Even Scarier." He was right when he said: "The scariest thing about GOP presidential contender Ron Paul is not his fringe, odd-ball racial views. It is that people take him seriously." But now Iowa has thankfully shown that the vast majority of Americans, especially those seeking political change, reject Paul.
After losing badly in Iowa Paul said: "The other candidates talk about tinkering with the status quo. We don’t want to tinker; we want to change the status quo." He said that his campaign is on the upswing and gaining support among independents, frustrated Republicans and unhappy Democrats. Just one very big problem: The Iowa results show that all these people are much more likely to vote for other Democratic and Republican change-candidates.
Paul’s supporters claim that he will do much better in New Hampshire where Libertarian Party members hold a number of offices. I don’t think so. Several polls taken before the Iowa results found Paul at just 5 to 9 percent. Will Paul get a big boost from Iowa? I don’t think so. Paul had predicted he could finish in third place in Iowa, and many of his supporters think he will do that in New Hampshire. I don’t think so. Paul will likely finish fifth in New Hampshire, in large part because more independents will go to Obama and McCain.
When Paul first ran for president as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, he won just 0.54 percent of the vote. Iowa shows that his second presidential bid will not produce much better results. Paul is definitely not tapping in a major way into the national populist movement, major desire for political change, anti-status quo sentiment, or even the anti-Iraq war issue. Clearly, other Democratic and Republican change-candidates are doing much better. This reality will not affect Paul’s passionate, cult-like followers that are solidified like cement in their belief that Paul can and should be our next president, something that Paul himself probably never really believed.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 13 thumbs so far
2008 Joel S. Hirschhorn, all rights reserved.
Published: Friday, January 4, 2008
Last modified: Friday, January 4, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of Joel S. Hirschhorn only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Joel S. Hirschhorn is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
"Ten per cent is not insignificant - that's a huge number. Here you have a candidate that 10 per cent of the people caucused in his party really want him and it's not like he's an insignificant player. He didn't just drop in yesterday to the process, he has been running for president for a long time, and certainly many of the issues he's raised are rather provocative and certainly stimulate the debate; that's not a bad thing."
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2008-01-04 20:20:46
That's a whole lot of wishful thinking and sour grapes there, Joel. I'll just stick to the highlights that reduce your points to the mean spirited garbage that underlies your article.
1. Your false premise: A vote for Huckabee is certainly not a vote for change. It is a vote for more big government liberal spending and empire building. He hasn't a conservative bone in his body. Your assertion that a vote for him is a vote for change is totally indefensible.
2. Your absurd generalization: Just because some Ron Paul fans are of the poisonous, obnoxious type in no way implies they all are. I'll be the first to admit that freedom is attractive to some rude, ignorant and obnoxious people but I'll guarantee it attracts far more normal, responsible and mature people. Funny you can't see them. Is it them, or you who cause them to be invisible? I have my hunch.
3. Your totally biased reference: Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a professional victim who would view any attempt to reduce the magnitude of the welfare state as racist. He is simply not credible in any other context.
4. Your ridiculously false quote from the above regarding Dr. Paul's "oddball racial views". Either you or poor 'ole Earl have no clue about Dr. Paul's position if either of you think it is "oddball". To paraphrase his position, Dr. Paul believes that rights are attributes of individuals, not groups. I know a professional victim like poor 'ole Earl wants to be surrounded by a whole class of victims. I would expect no better from the likes of him. Inconveniently for your purposes, there are many minority individuals who LOVE Dr. Paul for this point of view. Only those who want something for nothing, something someone else rightfully earned, would think this position is an "oddball racial view"
As to your predictions for New Hampshire, who knows? I certainly don't. I do know that Iowa does not represent any kind of national sentiment. Iowans have never picked a winner. I also know that Ron Paul is the only conservative in the race. If any of the others are chosen the Democrats and the Republicans may as well be the same party.
I believe Ron Paul to be the only Republican who has a chance in November. I believe if he doesn’t get the GOP nomination he can still win with a write-in campaign. Every attempt to thwart him results in his momentum increasing dramatically. FOX news couldn't have helped him more if they had had a 24 hour Ron Paul special leading into New Hampshire. This is fun to watch. The only thing that could stop him is if he decided to run as a 3rd party candidate. I’m almost certain he is too smart for that and he has absolutely nothing to gain by doing so.Â
No matter what happens in the primary cycle or even in November, the revolution has started.  Conservatives are going to regain control of the GOP. The neocons are history; their reign is a horrible smear on our history that will be the shame of the Republican Party for centuries to come.
Hirschhorn is dead wrong. He says that Independents turned to McCain and Romney over Paul. According to CNN exit polling, 29% of Independents who participated in the Republican Caucus voted for Paul- that makes him FIRST among Independent voters.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#IAREP
Only one problem with your assessment of Huckabee's position to get rid of the federal income tax: he wants to replace it with another federal tax. Dr. Paul would replace it with nothing and work like the devil to get rid of the welfare state. Ron Paul may not win any state primary, but he will certainly end up with enough delegates at the national convention to carry some weight. This playing field is ripe for a come-from-behind surprise. Do your homework and make life a little more interesting for the rest of us, please.
when i read the words you just wrote joel it makes me sad, and then it makes me wonder why you are such a naysayer...... i hope you get over that, i really do. america needs an end to the war... we don't need a pre approved canidate the media keeps pushing down our throats as the persona of suppossed "change ". you should write for a diffrent post then nolan if you don't get that ...
Joel stop the insanity, lies and misinformation... get some windex, clean your specticles and contemplate the darkest of perverbial dark horse canidates here, who if he were to fall in the woods would never get the coverage he made a sound or not......... i think you should reconsider what you wrote and appologize for a case of blues......... but don't worry ron paul still loves you and freedom.....always infamous,
This is one of the best articles I've read so far; shows the current reality and what could be the future if something is not done to make a real change.
Yawn. Ron Paul did well. Get over it. And for the record - Paul predicted nothing regarding his campaign. The only thing he does predict is an devestating financial collapse that Wall Street is itself waking up to should the media and the public continue to rally around nothing less than constitutional adherence to the rule of law, a cessation of empire building and foreign intermeddling, and a return to conservative fiscal policy.
Posted By: Richard Wicks
Date: 2008-01-04 21:33:15
All I can say is that I'm very grateful that I own gold. It looks like the country is on the course for bankruptcy, and if country is going to have to go through a depression to recognize that we're on an unsustainable course, so be it.
Ron Paul is the only REAL candidate who will actually bring about change.
What is my evidence?
The media is trying soooo hard to silence him. The status quo is trying soooo hard to silence him.
If Obama, Edwards, or any other candidate talks about their never defined "change," then why are they not seeing the same censorship as Dr. Paul? If Obama is suggesting the same change as Ron Paul, then shouldn't Obama be experiencing the exact same censorship Paul is facing?
There's a reason Obama is not censored. The reason is that Obama is just another corrupt politician who the corporate elite would love to have in power. Just like Bush, Obama will run on very nice speeches, but in office will abandon them all and continue destructive policies.
Conveniently, to prevent voters from seeing this, Obama doesn't have much, if any, of a track record to see if he actually stays true to his words.
Ron Paul on the other hand, has 10 terms worth of proof showing that he's a candidate who actually won't flip-flop. This is why he's not allowed to poll well.
Ron Paul, if elected, will please statist world wide by abondoning the big stick and speaking softly. He truly is the next Neville Chamberlain. A vote for Paul is a vote to continue and increase world Tryanny.
Overall this article was well articulated and I found an appreciation of the thought process behind the observations although I disagreed with many of the assumptions. This was, no doubt, to be expected however since I am one of "Ron Paul’s obnoxious supporters..." Being a supporter does not automatically mean I am some cultist, brainwashed victim.  There are many who are well educated and simply passionate about the foundations our Federalist Republic was based on and concerned those foundations are crumbling. If that makes me obnoxious, fringe, and radical so be it.
Posted By: Mark Berglund
Date: 2008-01-04 22:55:29
This article was written just to get more clicks to get more money. The article on altnet was debunked by people who commented on that article. This writer should read comments on the bottom of a page before using it as a reference. Supporters of Ron Paul should debunk writers like this then stop commenting or reading it so it doesn't get more clicks and less bloggers are encouraged to write negative things about Dr. Paul to fill there own pockets and make their site seem better than it is for advertisers. Maybe this author should supply the good word about Paul and we would make him more money.
We the people pick Ron Paul!
More are getting educated every day.
At what level do we reach critical mass?
Ron Paul won't get ride of the IRS overnight, it will take years. He just wants us to start travelling away from Keynes, he likes Hayek and Mises, so your 7 questions don't make me squirm...
The messenger is just as important as the message. Ron Paul's integrity and good character is above reproach. Can't say the same for some of the other candidates. Stumbled on to the "Judicial watch of Ten Most Corrupt Politicians of 2007 at http://www.judicialwatch.org/ Huckabee, Guliani, Clinton and even Obama was on the list.
When I first commented, I thought you were being facetious with this article but after reading, http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=47275, I feel like you are being sincere. You really think Ron Paul used earmarks for a personal gain other than to try and receive back some of the money that was taken by the federal government from the people of Texas to be used against his spending beliefs?
Anyway, I still stand by what I wrote earlier; it's time for the supporters of Ron Paul to work harder and get the word out.
"None of these results will impact Paul’s supporters nationwide."
Impact one: Paul's existing supporters will be further inspired to get the word out.
Impact two: More people will research Dr. Paul when they learn of his victory over Guiliani in Iowa. Of course his name wasn't mentioned in the L.A. Times today. I didn't hear about him on public radio or democracy now.
Also, Ron Paul WAS basically tied for 3rd place so they weren't to far off in their optimism.
If you can't get to the "judicial watch", just do a Google search for "judicial watch.
I find it sad that we individuals who support Ron Paul are referred to as obnoxious supporters, radical, trouble makers, etc. Please show me the proof or evidence that supports this. Obviously Joel if you are any kind a of a college educated person you should have had to do plenty of research papers in college using documented sources. If you don't like Ron Paul so be it but don't ridicule the Ron Paul supporters. We are just exercising our "Our God Given Rights" in a free and democratic society. You consider Ron Paul supporters rebellious. What so you call our founding fathers then? Were they not rebellious in the fact that they went to war against England? There are a lot of people in this great nation who don't like the Washington status quo and want change - a lot more than what you may realize. Also do your homework - the IRS is illegal. History will tell you the16thconstitutional amendment was never ratified properly by the 48 states at that time which established the IRS. And the Federal Reserve is a private banking corporation run by some of the richest individuals in the world. It is not part of our Federal Government system.So maybe some of us radicals are just a little better educated than you, including Ron Paul.Maybe we just want our country back the way our Founding Fathers intended it to be.It doesn’t mean that we are going to go backwards as a nation, its just time we step back and go forward in a new, better direction asthe most powerful nation on this earth.I am a college educated individual and I own my own business.I don’t consider myself to be radical or anything else extreme.But we need a leader in this country with the guts to change things for the better of the people.So far Ron Paul is the only one willing to make changes and go against the status quo.Change can be scary but the direction this nation is heading is even scarier.Thank you.
Posted By: Dr Ward Ciac II
Date: 2008-01-05 12:54:30
Here is Professor Ciac's analysis of Ron Paul (RP) in Iowa / New Hampshire:
Iowa 40% dems, 40% reps, 20% indies RP was polling about 5% of reps, 30% indies. Say half the 20% indies vote rep, half vote dem. (40 * .05 + 10 * .30))/ 50 = 10.0% in Iowa (he got it)
New Hampshire 40% indie, say 30% dems and 30% reps. RP polling about 8% of reps in NH, say polling at 30% for indies. Say half the 40% indies vote rep, half vote dem. (30 * .08 + 20 * .30))/ 50 = 16.8% in NH
The latest Rasmussen data shows RP at 14%, but this is a futures' market. If we use it however (.14), then RP is at 20.4% in NH, competitive for 2nd or 3rd place.
If Obama or Hillary wins, the privately-owned Federal Reserve will continue to increase the money suppy and I will continue to laugh all the way to the bank with my newly made profits in gold, silver, uranium, oil, softs, food and other commodities that are experiencing rapid price inflation as a result of the Fed's "easy" moneytary policy. I'd much rather have my freedom, but then again, with the absurd amount of money I've been making, I can simply buy it.
It's a shame that the men and women on fixed incomes can't. I wonder why Obama/Clinton/et al aren't talking about that? It might have something to do with the fact that they don't understand monetary inflation and that their basic, fundamental economic policies are inflationary and Keynesian.
Ron Paul is a product that just doesn't get communicated enough because of the mainstream media and the party infrastructure itself have some how been conspiring to deny Ron Paul the free ride that every other candidates have been enjoying.
Not enough they cut Paul's airtime and coverage, they sabotage his image and spin his words while at the same time promoting the media's candidate.
You Sir, have to be fair about what your assuming. Your entire argument in this article fail to assume the aforementioned sabotage by the media. Thus your entire argument about people rejecting Ron Paul's message wouldn't be logical since the voters haven't heard enough and heard to much of the sabotage propaganda or the spin of his message.
The logic is that the majority of American People would never reject the message that promotes freedom and liberty.
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-02-22 11:31:59
Most voters fall pray or victim to mindless thinking. They want to be placated by empty suits. Of course we all agree that we need "Change", but I harken to say that "change" from the original plan is what got us here in this condition. Simply by act of election and limited terms, we are gonna get "change" even if it is just the name on the door. We the lunatic, rebellious Paulites dont want empty rhetoric, we want our government to follow the rule of law and give us our country back. Call us freaks all you want, I appreciate it, but do you appreciate that we are screaming for your LIBERTY too? Talking LIBERTY, the Constitution, Keneysian vs. Mises monetary policy goes over the heads of most how think Dr. Paul is the fringe. we believe that printing fiat money and making the rules up as you go is in fact way more insane than honest money and following the rule of law. remember what Twain said about patriots, we will be the raucuos few fighting for your LIBERTY too, we expect no thanks, but we dont expect to be road blocked by the people as well as the establishment. Get on board folks, we understand that you have been misled over time and that LIBERTY requires RESPONSIBILITY and that can be scary. If you cannot handle the responsibility, go join the military (they will take care of you) and leave the rest of us RESPONSIBLE people to our LIBERTY.
LIBERTY or DEATH
P.S. we are marchin on Washington in June, go to www.ronpaulmarch.com then join us in the Civil Liberties Movement.
Posted By: Christian Prophet
Date: 2008-02-23 14:05:54
People prefer to buy a product from a salesman they like. A good salesman sells HIMSELF before he can even hope to sell his product.
Ron Paul simply never prepared himself as a salesman. He has all the right ideas and all the wrong persona. Most people do not want to listen to someone who is radiating pain, fear, guilt or anger.
Ron Paul would have been hugely more successful if he had first studied "Course in Political Miracles" [ [link edited for length] ]. Then he would have stood taller and appeared serenely confident and sure of himself, and like Ronald Reagan, people would have been attracted more to listen to his ideas.
Obama has done his homework. By appearing confident and strong, and talking about hope for the future, he is selling HIMSELF. His ideas will lead to disaster, but he knows how to attract millions. Liberty lovers should learn this lesson.
Posted By: Chancellor Helmut Cole
Date: 2008-02-29 08:49:14
Ron Paul does not belong in today's Republican Party. The fact that he got 10% of the Republican vote in a place like Iowa with the media blackout is astounding. Dr. Paul is the only candidate talking about true change. It will take a while for his ideas to gain traction, but the economic climate will speed things up quite a bit. In the end, his ideas will win even if he does not.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 Joel S. Hirschhorn, all rights reserved.