Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Wag the Blog: What Does Ron Paul's Support Mean?

It started out as a lark.

Signs touting Rep. Ron Paul's seemingly quixotic presidential campaign began popping up on the sides of roads. A "Ron Paul for President" bumper sticker would be spotted during the morning or evening commute.

Then came the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames. The number -- and volume -- of the Paul supporters turned them into the talk of the political world on that blazing hot day in August. Some reporters gathered at the event openly wondered whether Paul would shock the world by finishing in the top three of the Straw Poll. When he didn't -- he placed fifth -- the buzz (at least among media types) died down. Paul's campaign seemed all talk and no action.

That all changed on Nov. 5. In commemoration of Guy Fawkes' attempted assassination of King James I, the Paul network organized a fundraising bomb -- for lack of a better word. More than $4 million was collected online in roughly 24 hours, a stunning achievement for any candidate but especially someone with Paul's seemingly long-shot odds at the nomination.

Even then, however, it was easy to write Paul off. Other fringe candidates had been able to collect several million dollars form their efforts. Paul fit somewhat easily into the model of other perennial candidates like Lyndon LaRouche.

No more. Paul collected more than $6 million in a single day earlier this week (Dec. 16 -- the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, natch). Paul campaign officials say that he will top $18 million raised between Sept. 1 and Dec 31, a total that will put him first or very close to the top of the fundraising chase.

The Fix is often baffled about politics but rarely totally stumped. Ron Paul's financial prowess is, however, an example of a development that we just can't figure out.

So, we're turning to you -- The Fix community. For today's Wag the Blog question, we want to know what you think (or believe) is behind the amount of money that Paul has collected. Is it a validation of Paul's "out of Iraq now" position? A sign of widespread dissatisfaction with the two-party system? Or are we over-analyzing it?

We know the Paul community is VERY well organized online and not afraid to share their thoughts on Dr. Paul. We welcome them to today's discussion. But, we also remind them (as well as all members of the Fix community) that Wag the Blog was created to foster intelligent conversation on political hot topics. Please do your best to answer the question posed -- what does Paul's financial success mean -- and not simply deliver a screed about why you love (or hate) Dr. Paul.

As always, the most thoughtful/insightful comments will be excerpted in a post of their own at a later date.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 18, 2007; 4:45 PM ET
Categories:  Wag The Blog  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Edwards Makes the Electability Case
Next: Huckabee: The Christmas Ad


Some of Ron Paul's appeal stems from his clear message that our war on Iraq and prospectively on Iran does us great hard as a nation, that this spills unnecessary blood, wastes our substance, and evaporates our reputation as a decent world citizen who can model good things but not impose them on others.

However there are a few horses in the running that are better placed to win and thereafter end this terrible and costly mistake. Edwards comes to mind, if he's still in the race. Obama is a promising bet. And Huckabee speaks out forthrightly about the myopia of the arrogant White House bunker worldview.

Posted by: FirstMouse | January 13, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

> what does Paul's financial success mean?

The obvious is that the reason Ron Paul had raised almost no money before this quarter is that the jaded, cynical majority turned off by politics in general had not heard of him and weren't looking.

I have read the average donation to Ron Paul is $75.

This means for everyone who donated $1000 (like I did) there were many who were able to spare $5, $10 or $20 who understand Ron Paul's message of peace and freedom.

What this also means is that, while Barack, Rudy and Hillary's supporters are tapped out, having given $2300 each, Paul supporters are far from maxed out, will follow his campaign, and if he shows well at the early primaries will be repeat donors. This is all optimistic news for our next president, Ron Paul.

Posted by: haloiq | December 28, 2007 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul cured my Apathy. I was part of the Reagan Youth and Revolution of 1980 & 1984, then I became illusioned with all of his predecessors. I voted for Ron Paul in 1988 as a protest again the first Brush when Jack Kemp didn't get the nomination. I have never contributed to a campaign until now. A lot of my generation is really pissed off at how the republicans and democrats are running the country into bankruptcy and destroying our personal liberties and freedoms. They have made most of the rest of the world hate us and we are fighting wars with no end. While Rudy Guiliani has $2300 breakfasts and diners with wealthy people looking for special tax breaks and government handouts to their multinational companies, Ron Paul is receiving money at $20 to 100 dollars a person. We reject voting for the lesser of two evils, because they are still evil. Viva la revolution.

Posted by: encinomanbrewery | December 23, 2007 1:31 AM | Report abuse

If government supervision and regulation is abolished, who do you think is going to run the show? Hint: it isn't going to be you.

Posted by: TheBogus | December 20, 2007 05:32 PM

When there are no lobbyists and special interest groups to compete with the profits of the market, American consumers will have more power than ever. I already choose where to spend my money based on a company's business practices and ethics, don't you?

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 22, 2007 10:37 PM | Report abuse

I am a Paul supporter and one thing that RP's money bombs mean is that the power of the internet greater than most expected.

Posted by: caboose2179 | December 22, 2007 5:52 PM | Report abuse

@ TheBogus;

"It never ceases to amaze me that so many people would state their support for Paul on the grounds that corporations are running our government and putting profit before patriotism and Ron provides the antidote. Yet they are willing to embrace the libertarian view that government should be abolished, or at least sizably reduced. If government supervision and regulation is abolished, who do you think is going to run the show? Hint: it isn't going to be you."

Oh, you mean the multinationals don't run things exactly the way they want now, with a democratic veneer of respectability? Please examine your premises. More important, read some serious history.

Ron's financial success means even in a system where outsiders are largely ignored, he will now be increasingly considered a substantial candidate. A third place in Iowa and / or New Hampshire will likely sustain a run up to the convention, given his organization and his volunteers. If he isn't nominated, he will still influence the Party platform, as already the other candidates have been appropriating his rhetoric (if not his views) for a while now.

Posted by: vince | December 22, 2007 12:50 AM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's financial support mean?

George Soros has found an incredibly smart way to spend about $6 million dollars to keep the Republicans out of the WhiteHouse in 2008.

Hillary's best shot is a 3-way race where Ron Paul plays the role of Ralph Nader.

Posted by: viscobob | December 21, 2007 01:03 PM

OK, smart ass! So whaddaya think we should do with our other $ 12 mil??

Posted by: ricknhouston | December 21, 2007 2:39 PM | Report abuse

* Paul was born and raised in Pittsburgh

* Graduated from Gettysburg College & Duke University School of Med

* Served 5 yrs in the U.S. Air Force

* Moved to Texas 1968 with wife of fifty years Carol

* Retired OB/GYN who delivered over 4,000 babies

* Has 5 children, 18 grandchildren & 1 great grandchild & can name them all

* In 10th term of Congress as Republican since 1976

* Never voted to raise taxes or for
an unbalanced budget

* Never voted for restrictions on gun ownership

* Never voted for Congressional pay raise or taken a government-paid junket

* Never voted to increase power of the executive branch

* Voted against the Patriot Act

* Voted against regulation of Internet

* Voted against the Iraq war

* NOT in favor of entangling treaties or alliances

* NOT in favor of Nation Building

* IS a true Concstitutionalist

* IS a Non-Interventionalist

* Has Always returned the balance of his Annual Budget to Treasury

* Against amnesty for illegal immi
grants or their U.S. born children

* Will enforce U.S. Borders

* Against all forms of Federal Taxation

* Against Federal Rsrv & Inflation Taxes


* Will build & maintain strong NAT'L DEFENSE

A vote for Ron Paul
Is a Vote for America !

Posted by: ricknhouston | December 21, 2007 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Previous comment made with tongue planted firmly in cheek. . . sort of. . .

Posted by: viscobob | December 21, 2007 1:04 PM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's financial support mean?

George Soros has found an incredibly smart way to spend about $6 million dollars to keep the Republicans out of the WhiteHouse in 2008.

Hillary's best shot is a 3-way race where Ron Paul plays the role of Ralph Nader.

Posted by: viscobob | December 21, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

After Ron raised the record revenue Sunday Yahoo among other media giants had very little to say about it. CNN at least acknowledged it and included the most tell tale comment by Paul himself--and that is that he wishes his message would take precedent over the money. Ron represents true American basics yet the media has slandarized him and spent more time on religious rhetoric about the candidates identity with God then it has on the core issues. If things were done the way they are being done now back in colonial times we would still be under English rule-- thank God for Ron Paul--he is at least something to believe in. Keep it rolling/Waldo

Posted by: waldos | December 21, 2007 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Once perhaps every century, a number of things coalesce to enable a special kind of movement. I believe this is happening now. It means that Americans who support Dr. Paul finally see what is the truth and what has been for so long wrong in America.

We have had a terrible foreign policy for many years that has kept us in wars. We have had our economy manipulated and now close to ruin for many years. We have had a monetary system imposed upon this country that has doomed the middle class to slip into poverty and the rich to become richer. Worse, in the hands of private bankers, something forbidden by the Constitution, it has led to our government being completely run by a powerful and rich elite who have not the best intentions for this country, but rather only their own arrogant, greedy desires at heart, regardless of the cost in human lives and regardless of the loss of our liberty and sovereignty in the process of achieving their ends.

We the people have allowed ourselves to become beaten down, accepting of our fate, complacent and apathetic in our own personal struggles to make ends meet. We have allowed ourselves to be persuaded to be ruled by fear. And we have become dispossessed by the political system and substituted entertainment and material things to replace any power and loss of liberty and privacy we may have ever thought we had.

Along comes the right man at the right time, a man of undeniable integrity, intelligence, common sense, and love of country and freedom. Luckily, many Americans are beyond fed up and have become angry that our country has isolated us from the world with its policies abroad and condemned us in the eyes of the world with its hubris. We Americans who love our country know in our hearts and minds that we were never intended to rule an empire. The knowledge that we have seen the beast and the beast is us is a devastating truth.

The honorable man has awakened us to the goodness within ourselves and the goodness that once was our country. Main Stream Media and other powers have tried to suppress his message and this further angers Americans.

Summed up, he humbly offers the right message with viable solutions, that simplify sensibly what all the other candidates are trying to further complicate as they speak down to us from their lofty planes. He reminds us what our government should be, rather than what many politicians who seek only more power through bigger government want it to be. He reminds us that our monentary system is close to collapse, and then all else will fall with it. He reminds us that we were not meant to rule the world.

He is angry, we are angry, and we want our country back. Only a leader with integrity at this point in our country's history can begin to accomplish the task that lies before us. The usual suspects with their plastic, polished lies are not an option.

The once in a lifetime circumstances, the once in a lifetime leader, and the finally awakened populace filled with determination wants to be heard and wants to restore the liberty, privacy, rule of law, and honor that were originally this country as set forth by our Constitution. And so we begin the journey, by opening our wallets, then volunteering in a myriad of ways to help that man help us.

Posted by: Quiltskate1 | December 21, 2007 4:42 AM | Report abuse

Novamatt, in response to your question (and I have skipped over quite a few posts, so I hope I haven't missed anything):
I'm a libertarian, and until Paul ran have been registered as such for most of my adult life (I'm 34). I almost always vote libertarian. Paul is a libertarian, so I will vote for him in the primaries. I don't expect that he'll win, although I do think people tend to underestimate how willing (I would say extremely eager) most of his supporters are to actually show up and vote for him.

If he doesn't win the nomination, I will do what I always do, and vote for who I believe to be the most principled, honest candidate I can find who isn't interested in using what I believe to be overly coercive and unconstitutional means to acheive their desired ends -- or at least back one that I feel it won't compromise my principles to support if I feel they're more likely to advance those principles publicly.

As far as Ron Paul newbies (most of his supporters have only heard of him recently). I have a feeling they'll be looking for similar options once they realize they're available. I hope to see the libertarian viewpoint injected into the political dialogue in this country as a result of Dr. Paul's campaign, and I'm pretty sure we will see some ripples. If Paul has done anything, he has "created" a demand, and to the extent the laws of economics apply to politics, I think more competition will spring up to supply it. Good question.

Posted by: hisnameismatt | December 20, 2007 11:39 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people would state their support for Paul on the grounds that corporations are running our government and putting profit before patriotism and Ron provides the antidote. Yet they are willing to embrace the libertarian view that government should be abolished, or at least sizably reduced. If government supervision and regulation is abolished, who do you think is going to run the show? Hint: it isn't going to be you.

Posted by: TheBogus | December 20, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success is due to his supporter's ability to harness the internet to reach thousands of like-minded people. Whether or not the Paul campaigns prowess at raising money can lead to success at the polls is as yet unknown. There is a slow but steady increase in support for Ron Paul that is showing up when likely voters are polled via landline telephone.

The problem for Ron Paul is getting his increasingly popular message out before the primary season begins in earnest. Many states have moved up the dates of their Republican presidential primaries. If his campaign can marshal its cash hoard, Congressman Paul could do surprisingly well in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Posted by: txpenguin | December 20, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents true change to the present and corupt two party system. The media wouldn't be surprised if it had the courage and forsight to report on all the candidates with equal fervor. Reporters tend to editorialize when reporting on what they label as lower tier candidates failing to realize that there is only one tier. All candidates are equal until the election. Now the question is why? Is the media controlled by some unseen force or are the reporters intellectually challenged? I for one do not agree with all that Ron Paul stands for but I can also say that I do not agree at all with the other candidates Dems or Repubs. So until Lou Dobbs joins the fight I'll go with Ron.

Posted by: rlbowolick | December 20, 2007 3:58 PM | Report abuse

re: k_henryv comments

You have made some very good observations and honest ones; with a couple exceptions, you say 1) "These people are not numerous"... 2)"Paul has no delusions about winning the nomination"...

This is just supposition on your part. You have no idea what is happening at the grass roots level or how many there are of us, nor do you 'know' how Ron Paul thinks about winning the nomination.

Romney and McCain will fall out of the race after New Hampshire. Biden is not viable. Much of Huckabee's current support has come from 2nd Amendment activists. He will lose those supporters to Paul.

The democrats have no electable candidate.

The State of Affairs of the United States is in a helluva mess. Who will clean it up? The same old politicians with the same old rhetoric?
The 'silent majority' is back, and we mean business.

Posted by: whodowl | December 20, 2007 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Checkout the Ron Paul blimp

Posted by: amishcar | December 20, 2007 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul's financial success could, I think, most generally be attributed to the number of people who are keenly aware of how far from the founding principles of this country our government has strayed. These people are not numerous within the American electorate, but they are the most politically aware and in my opinion, when a man comes along and speaks like Paul about the original values and philosophy, the lucid, fed-up voters take notice and donate.
Paul's foreign policy stance also speaks to the entire anti-war, anti-empire crowd and as Iraq continues to be a perceived failure among most Americans, Paul's words resonate on a deep and visceral level. The opposition to war is a gut reaction and it's one a majority of Americans now feel. No other candidate has delivered a message as clearly and vehemently anti-war as the one Paul has. Why his supporters are actually donating money to a longshot candidate is, I guess, more a psychological debate. But obviously, for whatever reason, plenty of individual voters find Paul's message so appealing that they feel they should deliver money to him. I personally think Paul has no delusions about winning the nomination, but rather wants to make a point with his candidacy and with every fundraising success, his mission is that much more complete and successful.

Posted by: k_henryv | December 20, 2007 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is having unprecedented success in his campaign because he is saying the right things at the right time. Americans are looking for a change agent and Paul is nothing if not a change. Whether or not he is sincere or capable of accomplishing his stated goals doesn't matter as much, to a dissatisfied public, as his guts to actually say things that are contrary to the ordinary.

All of us self-absorbed baby boomers are joining with the perpetually self-absorbed first-time voters in the belief that we can actually "make a difference" - this time for sure.

The dems know that a strong showing for Paul might lead to a 3rd party, thus assuring a victory for themselves. Just like it did in 1992. That is also where some of the money is coming from.

Chris, please post this along with my plea for all the Paul supporters to work very hard to get their man on the ballot, as a Republican. He would do a lot of good and, just like any Republican candidate, would be 100 times better than ANY democrat. However, if for some reason he doesn't get the nomination, I beg the Paul supporters to support the Republican candidate and work to get the Paul ideals you believe in included on the party's platform. The system will work. Please work within the system.

America cannot afford to reverse the positive direction we are going in now. Maybe Paul can speed the boat but getting any democrat president would definitely take the oars right out of our hands.

Posted by: texascubfan | December 20, 2007 12:31 PM | Report abuse

What it means Chris is that you have eyes but you cannot see. Common people - the masses - the majority of Americans are sick and tired of the ruling elite trampling on their freedoms. You have to ask? Ron Paul, barring death or concerted cheating during the elections - will be the NEXT President of the United States. Helping corporate interests won't save your salary Chris. It will only lead to a future wherein China is a world power above that of the USA. Drop the pretense or drop the bias against Ron Paul.
$6+MILLION raised in a single day - the largest grassroots contibution in history - and not on the front page of your paper? You guys are the actual chains of slavery to special interests, the tools of inequity and a self-fulfilling evil. Ron Paul is fighting for my Freedom!!! That is why I am fighting for him.

Posted by: rexsolomon | December 20, 2007 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I can only speak for myself, why I would like to see Ron Paul as president.

#1 reason, the economy. He is the only person speaking the need to stop the deficit spending and strengthen the dollar before this country goes into a depression. His views on a allowing competing currency such as gold and silver make sense. Most people don't understand ecomomics so it is easy for them to write off Dr. Paul's ideas as kooky when in fact they are very good ideas but to the ignorant masses they would seem kooky.

#2 His understanding to bring the troops home, not just in Iraq but in Asia and Europe too. This to me is very much tied to the economy. If the government keeps overspending overseas it will collapse the economy. All the other candidates ignore the giant elephant in the room, it is nice to say the surge is working in Iraq but they never expect to pay for it just pass it off to the next generation, that will be disasterous to the ecomomy and long term security of this nation. Only Ron Paul has the foresight to see this urgent need to restrain government before it collapses from its own weight.

#3 Dr. Paul's Congressional record shows he means what he says. He votes with the Constitution. All the other candidates have excuses for why they voted for something when now they run opposed to a particular position they once supported.

There are many people and many corporations that make a lot of money off of the current spending and would say anything to keep the status quo. Companies that make money from America's foreign policy and domestic policy will vote for any candidate rather than Ron Paul. There is little difference between Hillary and Rudy, or Huckabee and Edwards, the big corporations win either way. Ron Paul will stop the corporate subsidies masquerading as foreign and domestic policy.

That is why I support Ron Paul.

Posted by: info4 | December 20, 2007 11:19 AM | Report abuse

The support Ron Paul is getting shows the appeal that simplistic solutions have for those Americans who live a dream world of 1950s stereotypes. Isolationism is a popular theme in our history, but it has never been a realistic one. Even in the early days of the republic, when communications moved at the speed of sailing ships, world affairs in the form of the French Revolution and the Barbary pirates affected us. In a world of ICBMs and the Internet, the idea is totally insane.

Smaller government sounds nice, but is it realistic. What are we going to cut? It would be Congress that decides, not the president. Paul could veto spending bills and wreck the nation's credit, perhaps, but if you all think that Ron Paul can do anything to make your life any safer or more prosperous, you are dreaming.

Ron Paul is just a Libertarian in GOP clothing. Just because fringe groups will send him money doesn't mean that he is worth supporting. Look at what his ideas really mean beyond the feel good slogans. It would be hard to find someone less aware of how the real world works than George W. Bush, but Ron Paul is the man.

When middle-of-the-road people look at his beliefs, they will run from him in droves. A GOP nomination of Ron Paul would be the best thing possible to assure a Democratic victory next year.

I can understand the anger at the way things are going. I'm angry too, but turning to a fool who lives in a dream world to save us is not the solution.

Posted by: scromett | December 20, 2007 10:10 AM | Report abuse

AN ARDENT DESIRE FOR CHANGE is behind this groundswell of support. History is being written here and American politics are changing forever.

Why I Support Ron Paul
Some people believe that Ron Paul is just an Internet fad, backed by spammers and young people on the Internet who have no real grasp on the issues. I can understand why some people think that -- that's what I thought for a long time.

I continued hearing more and more about Ron Paul from friends, so one day last month I decided to take a close look at him and all the other candidates. I had been supporting Fred Thompson mostly because he was the least painful of the candidates on the issues when comparing to my views and principals. After looking at Ron Paul, I was shocked at what I found, and have never looked back since.

First, Fred Thompson looks to be a formidable candidate. He seems very presidential and I think he's going to pull ahead of Romney and Giulini in the polls after Iowa. I think he's got potential, but I don't think he has motive for Change. Change is something people of this election cycle want, and Change is something that will set apart a candidate from all the others.

I believe Ron Paul has change.

Posted by: lawsonlead | December 20, 2007 7:24 AM | Report abuse

What is it with the media, and everyone out there thinking all Ron Paul supporters are off on some trip? I'm real, a real American that belives in our constitution, what happened out there that we have forgoten what that means. I support Ron Paul, and so do alot of other true Americans... All you have to do, is go to his site and look at his issues, he's an American with all sence of the word!!!

Posted by: bluejeanboomer | December 20, 2007 2:51 AM | Report abuse

First of all, it should be recognized that Paul's support might very well be broader then the polls give it credit for. Much discussion has been made concerning the many, many reasons for this.

One is, as you mention in the blog, that many people are frustrated with their respective parties. Dems are not accopmlishing in Congress what they promised to do (end the war, open up government), and neither did Republicans (cut spending, shrink government). Not to mention many realize that each party, when in power, looks remarkably the other wjem IT was in power. Paul's integrity of record--over decades--speaks to these people, and to many apathetic non-voters.

Further, Paul has allowed a very bottom-up campaign. That is very unusual for control-obsessed politicans, and it has (along with the message) made people very active for him. They feel it is on their shoulders, they they are buoyed by the results of their actions they see in the media after things like the Ron Paul Blimp, the two money bombs, and the increased exposure when they through big rallys.

Finally, Paul has a unique message. There are four to six Democrats each saying mostly similar things, and there is an equal amount of Republicans, all mostly saying the same things. Paul is spreading a message that is very unique, that stands out, and that hasn't had this much exposure in a long, long time. Therefore as his opponants on either side split the money and support of their ideologies, Paul takes ALL of his. Unfortunately his support is not captured in the "scientific" polls, but the money is. And the money is making waves, and forcing questions, such as the ones posted in this blog, to be addressed. We're happy to help.

It's a great message of freedom, responsibility, and peace being spread by an incredible man of integrity, wisdom, and intelligence. And, win or lose, it will affect people like me for decades.

Posted by: lajdawg | December 20, 2007 1:48 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's popularity shows that there are a lot of Americans who understand that all 2-part systems work the same way, whether they are 2 political parties, symbiotic/host pairs, binary star systems or anything else.

The "R"s and "D"s have become essentially alike, differing only in which "wedge" issues they claim as their own.

Neither party serves the citizens, or places citizens' interests above those of the corporate campaign financiers.

They will not write reform to clean up their own bribery networks, or to stop the revolving door to lobby shops when they cash out their office.


Start by having the courage and conviction to NOT vote for the "top tier" from the bi-opoly (as opposed to a mon-opoly) party system.

I'm not saying to vote for Ron Paul, and I don't think I will, (Go Richardson!!!!) but by supporting, promoting, nay DEMANDING the 2-party bi-opoly death grip on our politics be dismantled.
The laws and campaign regulations they have written to keep themselves the only 2 viable parties must be wiped off the books.
We all must be smart and courageous enough to support MANY other parties.

Posted by: lquarton | December 20, 2007 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Basically...I believe Ron Paul's support has come from a political hunger for:

1. Less government control.
2. Using our troops for our defense only, and not as a world police.
3. Elimination of IRS.
4. Elimination of the Federal Reserve.
5. Personal freedoms secured.
6. Sound non fiat money system.
7. A low-cost government.

These are not new political ideas. They were common American policies during America's extremely prosperous years.
I think this is why there is such enthusiasm for backing Ron Paul. We're tired of immoral big spending socialist warmongers that are more loyal to american "interests" than American people, "We the People".

Posted by: jeffzeppelin | December 20, 2007 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Thank you, Chris, for your invitation.

While many good points of view are already posted, it seems to me that America perhaps has simply come of age.

We of the older generation were told to essentially believe everything the media reported, trust our government, law enforcement, etc. In our public schools and our society: sit down and shut up unless you raise your hand, get permission.

The institutions have betrayed us. We have finally figured that out. The only logical step next is to DO something about it. Revolution!

Having lived a considerable number of years in Dr. Paul's district with many encounters, he has always embraced the same principals, given the same messages and has stood up for - in the face of regular opposition - those beliefs. Even the young school could safely presume: this has a ring of integrity. The most important thing the institutions have lost...even on your pages all too often.

It is counfounding that this supreme human characterist is parlayed in the media as some idiotic, fanatic loser status. Going further, as some commentors have here, and claiming anyone who supports such characteristic is also -- Ronbot, was it?

I am a natural-born American...Period. Partisanship - only two in this great country? - has shown allegiance which only fractionalizes the American people. What a muck.

Where is the best person for the job? That is the only thing I ever go to vote for.

But the money was your issue. So, I give to Dr. Paul because I believe he is the best man for the job.

To those inclined to socialism, Dr. Paul's agenda is likely a shock. Please consider that on the average "indigent" government program, there is a head honcho making six figures (the salary you pay him) to manage those "indigents."

Posted by: rockylrue | December 20, 2007 12:05 AM | Report abuse

When I began reading all these posts, I had absolutely no intention of spending my entire evening on this site; but that's exactly what I did! I thank you all for giving me a good overview of the opinions for and against Rep. Ron Paul! Most of your comments - even from the opposition - are well thought out.

There's only one point I can add as a latecomer to this party.

Ron Paul decided to become involved in politics in 1971 after learning that Tricky Dick Nixon had unilaterally removed the last vestige of gold backing from the United States currency. Dr. Paul recognized that this was a prescription for ultimate economic disaster. The financial press now confirms Ron Paul's prophetic knowledge on a daily basis!

As a paleoconservative Republican, a free-market economics professor, and a 30-year military veteran who still takes seriously the oath I took to defend the Constitution, I agree 100% with all of Rep. Paul's positions. Even if this were not so, however, the impending bankruptcy of our economy would propel me to support a presidential candidate who understands sound monetary and fiscal policies.

Ron Paul has not only demonstrated such an understanding; he has tirelessly swum upstream against the Washington establishment since 1976. Providence has placed this uniquely gifted, talented, and patriotic statesman in a position to mobilize the efforts of the remnant of Americans who still treasure the priceless gift that this country represents.

The thousand bucks or so and the thousand hours or so that I've given to the cause of nominating Ron Paul is the best investment I've ever made! If America falls from the massive internal corruption that besets us, none of the "issues" that the media and the other politicians consider important will matter.

I encourage all my fellow RonPaulicans to re-double your efforts to get out the vote on February 5th, or whichever day is the day in your state!

John Nehring

Posted by: johnwss | December 19, 2007 11:57 PM | Report abuse

There is no secret to the popularity of Dr. Paul. The message of freedom, individual liberty, and personal responsilbility resonates with many, many people in America.

Posted by: dbassam.flushing | December 19, 2007 10:19 PM | Report abuse

The fundraising success of Ron Paul is based on the substance of the principles held by Ron Paul in his view of the integral necessity of Constitutional fidelity to the spirit of the law or principles contained in the Constitution. This is the appeal of Ron Paul to his supporters...and this meeting of minds has blown like a breath of fresh air across the U.S. along with Ron Paul. This shared vision of restoration of the Constitution into the rightful place of importance in the structure of this democracy has caught fire in the hearts of patriots because it is a vision of hope! Ron Paul is a thoughtful, intelligent, yet unassuming man but he has pointed the way toward hope and inspired across a broad range of culture, race, age, social class and political parties. The primary element of Ron Paul's appeal is his willingness to lead this country back on the course it was destined in the creation of the U.S. Constitution without the distortions that have been so craftily applied in a return to a government 'by and for' "We the People". Ron Paul = Hope for America. May God Bless America!

Posted by: jowriter63 | December 19, 2007 9:29 PM | Report abuse

The fundraising success of Ron Paul is based on the substance of the principles held by Ron Paul in his view of the integral necessity of Constitutional fidelity to the spirit of the law or principles contained in the Constitution. This is the appeal of Ron Paul to his supporters...and this meeting of minds has blown like a breath of fresh air across the U.S. along with Ron Paul. This shared vision of restoration of the Constitution into the rightful place of importance in the structure of this democracy has caught fire in the hearts of patriots because it is a vision of hope! Ron Paul is a thoughtful, intelligent, yet unassuming man but he has pointed the way toward hope and inspired across a broad range of culture, race, age, social class and political parties. The primary element of Ron Paul's appeal is his willingness to lead this country back on the course it was destined in the creation of the U.S. Constitution without the distortions that have been so craftily applied in a return to a government 'by and for' "We the People". Ron Paul = Hope for America. May God Bless America!

Posted by: jowriter63 | December 19, 2007 9:28 PM | Report abuse

It's plain and simple.

He is the first Honest Politician in a Long Long Time.

People say don't trust him, but if you review his record, history, etc...

He says exactly what he is going to do and he does it.

As a businessman I believe in honesty, if you can't trust someone then why even bother?

That is why I donated the max. I trust him completely. As for his issues, I understand some people have issues. But having studied history, economics, and foriegn relations I personally believe he is the only one that has done his research and is correct in his judgement.

I would be proud to call him Mister President and I would be glad to call him my employee as every other government official is, or as this type of government is suppose to function. By the people and for the people!

Thank you for allowing me the time to post this message.


Tone T.

Posted by: tone1yourdaddy | December 19, 2007 8:45 PM | Report abuse

You were underanalyzing it. Spend a few days studying Paul's unchanging Libertarian beliefs and resultant actions,then look closely at the hordes called the the "phenomenon," like I did. Read all their blogs. We are flesh and blood and Many. Yes, our children are in Iraq. The country we were taught about in school bears no resemblance to the Bad Joke which passes for government now.

Congressman Paul didn't raise the money. It was done for him by us, the every day multitudes, the ones who have been disgusted to death since the Vietnam WAR, yes WAR. We are the ones who only have cell phones, and don't get polled! And hell yes, we know that in a revolution you need bullets, defined now as votes, and we are registered to win. Internet and cell phones have empowered the people, even those of us whose kids had to show us how they work, so elections and polling methods better catch up, if they can. I don't think anybody can keep the wool over our eyes or make us feel powerless again.

I can't Wait to read all the comments.


Posted by: nestingismybusiness | December 19, 2007 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Howdy to da Fix,

Thanks for you good column, and the different issues you address. You are doing a good job of bringing many interesting things to the mainstream press.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I truly believe much of the support for Ron Paul is a validation of Paul's "out of Iraq now" position, and his claim that we need to take responsibility for the problems with our foreign policy. I do not think it is a sign of widespread dissatisfaction with the two-party system, but a real dissatifaction with the candidates and their status quo positions on important national and internation issues. While I do not agree with Dr No on all things, I admire the way he speaks his mind, and is not swayed by the polls or media coverage.

Ron Paul seems to have very good and well thought out reasons for his positions, and I think he will surprise a lot of people at the polls. Many people are very afraid of the rise in fascism here in the U.S. and he seems to be the only candidate that is really addessing many of these serious issues in a direct and meaninful manner. People feel they are not being heard, so are voting with their wallets.

We need new ways of addressing our problems. If we do what we have always done, we will get what we always got. It is time to start thinking about future generations and what we are leaving behind for them.

Happy holidays, and me thinks the upcoming polling will be very interesting. Dr. Paul is helping to make it that way!

Posted by: free4rhythm2007 | December 19, 2007 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I believe
Posted by: jimd52 | December 19, 2007 06:52 PM

is partially right but did not go far enough...

A huge base of the Republican and Democratic voters have left and become alienated with government...Alot of Republicans stayed home in 06..They let the Democrats win...Now the Dems have ticked off an important part of their base...Dennis Kucinich has come out in support of Paul and I would keep my eyes on those two..
I smell a new party and I believe it to be the "Consitutionalist" party.
I believe their will be alot of people in this party..
I know how Rons brain works..He is not very complicated all though his brain does work on several levels and you must keep up..
He does not think in terms of what is moral, or what makes people happy or even if mother would approve, he looks to his Constitution just like Dennis does and this is what we need.
This is how he will cut foreign aid to Israel...Or Saudi Arabia or anyone else...He may feel it morally wrong, but the Constitution does not tell him to be moralistic in giving aid.
The Constitution says "stay out of entangling alliances".
He says our constitution has a fix for about 80% of what ales this country and with the peoples help he will try to fix the remaining 20%..This is why he says it will not be that hard...All we have to do is follow our constitution...We have directions in writing for what to do..
We must use this now.
I agree!
So do All Ron Paul supporters.

Posted by: eric9866 | December 19, 2007 7:49 PM | Report abuse

They have invaded threads and pollings...They have been going into forums and putting links saying "donate to ron paul" then when you get to the link if you look close it is a Huckabee site..
Hucksters were found phoning Romney supporters in Iowa and NH.
They have been behind this telephoning pranks and the like..
Huckabee and Romney have been chosen and if going against Hillary Clinton Im off!

Posted by: eric9866 | December 19, 2007 7:36 PM | Report abuse

One more note: Something strikes me as suspicious about the first post at the top. I'm not so sure that was actually posted by a supporter of Ron Paul. If it was, it doesn't make any sense.

Posted by: jackmercurius | December 19, 2007 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul has attracted the support of millions of disaffected Americans. Close to 70% of Americans, according to the polls, say the country is heading in the wrong direction. The middle class is very anxious about the economy, outsourcing and immigration. They are sick of politics as usual and Ron Paul is the antithesis of the modern, poll-driven, focus group tested, pre-packaged political product. He speaks in simple direct sentences and offers simplistic solutions that are appealing to many people.

Ron Paul has attracted a very incongruous group of followers. I would identify them as follows:

1. The commited ideological Libertarians - a very small but articulate and motivated minority.

2. There are a lot of people who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Ron Paul has a lot of appeal to these people. Many of these people are independents and the overwhelming majority of independents oppose the Iraq war. His message of fiscal restraint, limited government along with his 'live and let live' social issue positions resonates with these people, many of whom are more educated and affluent than the average citizen.

3. Old fashioned Robert Taft-Barry Goldwater Republicans - there was a strong isolationist strain in the pre-WWII Republican party and, with the end of the Cold War, this attitude is reasserting itself. These folks are disgusted with the runaway spending, growth of government, and Wilsonian foreign policy of the Bush administration. Ron Paul has struck a very responsive chord with these voters.

4. As evidenced by some of the posts above, he is also attracting the support of many of the conspiracy theorists. His argument that the government has been violating the Constitution for the last 90 years or so and that he will abolish the IRS appeals to many of these people. There is a cult out there pushing the notion that the federal income tax is unconstitutional. Several of them are in jail for tax evasion. He also has the support of the people who see black helicopters hovering on the horizon poised to impose one world government under the UN courtesy of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Rockefellers and a world-wide Jewish conspiracy.

He is also a very appealing candidate - this will be a change election and the anti-politician image is very popular. However, there is a definite upper limit to his potential vote totals. Once the negative impact some of his policies would have on the economy is made clear, a lot of his support will fade away. I think the fair tax, abolishing the Federal Reserve, and putting the currency on a metallic standard represent true voodoo economics.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 19, 2007 6:52 PM | Report abuse


I live in Rons district and we have seen him do this before...He only uses the power of the people! 97% of contributions to his house campaign here come from individuals. NOT corporations. The next closest is Sheila Jackson-Lee with 67% from individuals.
Ron is a truth sayer. Like it or not. He weighs his decisions on his votes very carefully against his morals, our morals, our laws and then the Constitution..If something comes up that he feels the Constitution does not grant him specific power to vote on as a FEDERAL official, he will vote NAY every time.

Rons appeal is that of several.
People like his being a baby doctor and see joy and love and life in it.
People see his truths.
People see his telling us to be warned, as REAL!
We know he is right. We can feel it. Why is what he says taken so far off base?

I think Americans have gotten used to outsourcing their lives and Ron knows this power can be dangerous if placed in the wrong hands like it has..
See, Ron is one of the last few that still believes the power of the people, through the Constitution, is absolute power.
He knows this power is the only thing that can bring down this corrupted government that is in bed with the corporations.
I agree!
Ron does not hate these corporations. He sees them as vital to our way of life.
What he wants to do is cut the head off this huge, runaway, corrupted federal government and return power to the individual states(closer to the people).
If he had his way it would even be more local than that, but this would be unConstitutional.
The Constitution says the states have power.

This strikes many as odd.
But this is how things were for most of our great existence. This is what makes us unique.
It is not United of America.
It is United STATES!
States=different/ not same.
He believes most of our problems have been created because we have taken power from the states and placed it further from the people, and now we have virtually no voice.
He knows he is not the end all to all the problems we face.
He does not even say he has all the answers, though I think he has good ones.
He says the people are being restrained by our Constitution and the Constitution was made to restrain government.
He says we must reverse course or suffer a long hard fight to get our freedom back.
Better to live broke and free than broke and not free.
We will be broke for a long time to come. Ron knows this. But raising taxes and borrowing more to keep war going was a mistake made several times before.
He knows what needs to be done to prevent this from happening again.
He will call for a Constitutional Conference and with the help of the people and the congress and some good scholars like Bruce Fein and others, they will make the Constitution stronger.
Maybe even a Constituional Court, detached from the Supreme Court, like Spain(who holds the best civil rights record to date/ number 1 for civil rights...we should take notes, we are like 45 or 50th!)
We feel we must do something drastic.
We can never have this happen again..

Ron Pauls campaign is based on ALL the TRUE American qualities.
Imagination of a bright future.
No supporting of the evil in this country. NO MSM advertising, they will use local radio and TV and printers to do their work.
We view these as enemies.
You will see the work of a true politician.
He will begin to drop bombs now.

It has begun!
The time has come...

Watch how this man uses the MSM against themselves.
Watch how he commands attention and interviews but pays for NONE of them. Watch how he sits back and watches these corrupted platforms fight each other for the top spot, mean while they ignore him!
They are frustrated.
They cant attack him!
He doesnt even exist to them.
They have made this mistake BEFORE!
We have seen it..
Behold what America is in store for...
We will witness the true power of the American people for all the world to see!

Watch how MSM and others scramble to introduce Paul, so they can smear him!
Watch how he sits back and exposes the bias of the MSM, without lifting a finger.
Watch how they try to expose him, but cant, because he has lived his life spotless.

They should not even be allowed on the same stage as this man...

You are witnessing the biggest grass roots movement this country has ever seen and it is gaining massive strength..
They know this and they are afraid.
The neoconservatives lose to Ron EVERY time in our home district..
He has won 10 consecutive times here!

What a way to beat them! Using one of their own to take them down!
How American
They WILL go down.
The neos spent a million dollars to unseat Dr. Paul here in his home district.
They asked the Democrat to jump ship and join them against Paul. He did.
They promised him he would run unopposed.
Only problem was Dr. Paul did not agree to this and they lost to his 65% of the vote!(a wider margin than the election before!)
What does that say?
No big oil money in our big oil district, either?
The corrupted neos are forever embarrassed here, and will not even discuss it.
Hell, they cant even figure out what it is about him the people like.
Neither party can.
Even Karl Rove has said "do not underestimate the power Ron Paul has with the people."
Well, guess what?
They already have!
He will use these people against themselves and they can do nothing but shut up and take it.
The peoples voice will be heard, with or with out the MSM.

The answer to your question is:

We love him and we trust him!
Even though, he tells us not to.
Above all else, he has taught us not to trust government with our power and we DONT.
We will use him to get it back and he said he will permit himself to be the conduit for freedom and true happiness!!
We cant do it with out you, please help us fight.

Sorry so long..
Cant do it in 1 or 3 sound bites.

Go Ron Paul.

BTW: I have always liked you Chris...I have never blogged...

Please stay true to the people...This too is where you receive your true power!

Posted by: eric9866 | December 19, 2007 6:37 PM | Report abuse

To answer the question, now, what the financial support means is that there is a segment of the electorate that feels shortchanged by the same old type of politics and is not afraid to put its money where its ideals are.

Posted by: leuchtman | December 19, 2007 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is genuine.

I have often heard him referred to as "fringe" and "unconventional", and in one post someone meantioned the word "anarchy". That confuses me because I don't think it reflects what I've heard him say.

Dr. Paul speaks plainly and consistantly. I think that's part of his appeal. Also he speaks to matters we don't often hear politicians speak to (because its not politically safe). When he said that U.S. foreign policy has contributed to bitterness, when he talked about "blow-back", he was not telling us his own theories. He was quoting official reports. It has been very easy and very cheap for many in the media, as well as Mr. Guliani, to misrepresent him and to change the meaning of his words. Ron Paul speaks straight to us. Many others would give us versions of reality that do not challenge us to check out the real situation, but would attempt to lull our minds. Many of us appreciate this about Dr. Paul.

I think many of us are aware that most major media outlets are owned by a small number of people, and that these outlets have ubiquitous influence on our perceptions. I think a number of people realize that the Federal Reserve is a private company which manages our economy and reduces the value of our money over time. And many people feel that government is no longer accountable to the People as, in a Republic, it ought to be. Ron Paul speaks to these matters, and a lot of us have ripened ears to hear him.

His ideas make sense. I would hardly call them radical. They're quite traditional, in the best sense of the word. Look into it. Read his writings, watch his interviews, see if it makes sense.

Posted by: jackmercurius | December 19, 2007 6:22 PM | Report abuse

At the very least, he has a message that isn't being spoken by any of the other candidates, and it is a message that to a certain extent appeals to a bloc of voters (somewhere between 5 and 20% of the electorate) that is fundamentally ignored by the current two party system.

The part that I have trouble understanding is that Rep. Paul is viewed as a fringe candidate when his view on governance was the norm as little as fifty to sixty years ago. The idea of a Federal system has been thrown to the winds, even among those Republicans who pretend to believe in it.

I'm a libertarian who trends toward Democratic candidates because they have over the course of time been less destructive of individual liberty than Republicans, and I find Rep. Paul's message appealing, even though we disagree on much.

Posted by: leuchtman | December 19, 2007 6:20 PM | Report abuse

I also think it helpful to let Chris know when and where you first found Ron Pauls message..
When is key..
They all call us Paultards and act like we have been here forever..
I joined the campaign in March...I was not hip to his message until then..
Now I know it all...I did my homework...All 1000 hours of it!

I joined March of 07.

Posted by: eric9866 | December 19, 2007 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success means that he is a true top-tier front-runner and deserves more respect from the media. All that is left is an appropriate showing in the primaries/caucuses.

One thing we all need to realize is that if the votes are counted behind closed doors in secret, that's a sure sign of fraud. Just visit any third-world election. What we need are paper ballots and public vote audits to verify the accuracy of the votes cast. Diebold machines are woefully fraud-prone. It doesn't matter who we support, we all want our candidate to win fair and square. Therefore, we need more accountability in the election process.

Case in point: You mention the Iowa straw poll in August. If you recall, that vote was counted in secret behind closed doors and Diebold machines were used, some of which 'malfunctioned'. The person charged with auditing the poll is on Romney's campaign staff. Who among us Americans are willing to say that scenario is not just a little fishy?

One more thing. If you've ever taken an IQ quiz, you probably noticed that most of the questions are pattern recognition. So in that spirit, complete the following sequence:

Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, _____.

That's not a naturally occurring sequence as the relevant variables involved in producing it are quite numerous and complex. Only vote manipulation is a logical explanation.

Wake up. Use your noggin. Things are not as they seem.

Posted by: texntn | December 19, 2007 5:09 PM | Report abuse

You gotta love ROn Paul supporters. Go get em ladies and gentlemen. Let the gop know that this country is ours, not theirs. They represent us only as long as we let them. this is not a monarchy. Show the gop that we left the empire to found america. Hold the red coat party loyalists to account and hold their feet to the fire. The party is yours.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 19, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse


"Let's say Paul doesn't win the nomination, and Huckabee or Romney or one of the other top-tier candidates does. Hard to believe, I know, but play along with me."

There's no other establishment candidate I'd support, and I actually only grudgingly have come to support Ron Paul. I work for a gay-rights organization, I'm pro-choice, and I'm pro-immigration (it doesn't bother me one bit when a peaceful and honest person crosses some imaginary line), so I find some of Dr. Paul's positions -- and, more than that, attitudes -- to be highly disturbing.

Nonetheless, if I'm ever going to support any candidate who has a chance of affecting things positively, this is the time and this is the man. I do not believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination, but I believe his star will continue to rise and he'll run an independent or third-party campaign (he'd be a fool to throw away all that grassroots support). And I believe he'll poll the ten percent or five percent or even two percent that is necessary, in these times of razor-thin electoral margins, to hold the Democrats' feet to the fire (on the war, spying, indefinite detention, etc.) as well as the Republicans' (fiscal sanity).

That's about the most I can expect for my vote or my contribution to accomplish these days.

To complete the answer to your question, if Ron Paul doesn't end up in the general election at all, I'll mostl likely support the Libertarian or Green candidate.

Posted by: kdogg36 | December 19, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I think we see in Dr. Paul someone who has integrity and honesty, courage to speak the truth, strength to accept the derision from the media, and honor to stand up for his beliefs and never waver. He has given us the chance to rekindle our belief in the freedom and liberty promised to every American citizen. He has inspired us to believe in America and the feeling that We The People really matter. I have admired Dr. Paul even before he announced he was running for president. I have heard his views in the House watching C-Span, and I have subscribed to his newsletters for some time now. One of the best was his newsletter entitled "Neo-Conned." It gives one of the best descriptions of how it started, what they stand for, how it is harming our country, and the people who have made it the policy of the government. He is against everything they stand for. I am too. Finding a candidate who has your exact same views on everything would be fantastic, but I don't think it would be possible. Finding a candidate who embodies your belief in America and what she can be isn't. Dr. Paul does that. The owners of this paper, many of their writers and the Neo-Conservative think tanks they allow to voice their opinions, as well as other media conglomerates, ascribe to the New World Order and a one world government agenda of the groups mentioned in a previous post, who are intent upon bringing everyone under an elitist dominate group who believe the ordinary people don't have the intellect to know how to manage their lives and they feel only they have the knowledge to make the world run and be prosperous,peaceful, and equal for all people. Most all of the candidates are either members of these groups or are under their influence. Dr. Paul is not. He is independent of their plans for the world and believes in nations and their sovereignty, the right of countries to govern their way without the United States becoming entangled in their affairs, and the individual right to manage your own life without government intrusion. He doesn't say he is against protecting, preserving, or defending our nation against an invasion with military force. He just doesn't believe in going into another country pre-emptively. is not against military action against an invasion of our country. He does believe in maintaining good diplomatic relations with other countries and respecting each nation's sovereignty. He is a good and honorable man and deserves the support he has been given. I hope many will recognize this and support him. It would be a happy and liberating day if he could have success and send a message to the media that the American people reject being told only what the media wants us to hear and read.

Posted by: RedRose1 | December 19, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Let me summarize why I think Ron Paul is
raising a lot of money; Honesty, integrity
and logic; things people identify with deep down!! Honesty should be easy--Ron Paul refuses to lie. Integrity--Ron Paul
refuses to cave in to politically correct
pressures. Logic--Ron Paul knows that you
cannot continue to give a blank check to a
corrupt Federal government and expect it to
balance its budget.

One poster here claims that Ron Paul has
about 3% backing at best...we will just have to see about that...and it is not
just kooky college students that believe
in Ron Paul's message. I am 53 and I served in the military and there are millions of others like me. Ron Paul's
message is coming through loud and clear
to young people and Baby Boomers alike.

If you take the time to listen to his message, you might learn something about
honesty, integrity, and logic.

Posted by: pat52007 | December 19, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

As a Ron Paul supporter, I am absolutely delighted that he has been able to raise more than $18 million this quarter. What a thrill it was to see him pull in $4.5 million on November 5th and then set a single-day fundraising record with $6 million on December 16th! But will all of that money translate into enough votes to get Paul some key victories in the early primaries and caucuses and ultimately the GOP presidential nomination? With my heart, I certainly hope so. But with my head, I'm thinking it probably won't.

The reason I'm thinking the way I am is because I don't believe our country is ready for a great man like Ron Paul. That's too bad for all of us. No matter how much of that money Dr. Paul spends to familiarize voters with his stands on the issues, too many people are going to automatically reject his brand of politics. They have been conditioned and preprogrammed to do so.

In this country, people have grown too accustomed to having the federal government do what the states should be doing or even what individuals should be doing for themselves. They have become too comfortable with pandering politicians offering to "help" them with the management of their daily lives and promising to hand out more goodies than the next guy. Paul's style just cuts too much against the grain of the conventional foolishness. The general population of voters will find his minimalist approach to government too foreign to them and, due partly to irresponsible "reporting" by the mainstream media, they will be spooked.

Therefore, I believe Paul, despite all the money, will still have still have difficulty rising above single digits in most states. I see the only possible exceptions being New Hampshire and Alaska, where he could garner 15-20% of the vote. But, then again, maybe I'm wrong. I never thought the $18 million was possible.

Terry Mitchell

Posted by: terrymitchell | December 19, 2007 3:28 PM | Report abuse

PS.... i read this in an above comment

"Ron Paul attracts the disaffected fringe."


Posted by: mbrown345 | December 19, 2007 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul vs. The Philosophically Bankrupt

After reading the name-calling and other non sequiturs from the anti-Ron Paul crowd, I am of the view that their hostility arises less from his opposition to war, or the direction American foreign policy has taken for decades, or any of the other specific programs he has criticized. What troubles them the most is that Paul has a philosophically-principled integrity in what he advocates and that, to challenge him, one must be prepared to deal with him at that higher level.

But modern political discourse long ago gave up on principles, in favor of the pursuit of power as a sufficient end. There is an intellectual bankruptcy exhibited by writers and speakers on the political "left," "right," or "middle." Competing ideas and values that once engaged the minds of thoughtful men and women have given way to little more than pronouncements on behalf of narrowly-defined political programs; the validity of a proposition no longer depends upon reasoned analysis, but upon the outcome of public opinion polls.

Ron Paul's campaign interjects an energized, principled inquiry into the political realm, an undertaking for which men and women with no philosophic center or rigorous minds find themselves woefully ill-prepared.

Posted by: chris6 | December 19, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I see you have generated a few posts here!!! tee hee

This is what the vote will look like....WE CARE and are tired of being lied to, stolen from and manipulated.

Ron Paul is brilliant, authentic, principled and OUR CHOICE! Welcome to the American Enlightenment!

Posted by: mbrown345 | December 19, 2007 2:14 PM | Report abuse

brenda.little says
"I was dismissive at the time, but after he persisted in telling me to check him out, I did and have come to fully support him as does my son and MANY of his friends, all whom happen to be among those not included in most polls."

Are they voting in the GOP primary?

Posted by: bsimon | December 19, 2007 2:03 PM | Report abuse

I know exactly why Ron Paul is so popular. But you could never believe me. The explanation is utterly contradictory to everything you believe to be true. Others will probably explain it, clearly and eloquently, but you will pass over the truth because it will appear to you to be irrational and fantastic.

Posted by: jdadson | December 19, 2007 1:55 PM | Report abuse

What is behind the amount of money Ron Paul raised? His supporters are behind it -- in MUCH larger numbers than most "experts" or the mainstream media (MSM) understand. I am a 40 year old teacher, and though I have voted in every presidential election, have done so with very little enthusiasm or true belief in the candidates. It was more of choosing what I believed was "the lesser of two evils".

For the first time, I have donated to a presidential campaign (twice now), will be voting in a primary, am promoting a candidate with yard signs, bumper stickers, emails to friends & family, etc. Why? Because for the first time I actually believe in a candidate and his position on several extremely important issues. One of those being our totally out-of-control government spending resulting in a sickening national debt that is growing at an alarming rate. You can watch this growing at the rate of approximately $100,000 every 3 seconds on Ron Paul's official Myspace page:

I am representative of many others like me who believe that Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about issues that are CORE to America. And he makes sense -- he is straightforward with none of that double talking. He has sound, responsible ideas for addressing the most pressing concerns in our country. Most of us believe that any other candidate, regardless of party affiliation, regardless of empty campaign promises, will just continue on with "business as usual" in the federal government.

An interesting side note: My 22 year old son first told me about Ron Paul months ago. I was dismissive at the time, but after he persisted in telling me to check him out, I did and have come to fully support him as does my son and MANY of his friends, all whom happen to be among those not included in most polls.

So that's what's behind all the money that came in? Plain and simple -- its merely representative of the tremendous amount of support this candidate has. There's no mystery. The only reason the "experts" and MSM are baffled by the financial support Ron Paul has received is that they are relying on outdated methods for assessing the support a candidate has.

Posted by: brenda.little | December 19, 2007 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I couldn't force my way through all of the previous comments.

The way I see it, Ron Paul's fanbase is composed of this group of young, educated, pseudointellectual elites who were looking for something to latch on to after becoming disillusioned with the political process. Being 1) only recently disillusioned, 2) young, and 3) elite, they were able to 1) still be freely passionate about a cause, 2) be very savvy about new technology, and 3) fork over the necessary money. And that just got the ball rolling, because once he had this very passionate internet and college campus following, the mainstream media had to take notice. And, I mean, there's been a whole lot of plain old word-of-mouth advertising; his followers aren't afraid to speak their mind; if they were, he'd be in a far worse position.

A few of my friends (Ron Paul-ites) were discussing how to spread propaganda about him: "You tell a republican he's a *real* republican, and you tell and independent/libertarian/etc. that he's a libertarian." And looking at it that way, you do reach a wider base than someone who is just a third party candidate, or even someone who is a straight up Republican or Democrat. So perhaps that is another factor.

I think a lot of people who aren't comfortable with the idea of "socialism" but are in favor of increased civil liberties and the like (possibly secular fiscal conservatives, etc.) see Ron Paul's ideology as their own.

But basically he has supporters who are very politically aware, very tired of the status quo, very wealthy, and very willing to take advantage this perhaps once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to really change American politics. And they have also spread the word to people less like them: you know, "average Joe"s and the like, expanding his fanbase (although I'm pretty sure all/most of the money still comes from the former group.)

Posted by: tamingoftheshru | December 19, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't get where the confusion is coming in at. I'm a registered republican but did not vote in the last presidential election. Let's see... evil, or less than evil, what a choice! Post '04's administration has been an embarrassment to the party! I was nearly ready to denounce citizenship until Dr. Paul. Under the Bush regime (again, I'm a republican), we have lost all our liberties, and many Americans just don't get it yet. It was Bush that initially wanted Amnesty and his lap dogs followed (until they had to go home and face their constituents). Rule of law? What's that? It's Dr. Paul that will get this country back to its roots. Where we can again shine as a country and hold our heads up. This administration (both republicans and democrats) has led us into debt, poverty, shame and shackles. Dr. Paul is for the constitution; a 180 from the above. Gee... what's not to like about that? Americans are tired of the same ole same ole politics, what's not to get?

Posted by: Shmedley | December 19, 2007 1:41 PM | Report abuse

I don't get where the confusion is coming in at. I'm a registered republican but did not vote in the last presidential election. Let's see... evil, or less than evil, what a choice! Post '04's administration has been an embarrassment to the party! I was nearly ready to denounce citizenship until Dr. Paul. Under the Bush regime (again, I'm a republican), we have lost all our liberties, and many Americans just don't get it yet. It was Bush that initially wanted Amnesty and his lap dogs followed (until they had to go home and face their constituents). Rule of law? What's that? It's Dr. Paul that will get this country back to its roots. Where we can again shine as a country and hold our heads up. This administration (both republicans and democrats) has led us into debt, poverty, shame and shackles. Dr. Paul is for the constitution; a 180 from the above. Gee... what's not to like about that? Americans are tired of the same ole same ole politics, what's not to get?

Posted by: Shmedley | December 19, 2007 1:40 PM | Report abuse

1) Opposes the war in Iraq in particular and liberal imperialism in general.
2) Inspires those dissatisfied with the quality of the Republican candidates.
a) Honest. Wrong on nearly every count, but not disingenuous about where he stands.
b) Intelligent. Wrong on nearly every count, but able to make a case for most of his program.
c) Consistent. Ron Paul of today is Ron Paul of twenty years go.
d) Actually would dismantle government: the revenge of generations of Republicans who have voted for smaller government and gotten bloated bureaucracies and massive deficits instead.
3) Inspires Romantic Longings. David. Don Quixote. Robin Hood.
4) Has a blimp. Who doesn't love a guy with a blimp?

Posted by: wapo | December 19, 2007 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Hope at least a few of these Paul supporters stay with us through the early states. Still want to see their take on Paul's performance, the rest of the field, and whom they might support beyond him.

It's striking how much people want to believe that all of our political ills can be banished if we just elect this one guy. Ron Paul couldn't do that alone even if he were elected president in a landslide. I want to tell the Paul-ists that when their guy loses (which he will, sorry), don't get discouraged. Find other like-minded candidates running for whatever office and get behind them. Or run for office yourself. Idealism is good. We need more idealists, of many different stripes, involved in politics.

Posted by: novamatt | December 19, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul could be the last chance for America to return to an America of the people and by the people. The present administration and several past administrations have not been representing the wishes of the people. Ron Paul represents the constitution and, I for one, agree with him. If we continue on the present course for America, I hate to think what our future will hold. I hope the new funds he has accumulated will help him to get ellected. I wish the media would also give him equal coverage.

Posted by: johnmanly2003 | December 19, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

A Soldiers Personal Revolution

I joined the Army in the early months of 2001; my patriotism led me to the recruiter's office. I had grown up in awe of my grandfathers and their stories of World War II, and their reminiscing became my dreams. When I got to basic training I did not talk about missing home like the other recruits around me, I felt at home in ways I never had before.

The weeks after 9/11 found me in Kosovo, part of C co 3/7 Infantry, 3rd Infantry Division, patrolling the border with Macedonia as part of our duties. We had ammunition to defend ourselves with and the authority to apprehend anyone crossing the border illegally. I will get back to why these details are important later.

Fast forward to 2003, I am rolling across the desert in the back of a Bradley fighting vehicle, part of the spearhead into Iraq. Other than those first three weeks of "Shock and Awe" what I remember most about Iraq was the people. Crowds of kids wanting to know about Michael Jackson and Britney Spears, open-minded adults wanted to know about our social freedoms, and ninety some percent of Iraqis just wanted to raise their families in peace and did not hesitate to tell us. I really fell in love with the Iraqi people. My platoon and I played soccer with some of those crowds of kids, we had dinner and shared food with families in their homes, we even went to a few house parties, and my lieutenant and I spent one very memorable afternoon swimming in an irrigation ditch with five young women. It is all of them I think of when anyone tells me we need to turn the Middle East into a sheet of glass or that all Muslims are our enemies.

I remember thinking on this briefly when I was there, but more so since I've returned, usually when I'm day dreaming behind the wheel of my van, but what we were doing when we were doing our jobs, patrolling the streets, conducting road blocks vehicle searches, bodily searching individuals, and searching houses, couldn't be helping our long range plans for winning hearts and minds. I really have to wonder, how long would it take me to move from a position of thanks for my despotic government being removed to feeling like I lived in a conquered and occupied country if I saw foreign troops on the streets of my hometown Tallahassee everyday? Add to this our having bases and troops in Turkey, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia, ( I may have missed a few, we have approximately 700 bases in 130 countries ) some of them for decades, our Navy of their coast, our fighter jets in their sky's , the CIA in business with monarchs, dictators and thugs, and our State Department treating their leaders like irresponsible children, it's no wonder moderate Muslims takes to the streets shouting " Death to America" and a minority takes action against us. I would expect we would be doing the same thing if say, China had bases on our soil, and her Navy patrolled our coastline and Chinese fighter jets streaked across our sky. In short, this is all hard to admit, but our actions do have consequences.

Fast forward again to the present day, I am out of active duty, and in the Army Reserves. (I wanted to stay active duty, but my wife said I would be single, so we had a compromise.)To be honest the reserves has bored me to tears and I haven't felt like I'm giving anything back to my country, so I looked into getting attached to a National Guard unit on our border with Mexico for a tour or two. However, when I learned they don't have the authority to apprehend illegal border crossers and can only call up our overworked and overstretched border patrol when they spot illegal activity, I got myself in trouble again by thinking - about what I had done in Kosovo and about what I knew our military had done to our own people in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina ( disarmed law abiding civilians only trying to protect themselves when the police had failed to do so) . To add insult to injury, our Guardsmen and women on our own border don't have ammunition and have on several documented occasions actually had to retreat when facing fire from Mexican paramilitary groups. Now why would I want to sign up for that? To be witness to the violation of America's sovereignty? No one in the Executive branch of our government is doing anything about it, and it makes me wonder why I am even in the Army at all.

Why are we the worlds policeman when our own country is being openly violated? Why are we borrowing money hand over fist from nations not exactly our friends, just to spend it on our out of control foreign policy? I am starting to feel like the powers that be do not have America's interests in mind at all. It's starting to feel like our ruin is their objective. From our factories closing and moving overseas, to the plunging value of our dollar, America is crumbling. Yet I love her far to much to watch her fall apart.
This is why I am taking my personal revolution and joining forces with Dr. Ron Paul's revolution. His "bring all the troops home" non-intervention foreign policy and plans to put America first again are just what we need at this time in our history. I don't expect you to agree with everything he says, but I do hope we can all put our differences aside and join him in seeing that ALL the troops come home, the Republic is restored and America saved.

Posted by: exclusivelyamericanmade | December 19, 2007 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul's financial success is a reflection of America's disenfranchisement. America doesn't see hope in either the political party as reflected by the ridiculously low approval ratings of the Congress. Ron Paul's message simplicity resonates with the citizens who actually can't believe the "spiel" from the other candidates. Dr. Paul's followers cross age, demographic, political, and philosophical boundaries. The only boundary that Ron Paul won't cross is moral. The other candidates can speak about their "current" views, but Ron Paul's record speaks for its past, present, and future views. How can one say that? Easy, he follows the Constitution. Money is a symbol for the people's "hope" that their government will listen and work for THEM.

Posted by: browning9 | December 19, 2007 12:58 PM | Report abuse

"What does Paul's financial success mean?"

It means that not even corporately owned media can hide a candidate of true integrity long enough to silence him out of the nomination.

It means that there is finally hope for the effort of the average joe in this country, to return to the average joe's in this country, the hard-earned tax money that has been getting sucked up by the disgustingly wealthy corporations only to have it squandered on new suits, electric hairbrushes, and murderous empire-building.

It means that the average joe who hears Dr. Ron Paul's message of letting the corporations pay for their polluting practices without subsidies from tax dollars, it resonates.

It means that American joe's have been anticipating a revolutionary leader of integrity, and that the time for realizing this dream has come.


Posted by: angelak_johnson | December 19, 2007 12:54 PM | Report abuse

thecrisis- " exactly is Paul going to become the nominee? You guys know there is a process to becoming the nominee and it's called the caucus/primary process...I know that Ronbots want him to be ordained the nominee by magical aliens or something but at this point in the game, no amount of money is going to make Paul, a complete psychotic, have a chance in Iowa or New Hampshire."

I think that you (and the others like you) are going to be surprised by the turnout of the Paul supporters in the primaries.

That is when those who want to deny and belittle this "phenomenon" that is the Ron Paul revolution will be left confused and dumbfounded.

We actually "get it" and will be out there voting for Ron Paul when the time comes.

And to answer the other question about what I will do if Ron Paul doesn't get the GOP nomination. I will then vote for the Libertarian candidate (whoever that is) since that will be the person who most closely agrees with my political views.

Am I in 100% agreement with Ron Paul on the issues? - NO! Will I be in 100% agreement on the issues with whoever is the Libertarian candidate? - NO!

But either will be a hell of a lot closer to me than anyone else that is out there.

Ron Paul isn't perfect, but he is as close as we are ever going to get to what we want and need.

That is why we are putting our money, our time, and eventually our votes into the Ron Paul campaign.


Posted by: craigyope | December 19, 2007 12:50 PM | Report abuse

The media is behind the times in a big way. Now that the internet exists, many get their news that way these days. This method of getting news also allows me to figure out, almost immediately whether or not the article is spin, because I can research it.

When I came across Ron Paul I liked what I read and what I heard in his videos. I researched his positions and statements and found them to be consistently true and I finally had a candidate to back that wasn't status quo and in whom I could trust to not become corrupt, and his record backs that up.

Realizing, through internet media, how corrupt the system is and the media alongside it, cheering it on. Hiding things about the Iraq war, economics, etc. made me realize that Paul will not get a fair shake in a system that is set up to keep "outsiders" out. So, we realize that we have to go above and beyond anything we've ever done before. Set fundraising records, make videos, have feet on the ground support. Something that I've never done for any other candidate.

To understand it, read up on Ron Paul's positions, watch a few videos on YouTube, go to a meetup meeting. I'm sure there's plenty.

We realize that we have the numbers, the support and a bullet-proof ethical candidate. At first, Ron Paul's positions may seem alien and over the top, but the more research you do, you'll realize that this guy has it right.

Posted by: a.brookhouser | December 19, 2007 12:47 PM | Report abuse

thecrisis: FYI Obama had a money bomb donation day. Guess what, he didn't even get to $5,000.00. So there's your grassroots for him. So-where did his campaign money come from? Well-BIG BUSINESS OF COURSE. He is not WE THE PEOPLE. He is ME FOR BIG BUSINESS.

Posted by: Chance1 | December 19, 2007 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Hi _Colin,

Hopefully I'm not mis-reading the question, but I beleive neither? From his past behavior as a Congressman I beleive he asks:
Does the Constitution authorize Congress to pass a law? And form there he votes. (rather than voting for what would benefit him)

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Paul's fund-raising success isn't due to long-term libertarians like me, but to tens of thousands of people attracted to his principles and principledness, and who are repelled by what the Republican and Democrats have become.

No other candidates speak as clearly about what they believe and no candidate above him in the polls will commit to getting out of Iraq quickly.

Democrats and Republicans have absolutely caved in to George Bush's grab of government power. Ron Paul stands for the individual rights, rule of law, separation of powers, and minimal government ideas that our country was founded on.

Contributions to Ron Paul in the 4th quarter have averaged $147 per person. It is a grass roots campaign if there ever was one.

Posted by: jkunze | December 19, 2007 12:33 PM | Report abuse

_Colin wrote:
"Is Rep Paul's position that those Supreme Court decisions are somehow invalid, despite the Court's unquestioned power of judicial review, or does he propose AMENDING the constitution to reflect his views?"

I don't know for certain. However, I've heard Paul's supporters claim that their candidate believes that the federal government only holds those powers specifically enumerated by the Constitution. Since judicial review arose from Marshall's interpretation of Article III rather than from a rigidly literal reading of it, my guess would be that Paul considers judicial review an unconstitutional expansion of the Supreme Court's power.

Posted by: tjmaness | December 19, 2007 12:29 PM | Report abuse

amazing-almost 300 posts and all of them ron paul supporters. congrats, i hope your guy pulls out a suprise win in iowa.

a minor quibble tho, my home state of michigan im noticing a bunch of homemade ron paul signs on the over pass(the most recent one on I-96 eastbound about a mile before the detroit border) could you guys at least put them on the side of the road? its a lot easier to read, rather than me having to turn my head and almost ram my car into a 18 wheeler.

but in all seriousness, now have you guys ever though say through some sheer luck, ron paul wins the nomination? do you honestly think that he would actually beat any of dems we have running right now? i cant even find any polls showing that(considering it would be a curbstomp).

but here's the 64thousand dollar question, if you paul doesnt win the nom, will you support the gop canidate, or vote libertarian en mass?

Posted by: jaymills1124 | December 19, 2007 12:27 PM | Report abuse

hey rufus: you misunderstand. I am 100 percent in favor of paul carrying his fight for the GOP nomination all the way to the convention, and then to a 3rd party bid when the nomination goes to one of the GOP hacks like Willard Mittens Romney.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 19, 2007 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Possible reason for alternative "Ron Paul"?

Someone of simple wisdom once said "Pile up a lot of money and you will attract thieves". No truer statement could be used to describe our government -- local, state, and national. Our National disgrace is magnified by countless billions, even trillions of current and future taxpayer dollars. We truly live in an extreme evolvement of a "Government for Sale". All other issue debates relate to the symptoms rather than this disease.

Political parties, politicians, agencies, contractors, corporations, foreign governments, etc. all benefit from the over (and probable under) the table decisions and stalemates prosecuted legislatively and administratively by our government. Even without the speaking fees and book deals, we send our Mr. and Ms. Smith to office only to watch the disintegration of their ethics, morality and conscience as they turn promises into well paid careers and pensions.

Regardless of your opinion of Wal-Mart, they will not allow any vested party to take their buyers to lunch, offer gifts or trips or anything that might taint the objectivity of their buying decisions. Not so with the leadership of our increasingly corrupt government. Today, there are lobbyists for every position of every issue from the most minute to the magnitude of war, health care, energy, social security, environment, education, and infrastructure and on and on. Long term solutions of any of these issues would terminate the flow of funds to all sides of those issues. Political parties and the elections of their candidates play to the same failure of our current system.

The sell-out and resulting wastes are unimaginable by many Americans. This "doomsday bomb of economic debt" will reach critical mass for future generations, but well after its creators, our leaders, have left the scene to their financially protected bunkers. Note: It will be interesting to see how much time Vice President Cheney spends in this country after January '09 versus in the palaces of Halliburton in Dubai.

Given our current crisis, our country would be better served by publicly funding a level playing field for elections rather than allowing a bought and paid for government by special interest. Additionally, term limits has and continues to be a key component to statesmanship versus career politicians.

As patriots, our bewilderment has lead to frustration, even anger, but the solutions seem insurmountable. Evolution of this corruption appears to many that only some form of revolution could resolve. Choices in the election process have only lead to disappointment and voter apathy; thus perpetuating the problem. It has taken generations to reach our current situation and may take generations to correct and only then if there is absolute resolve to do so. However, everything is at stake. Regardless of your party preference, our slogan should read "Re-Elect No One". Your current representatives are truly no better than mine. Both the pledge and action of our elected officials must be like Wal-Mart: to eliminate the funds that influence decisions and often indecisions. Local and state officials should be held just as accountable.

The teeth of this integrity law would include immediate dismissal from office, substantial financial penalties, potential prison time, and hopefully the shame of the country. Additionally, foreign countries should be encouraged to expose what are possibly the deposits or promise of deposits to offshore accounts in their name, their family, or their friends of the most corrupt. Money itself is not corrupt, but the desire to acquire it at the expense of our society and our country seems criminal to all but our leadership.

Posted by: circleztx | December 19, 2007 12:20 PM | Report abuse

support for paul is simply support for discontinuing business as usual in washington. it is not a surprise to many that virtually all of the current candidates offer no new course. mr. paul will do well enough in the primaries to mount a serious threat as a third or fourth party candidate and that may wake up the corrupt group of pols in charge now. possibly eliminating the candidates of the 2 major parties from a victory. the current crop of extremist republicans and spineless democrats is less than acceptable.

Posted by: blue111 | December 19, 2007 12:20 PM | Report abuse

EASY crisis and voter. Easy.

We are all americans. What makes your points or what is important to you more important than the paulits? It's not. Give them their time and space. Let tham post their posts without peanut gallery comments.

Each individual has one vote. Regardless of job money or political persuasion. And to say the paulites are all poor is an insult. that is the jones effect propoganda the right is using. That is why we are still in the war right now. this is why we can't solve the problems as one. To many people pointing fingers. All the fingers should be pointing at those destroying the constitution and countyr. Not those fighting for it.

If you guys want to attack of blame someone, go after the fascist repbucalins 9not Paul). go after the moderate democrats selling out to the fascists.

but give the paulites their time and respect. They have earned it. Where would the gop be without paul? Alice in wonderland? The paulites are putting in more work than any of us to fix the nation. It's not the liberals hodling up progress, it's the gop. Will the gop listen to the dem's? But they will listen to paul. They have to. Ease up gentlemen. this is america

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 19, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success is the equivalent of a protest vote by those of us who are deeply concerned about our country and where we are headed. It represents the growing disillusionment and disgust at the inability and refusal of our government to take action on issues that are most important to us. Ron Paul says what he thinks, makes no apologies for his views, and has the voting record to prove it. Voters might not agree with all of his views, but at least we know what they are and that they won't change according to the latest polls. While most of us realize that Ron Paul will never get the Republican nomination, it is our way of forcing both the government and the media to wake up and acknowledge that we are a growing movement with the financial resources to make an impact. Voters are no longer willing to sit back and allow the media to dictate our vote through the refusal to cover certain candidates, and thanks to the Internet, we don't have to. Despite the number of spins that the lunatic fringe comprises the base of this campaign, the truth is that the supporters are more diverse than those of any other candidate and span the ranges of age, education, socioeconomic and even political backgrounds.

Posted by: mcnb05 | December 19, 2007 11:56 AM | Report abuse

colin: you gotta respect anyone who can legally drain the wallets and bank accounts of people who appear to have little $$.

The ron paul campaign should be labeled "for entertainment purposes only." I do find his resemblance to pat paulsen rather amusing.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 19, 2007 11:45 AM | Report abuse

i AGREE WITH MUCH OF WHAT PAUL SAYS, in terms of the problems that face the country. It's what to do about it. I don't feel we need to or can scrap the entire government. I agree wiht the problems of the nation, but we can fix them. We need the courage to close the door on the past and look to the future.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 19, 2007 11:43 AM | Report abuse

MikeB -- Paul also thinks the entire new deal is unconstitutional. I concede, however, that he's in touch with working class america on issues regarding trade and the war. I think he's a little crazy, but certainly principled. Accordingly, I certainly respect the guy.

Posted by: _Colin | December 19, 2007 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 19, 2007 11:33 AM | Report abuse

I agree with many of the comments. I was thinking about why I am a Ron Paul "supporter" while still confident in the fact that I'll be casting my NH primary vote for Obama.

To me Ron Paul is what Stephen Colbert would have been if he had gotten on the ballot. That is, a funny way to express my disgust with the political system, and for lack of a better term, my nihilism. I like Ron Paul because he is true. And finding truth in politics is something that many of us have given up on long ago.

Posted by: aml_lewis | December 19, 2007 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Here's a question for Ron Paul supporters. Rep Paul seems to think much of the Federal Government is unconstitutional. Under our Constitutional system, however, the Supreme Court is charged with interpreting the Constitution and has upheld the expansion of the Federal Government. Is Rep Paul's position that those Supreme Court decisions are somehow invalid, despite the Court's unquestioned power of judicial review, or does he propose AMENDING the constitution to reflect his views?

IF it's the latter, that's fine I suppose -- if completely unrealistic. If it's the latter, ya'll have a lot to learn about constitutional law and separation of powers. The judiciary is a co-equal branch folks, and what they say actually does matter.

Posted by: _Colin | December 19, 2007 11:32 AM | Report abuse

I had never paid any attention to Ropn Paul before this column. So, after rading the attacks from the Clitnon and pro-business folk here, I went off and read his policy statements on his web site. "So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation." This sounds rather more like Lou Dobbs and John Edwards. Given the amouint of money corporations and businesses and foreign governments are shoving into this campaign, this goes a long ways towards explaining why Ron Paul has been marginalized and attacked by the various silly pawns of those same businesses (as represented by Romney, Guiliani, Clinton, et al). SO, I sent him $100 today. Edwards is better, but Paul is far more pregressive than even Obama.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | December 19, 2007 11:31 AM | Report abuse

To Rep Paul's supporters, are you expecting him to receive the nomination? And, if so, where do you expect him to finish in Iowa? New Hampshire? etc...

As Chris notes in the introduction, Rep Paul came in 5th place in the Ames straw poll. Are supporters that didn't show up for that going to show up on caucus night?

Is he going to win the nomination based on the support of people formerly disaffected with the process, or is he going to be able to convince rank-and-file GOPers that he is the best candidate?

Posted by: bsimon | December 19, 2007 11:29 AM | Report abuse

The un-holy coalition between the corporatists and the theocrats has left behind (snort) the fiscal conservatives and the libertarians -- both groups, I note, tending to have lots of money. Ron Paul is the result. It's too bad that his wacky nativist views make him the next thing to a neo-nazi.

Posted by: lb99999999 | December 19, 2007 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Yikes, 261 comments? You Paulites need to go get a job or find something better to do with your time!

No wonder you only can contribute $30 of the $40 in your checking account. If you spent more time working and less time whining about conspiracy theories maybe your candidate could run a real campaign!

Posted by: thecrisis | December 19, 2007 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents peace, prosperity and freedom. He is attracting people that are frustrated with how this country is being run. He is a man of integrity and he will tell you the truth, even if the truth seems a little off key. He is about what our Fore Fathers set up. Giving more power to the local government because it is more close to the people. He feels the federal government should not be imposing and parenting the American people--as if the American people do not know what is best for them. I feel that my vote is a privilege and I say that the mainstream media should not make my vote for me. Sure they can say this about this candidate or that candidate but my vote is my choice and that is why I took the initiative of researching and learning about Ron Paul. When people hear his message and do their homework about Ron Paul and what he stands for, and see how consistent with his views- the people will choose the logical choice. He is the only candidate that is not going towards big government, more taxes, less spending, and not taking a socialistic approach on healthcare. He believes that our healthcare should be in a free market, so that companies should compete over prices--making it better for people to have a choice. As for the Iraq war, it was wrong of us to go in there and invade and occupy their country, so we should leave because it doesn't make sense that the military that should be guarding our borders are all sent to Iraq and various parts of the world. I choose Ron Paul because he seems to see the bigger picture, globalism. Globalism is also known as the New World Order. He sees that this will lead America to no longer be a sovereign nation. We will be taking orders from international government, which nullifies the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It's already happening and people don't seem to realize it. It's those who are ignorant that think Ron Paul is outrageous because they don't take the time to actually do the research themselves and let the msm make their minds up for them. I mean it's funny to say that we are conspiracy theorists when these things really exist, meaning that these things aren't a conspiracy. CNN reported back in 2005 about how President Bush signed a pact with President of Mexico and President of Canada this all being done behind closed doors and without the consent of Congress. CNN also reported on how the people of Texas don't want a super highway to go through their land plus taking American jobs away from the trucking industry.

Posted by: kristinerhodes | December 19, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Awesome post tishjo1234!

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul can win. First comes fund raising and then the votes will follow. Read:

President Ron Paul - Could He Really Win?

Learn how outside economic and foreign policy events just might elect Ron Paul. is a two part article on how current events outside the political process could elect Ron Paul as President

Posted by: ronholland | December 19, 2007 11:13 AM | Report abuse's Politics Blog
About This Blog | Meet Chris Cillizza | RSS Feed (What's RSS?)
Preview your Comment

Ron Paul is able to raise large amounts of money in bulk for the simple reason that he has a strong and loyal group of support. This group has made up its mind and is not just leaning towards one candidate.

Because his support is small, tey unwavering, the supporters get to know each other well at rallies and events, making it very easy for them to donate. It is much easier to donate when you see yourself as part of a team, or see the person donating to as a friend. The close knit group also creates a bit of peer pressure towards those who do not donate.

The situation is a lot like giving a donation in the office for the boss's christmas gift. Almost everyone gives, because they all know the boss, they feel part of the team, and they don't want to be ostracized as the one who didn't donate.

This sort of dynamic is not present in other campaigns, where support is not as set, and is not even possible for candidates with large support because they can not create that close knit feeling.

Posted by: HokiePaul | December 19, 2007 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 19, 2007 11:11 AM | Report abuse

"I am no economist, and I will certainly listen to those of you who are, but it does not sit well with me that Dr. Paul's positions and ideas are not taken seriously by serious, mainstream economists." Posted by: bokonon13 | December 19, 2007 10:29 AM

I strongly support Ron Paul, we very badly need to have more Representatives in the House who understand in a principled way the importance of property rights and religious freedom.
Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize economist
I mean this is all seriousness, Ron Paul [is my pro-stock market candidate].
Donald Luskin, May 3, 2007

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 19, 2007 11:05 AM | Report abuse

The Ron Paul rEVOLution represents a changing of the guard -- the cause being guarded that of liberty. With what many of his supporters perceive to be the future of our country and the values upon which is was founded at stake, it's no surprise that Ron Paul is able to raise millions.

The baby boomers, arguably the most self-centered generation in history, spent their lives in complacency, with an almost single-minded focus on themselves. Their children, now awakening to their responsibility to ensure the future of our country, are perhaps the best educuated generation in recent history. They are internet savvy, which is why Dr. Paul rates so high on the internet. They use cell phones instead of landlines, which helps explain the discrepancy behind the overwhelming support for Dr. Paul in internet polls vs. the low numbers in traditional polls conducted on landline telephones.

The youth of our country understand the power of the internet and have used it to form vast social networks that were unthinkable in earlier times. They've harnessed the power of internet blogs, online forums and Youtube as an alternative to the mainstream media, which they distrust since the ownership of these media outlets have centralized ownership amongs the hands of the few who now control the content.

As Dr. Paul's message is spread, this generation of Americans does their homework. And in doing so, they come to realize that the current Establishment is bankrupting our country, both morally and financially. Understanding that it's now or never, they open their wallets. At the rate things are going, those dollars will be soon be worthless anyway unless fiscal policies change.

The signs that read "Dr. Paul cured my apathy" are truly the most telling signs of the time.

Posted by: tishjo1234 | December 19, 2007 11:03 AM | Report abuse

We Ron Paul Supporters don't (I don't anyway) believe that "conspiracy theory" stuff.
I think we made this country what it is. We allowed the current Administration and past Administrations to get us to get to the point where "REALID" cards, and a "North American Union" could be implement-able ideas. We also allowed (and contributed to) the crippling state of our national debt with sub prime loans. (All real, look them up) I am to blame as much as anyone else for idling sitting by until now. The Powers that be have just played on our pacification (we just assume that the America will always be what we want it to be". Slowly, we are starting to see where this country is headed looks less and less like we want, and we are finally starting waking up!

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is getting the cash from many many sources. Paul is running as a Republican, and gets money from Republicans who approve of the small government rhetoric he gives out. Ron Paul is getting money from Democrats who are anti-war and don't believe the Democrats are doing enough to end the war. They hope that by getting Ron Paul all this money, he can turn it around and actually win the nomination and they can have an anti-war candidate on both sides of the divide. Some Indapendents obviously support Paul. Also, Paul also has the support of both the Libertarian and Constitution parties. Both of those parties see an opportunity to get Paul into their party if and when he loses the Republican nomination. If they really jack up his support now and if he does well in the primaries, he will be more likely to consider it.

All that shows, is that Ron Paul has support from all over the place and that raising money and getting support won't be a problem. His problem now, is finding enough support for the primaries and I don't think there are enough Republicans left to push him through.

Posted by: skywrnchsr509 | December 19, 2007 10:42 AM | Report abuse

bokonon13 -

I understand you are concerned about Ron Paul's "theories." I was too. But then I asked myself, "What were we doing before Woodrow Wilson?" We were following the Constitution to the best of our abilities and it worked. The Rule of Law works.

Please everyone - read up on the history that has taken us this far from the Constitutional principles that made this country great.

Will it be painful adjusting? Yes! Will we have to re-learn everything we thought was right? Probably? Is living in a TRULY FREE nation worth it? ABSOLUTELY!

Now turn off the TV and go do the homework. :)

We can't afford to fail this test.

Posted by: jtcne | December 19, 2007 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I've listened to a few of Ron Paul's speeches. He's another Howard Dean, except that Ron Paul has more crossover support. In many respects, Ron Paul is the quintessential states' rights Republican, which is the very reason why a lot of Democrats and Independents like what he has to say. In South Carolina, Ron Paul specifically mentioned the "military-industrial complex," which Eisenhower coined. When Ron Paul talks about reducing the fed's influence on people's lives, libertarians' ears perk up. And when he talks about getting out of Iraq, that appeals to progressive Democrats. Without much media coverage and the backing of the GOP powers-that-be, it's dubious whether or not Ron Paul will have a major influence during the primaries. Still, he certainly has a lot of broad, fervent support. But his being a true maverick is simultaneously an asset and liability for him. After the Civil War, the Republicans became proponents of states' rights, while the Democrats became proponents of shifting more power to the feds. But with the rise of the Middle Class and compassionate conservatism/triangulation, there's no real dichotomy that distinguishes the two parties. Republicans tried to play Big Brother in the Schiavo case, while state-level Democrats are balancing budgets better than a fiscal conservative Republican ever could. Anti-abortion Democrats are winning elections in conservative districts, while Romney and Guiliani succeeded in royal-blue states, by using centrist policies (though they're in denial). There's nothing really new or extraordinary about what Ron Paul is saying. However, in an environment where the two parties have rushed to the mushy middle, to get Middle Class dollars and support, Ron Paul seems like the maverick that McCain erroneously claimed to be.

Posted by: con_crusher | December 19, 2007 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is the first candidate to actually speak to the hordes of crazy people in this country. Like this guy from the NYT Magazine article on him:

"The people who own the Federal Reserve own the oil companies, they own the mass media, they own the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, they're part of the Bilderbergers, and unfortunately their spiritual practices are very wicked and diabolical as well," Carey said. "They go to a place out in California known as the Bohemian Grove, and there's been footage obtained by infiltration of what their practices are. And they do mock human sacrifices to an owl-god called Moloch. This is true. Go research it yourself."

Posted by: donjaime37 | December 19, 2007 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul may be a decent man, but he is not going to get my vote, even if he can leap tall buildings in a single bound, as some of you imply. His theoretical positions are just that - theoretical - having never been successfully tried in the real world. I am no economist, and I will certainly listen to those of you who are, but it does not sit well with me that Dr. Paul's positions and ideas are not taken seriously by serious, mainstream economists. Even if you Paulywogs believe that the mainstream is precisely the problem, it is the reality that we face right now, and (by definition) the set of circumstances with which the majority of us are the most familiar, and if change of ANY kind is going to come, it must at least begin with that acknowledgment.

Posted by: bokonon13 | December 19, 2007 10:29 AM | Report abuse

"It means the guy who speaks most passionately about wasteful government spending has a campaign blimp".
Ron Paul`s supporters paid,and are paying, for the "Blimp".No Government Money was used.
Ron Paul supporters raise 6,000.000+ in one (1) day.
Ron Paul Supporters have raised over 18,400,000 for this qt and we still have almost half of the month left to raise even more.
Supporters!! Not Special Interest,Not The Corp`s...Just his supporters.
Over 25,000 new supporters in one just day.

Posted by: Jcalex1 | December 19, 2007 10:23 AM | Report abuse

I don't think the beltway types, the Broders, the bubble pundits, have any clue whatsoever how deeply fractured the republican party is at this minute. This is a fascinating piece about it right here, from an R standpoint:

'Conservatives David "Axis of Evil" Frum and Ross Douthat have been sounding alarms warning that the ideas embraced by the Republican presidential candidates may have gotten just a little too wacky. Frum, alluding to Mike Huckabee's national sales tax and Ron Paul's "self-taught monetary views," concludes that "if it is elitist to expect politicians to be able to see through glaringly false and stupid ideas - well in that case, call me elitist."

Frum worries that the right may have become overly reliant on populism - defending "the commonsense wisdom of ordinary voters against the pretensions of know-it-alls." Douthat agrees, while nonetheless zinging Frum for supporting Rudolph Giuliani in light of Rudy's enthusiasm for thoroughly discredited supply-side economics. Douthat writes: "Frum's larger worry about anti-intellectualism in the contemporary Right is one I share in spades."

But here's the real problem for today's conservatives: their movement's intellectuals and experts are overwhelmingly the ones who have come up with the ideas that have largely proven to be just as bankrupt in practice as the gold standard that Paul wants to resurrect. The brains behind the enterprise don't have any ideas left in the well to draw from that haven't already been tried and failed. Frum says, "...politicians who want to deliver effective government and positive results have to care about more than values - and have to do more than check their guts. They need to study the problem, master the evidence, and face criticism."

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 10:17 AM | Report abuse

'Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the U.S. military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of "occupying forces" as the key to national reconciliation, according to focus groups conducted for the U.S. military last month.'

Ahh, smell the gratitude... the flowers and candy. This is the gratitude we get for spending a trillion dollars, 4000 american dead and 40,000 wounded. we should defiitely stay there forever--definitely worth it.

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul is achieving financial success because he appeals to Americans of all ages across the political spectrum.
1. We want out of Iraq.
2. We want the govt to stop wasting our hard-earned money. (see
3. The beaurocracy is bloated and inefficient. Competition lowers prices and raises quality.
4. We want the govt out of our wallets, our bedrooms, and our personal decisions.
(why is ANY marriage the Fed's business?)
Just these four points garner support from liberal and yellow dog Democrats, Constitutionalists, Log Cabin Republicans, paleocons, etc.
A former Reagan Dem, now R/l, I donated to both of the money bombs for Dr. Paul - my first political donations, and I've been voting for 30 years. Although relatively low income, I am taxed QUITE enough, thank you. I am capable, and would prefer, to choose my own insurance and health care providers - rather than turn my choice and money over to the folks who brought us FEMA and the IRS. I'd also like to choose for myself which charities to support, many of which are more efficient than our 'social programs'.
We vote, we read Wikipedia, find voting records, and search the net for information. We have jobs, busy lives and cell phones. We don't get polled, but there are many of us and we want a less intrusive government.
Dr. Paul is financially successful because there are a lot of people who support his positions and will open their wallets to help get the word out('cause the media sure isn't). Duh.
I'll write him in if I have to.

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 19, 2007 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Curious if anyone remembers how the media treated Ferraro in 1984 (right?)... how does that compare with the current take on Hillary?

Posted by: bokonon13 | December 19, 2007 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Yahoo/The Nation write
"The story is the National Enquirer top-of-the-page cover article ... that claims the former senator from North Carolina is the father of a soon-to-be-born "love child.""

I just saw a Reuters headline that Britney Spears's 16 year old sister is pregnant.


Posted by: bsimon | December 19, 2007 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Oh I see. the National Enquirer, which has really tremendous credibility, particularly when it comes to rrecounting the tales of those who have been impregnated by aliens:

'The story is the National Enquirer top-of-the-page cover article -- which is set to go on sale at the checkout counters of the supermarkets and drug stores of Iowa, New Hampshire and the other 48 states Wednesday morning -- that claims the former senator from North Carolina is the father of a soon-to-be-born "love child."

Going on sale just before the primaries -- what a coincidence!!!

"The big consumer brands like Coke, Pepsi, P&G etc. all have ambitions to penetrate the low-end rural consumer."

Mark, having worked in marketing, I can tell you the big brands have been penetrating the low-end consumers for years.

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Thank you for a decent article on Ron.

First of all, someone commented on the blimp and wasteful spending. Had he been following Ron's campaign all along, he would know that the Ron Paul Campaign did not fund the blimp. IT was funded by supporters apart from the official campaign.

Ron received donations from the American PEOPLE, individuals. The reason is because people are tired of having the Bush's and clintons shoved down our throats. His message is real and is exactly what the people are thinking and feeling today. No things won't change overnite but he will be a good first step to mending our country. We are tired of the corrupt government we have now and a president who says "the Constitution is just a piece of paper". Well, it isn't. America is being sold off by our governement and that BIG BANKING INSTITUTE THE FEDERAL RESERVE. Enough already. We want our country and our ideals back.

RC in CT

Posted by: Chance1 | December 19, 2007 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Why does the otherwise intelligent or semi-intelligent media keep asking this weird question about Ron Paul's "mysterious" popularity? It's like they are playing possum with their brains.

Ron Paul is brilliant, his rhetoric is as strong as steel, his courage in exposing government problems is monumental, he is telling the truth and resonating with people who can discern the truth. He is educating the nation and appealing to the best in all of us.

He towers over his opponents in integrity and wisdom. He is a giant elephant in a pack of mice and you are feebly asking us to explain his popularity. As if the adulation of mice is so "normal."

Can't you bend your head a little and see that colossal up there???

Posted by: globe_amaranth | December 19, 2007 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Well said jtcne!

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 9:52 AM | Report abuse

A lot of people who have libertarian leanings (like me) tend to gravitate towards the internet, as it is less regulated that most of the rest of our lives. The last eight years have been very, very damaging to libertarians and those who, while not libertarians, believe in an open, accountable government. I've been seeing Ron Paul support on blogs for OVER A YEAR, and it is usually from people who run their own blogs and comment on many others. They have a wide range of influence. Moreover, a lot of us post-baby boomers don't have landlines to be tracked for polls, just cell phones.

The real question is whether any of these Internet supporters will leave their computer to vote for Paul.

I've found a lot of support for Paul on local/regional political blogs, and I'd suggest you hunt through those to get a better idea of the depth and commitment of his supporters. Here is an example close to me:

Posted by: jefmlrjudo | December 19, 2007 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Sorry about the typos in my last post. (Forgot to proofread. tisk..tisk..)

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 9:46 AM | Report abuse

newsflash* John McCain has a black baby.

Rudy Guiliani killed his mother.

Mike Huckabee's killed a dog by hanging it, stoning it, and slitting i's throat. Oh wait...

Anyway, first two are about as substantative and sleazy without offering any proof. Could be true. Could be a smear. Where's the link?

Time for a new topic, CC. How about this?

'Mike Huckabee's national surge is apparent in a new Zogby poll, in which he trails Rudy Giuliani now by only a single point. Rudy has 23%, Huckabee 22%, Mitt Romney 16%, Fred Thompson 13%, and John McCain 12%. A month ago, Huckabee was 18 points behind Rudy.'

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 9:46 AM | Report abuse

drindl, off the exhausting and perhaps exhausted topic, more from the WORST TEXTBOOK EVER WRITTEN:

"The big consumer brands like Coke, Pepsi, P&G etc. all have ambitions to penetrate the low-end rural consumer."

Freudian slip, meet your master!

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 19, 2007 9:45 AM | Report abuse

If the story is true, John Edwards is finished as a contender for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | December 19, 2007 9:44 AM | Report abuse

nosubstituteforvictory said:
"Mental illness is as old as the human race itself. Read jtcne comment above. Then read it again.

Figure 100,000 fruitcakes like this guy across the nation and its easy to see how Ron Paul could raise millions."

Resorting to insults does nothing to stop the Neo-Con agenda. When your children wake up homeless on the land our fathers died for, ask yourself, "Why didn't I seek the truth for myself?"

I'll be the first to admit it! It all sounds very far fetched and very unreal. Who wants to believe any of the facts I posted? I certainly didn't and I sometimes wish I hadn't learned these things. I was quite happy spending my evenings and weekends blissfully ignorant like most Americans at the mall with my family or at the movies. Alas, it's too late.

Now that I'm aware, I have a responsibility, as do all Americans, to point to this domestic threat. When you get your paycheck and nearly half of it is gone, do you - 1) Thank God we live in the land of the "Free?" 2) Feel relieved that the government has re-distributed wealth in a socialistic fashion? 3) Feel like the slave that you really are and take action as the Founding Fathers would have?

I asked that you not take what I said at face value. I'll reiterate this - research the facts.

If you find I'm wrong, you've wasted little time.

If you find out I'm right, FIGHT FOR YOUR COUNTRY!

We have little time left to be arguing without regard to the facts.

You see the posts here - many people have already learned the truth about the CFR, the North American Union, the income tax fraud, and the imperialist NeoCon agenda.

Unfortunately, this rabbit hole goes even deeper. It's just a matter of a few Google searches and clearing your head of the main stream media lies.

Posted by: jtcne | December 19, 2007 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Novamatt writes
"Let's say Paul doesn't win the nomination, and Huckabee or Romney or one of the other top-tier candidates does. Hard to believe, I know, but play along with me. Would you support the Republican nominee in the general? Would you be looking for a third-party candidate to support?"

I'm inclined to predict that Rep Paul will run as the Libertarian party candidate again.

Posted by: bsimon | December 19, 2007 9:41 AM | Report abuse

novamatt: Ron Paul is a "noninterventionist" not an "isolationist". HUGE difference

noninterventionist stance:
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations - entangling alliances with none" - Thomas Jefferson.

Act for ourselves and not for others," by forming an "American character wholly free of foreign attachments" -- George Washington.

An isolationist stance a "noninterventionist" stance true, but here is the BIG HUGE GINORMOUS difference part:

Isolationism also involves "Protectionism:
The idea that "There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states." (kind of sounds like where we are headed with the current administration Real ID cards, (papers please...)

Ron Paul (and his supporters) doesn't want the Isolationsist stuff. We wants urestricted free Trade, socially and Economically...

Non-interventionists and Isolationists are Apples and Oranges

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 9:40 AM | Report abuse

proud- got source, or you just stirrin' the pot for fun's sake (kinda like kid johnny - zing!)

Posted by: bsimon | December 19, 2007 9:36 AM | Report abuse

news flash* John Edwards and a campaign staffer have allegedly been carrying on an affair for 18 months and now she's pregnant.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | December 19, 2007 9:33 AM | Report abuse

all things to all people. tabla rasa.

in other news, rudy is not going to get the 'charm' and likability vote, that's for sure...

Rudolph Giuliani's decision to largely abandon the early voting state of New Hampshire and concentrate his efforts on the Florida primary three weeks later reflects an uncomfortable truth for the former New York mayor: The more he campaigned in the Granite State and the more he spent on advertising there, the more his poll numbers dropped.

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 9:33 AM | Report abuse

all things to all people

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 9:31 AM | Report abuse

What it means is United States citizens are waking up. We've been submissive little lambs when it comes to having our liberties stolen, our lives oppressed, our money taken in the form of excessive and oppressive taxes. American citizens have finally seen the butcher block ahead in the form of the NAU and other freedom erasing globalist agendas. There are those in power who could care less about individual liberty and would sacrifice us all just to increase and consolidate their own lust for power.

And the current administration tells us the Patriot Act is all about security and NOT spying on Americans--Sure, while at the same time the government leaves our borders wide open so any terrorist who wants to can walk right in---I guess if you are mentally deranged that makes all kinds of sense!

Posted by: cnphipps | December 19, 2007 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Hello adriennemichael. Thank you for your view. However, I have a couple questions:

Does "Meet the Press" invite "Unprofessional" and "Kooky" 2008 Presidential Contenders to take up one hour of Precious Airtime?

Or do Unprofessional" and "Kooky" 2008 Presidential Contenders win overall in Straw polls? (as of 12/12/2007)?

If your answer is yes, then I guess having him (FINALLY) recognized by MSM, AND the will of the people is not enough for you.

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Just look at the Senate caving into the lame duck President Bush and voting $555 billion budget with no strings attached-especially in regard to the Iraq war-and you will understand why Ron Paul is an attractive alternative to the politics-as-usual crowd in Washington. Since 2004 I have voted a straight Democrat ticket in hopes that there would eventually be enough of them to stand up to Bush and do the right thing. I had vowed never to vote for another Republican in my life. My son is serving in Iraq and my son-in-law has served three tours there. I have seen the toll it has taken on him, his wife, his children and their community of Marines. I have no confidence that electing a Democrat will end the horror show in Iraq and so I must consider the only other alternative. I believe that Ron Paul will undo the nightmare we have been living in for the past 7 years and return this government to the people. The business-as-usual crowd is not listening to us and it's time to show them the door.

Posted by: bwilc | December 19, 2007 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, Mark, think you're right on. Paul in a lot of ways is a throwback to the isolationist/social darwinist wing of the pre-WWII GOP. He's not a libertarian -- big L or small l. He's more of a paleo-conservative than anything else.

Posted by: novamatt | December 19, 2007 9:11 AM | Report abuse

What does the Paul cash mean?

It means a whole lot of fed-up people have found a voice and are speaking up about the dangerous road America is traveling down. That's what I love about my fellow countrymen: we put our money where our mouths are.

Sticking your head in the sand is unamerican.

We need to get involved.

Posted by: schase1 | December 19, 2007 9:09 AM | Report abuse

I have to say I was pretty impressed when Paul quoted Sinclair Lewis, one of my favorite America authors, about fascism, flags and crosses. He understands the way that potent, emotionally laden symbols can be used by demamogues and dictators.

I would like to echo Novamatt's question. I can see that Paul's supporters range across a broad spectrum but all with tremendous enthusiassm.

What would you do if he doesn't get the nom?

Posted by: drindl | December 19, 2007 9:09 AM | Report abuse

As a 42 year old political independent, I never supported a political candidate at any level until this year. I find Ron Paul's message of freedom, peace and prosperity inspiring and engaging. This is a philosophy that touches me at a deeper level. Dr. Paul is the first and only politician I know who's taken this philosophy and put it into practice. That's why I support Dr. Paul with my time and energy and money. As Victor Hugo said "there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come".

As for the future, I will continue to espouse these ideals in the public forum to my friends, neighbors and politicians at all levels. For me, it's the ideals of individual right, health freedom, sound fiscal policy and peace that matter regardless of the political party.

Posted by: ktw3 | December 19, 2007 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I first discovered Ron Paul at the first Republican debate and fell in love. One year ago I could not imagin donating money to any political campaign and yet I donated twice on December 16th. I am pro-choice, libral on most social issues and voted for Gore in 2000 and voted the Democrats into office in the last election. I have come to realize the Democrats are just wolves in sheeps clothing and really are no different then the Republicans. They are all corporate owned toadies who shill for their masters.
Ron Paul will win. I am sure of this.

Posted by: bluebonnets1966 | December 19, 2007 8:59 AM | Report abuse

We "paid" $4,600 to the Paul campaign {$2300 each} to get rid of the Patriot act. We do not want a biometricly enabled national ID card. (your papers please} We do not want our children chipped. We would like to leave a sovreign USA to our children. We are both life long democratic voters in our 50's. All the front runners from both parties voted FOR the Patriot act. Please folks its your families and country to. Ann

Posted by: akdothan1952 | December 19, 2007 8:58 AM | Report abuse

mrbreau: I may be mistaken, but The premise of "The True Beleiver" is that "Mass movements spread by promising a glorious future, and they need people to be willing to sacrifice all for that future, including themselves and others.
To do that, they need to devalue both the past and the present." (Wikipedia)
First, we are not being promised a glorious future. Only a return to what our Founding Fathers documented as a path to follow to keep this Country on track, it was written long ago in black and white.. Again.. it is call the Constition! It is imperfect yes, but a million times better than where we are today. Also, what have we as Ron Paul supporters been asked to give? Money to support his Campaign so he can represent what we already beleive? Time to support him and spread his word? Hmmm... I gues that makes every Candidate on the ballot just as crooked!! His team is only working within the system as everyone else, and he is winning! (And he is loved by many and hated by some for it!)

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's sucess in raising money is not matched by results in the polls because he has an ineffective campaign. Where's all that money going? Why isn't he on the air, and taking helicopters, and going on listening tours, and such things?

His campaign staff is blowing it, with all that money Paul should have something to show for it.

I would imagine that as one poster mentioned, many contributers are traditionally non-voters, and heavy internet users. And, along with Pauls's campaign staff, unseasoned and not ready for a presidential run. It's all very fine to blame the media, but to win you have to appeal to more than a few people that have weak participation and follow-through. Paul is a trend, that will die out after the first few primaries.

If Paul's ideas were expressed a bit better, not the 'what' but the 'how', if his emotional inteligence was a bit more on, as well as his supporters I might add, he would get more substantive coverage. Many of his views are resonating, but the message appears 'kooky' and gets lost. Quite simply, it doesn't look professional, and therefore it doesn't look presidential. Sorry, but that's the view from out here.

Posted by: adriennemichael | December 19, 2007 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Actually, You might have to read Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer" to understand the answer to why Ron Paul is doing so well......IMO

Posted by: mrbreau | December 19, 2007 8:33 AM | Report abuse

The political experts are confused because the polls don't match the large fundraising totals and the number of signs, etc.

Pollsters are out of touch here. Here's my hunch: So many of Ron Paul's supporters are young, have never voted, or are so disgusted they haven't voted in years. The pollsters' conventional methodology misses these people.

First: pollsters call land lines. So many young RP supporters don't have land lines -- only cellphones.

Second: Pollsters almost always ask, "did you vote in the last Republican Primary?" and then poll those people ("likely Republican voters") So many RP supporters did not vote in the last Republican Primary, so pollsters don't consider them "likely Republican voters."

I advise you to check out the MeetUp groups and see who is who.

That is why there is now a HUGE emphasis by the Ron Paul campaign for all supporters to REGISTER REPUBLICAN asap!

Linda from Pennsylvania

Posted by: morrisonl5 | December 19, 2007 8:27 AM | Report abuse

The political experts are confused because the polls don't match the large fundraising totals and the number of signs, etc.

Pollsters are out of touch here. Here's my hunch: So many of Ron Paul's supporters are young, have never voted, or are so disgusted they haven't voted in years. The pollsters' conventional methodology misses these people.

First: pollsters call land lines. So many young RP supporters don't have land lines -- only cellphones.

Second: Pollsters almost always ask, "did you vote in the last Republican Primary?" and then poll those people ("likely Republican voters") So many RP supporters did not vote in the last Republican Primary, so pollsters don't consider them "likely Republican voters."

I advise you to check out the MeetUp groups and see who is who.

Linda from Pennsylvania

Posted by: morrisonl5 | December 19, 2007 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Novamatt, when I invited RP supporters to stay involved even if RP is not the nominee,
at 6:29P I got the following reply:
"Involved in what? ALL the other candidates are baisically the same old garbage with slight differences in their putrid stench.
I will not support anyone I do not agree with, I can agree with none but Dr. Paul on the major issues."

BTW, at 5:31P I had written an analysis that I think is similar to yours.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 19, 2007 8:17 AM | Report abuse

He is financially successful because he caters to no special interest lobbying groups.
Americans don't trust our current "big government". As such, he and his team (the American People) would like to "put us back
on the right track" into the correct system that was put in place by the founding fathers
That system is governed by the Constitution, which is of by and for the People. Not lobbyists or big business.
He is also financially successful because his message is honest, clear, simple and to the point, and he has unwavering principles. (The big 5)
It also doesn't hurt his wallet that people in general like to see the underdog win, (especially when they agree with the underdog!)

Posted by: crispoj1000 | December 19, 2007 8:08 AM | Report abuse

The State of Affairs of the United States is in a helluva mess. Who will clean it up? The same old politicians with the same old rhetoric?
The 'silent majority' is back, and we mean business.

Posted by: whodowl | December 19, 2007 7:57 AM | Report abuse

I have a couple of questions for any of the Paul supporters who might be hanging around here this morning. Let's say Paul doesn't win the nomination, and Huckabee or Romney or one of the other top-tier candidates does. Hard to believe, I know, but play along with me. Would you support the Republican nominee in the general? Would you be looking for a third-party candidate to support? Would you take a long look at the Democratic nominee? Are there some Republicans you would consider voting for, but others you've ruled out?

Thanks in advance for any answers.

Posted by: novamatt | December 19, 2007 7:41 AM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's support mean?

If you look at the attendees of a Ron Paul event, you might see Blacks and Jews and White supremacists and Hispanics and families and college students. Attempting to put these people into measurable categories with specific motivations brings to mind Yoda's famed quote, "That is why you fail." Who are Ron Paul's supporters? Americans. People who want their lives back in almost as many ways as they are individuals. So much has been lost: time, money, our dreams, our privacy, our civil liberties. We live in fear and making ends meet, instead of confidence and the pursuit of our dreams.

Our government currently operates to take money from all of us, and then pit us against each other on how it should be spent. The multiplicity of issues that arise distract us from the core flaw of the system. The money should never have been taken.

Ron Paul's support appears to come from so many directions because you are looking at the symptoms, not the root of the problem. Ron Paul's supporters can come together, even from apparently opposing groups because they have seen in his very simple, clear, and consistent message - a solution. Central to Ron Paul's rEVOLution is respect: respect for yourself and what is yours, and respect to allow others the same. That is the only price of admission. Pay that and welcome to the big tent of freedom, liberty, and Ron Paul's America.

Posted by: fnbrier | December 19, 2007 7:35 AM | Report abuse

I have never voted for a Republican presidential candidate, but might vote for Ron Paul if Hillary or Barak are the Dem. nominee. As a Red/Green I vote for people who seem to have character and wisdom. Ron Paul meets those criteria. I'd prefer Dennis, but there aren't enough thoughtful, informed folks voting for him to be electable. Ron Paul's Libertarian stands resonate with the disaffected heretofore non-voters and the true Republicans before the neocons took over the party. The American Empire needs to grow up and abandon its imperialistic fantasies. Ron Paul could accomplish that.

Posted by: esr91 | December 19, 2007 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Mental illness is as old as the human race itself. Read jtcne comment above. Then read it again.

Figure 100,000 fruitcakes like this guy across the nation and its easy to see how Ron Paul could raise millions.

New Hampshire will be the real test for Ron Paul and his bizarre internet following - if he can't draw 5% then we are talking about Lyndon Larouche here...

maybe he can draw some votes in Dade county with the Socialist Workers Party if some chads hang...

Posted by: nosubstituteforvictory | December 19, 2007 6:44 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is a Libertarian running in the Republican primaries. His message resonates with a lot of independents who are not normally involved in Politics. Most of these people have well paid jobs with unlimited access to the internet. Thereby he does well in this arena but in the end, its a minor story in the 08 election.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 19, 2007 6:40 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul pulls together a coalition of people who are not served by the two-party system. In a multi-party system, you would have a party of libertarians who would hold what is arguably the more consistent view that the government should interfere neither in economics nor in social policy. Instead, you have candidates in both parties who must string together a series of more or less incoherent policies because they attempt to appeal to half the population. Republican candidates must explain that government interference is bad unless it is to stabilize morality. Democratic candidates must explain why economics aren't fair without government oversight but that it is bad for the government to interfere with the personal lives of others. Some Republicans make an interesting rhetorical move by claiming that it is the liberals who are forcing their social agenda upon an unwilling majority rather than the other way around.

Ron Paul's presidential campaign is so successful because it takes views that are inconsistent with the party but that are consistent with certain members of the Republican party who, given their druthers, would be LIbertarian. General disaffection with the Bush administration's overseas misadventures and domestic surveillance strengthens the voices of those who do not buy into the necessary cognitive dissonance required to be full members of either party.
-M Keegan

Posted by: mlk.keegan | December 19, 2007 5:47 AM | Report abuse

In a nutshell - Liberty

"We The People" are waking up from the TV-induced trance...

We now realize that if you can tax a man's labor one percent, you can tax it 100%. That is slavery. Thus, the personal income tax and essentially, the IRS, must be abolished. Besides, there is no public statute enacted into positive law by a vote of the Congress that authorizes the IRS to tax a US Citizen on the fruits of his labor. The IRS shows us the law through it's "enforcement actions." That's effectively a bully. When the IRS is backed up by the Department of Justice with no law, it's tyranny. This country did fine from 1776 to 1913 without the personal income tax, it will do so again.

Government has nothing. What it gives, it takes from others. This is theft.

Creating fiat money and manipulating interest rates creates inflation. Inflation is theft without presence. Your money sitting in your 401k, mutual funds, savings, and your wallet is stolen directly from you without a hand having to touch it. Therefore, the Federal Reserve Act must be repealed.

The Bush Doctrine is no better than Nazi facism. Pre-emptive war is an invention of Hitler - Dwight Eisenhower.

We have decided that Benjamin Franklin was right - those who would sacrifice essential Liberty for temporary security deserve neither.

We have learned that our national sovreignty is under attack. The Rockefellers have been pulling the strings via the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission and that all the other mainstream candidates are members or have been members of these groups which have made no secret that the future of the world is that of One World Government - be it by "conquest or consent."

And that doesn't even get into the so-called "conspiracy theories." The facts suggest that the Bushes have been involved with groups that have been undermining this country since before World War II.

So, rather than lay out a conspiracy theory, I'll present you with the facts I dug up and let you decide through your own research what the truth is. After all, as the saying goes, "truth is stranger than fiction."

Timothy Bush (a great-grandfather many times over to the Bush presidents) was married to Deborah House (on April 12, 1759), probably (although as yet unconfirmed and that's the last of my speculation from here on out) related to Edward Mandell House who pushed for the creation of the Federal Reserve, IRS, and League of Nations with Woodrow Wilson.

Samuel Prescott Bush (great-grandfather of George W. Bush) was associated with the Rockefellers and was on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

Prescott Bush was a financier to the Nazis.

George H. W. Bush was in Dallas the day the JFK was shot, but doesn't remember where he was that day. He placed a call to report a possible assassination that day. He disavows being part of the CIA until he was made the director of the CIA, yet, he was flown to be debriefed by Herbert Hoover, Director of the FBI, the day after JFK was assassinated.

There were Bin Laden Construction Company engineers involved in the building of the World Trade Center. They were asking questions about where one would place detonation charges, which may not be unusual, as all buildings eventually will have to be demolished. The building was assembled with steel bolts, rather than welded joints.

Osama Bin Laden was funded by the CIA in Afganistan against the Soviets.

George H. W. Bush met with Osama Bin Laden's brother on September 10th, 2001 at a Carlyle Group conference at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington D.C.

Marvin Bush's (George W. Bush's brother) company, which had been funded by Kuwaiti-American Corporation, had the security contract for the World Trade Centers, Washington Dulles Airport, and United Airlines.

Jonathan Bush (George H. W. Bush's brother)was a chief officer of Riggs Bank, the bank from which funds were drawn by Saudi princess Haifa Al-Faisal and was used to fund the living expenses of 2 of the 9/11 terrorists, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. George W. Bush (headed numerous oil companies), Condoleeza Rice (Chevron-Texaco), Dick Cheney (Halliburton), and Donald Rumsfeld all have direct ties to oil companies.

Make sure you also read up on the Office of Naval Intelligence's (ONI) purchasing of 10 year Brady bonds on September 13th, 1991, which were later pledged illegally as collateral for other loans made by Cantor-Fitzgerald which was office on floors 105-110 of the north tower of the World Trade Center complex. The ONI investigators were on-site the day of the attack and perished along with all of the Cantor-Fitzgerald records. The ONI offices at the Pentagon, which had been investigating Manila in the Phillipines as a possible money laundering hub for CIA Black Ops and payoffs, were destroyed by the 9/11 attacks. Seven weeks after the 9/11 attack, Cheney, Rice, and Bush received a memo from US Military/Intelligence Operations of large sums of US currency being moved via crates in the Phillipines.

BYU Professor, Stephen Jones found signature traces of a military grade of Thermite, called Thermate, which cuts through steel "like butter" in the hardened molten steel deposits at the World Trade Center. Steel melts at over 2300 degrees Fahrenheit, whereas jet fuel burns at about 1600 degrees Fahrenheit, and that's only if the fire is not oxygen deficient, which would have been the case, at least in the South Tower which was bellowing dark smoke. The towers also fell at near free-fall speeds, which would not have been likely with the pancaking floors.

WTC Building 7 did not have flames fed by jet fuel. Yet, it collapsed in the same manner as the North and South Towers. When has a building that was simply on fire collapsed in the history of modern construction? Only WTC 7. Then there is also the video of Larry Silverstein saying he told them to "pull it" in reference to WTC Building 7. How could they "pull it"? Building demolitions take months to plan and execute. The timing and charge placements have to be well-orchestrated and planned in order to have a controlled fall like that of WTC 7.

Listen to the government, then do your own research. Weigh the facts. Make your own mind up. Someone is telling the truth. Remember, IRAQ had WMD and was a threat to the USA, right???

Wake up - think for yourself. Fight for LIBERTY, before it's too late.

Sure, you'll find plenty of kooks out there, but ignore them. Listen to those people who you can tell are intelligent and without any need for an agenda.

Good luck my fellow Americans!

My family has been in this country since over 100 years before the American Revolution. I'm not about to let my ancestors and many of the Founding Fathers die for America to become a tyrannical, oligarchical dictatorship controlled by the elite banking cartels of the Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs, Rothschilds, etc.

Not as long as I draw breath from a breeze.

Research hard enough - I'm convinced you'll eventually come to a conclusion I have yet to prove - this is all British infiltration of the US in retribution for the American Revolution and they have been using the US to continue building their empire by proxy by "spreading democracy" by force, not to mention through the globalized corporations. The CFR is a sister organization of the Chatham House, formerly known as the Royal Institute on International Affairs (RIAA). RIAA was formed in 1920, a year before the CFR. Now all the mainstream presidential candidates for 2008 are, or have been, CFR members?

The British are coming!!! The British are coming!!!

I only wish someone had realized that in 1921!

Posted by: jtcne | December 19, 2007 3:58 AM | Report abuse

Stop looking at the details and start paying attention to what's going on.

Divide and conquer.

It worked in Rome - it's working in the US.

Stop being good Republicans and Democrats and realize you need to first and foremost protect the country from all enemies - DOMESTIC and foreign!

Posted by: jtcne | December 19, 2007 3:55 AM | Report abuse



Posted by: wincapmtg | December 19, 2007 3:38 AM | Report abuse

CC --

I can't say that I know what his support means in general (although I think urbancoyotesfounder probably comes closest), but I can say why I contributed.

I contributed because I agree with many of Ron Paul's ideas, sure, but it was also my hope that the contribution would be a warning flare - to the MSM that they need to pay attention to our movement and also to the two parties. My message was that reckless government spending has to stop. I believe fervently in my fellow citizens, and I want desperately to believe in my country. If only the government could stay out of our way we might once again provide an example for the world of the triumph of the individual spirit.

The MSM didn't pay attention. But I won't stop until they do. Thank you Ron Paul.

Posted by: nganassim | December 19, 2007 3:25 AM | Report abuse

Why does Ron Paul have so much money and so few voters? and also Can Ron Paul translate his fundraising prowess into more than 3% of the vote?Posted by: wilson1204 | December 19, 2007 01:02 AM

A poll is not a vote. I haven't been polled. I will vote.

Posted by: interior.scapes | December 19, 2007 2:36 AM | Report abuse

The magic of Ron Paul is the simplicity of his ideas; Freedom, Liberty and the Constitution. I don't think he is thinking outside the box. Facts be told, he is about the only politician who has not left the box and sold out America for greed and power.

Look around you! The status quo politics are tearing this country to shreds. Congress will NOT secure our borders and yet we citizens need permission to leave. What nonsense is that? Our foods are deficient if not outright toxic, like the imported toys and dog foods. As manufacturing jobs left the country we were told that we were becoming a service industry. Now call for service and you get Pakistan, India and Mexico. Pill pushers are talking mandated immunizations to force big profits and worse. Our farmers have been forced out to corporations that raise genetically modified (GM) crops that do unknown damage to the world as a whole. New diseases are cropping up since the time of the first GM foods - look at mad cow and avian bird flu. The American people have been working for one master since 1913 when the Federal Reserve Act was falsely stated as having been ratified. America has been sold out for too long!

Ron Paul's magic potion ingredients! Honesty! Americanism! The Constitution! Liberty! Freedom! What more need be said?

Posted by: niidji | December 19, 2007 2:21 AM | Report abuse

Here's the Dr.'s response the the earmarks post..
"earmarks . . . are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. The real problem is that the United States government is too big, spends too much, and has too much power."

Still, why play along by earmarking federal spending? Because a crackdown on earmarks, he says, would only grant the executive branch more control over where the money goes. The total amount of spending wouldn't change. "There's nothing wrong with designating where the money goes," Paul says -- so long as the earmark is "up front and everyone knows about it," rather than having it slipped in at the last minute with no scrutiny.

In an ideal world, Paul says, there wouldn't be a federal income tax. But since there is, he says, he feels a responsibility to help his constituents recover some of the tax dollars the government has taken from them. "I don't want them to take it," he says, "but if they do take it, I'd just as soon help my constituents get it back."

Posted by: zaferberkun | December 19, 2007 2:06 AM | Report abuse

Poll numbers are just a fabrication of the MSM just like Judy Miller's WMD stories. They are trying to form opinions by telling people who is ahead: their candidate.

Same reason why they don't give him any coverage. Exposure means more followers and that scares them.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | December 19, 2007 1:37 AM | Report abuse

So many of your commenters seem to think the question was "What does Ron Paul mean?"

I think the question is two-fold: Why does Ron Paul have so much money and so few voters? and also Can Ron Paul translate his fundraising prowess into more than 3% of the vote?

I'd say no. The libertarian wing of the GOP is precious small, particularly in the last decade, as many libertarians have wandered to the Democratic party. But the libertarian wing definitely has some money and a dearth of interesting candidates to spend it on. Ever.

Ron Paul is kind of like the Chicago Blackhawks of a decade ago -- they had exactly 18,000 fans in the city, all of whom came to every single game and screamed bloody murder. If you only went to a game and took the experience out of context, you'd think "wow, this team should get some more capacity, get their own cable channel ..." But actually, if they had installed the 18,001st seat, it would have gone empty every game.

There's nowhere for Ron Paul to go. His 3% is passionate, but it includes every voter he'll ever get.

Posted by: wilson1204 | December 19, 2007 1:02 AM | Report abuse

I will give you the reason but am not sure you will buy it.
Its because the good doctor has the courage to speak the REAL truth. Not the PC "truth" or the MSM "truth" told by journalists scared of losing their jobs.
Ron Paul wants America to win back its freedom from the neocon choke hold.

Posted by: qualquan | December 19, 2007 12:59 AM | Report abuse

The "Ron Paul Revolution" comes from elite idealistic college students using daddy's money. While it is believed that on most college campuses it's cool to be for Obama, it seems to not be the case at my college at least. Indeed, at the University of South Florida supporting Ron Paul is a trend, as I assume it is on others as well. Of course, another factor is the libertarian faction. Libertarians once controlled the GOP but the 20 year shift to social conservative dominance has left them without a party they can relate to. Paul is trying to get that faction more influence in the GOP. Good luck.

Posted by: xjspzx | December 19, 2007 12:49 AM | Report abuse

I have been a lifelong Republican. As time and career allowed, I supported and did precinct work for Dewey, Goldwater and Regan, as well as other local and state candidates. I really believe in the maxim that the best government is the one who governs least (I think that Regan said this more eloquently).

Remember that money is power. When we give money to anyone, we give them power.

Today, the approval ratings of Congress is just above the U.S. savings rate (close to negative).

Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate who wants to change the status quo. The rest of the pack sound like Democrats to me.

I am enthused by the number of young people of all races who support him and believe in the idea that we should actually look at the Constitution when we are making laws.

Posted by: junkmailmenot | December 19, 2007 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Ron Paul means putting an end to this kind of impotence. We give upwards of $5B/year to Israel so they can laugh at us when it comes to the so-called Peace Process.

"Housing Minister Ze'ev Boim has given the green light for planning a new Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem, despite the fact that senior American officials say Israel had promised not to move forward with the project.

The neighborhood, near Atarot, is slated to contain more than 10,000 apartments, making it the largest Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem. Earlier this month, however, the United States objected to a plan to build a mere 300 apartments in another East Jerusalem neighborhood, Har Homa, with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice saying it did not contribute to the peace process.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | December 19, 2007 12:45 AM | Report abuse

I believe it has alot to do with just plain common sense. we have a country that feels like it is going broke yet we spend billions on building infastructure for other countries. ron pauls ideas of taking care of home first strikes a chord with alot of people who feel energized to the fact that there is a canidate who cares about them and not the interest of big business.

Posted by: djbridg | December 19, 2007 12:34 AM | Report abuse

drd6000 - 'Dave posits a Democratic conspiracy to promote a conservative Republican, but to what end? Why spend millions to push Ron Paul from 2% in the polls to 7%?'

To force the other R's to spend more money (which they don't have) on other R's (and not D's) since it would be a more competitive race. A fractured party and a hard, long fight to the nomination always helps the other party. To promote the idea of a 3rd party candidacy, that if it comes to fruition, delivers the presidency to Democrats. As much as I like many of Dr. Paul's ideas, many of the are simply too far outside the mainstream of either party, providing the opposition with plenty of ammo and in a guilt by association way, helping to portray all R's as "radical".

Posted by: dave | December 19, 2007 12:21 AM | Report abuse

The underlying reason that Ron Paul is generating sufficient enthusiasm for 58,000+ people to put their money where their mouth is is that a number of Americans recognize that we need to return to a truly Constitutional national government. Such a government that exercised only the authority expressly given it by the Constitution would be beneficial on several fronts. First, it would be forced to go through the proper process and make Congress declare war, or if that was irresponsible, to keep us out of it. This should help prevent another mess like Iraq or Vietnam (both undeclared wars). Second, a reduction in the role of the national government would help us to stop deficit spending, even with the elimination of the income tax. Third, it has become increasingly obvious that this country is very divided. One has only to look at the red state/blue state map to see that. What many do not realize is that under a proper Constitutional government, this is not such a problem, since states will have increased authority to make policy appropriate for their citizens. Thus if the people of Massachusetts want to have a very liberal government and the people of Utah want to have a very conservative one, both can do so. This makes infinitely more sense than a one size fits all national government policy. It's what the founders intended in the Constitution and how Ron Paul hopes to govern.

Posted by: Andrew_Bramsen | December 19, 2007 12:16 AM | Report abuse

It means a whole bunch of us are sick and tired of the oligarchy in DC that rules both parties. It means we are tired of the MSM trying to keep America down by keeping its citizens uninformed, or informed of trivia.

We have come to realize that only MONEY buys policy. Individually we are not wealthy enough to compete with the numerous lobbies that control our government and media. Lobbies that have shoved policies that have bankrupted us morally and financially down our throat. But collectively we will garner the power to oust them even if it takes the rest of our lives.

RON PAUL is a warning to washington establishment. A warning that says we will go to ANY length to take back what's ours.


Posted by: dogsbestfriend | December 19, 2007 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Paul is raising money for two reasons. One, his base of support, libertarians, is comparatively well-off. Second, his population is more active than average online and so the cost of soliciting them, and the inconvenience of his supporters contributing, is much lower than normal.

He also builds lots of awareness, which leads to high-single digit support among Republican primary voters, or about 1% support or so among the whole electorate. That's where libertarians stand for now, and will until they can get a celebrity candidate who is better able to draw lots of attention to their ideas and get ordinary voters to listen. (Then they could get into double digits.)

Posted by: inonit | December 18, 2007 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Like others have said, there's a certain disaffected fringe that sees in Ron Paul something larger than just "politics as usual." These are people who have subconsciously absorbed the talking points version of high-school American history and hear in the words "liberty" and "freedom" more than just the buzzwords used to mask the shallowness of populism. But populism is very attractive, and the more desperate you are for some kind of "salvation," the more likely you are to give a bit extra--$6 million, for instance, or the hours of dedication required to swamp blog comment boards and informal online polls--to get to that promised land. If you look at it as a spectrum, you've got "normal" politicians like Romney or Edwards soliciting small donations from mildly interested people on the one hand, you've got Jim Jones convincing people to give their lives on the other, and somewhere in the half-inspiring, half-creepy middle-ground, just to the less-disturbing side of Scientology and Lyndon LaRouche, we have Ron Paul.

Posted by: niall.roberts | December 18, 2007 11:56 PM | Report abuse

The answer is rather simple.
Ron Paul comes across as the only candidate that is not part of the Washington Kleptocracy.
The last 20 years have shown a Washington both left and right so disconnected from America that our taxes have simply turned into tribute.
Ron Paul may be the close to a "throw all the bums out" vote. And that resoanates big time with a lot of people who have been steadily feeling disenfranchised by both parties.

Posted by: rgodzich | December 18, 2007 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul energizes a broad range of people, mostly political non-participants who don't want to be part of a game with an open secret: The job of a politician is to trick and/or bribe you to vote for them. Once they are in office, they will work tirelessly to increase their power, and throw breadcrumbs to special interest groups here and there along the way.

I don't think there's a big mystery here. People who go out and vote, who follow politics--the participants--are a minority. They can be likened to sports fans. They root for their team. They appreciate the strategy of the game, and don't really care that the game itself is meaningless (or in this case, destructive to life, liberty and happiness).

What is happening now can be likened to a stadium full of participants adorned in their Red Team / Blue Team paraphenalia being stormed by a mob of nerds and geeks and punks. The participants are standing around scratching their heads wondering why these people are suddenly taking an interest in football.

The people who Ron Paul is reaching, are the people who say, "To hell with the GAME! Nothing less is at stake than our lives and our freedoms. We want to be taken seriously, and we want the founding documents that enshrine our freedoms and supposedly govern our government to be taken seriously."

It doesn't really matter if people agree with everything he says, what matters is that he says it in spite of the fact that many do not. He stands honestly by his principles, as a leader should. Watching him on stage is not unlike watching Jean Luc Picard on Star Trek. This is an honest man who is seeking to do what he believes is right. He has a conscience.

In short, Ron Paul strikes a chord because he belongs to a species that has been absent from the halls of government for at least a century. Ron Paul is a Statesman, not a Politician.

Posted by: hisnameismatt | December 18, 2007 11:56 PM | Report abuse

We want Paul in the race because Paul will keep alive issues the other candidates (and their media allies) have tacitly agreed to ignore.

Posted by: dexterpeabody | December 18, 2007 11:47 PM | Report abuse

Just to set the record straight for those of you who think Dr. Paul is pristine I direct you to his earmark requests.

Sen. McCain requests no earmarks, whatsoever.

I think Dr. Paul's supporters have shown admirable energy and love of country, but some are way over the top.

Read the earmark requests.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 18, 2007 11:43 PM | Report abuse

This is kinda cute, having a CFR mouthpiece asking why people support Ron Paul. Are you truly bumfuzzled, or scared. There seems to be several reasons why people feel compeled to support Dr. Paul. Constitutionalism, Iraq, free markets, devaluation of the dollar, the central bank, the IRS, out of control federal bureaucracy, more than half a century of misguided foreign policy, sovreignty, globalization,and a combination of any or all. He's viewed as an honest statesman, more than a politician. There is a major difference. Basically, we have quite a few sheep that have left the flock and if they're as informed as they should be, they won't be coming back. Baaaaaa

Posted by: mckiemack26 | December 18, 2007 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents the return of isolationism - that is his appeal.

America is basically isolationist - a nation of immigrants that has already left the world behind, why go back?

I'm not saying Ron Paul is populist, however there is a strong trend toward populism in America today as well.

Isolationism isn't that bad.

Ask George Washgington, lets be free of entangling alliances. YOu have heard that before, but doesn't it make more sense today than ever before?

Posted by: Miata7 | December 18, 2007 11:38 PM | Report abuse

Don't look at it too narrowly, as it seems you might be. Ron Paul is raising massive funds and pulling in serious support from the American people because he speaks to the heart of what this country is supposed to be about: individual liberty. His popularity isn't about a single issue. He may get his hook in you with an issue like the war, or the economy, but once the hook is in you quickly begin to see the whole picture and then begin to support him for his entire philosophy of freedom.

Posted by: anarchicluv | December 18, 2007 11:36 PM | Report abuse

This is far enough down the list that I guess it will never be read, but let me add my own two cents...

The reasons for Paul's support and his fundraising are related, but quite different.

The reason for his support is well-documented in all the above posts. His ideas are the traditional ideals of the American republic, ones that have not been spoken by the political class in about two decades. A long dormant hunger for these basic ideals has been awakened by his campaign.

The fundraising is a different phenomenon though. I really believe the exuberant fundraising is a result of the dismissiveness of the mainstream media. If the media had been granting Ron Paul equal time and fair coverage throughout the campaign, I am guessing the fundraising totals would be lower. His support would no doubt be broader, but there would be less of sense that supporters' only weapon in the battle for the attention of the media is fundraising. If you're a Hillary fan or a Mitt fan, why bother donating? Your gal or guy is discussed every night on TV.

As a seasoned political observer, I can tell you without question that the media clearly picked a few early, brand-name candidates upon which to focus their attention and left the others to scramble for the remaining crumbs. Free early exposure leads to respectable placement in early polls which leads to more exposure and so forth. Hillary, Barak and Edwards on the Democratic side. Giuliani, Romney, and McCain on the Republican side. Virtually every one was mentioned in every political discussion since coverage of the primaries first began. That name recognition is priceless, and it comes to these anointed candidates for free. But what of a Dodd, or a Biden, or a Hunter? It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that they will succumb when the American public is not even informed of their existence or their ideas.

Despite such a hostile environment, Paul's candidacy has survived because of its ideas. But it cannot prosper unless the media gives it equal footing with that of the anointed leaders. Paul's supporters know this, and since emails, straw polls, and the occasional profanity failed to make a dent, they went with the only tool they knew the media could not resist. Cash money.

Posted by: hardgral | December 18, 2007 11:33 PM | Report abuse

How can you be so surprised? Dr. Paul actually a person of character, consistency, and honesty. He is also the only presidential candidate who is actually serious about balancing the budget. People like to talk about it but nobody will actually do it -- except Ron Paul.

Posted by: darb02 | December 18, 2007 11:32 PM | Report abuse

The Washington insiders do not know what to make of the Ron Paul's because the campaign is as much by the people and for the people as it is Ron Paul's campaign. Much like we want our government to run. Not directed from on high by plutocrats running spin machines and bundle factories. The internet is the greatest gift to our democratic republic since the printing press. Information is now easily acquired by little effort and flows in multiple ways , not be constrained by gatekeepers anymore. People can mobilize, pull and push information and work in ad-hock ways to solve problems unheard until recently. It takes a libertarian like Ron Paul to have an understanding of the power unleashed by decentralization of effort. The mostly typical social authoritarians who work in Washington politics haven't a clue, but leading edge business's have learned the power of decentralization and solving problems by ad hocking resources and information. Washington and most of the political establishment campaign and govern with 19th century authoritarian, top-down culture and technology . Ron Paul is truly ahead of any other candidate running for president by recognizing that politics can be truly open and democratic with today's information technology . If he runs the government like he runs his campaign, he will truly be the best president we have ever had.

DF Robichaux

Posted by: davrobi2 | December 18, 2007 11:23 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to keep this very simple. It is something Ron Paul touched upon tonight on Glenn Beck's show.

The republican party has gone AWOL, and are far too close to the "conservative religious right" in my opinion.

The Republicans stand for economic liberty, but do not stand for personal liberty. They believe they are morally superior in their beliefs and philosophies. They are arrogant and believe they have the right, authority, and duty to impose their "goodness" upon everyone else. They do not believe in individual liberty or privacy. They believe in the privacy of government. They are willing to sacrifice personal liberty for security.

The democrats stand for personal liberty, but not economic liberty. They believe they have the right and duty to forcefully take from certain people in order to help others. This of course is in complete contradiction to the concept of liberty. And if this wasn't enough, none of their programs have even worked. Despite the fact that so many of their programs are absolute failures (social security, government supervised health care, public education, welfare, farm subsidies, et cetera), they keep on pushing them, claiming that they only need more money. Somehow, they do not realize that government is the problem, not the solution, yet their solution to every single problem is more government. Since the government has gotten involved in "charity," the problems have only gotten worse, because contrary to what the democrats believe, they do not know best. They are wasteful bureaucrats that can't seem to understand the concept that individuals know how to best spend, invest, and charitably donate their own money.

Ron Paul represents the best of both worlds. He's also a straight talker which I admire and he's also fairly well read in history and economics, although by no means an expert.

This is why I support him, despite the fact that he is a terrible orator in my opinion (he's a great author though).

Andrew Camacho

Posted by: apc3161 | December 18, 2007 11:23 PM | Report abuse

I'm a polltaker. Just today I asked a woman in Michigan who she planned to vote for in the presidential primary on January 15, and she said Ron Paul -- the first time I've ever had someone say that she was going to support this candidate. She was a Democrat who was going to cross party lines to support him, and she did not volunteer why. Another polltaker mentioned that he had a Paul voter, too.

It could be that his fund-raising has finally gotten him more widespread attention, and that people are now starting to take him into more serious consideration. I suppose that Huckabee having come out of nearly nowhere to take the lead in Iowa and perhaps nationally might have led some voters to think that it's not impossible to support a candidate outside of what had been the first tier and see that candidate have a chance, and grow more support in the polls.

Paul was the Libertarian nominee for President once, if I remember right. Even if Paul can't make a real run at the GOP nomination, he ought to be the Libertarian nominee again in 2008. If the Republicans do nominate Huckabee -- and I've thought all along that Giulianni's support was shallow -- Huckabee would be especially vulnerable to a Paul third party bid, given their differences over tax and spend issues. The question remains open over whether the sane and sensible Chamber of Commerce Republicans would be able to take Ron Paul seriously, but Paul could well be to the Republicans just what Ralph Nader has been to the Democrats for so long.

Then again, it is no longer inconceivable that Ron Paul could be the first Libertarian candidate elected to the White House. It's an incredible long shot, yes, but it's not impossible.

And it would be the political story of the century if it did happen.

Posted by: tcost1 | December 18, 2007 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Not a hard question. We love the man, that's why we defend him and give him that kind of money. Could anybody love Giuliani? Or Hillary? If you saw Giuliani or Hillary coming at you in a dark alley wouldn't you rather run the other way? The Evangelicals love Huckabee because he's one of their own, but that's it. As people realize that Dr Paul speaks for what the Founding Fathers intended, even more will join in the lovefest and rEVOLution.

Posted by: washpost3 | December 18, 2007 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Once called the lunatic fringe, kooks and many other names we are now being recognized. No one is laughing now!
Ron Paul isn't leading in the polls because the mainstream media doesn't want to acknowledge he even exists. He's not a "good ole boy" he doesn't "play ball" and that is scaring the heck out of Washington and the media.
Mohandas Gandhi once said, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win!"
Well guess what..."The Sheeple Have Awakened!"
The only journalist with nuggets big enough to support Ron Paul is CNN's Jack Cafferty and Tucker Carlson, and here I thought CNN was a liberal leftist network.
Be a part of the dream! There is hope for America! We can and will take back our government!

Posted by: bubblehed738 | December 18, 2007 11:19 PM | Report abuse

PS To ALL other current and future candidates:


STOP PANDERING FOR VOTES(<-----YOU LOOK RETARDED).i.e., Hillary not being able say if she likes a Chicago or a New York baseball team for fear of distancing voters.YOU ARE A SPAZ WOMAN!!

Posted by: misterbarnes | December 18, 2007 11:16 PM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's support mean?

Ron Paul's support means that it has a lot of living up to do. His virtual support must metamorphous into a physical support that votes at the polls. Paul's internet base must also convert many traditional voters along the way too. No one questions their commitment, passion, creativity or willingness to part with what money they can. However, they do question turnout and the void between traditional polls and internet numbers. Individual supporters must also continue to quickly progress in their type and level of involvement. If they are telling friends they must start telling strangers. If they are sending emails then they must start making calls and canvassing. They have an uphill battle against overwhelmingly improbable odds and I am proud to be one of them. Finally, they must surprise in the early primaries in order to cure the skepticism of voters in the rest of the states who say they would vote for him if they thought he had a chance. Then when he is interviewed by mainstream media they will cease to snicker when they ask questions and cease to ask if he will run as a 3rd party candidate.

Ron Paul 2008

Posted by: googles21 | December 18, 2007 11:11 PM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's support mean?

Ron Paul's support means that it has a lot of living up to do. His virtual support must metamorphous into a physical support that votes at the polls. Paul's internet base must also convert many traditional voters along the way too. No one questions their commitment, passion, creativity or willingness to part with what money they can. However, they do question turnout and the void between traditional polls and internet numbers. Individual supporters must also continue to quickly progress in their type and level of involvement. If they are telling friends they must start telling strangers. If they are sending emails then they must start making calls and canvassing. They have an uphill battle against overwhelmingly improbable odds and I am proud to be one of them. Finally, they must surprise in the early primaries in order to cure the skepticism of voters in the rest of the states who say they would vote for him if they thought he had a chance. Then when he is interviewed by mainstream media they will cease to snicker when they ask questions and cease to ask if he will run as a 3rd party candidacy.

Ron Paul 2008

Posted by: googles21 | December 18, 2007 11:09 PM | Report abuse

As the honorable John McCain said, Ron Paul is the most honest guy in Washington. Other candidates should STOP THE NON-SENSE and get back to having some real values. HONESTY would be a good start.

I would rather have an honest guy who i don't always agree with running the country than a lying politician who I share the same ideas. The ends DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS!!

I still can not understand how people continue to support candidates when the candidates have no honor, integrity or honesty. It's disgusting.

Anyone in office now should be pushed to the curb so people that act in the country's best interest can step up and lead us.

"Politician" should no longer be a career for people to have. always looking to get reelected and worrying about self preservation is not conducive to being a good leader.

RON PAUL is a great role model and a true Patriot. RP2008

Posted by: misterbarnes | December 18, 2007 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Dave posits a Democratic conspiracy to promote a conservative Republican, but to what end? Why spend millions to push Ron Paul from 2% in the polls to 7%?

Conservatives have been calling Ron Paul supporters conspiracy theorists all along, but some of the most bizarre conspiracy theories are the ones that try to explain Ron Paul's legions of enthusiastic supporters.

Posted by: drd6000 | December 18, 2007 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul attracts the dissaffected fringe.

Posted by: Phil6 | December 18, 2007 11:07 PM | Report abuse

The mainstream media and the political experts have been wrong about Ron Paul since he entered the race in March.

He was never "the longest of long shots", nor was he "obscure", or "little known outside his home district", from which paradoxically, he kept getting reelected by large margins, with the help of funds raised nationwide.

No, Ron Paul was already a hero to Constitutionalists and libertarians, and a legend on the Internet. Just because Libertarians get 1 or 2% in elections doesn't mean there aren't a lot more than 2% of us out here.

With his opposition to the Iraq war, and his defense of civil liberties, Ron Paul is also on the verge of becoming a hero to progressives, who tolerate his socially conservative views because he wouldn't force them on people.

But beyond those groups on the left and right ends of the political spectrum, Ron Paul is arguably the most mainstream candidate. He is the only major party candidate at the intersection of the majority American opinion on ending the war, stopping illegal immigration, cutting government spending, balancing the budget, cutting taxes, and protecting our Constitutional rights.

What's behind his amazing fundraising success?

Ron Paul has more actual, active supporters than all of the other candidates combined. He has more volunteers, more straw poll wins, more internet poll wins, more signs, more YouTube viewers, more people out talking about him, and now, more donors.

It's only the over-reliance on telephone polling that has prevented the media from seeing this. Even if the polls were accurate, they still would be meaningless -- most people simply haven't decided yet, regardless of what they tell the pollsters to get them off the phone. I think Huckabee's recent rise proved that conclusively.

Posted by: drd6000 | December 18, 2007 11:03 PM | Report abuse

What Does Ron Paul's Support Mean? Interesting. Odd that there are numerous people, some on this blog, that send in their little contribution, sometimes reportedly for the first time ever. There are people that talk about his ideas and how they move them. And yet, when it comes to going out and actually voting for the man, these people suddenly disappear. So either we are to believe that the committment stops at the checkbook or there are people putting their money where it matters but have no intention of voting for Dr. Paul. I have a hard time figuring that if you are so ticked off with the establishment or feel so passionate about Paul's libertarian ideas, that you are going to contribute to but not vote for Ron Paul. That seems illogical to me. That leaves people sending money to him with no intention of voting for him. Who would those people be? Who gains most from a surging Paul that pushes the least electable R candidate into the mix to futher splinter the GOP or possibly form a third party? The Democrats. I think the most logical explanation is that there is a group of MoveOn type Dems that is promoting and funding the completely unelectable Ron Paul.

Posted by: dave | December 18, 2007 11:00 PM | Report abuse

This is America fighting to restore and protect her constitutional integrity, her national sovereignty, her hard-earned prosperity, her hard-won liberty, her future, her reputation in the world. This is free speech and citizen-driven election process at its finest. Damn mainstream corporate-owned media who "spins" to tell us who is best for us, or who is most "presidential" based on image, or who is "electable" based on rhetoric they think we want to hear ("smoke"). We are working in defiance of the propaganda machines. The internet is the new "free press". It is the only means available to ordinary American citizens to take back the democratic process and elect someone who truly represents our interests, not the corporations who own the TV and newspaper media. Go America!

Posted by: msrbic | December 18, 2007 10:57 PM | Report abuse

The state of affairs of the United States is in an awful mess. Who will clean it up if not Ron Paul? Certainly not the same old politians with the same old rhetoric.
The 'silent majority' is back, and we mean business.

Posted by: whodowl | December 18, 2007 10:55 PM | Report abuse

How did Congressman Ron Paul collect $6 million in one day?

OK, I'm a retired certified public acountant, and I have some ideas that may help explain most of that fundraising success.

Ron Paul is a catch basin for various political opinions. He's been around a LONG time he's consistent on his issues and his voting record, and the present political situation is a perfect storm from which he can emerge as a first-tier candidate. So middle class voters email him a credit card donation of $50 or $100 dollars.

What middle class voters, specifically? Who are these people?

They fit into one or more of the following categories:

#1 Goldwater-Reagan republicans, furious that the party has signed on with the religious right and turned into a deficit-generating war party (Bush 41 ran up record deficits after the cold war was won and got the USA into 3 wars (Panama, Iraq I, and Somalia). Bush 43 ran up higher record deficits and got us into Iraq II on faulty intelligence and a preposterous occupation strategy.

#2 Anti-war democrats furious that their own party became a congressional majority after the 2006 elections and has been entirely ineffective in terminating the war. The thre major democratic candidates (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) will not promise to end this quagmire in their first term! Kucinich and Gravel didn't get political traction. So their anti-war fury makes Paul's CONSISTENT anti-war voting record, campaign war chest and trustworthy consistency worth voting their pocketbooks for.

#3: Independent voters, especially the 70% who are against the war and very especially those who realize the country is broke, can't keep its Medicare promises and is staring down the barrel of a monetary crisis.

#4: Voters who want a tough stance on immigration, especially, particularly, Perot voters in 1992 who are still angry and still out there. I suspect a lot of these folks were for McCain early, but have split off because of the perceived "soft" stance McCain has on illegal aliens. These voters want a fence on the southern border and they are keenly aware that NAFTA was never popular, never won a poll, but got enacted anyway.

#5 Young voters, especially college students, who know that their future is mortgaged and that they will get a puny or meaningless version of bankrupted medicare and social security for themselves. They want dollar stability and a plan to end trade deficits so they have a secure economic future. They correctly feel both parties have been co-opted to support a status quo that will suffocate the next generation.

#6 Actual troops serving in Iraq, who are more likely to donate to Paul than to any other candidate.

#7 Small business owners who feel the republian party is no longer the party of business and that the democrats want to regulate and bleed them to death.

#8 bloggers and techies, especially those who do research on the internet as a hobby and "fell into" Ron Paul's positions and speeches. These tend to be very independent-minded people who also tend to be furious about federal snooping and database sorting by the present administration.

#9 "old-fashioned" humanitarians, the kind of people who are lifelong supporters of the Geneva Conventions and admirers of Clara Barton. There is a segment of the American population that is fiercely proud of the USA tradition of humane treatment of prisoners and is utterly furious about this administration (particularly Abu Ghriab) and about the "soft" stance on torture of the Democratic majority in Congress since taking over the leadership in January, 2007. These are probably the very most ardent supporters of Ron Paul, the center of his pastiche of followers.

#10. Libertarians. Alone, they were never able to recruit groups one through nine above. Paul has been able to do it because of a consistent voting record and a political consistency about his small-government ideology.

And what happened was that segments one through ten above ponied up the money on the internet (which most of them are quite comfortable with). They want to make trouble. They want to shake up a status quo that disgusts them.

And that's how Ron Paul got $6 million in one day and $18.3 million (and counting) this quarter.


Posted by: urbancoyotesfounder | December 18, 2007 10:46 PM | Report abuse

How did Congressman Ron Paul collect $6 million in one day?

OK, I'm a retired certified public acountant, and I have some ideas that may help explain most of that fundraising success.

Ron Paul is a catch basin for various political opinions. He's been around a LONG time he's consistent on his issues and his voting record, and the present political situation is a perfect storm from which he can emerge as a first-tier candidate. So middle class voters email him a credit card donation of $50 or $100 dollars.

What middle class voters, specifically? Who are these people?

They fit into one or more of the following categories:

#1 Goldwater-Reagan republicans, furious that the party has signed on with the religious right and turned into a deficit-generating war party (Bush 41 ran up record deficits after the cold war was won and got the USA into 3 wars (Panama, Iraq I, and Somalia). Bush 43 ran up higher record deficits and got us into Iraq II on faulty intelligence and a preposterous occupation strategy.

#2 Anti-war democrats furious that their own party became a congressional majority after the 2006 elections yet has been entirely ineffective in terminating the war. The three major democratic candidates (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) will not promise to end this quagmire in their first term! Kucinich and Gravel didn't get political traction. So their anti-war fury makes Paul's CONSISTENT anti-war voting record, campaign war chest and trustworthy consistency worth voting their pocketbooks for.

#3: Independent voters, especially the 70% who are against the war and very especially those who realize the country is broke, can't keep its Medicare promises and is staring down the barrel of a monetary crisis.

#4: Voters who want a tough stance on immigration, especially, particularly, Perot voters in 1992 who are still angry and still out there. I suspect a lot of these folks were for McCain early, but have split off because of the perceived "soft" stance McCain has on illegal aliens. These voters want a fence on the southern border and they are keenly aware that NAFTA was never popular, never won a poll, but got enacted anyway.

#5 Young voters, especially college students, who know that their future is mortgaged and that they will get a puny or meaningless version of bankrupted medicare and social security for themselves. They want dollar stability and a plan to end trade deficits so they have a secure economic future. They correctly feel both parties have been co-opted to support a status quo that will suffocate the next generation.

#6 Actual troops serving in Iraq, who are more likely to donate to Paul than to any other candidate.

#7 Small business owners who feel the republian party is no longer the party of business and that the democrats want to regulate and bleed them to death.

#8 bloggers and techies, especially those who do research on the internet as a hobby and "fell into" Ron Paul's positions and speeches. These tend to be very independent-minded people who also tend to be furious about federal internet snooping and database sorting by the present administration.

#9 "old-fashioned" humanitarians, the kind of people who are lifelong supporters of the Geneva Conventions and admirers of Clara Barton. There is a segment of the American population that is fiercely proud of the USA tradition of humane treatment of prisoners and is utterly furious about this administration (particularly Abu Ghriab) and about the "soft" stance on torture of the Democratic majority in Congress since taking over the leadership in January, 2007. These are probably the very most ardent supporters of Ron Paul, the center of his pastiche of followers.

#10. Libertarians. Alone, they were never able to recruit groups one through nine above. Paul has been able to do it because of a consistent voting record and a political consistency about his small-government ideology.

And what happened was that segments one through ten above ponied up the money on the internet (which most of them are quite comfortable with surfing and on spending money electronically). They want to make trouble. They want to shake up a status quo that disgusts them.

And that's how Ron Paul got $6 million in one day and $18.3 million (and counting) this quarter.


Posted by: urbancoyotesfounder | December 18, 2007 10:42 PM | Report abuse

What you are seeing is a rising up of intelligent, well-read people who have reached their peak of being taxed to death, who are under terrible economic pressure, and experiencing that nagging, uncomfortable feeling in the pit of the stomach that says "something is really wrong".

We were too busy with our lives to understand and too busy to think about what we might do, if anything, and more than that - we were afraid to find out. We were alerted by other people who had taken the time to educate us, to Google Ron Paul, Watch This Video, Read This, Please Help!

We woke up, and we read and Googled and researched. And, we found hope in Dr. Paul. That nagging feeling now has a name - it's name is Oppression. Now we have something to work toward eliminating for ourselves, our families, our friends and for future generations.

We use our common sense to work on our goals, set targets, and make investments. Like any savvy investor, we take the fewest risks to reap the highest rewards.

Supporting Ron Paul is the most rewarding investment of time and money that I've ever made.

Posted by: dlwellskc | December 18, 2007 10:36 PM | Report abuse

This $6 million that was raised on Ron Paul's behalf shows just how out of touch mainstream media is. They haven't noticed that most people don't want more of the same like Hillary, Guiliani, Romney and the like. Americans want real change. Ron Paul provides that. Lots of very small people getting together trying to compete against the free media blitz the other candidates get. Ron Paul wins most of the Staw Polls yet no one reports it. Check for yourself Ron Paul wins most of them. What do the people have to do to show you that Ron Paul is the best candidate?

Posted by: Sappy | December 18, 2007 10:34 PM | Report abuse

The fact of the matter is Ron Paul is The only candidate that hasnt sold his soul to big corperations, He is truely a man of the people, and has the courage to lead this country back to greatness.

Posted by: donk290 | December 18, 2007 10:30 PM | Report abuse

I am surprised The Fix does not understand that a genuine revolution is occurring in this country. We the people want our government to uphold and abide by the supreme law of the land, The Constitution Of The United States Of America. We are sick & tired of being lied to. We know Ron Paul cannot be bought nor influenced, he is as honest a politician as you'll find anywhere and we the people are rallying behind the cause his candidacy represents = Limited Constitutional Government. The common citizen, like me, understand that our nation is in peril and we are rising up to collectively save Our Great Country. Our sovereignty is at stake!!! Restore The Republic! We are not a democracy, but a republic. Restore the balance of power... Wake up America & Google Ron Paul!!! Vote Ron Paul 4 FREEDOM!!! Your Liberty and Freedom and that of your children's are at stake.

Posted by: ProfessionalCloser | December 18, 2007 10:28 PM | Report abuse

It's all about the economy, stupid! Sound familiar? This was the Carvel mantra for the Clinton campaign and the same values hold true today.

Dr. Paul is the ONLY candidate that I find who is able to speak intelligently about the perils that our economy faces, and what needs to be done to fix it. No one else is talking about the economy.

Everyone else wants to talk about what they will spend more money on. We cannot continue tax and spend. It's time to show restraint...except in my enthusiasm for Ron Paul!


Posted by: stoutmaker72 | December 18, 2007 10:25 PM | Report abuse

I support Ron Paul because of his integrity, his connectness with the average person, who knows that the federal government is totally out of control. The politicians refuse to listen to the people. They forget they are not the government, only the representatives of the people. It's The People WHO are the government, not the other way around and We The People Demand Our Government Back!

I've been a republican, democrat and independent. I'm fed up and now I've re-registered as a republican to vote for a man who WILL finally bring Change to this country. NO other candidate will bring Real Change. NO ONE.

Every Congressman and Senator swears an oath to the Constitution, but none of them seem to know what that means - Only Dr. Paul really takes his Oath seriously and the People of the United States are waking up and seeing that he is the only choice for President that makes sense.

I strongly suspect that the next step in the Ron Paul Revolution is for individual Americans, to select candidates from amongst themselves on a grass-roots basis to run for the House of Representatives to support Dr. Paul in his office of the Presidency. This would include taking on republicans and democrats currently in office.

The political establishment do not YET understand that Ron Paul's candidancy is a grass-roots effort to take back our government. Dr. Paul is merely the spokesman.

This movement will not go away. This is NOT a one-time effort. IF any other politician is elected President in 2008, Dr. Paul's ideas will haunt then for the next 4 years.

Posted by: rmat33 | December 18, 2007 10:18 PM | Report abuse

I do honestly beleive that the polls are only showing about half of Ron Paul's actual support level, only time will tell on that.

That said, the growth of new media; the growth of video games, the growth of social networking, is all fundamentally based on the creation of a feedback loop (interactivity). The fundraising ticker on the Ron Paul website, Youtube, Facebook, Myspace, forums, blogging, candidate accessibility, personal messages from the candidate through email. These are the things that make somebody feel like they're a part of something organic and real. It also makes them feel responsible / accountable for the ultimate success or failure of the campaign. That's the key element that pushes somebody bust out their credit card.

Posted by: brad | December 18, 2007 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's haul is a result of his message of peace and freedom and his ability to bypass the old media. He speaks the truth and people of all political persuasions respect that, even if they don't agree with 100% of his positions. The masses are fed up with the phony candidates that the old media try to shove down our throat. The "anointed" candidates are unacceptable to anyone who does their own research.

Posted by: jamesbabb | December 18, 2007 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's appeal is much the same as Howard Dean's appeal-- they are two guys who speak their mind, and are not certified, blow-dried products of the political establishment. The American electorate is just itching to overturn the status quo, and voices like Ron Paul and Howard Dean are welcome refreshments, regardless of the substance of their message.

I don't mean to equate Dean and Paul in a policy sense; Dean is a mainstream, centrist kind of guy, while I view Paul as a bit of a nut case. But they both offer us something other than the empty suits who are approved and nominated by the media and the council of political elders. For that, I thank them both...

Posted by: prj | December 18, 2007 10:12 PM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's financial support mean - I think thats a great question more important than the man himself - in the end the financial support shows there is much support for Dr. Pauls views; it's an idea, a general feeling - that we as Americans deserve better. We need politicians that are themselves constitutionalists, that follow the law and do not heed to special interests, lobbyists, or seek to impose their will (rather than the will of the American people) on the general citizenry. Furthermore the Ron Paul Revolution is a great grassroots idea, but until more politicians pay heed to what the American people want, and the general voting population stops voting for "the lesser of two evils" rather than voting for the best candidate, there is little hope even for such a well financed movement, sadly its the ignorance and apathy of the American people who are to blame. Until power is restored to the people, which over the years has been stolen from us on both sides of the political spectrum (with unions, health care & defense companies being prime examples) - the American people will continue to be treated like dogs until the quest for greed and control ceases. So its time to face reality, and acknowledge that things have gone too far for some time now, and there is little hope in the current system - which is why it is imperative for us to change the system from within by always voting to reduce the power of the federal government, and return power to the states and to the people. We are now outsiders, our country as been taken from us long ago - if you still you think you live in a nation of "we the people", and think that we live in a free country think again... our only real recourse in taking back out county is from within, and in working the system as best we can for the sake of freedom.

-- Go Ron Paul !
Steve Cole

Posted by: atomicblast2000 | December 18, 2007 10:10 PM | Report abuse

I was there on that hot day in August at the Straw Poll, standing in the heat from sunup to sundown for Dr. Paul. I drove 500 miles with 4 people i had never seen before in my entire life; leaving behind a loving husband and little boy to do this on a day's planning.

Why? Not because i am angry. Not because i hate; but because i love. Because there is hope for America. Up until this point i assumed i had no role to play - that the government had no role for me, or my voice. Dr. Paul speaks plainly and openly about the things that we are concerned with. Dr. Paul offers real, tangible solutions - not to fix things overnight, but to start us on a path and lead to where we need to go. Dr. Paul doesn't speak in one-liners and trite feel-good catchphrases that appeal to the lowest common denominator, but instead addresses us as thinking adults genuinely concerned with the health of our nation. And above all else - Dr. Paul leads by example... he does not say one thing, for history to only reveal another. Dr. Paul has renewed the fount of hope in me, and has inspired me to live my life as he does - by my actions, and not just my words.

Posted by: Santana28hhh | December 18, 2007 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Ooo, I should add that that strain of political thought appeals to maybe 10% of the American electorate, tops. But that that 10% has been so under-represented and so ignored in recent years has contributed to the vehemence of their support of Paul and their willingness to contribute. Were there more candidates like Paul running for a variety of offices, the money would have to be spread around more, and supporters would maybe be paying a little more attention to a given candidate's chance of winning.

Posted by: novamatt | December 18, 2007 9:58 PM | Report abuse

I'd say the answer is simply this: Ron Paul has fewer supporters than mainstream candidates, but those he has are a lot more engaged.

Posted by: Bud0 | December 18, 2007 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is the latest incubation of a strain of American political thought that stretches back to the Whiskey Rebellion, if not earlier. This is a variety of right-wing populism, the sort that is frightened most by an activist elitist=controlled government and financial system in cahoots with the toiling, clutching masses to deprive the small landholders, the shopkeepers, the the small-town professional class, of its hard-won and hard-bitten wealth and status.

Ron Paul is a Bircher. And an Anti-Mason. And a Know-Nothing. And a Taft (and Goldwater) Republican. And a Copperhead and Jacksonian Democrat. And a Prohibitionist. He's the village rising up to fight back against the city. He's the true believer holding up the torch in the dark night of glad-handing and log-rolling politicians.

Not that I support any of this. The isolationist, frontier, laissez-faire, ubi-sant mythology Paul and his supporters traffic in is pretty clearly (to me, anyway) a cockeyed view of the world. But it does exist, has always existed in American political thought, and will likely continue to exist as long as there's a petit bourgeois class that feels hemmed in and betrayed by the governing power structures.

Posted by: novamatt | December 18, 2007 9:43 PM | Report abuse

"What does Paul's financial success mean?"

It means a free and unregulated Internet has changed American Politics forever.

It means corporate media has become inconsequential and irrelevant, and that so called "scientific" polls are about as scientific as phrenology.

It means the People no longer buy into the false Left/Right - Republican/Democrat paradigm.

But most of all, it means you better to get used to saying President Ron Paul, because he's about to become the 44th President of the United States.

Posted by: grannymiller | December 18, 2007 9:42 PM | Report abuse

It is not the size of his purse but how he spends the money that will count. Howard Dean raised tons of money but mismanaged effectively ending his campaign when returns were less than positive. If Ron Paul places well then the money will continue to pour in. If Ron Paul does not have good poll showings early the money will dry up. However, if he manages his campaign funds wisely, he can stay in the race longer despite early results. The longer he stays in the better his chances of being heard.

Posted by: clwhitworth | December 18, 2007 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is gaining ground because he actually stands for something, namely the Constitution. We have veered too far off course and the voters know it.

Posted by: cowboy_at_the_falls | December 18, 2007 9:38 PM | Report abuse

"what you think (or believe) is behind the amount of money that Paul has collected."

The voters love the message of freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, and limited federal government. The message is spreading and the message is attracting people to support the campaign for President of Dr. Ron Paul.

Posted by: johnB2 | December 18, 2007 9:36 PM | Report abuse

I agree in large part to the comment submitted by monkey.on.keyboard... I agree that the support Congressman Paul has enjoyed is due in part to the electorate's desire for real change.

I would add however that I think his support at the grassroots level is more than an online presence. He has drawn the largest republican crowds at his rallies (est 5,000.00 in Philadelphia), and large groups of supporters are temporarily relocating to early primary states in order to spread the message.

I am a young conservative who was originally attracted to Dr. Paul for his position of foreign intervention, but his support is not simply described by the so called "20% of the electorate is undecided" message. He is tapping into various niche groups that no other candidate is speaking to. True fiscal conservatives and balanced budget advocates, non-interventionist doves, monetary policy reformers, and young people who are concerned about the long term solvency of Social Security and Medicare.

These "pockets" of support have the capability to catch on with mainstream voters, but the overall success of the campaign will rest on his ability to convince average voters that these issues matter to them...

I hope he achieves that aim... either as a republican... or as an independent.


Posted by: maroonpk | December 18, 2007 9:27 PM | Report abuse

The media is invested in a narrative summarizing this as a campaign about "change" -- and it's easy to see people writing Paul off as a just a variation on that "apox on both your houses" sort of spoiler with a message the picks up the disaffected.

But this is just too simple (and would be just a lazy analysis) For the past 8 years, the scope of political discourse in our country has shrunk. Questions about the size of government that were completely mainstream in the Republican Party in the early 90s are now somehow branded "fringe". Government's growth is just taken for granted and accepted as a given.

For the past 8 years there have been false choices offered...either you cheered for the Republicans (who wanted to expand government's role in nation-building Iraq and Afganistan, and demanded evermore executive branch power in signing statements, torture, Guantanamo Bay, etc) or you cheered for the Democrats (who mostly went along with the Republicans on all the nation building and signing statement and domestic wiretapping stuff, but also wanted to expand entitlements and increase government's role in health care and other domestic spending, ).

To critical consumers of the news who think outside-the-box, Paul is a breath of fresh air. He represents what a lot of us have been thinking for a long time.

Here's a candidate who is for consistently smaller government, fiscal responsibility, and stepping back from the Executive branch power-grabs and foreign policy horrors of the Bush years. At the same time, he's not going to hand my health care over to the same government that can't even manage to respond to a natural disaster.

Posted by: heartlandmoderategal | December 18, 2007 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul supporters are some of the most well-informed citizens who are concerned about
1. The deficit and ridiculous SPENDING
2. Foreign Wars that THREATEN national security
3. i repeat economy, economy, economy
Ron Paul's stances concerning these issues are painfully transparent which is what attracts people who have been waiting for someone who is refreshingly honest. He would restore honesty and integrity to the White House instead of spreading more fear like the neo-cons or false hope like Barack-no-substance-Obama

Posted by: hoya937 | December 18, 2007 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's success is not a mystery. It is logical. None of us will agree with him on every issue. But he cuts across age barriers and party lines. He talks about the age old argument of big federal control vs states rights. He really tries to stay true to the Founding Fathers in terms of position on issues and believes in his heart that this is correct. I think his genuine feelings and thoughts resonate with folks who just want to hear the truth, act in good faith and keep the republic going. He says many things that are actually true. How novel is that? And he does not want you to vote for him. He wants you to vote on principal. Gee, what a novel idea. I have supported Dr. Benjamin Spock, Ronald Reagan, and dems and republicans and those in third or no parties. It is not the party, it is the individual, the truthfulness, the sincere individual not bought by the establishment. And by the way, the reason the media tries to squash Ron Paul is because he knows the real facts on insurance, the AMA, the insurance companies and the big drug and medical equipment companies. Think about it.... what industry is the number one advertiser on television? jm

Posted by: janmarie1 | December 18, 2007 9:15 PM | Report abuse

"I happen to be a First Amendment absolutist who believes in the right to
free speech with no exceptions. All right, I'll admit that I'm on record as
advocating that people who show other people slides of their trip to Europe
should be arrested and put in jail for a very long time. We all have our

Calvin Trillin, Columnist, 1997

Do any of Ron Paul's supporters think this is worth even a smile?

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | December 18, 2007 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Jeezus, CC-- be careful what you ask for.

Posted by: drindl | December 18, 2007 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul's fundraising success means one thing, and one thing alone, the process has been silently and cleverly rigged over the years. The polls are rigged, the media's coverage is rigged, the voting is rigged, and the ballot counts are rigged.

Each one of these points is a matter of public record, but the deafening media blackout on these and so many related matters is proof positive (for anyone interested in drawing a rational conclusion from an irrefutable premise) that THE POLITICAL PROCESS IS A SHOW PUT ON FOR THE HOI POLLOI TO ENABLE THE ELITE TO CROWN A PREDETERMINED ROYALTY, ONE OF THEIR OWN, WITHOUT A WHIFF OF SUSPICION ON THE RABBLE'S PART.

A pretend fight, a manufactured outcome, at every step of the way.

Ron Paul may have made the most recent such coronation an impossibility by an act of Divine Providence, but unless he continues to be protected by that same Providence, the elite will take him out as soon as he begins to pose a real threat.

The media, Parrots for the New World Order!!!

That's what the good doctor's success means.

Bob Coffey

Posted by: robts_coffey | December 18, 2007 9:09 PM | Report abuse

True anarchy is the current robbing of our US Treasury, land plunder for toll roads and the never ending deficit that threatens to leave us homeless in the Nation our fathers conquered.

Posted by: theusrepublic | December 18, 2007 9:08 PM | Report abuse

His financial success means that among other things, Dr Ron Paul (and John McCain) represent the only two candidates running for President who the citizens of the USA feel can be trusted to be honest irrespective of the consequences.

Posted by: earlinga | December 18, 2007 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success means that a significant number of voters are looking for a new direction in Washington. Ron Paul's straight forward candor with the public is a welcome breath of fresh air to the political arena. The new direction of federal fiscal responsibility is desparately needed in Washington.

Posted by: lmielke | December 18, 2007 9:03 PM | Report abuse

This money was given because Ron Paul is the only candidate who is trustworthy and honest, in comparison to the rest of today's politicians who have less than stellar character. The money was also given, because he is the only candidate who will bring our troops home, plus secure our borders. But, mostly I believe so many are giving money like never before, because they see Ron Paul as our LAST CHANCE to save this country. We trust him. Furthermore, the man really cares about you and me. He's not phony, nor is he "power" motivated, as so many of the rest of the candidates on both sides appear to be.

The story is a REALLY BIG ONE, and it is terribly sad the enthusiasm of our Teaparty fundraiser wasn't captured wholeheartedly by the Media. It was so much fun and so thrilling to see the country come together for such an event being broadcast through all the online video clips! It's as if the Media on TV, mostly, are angry about this. You explain that to us. We don't understand the narrowmindedness. The media is made of individuals. They can't all be brainwashed. They can't all be robots for the wealthy elitists.

The money has come in simply because Americans have become apathetic and disenchanted with all Washington politicians. We don't believe in them anymore essentially, and that is sad. But, there is ONE man we have found....won't you support him, too?

Posted by: carl_laura_pivonka | December 18, 2007 8:54 PM | Report abuse

This is an odd question coming from The Post. To act like they really don't understand what is behind the Ron Paul Revolution is very silly. Perhaps a history lesson on this Newspaper:

This paper is run and has been run by people, as well as employees, who have attended as Members or Guests, the Bilderberg Group meetings. A portion of these people are also CFR members (Council on Foreign Relations) and/or Trilateral Commission members: Katherine Graham - deceased, publisher '63-'93 (she belonged to all three), Donald E. Graham Publisher/CEO, Pulitzer Prize winning journalists Jim Hoagland, William Safire, Thomas L. Friedman, , and journalist Charles Krauthammer. They are just a few, and there may be more.
This media outlet knows way more of the inner-workings of this corrupt world than all of us combined.

All names mentioned above are also in violation of The Logan Act:
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
1 Stat. 613, January 30, 1799, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).


Posted by: steve | December 18, 2007 8:38 PM | Report abuse

First off, congratulations if you actually take the time to read all 100+ and counting comments.

What does Ron Paul's popularity mean? Two things.

1. A growing feeling that something is fundamentally wrong with the country. Many people may only have a fuzzy idea of what is wrong, but they sense it on an intuitive level, and are more open than ever to do something dramatic to get the country back on track. Like him or hate him, Ron Paul represents the possibility of dramatic change (and improvement) more than any other candidate.

I would argue this intuitive feeling that big change is needed is also the main reason for Obama's popularity.

2. It also means that Ron Paul's supporters are highly motivated and energized, at least online, more so than any other campaign. (I am not a Ron Paul supporter--just an outside observation). This allows them to have, say, double the impact of an average political supporter (e.g. twice as likely to donate than a Candidate X supporter).

What remains to be seen is if this intense energy will carry over to the grassroots, real-world level (e.g. RP supporters working twice as long to knock on doors, twice as likely to work on get-out-the-vote drives) AND if they can convince undecided voters to support Ron Paul. An impassioned 10% of the electorate is still only 10%.

P.S. If you want some insight on what may be wrong with this country, I highly recommend Larry Sabato's "A More Perfect Constitution."

Jason, D.C.

Posted by: monkey.on.keyboard | December 18, 2007 8:31 PM | Report abuse

What is behind Ron Paul's success?

Most people look for one or maybe two reasons. The truth is, there are many reasons. Here are a few that have played a role in my opinion:

1. Republicans in recent years were in power and did not significantly cut government spending or balance the budget.

2. There has been an undercurrent of unhappiness with the Republican party since Reagan left office. This fueled Pat Buchanan's many Presidential runs.

3. The internet has always skewed libertarian because it has a younger and wealthier demographic than the general population.

4. Cheap fast internet access is now common. This allows people that would never meet in real life, and might not agree on things to rally around a candidate they like for different reasons. It also allows a very easy way to donate money.

5. There is an unpopular war in Iraq.

All of these came together to form a perfect storm of sorts for an anti-war, anti-big government, anti-establishment candidate. Ron Paul came forward and is the perfect candidate, as he does not have the baggage that Buchanan carried from years of being in public life. He also has been consistent through all his years in congress.

Paul's movement is a rebirth of Fusionism, the merger of paleoconservatives and libertarians into a voting bloc.

Posted by: LordDiabolus | December 18, 2007 8:21 PM | Report abuse

My sixty years of being involved in politics brings back memories of Truman, JFK, Bobby K., and Bubba. One was killed while POTUS, another was killed before he would have become POTUS. The other two remind me of Ron Paul today. We also have another candidate running for the nomination in 08 that puts our country, and its peoples needs, ahead of everything else. The problem I have with Ron Paul is he has had the chance to do what he espouses now, and failed to do so.

Posted by: lylepink | December 18, 2007 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents what America used to be: the land of liberty.

Keep our noses out of other's affairs.
Keep the government out of my business.

A Ron Paul presidency would re-legalize liberty.

He would the US out of Iraq immediately, unlike most of the other candidates including the Democrats, without 'timetables.'

He would drastically scale back America's overseas Empire.

He would shut down the DEA, IRS, Dept of Commerce, Education.

Sadly, this kind of liberty, which the founders gave us, frightens people.

Posted by: ritchee303 | December 18, 2007 8:21 PM | Report abuse

This money will assure that Ron Paul will be discussed on the major news networks. Having Sean Hannity to endure listenening to Paul's posititions, would be money well spent for any Paul supporter.

Posted by: washpo | December 18, 2007 8:17 PM | Report abuse


First - I need to clear up what bsimon said about the blimp. It is not an official campaign blimp. It is paid for and organized completely by Ron Paul Supporters independant of the campaign! (

This correction leads into your question Chris about how Ron Paul is so succesful in attracting a large, motivated and organized grassroots campaign.

It really stems from his message and his record. He is consistent, he is honest, he is humble and he speaks truth to power. Dont underestimate the power of a message - in this case Ron Paul's Presidential Platform. Planned campaigning and strategy will only go so far and wont go beyond the plan. The message is what is bringing in the money. It took time, because the message and knowledge of his record had to sink in (its many new ideas to people - including me), but its the reason the money is coming in now in large amounts and its the reason his campaign is solid.

He's NOT telling people that the federal government and a over-powerful executive branch will solve all problems, which is how every other candidate is addressing the issues people worry about. They propose solving them through a controlling, powerful, expensive central government.

Ron Paul asks people to take responsibility for themselves and their country. And there are many people who do want to take personal responsibility - those that do are donating to his campaign and being creative in growing his support.



Posted by: hannibal81 | December 18, 2007 8:16 PM | Report abuse

A post toward the very top of the column addressed supporters of Dr. Paul as "fanatics" and "Ronbots".

Two points:
1. Not clever
2. WTF? You don't see Ron Paul supporters calling supporters of other candidates stupid nicknames like "Huck-tards" (funnier, btdubs).

Stick to the issues, chief.

Posted by: william.altorfer | December 18, 2007 8:12 PM | Report abuse

For what it's worth and just to rile the Obama guy...
Top contributors to each compaign:

Posted by: derekraugh | December 18, 2007 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Why I support Ron Paul:

1. I am a conservative and hold to Dr. Paul's platform of small, fiscally responsible government as intentionally laid out in the Constitution of the United States.

2. I am a medical student and refuse to work for the federal government. I am totally opposed to socialized/nationalized/single-payer health insurance and see on a daily basis how federal bureaucracy fails patients and physicians alike. Today alone I saw a hospital tell a patient with medicaid to go home and contact their primary care physician to follow up and she nearly hemorrhaged to death at home. Physician DO NOT TURN PATIENTS AWAY, but you can bet your last penny that federal programs find a way. I would rather treat a patient for free than deal with Medicare/Medicaid ever again and I follow Dr. Paul, who actually had the conviction to stand up to his ideals. Integrity counts for me.

3. The dollar, or whats left of it in 2007 through the inflationary actions of the Federal Reserve, is poised to collapse and destroy the dreams and savings of millions of Americans. We can no longer afford to give over our trust to these unregulated, non-transparent central bankers who do little more than print fiat currency to cover the gross overspending on federal programs in Washington. They aren't spending my tax dollars, they're robbing me and my parents and your grandchildren of their rightful savings.

4. I would rather see a sermon in actions than hear another preacher try to tell me how he's way more religious than the others. Actions speak louder than words and Dr. Ron Paul's record is untouchable. The separation of church and state was for the benefit and protection of all from the forces of tyranny and oppression. I couldn't be more proud that Dr. Paul doesn't make sweeping appeals to the fundamentalist Christian right and nor does he need to. There are far more Christians like myself out there who understand the Constitutional foundations of our country as I do.

These are just a few of my motivations, but mostly because I want and demand a change, nay, a REVOLUTION in the way government is operated in the USA. Dr. Ron Paul gives me hope that America can survive and that freedom and liberty are more than just high ideals. Also, I don't own a land line phone and have never been polled by Gallop, et al in my life.

Posted by: wsteelman | December 18, 2007 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success means that there are many people in the USA who never felt they could have a voice until now. These people are so energized by finding a candidate who offers a choice that they pump money into his campaign. These people have the passion of the newly converted and are willing to empty their pockets when the plate is passed.

Here are the most common reasons given to me when I asked, "Why did you join the Ron Paul movement?" They are in order of frequency of occurance.

#1 I supported George W. Bush and I feel betrayed.
#2 I voted for Democrats last year and I feel betrayed.
#3 I want to be able to raise my family. I don't want to inherit all this debt you boomers have created.
#4 I am against the war.
#5 I want the government to stay out of my life.
#6 I am a Libertarian. (Surprisingly many Libertarians I know won't join the campaign because Dr Paul is a Republican.)

Posted by: j.c.clifford | December 18, 2007 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Lukehappy wrote:

"Ron Paul is raising money hand over fist because voters are fed up with the lack of alternatives. Not just Republicans, but Democrats too. I will be changing my party affiliation to Republican so that I can vote for Ron Paul in New Mexico's primary.

The question is not which person is the best Republican or the best Democrat to vote for? The question is who is the best American. I think Ron Paul is the best American running for President and I plan to vote for him."

The exact same can be said for Obama except he doesn't advocate abolishing the Department of Education or Homeland Security. In fact, I think you stole a line from one of his speeches where you said it's not about which Republican or Democrat is best for president.

I'll say it again, Obama has raised tens of millions of dollars MORE than Paul and Paul has taken more money from PACs than Obama has. What does that say about who has the will of the people by their side?

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 8:02 PM | Report abuse

I am a 62-year old independent, and NEVER in my voting lifetime have I contributed $$ to a presidential candidate - but I've given twice during the moneybombs and will contribute again, up to the $4600 limit if the campaign continues to be successful. I disagree (rather vigorously) with several of Dr.Paul's positions, but he is the ONLY candidate, in EITHER party, who appears willing to shrink the size of the federal government and cut spending. Previously elected politicians have been consistently driving this country toward an economic Armageddon; his approach seems dramatic, but our country's economy is sick, and it needs a doctor - this one.

Posted by: Minnesotastan | December 18, 2007 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is raising money hand over fist because voters are fed up with the lack of alternatives. Not just Republicans, but Democrats too. I will be changing my party affiliation to Republican so that I can vote for Ron Paul in New Mexico's primary.

The question is not which person is the best Republican or the best Democrat to vote for? The question is who is the best American. I think Ron Paul is the best American running for President and I plan to vote for him.

Posted by: Lukehappy | December 18, 2007 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The reason is VERY simple. Compared to other countries in the world, the United States is being told that we are in an age of terrorism. Under this disguise all our rights are being stripped away. More and more people are becoming aware that this is an illusionary enemy. For example, european news hardly mentions terrorism on a daily basis. In the USA you hear nothing else. People are waking up and it's time to revolt against the country which is turning FASCIST. Right now it's still covert, but it's going to be overt soon. Next to that the idea of big government, no more income taxes, and going back to a country which the FOUNDERS created, is the only reason why people are going trough so many efforts. BECAUSE RON PAUL IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHICH TRULY REPRESENTS THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE! We, The People, shoud be in control, and not the government!

Posted by: olivier | December 18, 2007 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Apparently, this guy can't even ask for opinions without including pejoratives like "quixotic" and using "assassination" when referring to Guy Fawkes Day. Anyone who researches the subject knows the November 5 was picked more for its association with the comic/movie "V is for Vendetta" by someone officially unrelated to the campaign. Thoughtful audiences have seen the extreme media bias since Ron Paul entered the campaign and are quite sick of it.

Here's mud in your eye.

Next time you ask for an honest opinion, try not to influence it first.

Posted by: lgd_housing | December 18, 2007 7:40 PM | Report abuse

I read up on ron paul and it was a breath of fresh air i was inclined to donate for the first time ever which was a suprise to me to be sure.

Posted by: slc577 | December 18, 2007 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Aaron and Xerxes - both great posts. Aaron, I couldn't quite find a way to convey the "ink blot" argument you made but it's very true and I've been thinking that for some time.

And Xerxes, your points play directly into that. People are both ignoring what Paul is actually saying he'd DO to the government, while instead projecting their image of a fight-the-system American Hero onto him.

If you want to know what Paul would do as a president, look at his record in the House. He would veto everything and sit on his thumb, waiting for the free market to save him. He has been the least proactive member of the House, only voting NO on everything and failing to come up with any system for rallying support for his causes. If he can't garner some support from the 450 House members, how can he rally real voters? exactly is Paul going to become the nominee? You guys know there is a process to becoming the nominee and it's called the caucus/primary process...I know that Ronbots want him to be ordained the nominee by magical aliens or something but at this point in the game, no amount of money is going to make Paul, a complete psychotic, have a chance in Iowa or New Hampshire.

And I echo the statement of the ridiculous blimp spending and refer back to a point I made a few days ago on here - if Paul wins, is he going to spend $1 billion to fly a "America rocks!" blimp over Iran?

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 7:30 PM | Report abuse

I think the reasons for his financial success and passionate support are:
1. He's 100% honest and consistent. In an environment where we've been lied to time and time again by our leaders and yet are still asked to trust them blindly, Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air. He doesn't act like a politician, saying what we want to hear and then letting us down. He says what he thinks, even if it's not popular.
2. There's no centralized force trying to tell us how to support him. We can make our own signs and t-shirts and slogans. This movement is not about him -- it's about us having a voice. If he's elected, it will not be because he's a great leader but because he allowed American to, in essence, run for office through him.
3. He asked for my money and support. It was indirect, of course, not a demand, but a sense that my help was needed. I've never been asked by a presidential candidate for help. They look to big businesses, wealthy individuals, labor unions, etc. I never felt like I was a part of it or like my help was even necessary. But Ron Paul is all about the individual. It's empowering.
4. Perhaps most importantly, his message is true. Never underestimate the power of truth.

Posted by: 02jas_2 | December 18, 2007 7:24 PM | Report abuse

thecrisis -- good point. The truth is though that it will help Obama if he is the Dem nominee to have a GOP candidate countering each argument for the Iraq war that the other GOP hopefuls bring up.

Posted by: urban4 | December 18, 2007 7:16 PM | Report abuse

"Q: We want to know what you think (or believe) is behind the amount of money that Paul has collected."

This all comes from Ron Paul tapping into a large group of disenfranchised citizens.

His message is what a large segment of our society has been looking for, but not finding in the political landscape of the last thirty-plus years.

The political climate of our country at this time is ripe for the appearance of someone like Ron Paul.

Active Libertarians like myself have always know about Ron Paul and his message. But now other like-mined individuals out there are getting the chance to be exposed to a focal point for what they already believed.

They are finding out that there are others like them. Others who believe in the same things that they do. That there is a philosophy that encapsulates what they think is right.

It is finally time for this kind of movement to come to the forefront and upset the stagnant, bloated country that we have become.

This money is the symbol of a new awakening. People are going to be shocked out of their stupor in the next few months once Ron Paul breaks down the door of the establishment and becomes the GOP nominee.


Posted by: craigyope | December 18, 2007 7:16 PM | Report abuse

George W. Bush has made people scared of the government. Ron Paul has promised to scale government back. Many people who think Bush has had an overly aggressive foreign policy and an overzealous domestic infringement on privacy look to Paul to reverse the trend.

Posted by: billebrooks | December 18, 2007 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul does seem to be the most honest, plain-talking candidate up there. He's one of the few leaders I believe to be truly principled, and he's one of the few leaders anywhere whom I entirely trust to never violate my constitutional rights. This resonates with people.

But the other reason he's been so successful is that no one has paid attention to his ideas yet.

Does anyone actually think Americans will vote en masse for a candidate who wants to eviscerate nearly every government program, defund schools, get rid of Homeland Security and FEMA, repeal the right of people to elect their US Senators, opposes the Civil Rights Act....the list goes on and on, and there's something for everyone to hate. One week of attack ads and he'd be toast.

It's certainly disappointing that the MSM pays attention only to the frontrunners, but the reality is that RP is a fringe candidate who wouldn't have a chance in hell against any of the other candidates, democrat or republican.

Posted by: Xerxes501 | December 18, 2007 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is something like a Rorschach ink blot. While he is a real person who takes real positions, people attracted to him tend to see an image projected by their own minds. This is actually probably true of most all candidates, but the motley and irregular nature of Paul's following draws more attention to it.

Ultimately, I think there are a lot of people dissatisfied with a lot of things in this country, some with the war, some with the two-party system, some with the mainstream media, some with multinational corporations and free trade, some with taxes, some with lying politicians, etc., and Paul appears to offer an alternative for all of these people.

Add to this Paul's appeal to conspiracy theorists, which a large portion of Americans are, whether about JFK, 911, aliens, the Fed banking system, or whatever, and Paul ends up with a genuine cult following that is fueled to even more intensity by the media's unwillingness to treat him as a top-tier candidate with a real chance of winning the nomination.

Ironically, had the mainstream media started touting Paul several months ago as a genuine contender in the race, I suspect his aura would have faded a little by now. Americans also like an underdog, especially when the frontrunners are so uninspiring, and Paul's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," one-man-against-the-system charm plays well to anyone who feels disenfranchised. And since the media spends most of the time between elections telling us that we ought to be afraid and feel disenfranchised, and since politicians fill up the time during elections telling us that they offer hope for our disenfranchisement, only to let us down after the election is done, most people in the country walk around feeling like the little guy most of the time. We see ourselves in Ron Paul, and so we fight for him to succeed.

Posted by: aaronspooner | December 18, 2007 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Next the IRS will be the largest single contributor to the Paul campaign. Laugh.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 7:12 PM | Report abuse

if I weren't so poor and cheap,even I would send him a donation.we are all just tired of the political hacks.What is really amazing is that he has raised all of this money without Israeli Lobby support.

Posted by: Ricardo1 | December 18, 2007 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Please, anyone address the fact that Paul has raised more money from PACs than Obama. Anyone?

I find it humorous at least. About as humorous as the rest of the Paul campaign, that is.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 7:11 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I forgot to mention, I am no internet fruitcake, nor young kid (50 years old) and I worked telephone call banks for Bush in his second election.
Other than Ron Paul all the other Republican canidates just are more of the same big government types in my opinion, we need to get back to basics, i.e. the Constitution!!!!

Posted by: np2j | December 18, 2007 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Good Afternoon. Dr. Ron Paul is the first candidate I have given money to. It was love at first sight when I saw him on Jay Leno's show. Frankly, I was shocked that such an honest, intelligent, down-to-earth individual was in politics. I had lost faith in our country until Dr. Paul came into my life. That is why he has had fundraising success. Quite simply, he has given the American people hope.

Posted by: Jennifer_Bayon | December 18, 2007 7:10 PM | Report abuse

It means that Ron Paul supporters (1) have money, (2) tired of the rest of the GOP, (3) want to get out of Iraq, (4) want to pay less taxes, (5) don't care about feasibility, (6) have limited knowledge of what Ron Paul really stands for and how this democracy works.
If Dr. Paul is elected, unlikely as it is, he and his supporters will be hit by reality like a ton of bricks.
It's a revolution that will bring no resolution.

Posted by: urban4 | December 18, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

We are tired of 'dynasty politics' and the status quo. We don't like Big Brother. We are sick of the Good ol Boy Network. Things as they are aren't working, and electing more of the same people isn't going to fix anything. We want a fresh start.
The size of the political machine has overwhelmed the concept of the individual. Politicians are multi-millionaire celebrities that live in a different world than the people. Real people feel no connection to the establishment that has taken over our lives. Ron Paul doesn't come across as being part of that establishment. Nobody thinks he has been bought off by the military/industrial complex, big corporations, or the Chinese. He's just one of us.
Ron Paul is honest. He isn't afraid to state his beliefs in plain terms with no political doublespeak. He sticks to those beliefs with an integrity that in today's political world seems looney.
Finally, the founders of this country had a great system, one that brought us to unrivalled strength and prosperity. Big government has undermined that system. We want a return to personal freedom and personal responsibility.

Posted by: humptydump1 | December 18, 2007 7:05 PM | Report abuse

I sent Ron Paul $30 Sunday even though I only had $40 in my bank account.

To me Ron Pauls message of limited government harks back to the early Reagan years, Republicans seem to have gotten off the "limited government" track.

We need to get the Federal government off our backs and out of our business. Can you imagine how the economy would take off if personal income taxes were abolished and there were serious cut backs in federal spending?

I do disagree about Dr. Pauls wanting to get out of Iraq right away, I think we need to finish the job there. However I still feel his ideas are closest to what I am looking for in a candidate.

I certainly will never vote for someone like Huckabee who is so backwards as to not think evolution is for real, or a Morman nut case, we need to get religion out of politics entirely!

Posted by: np2j | December 18, 2007 7:03 PM | Report abuse

The North American union is scheduled to be unveiled in 2010. I believe Ron Paul is the only candidate who would shelve this idea to the dust bin of history where it belongs. My son could be growing up in a VERY different country, one where American sovereignty would be permanently lost.

Posted by: noni4pets | December 18, 2007 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Early on, TPTB (MSM) did not give Ron Paul much of a chance, therefore his positions were also not given much scrutiny. If one only looks at the headlines, he seems to be many things to many people.

If you're a republican who doesn't like the Irq war (or foreign entanglements) - vote Ron Paul. A small government libertarian who wants the government out of your pocketbook or bedroom - Ron Paul. Maybe you're a progressive who's seriously frightened about privacy issues - the Patriot Act, warrantles wiretapping, etc. - here's Ron Paul. Tired of political double-speak - Ron Paul's plain-spokenness and integrity will appeal.

Ron Paul - like his supporters - has passion and sincerety, and this country is ready for a change. More than other candidates - especially in the Republican ranks - Ron Paul makes you believe change is possible. But if you look closer, is this the change you really want?

Posted by: -pamela | December 18, 2007 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents the Old Right.

The Old Right of Father Coughlin and Charles Linbergh. The Old Right of the John Birch Society.

He represents the Old Right, which was and is virulently antisemitic.

He, of course, won't come out and say he hates Jews. Instead, he says he justs hates Israel and Zionism. Just like LaRouche says.

And just like LaRouche, his big demon is the "neoconservatives." Of course, "neoconservative" is just the new code word for "cosmopolitan Jew."

Even his own former chief-of-staff, Eric Dondero, has called him an antisemtic . . . in writing.

What a coincidence that he raised "six million."

Posted by: sales | December 18, 2007 6:58 PM | Report abuse

One thing it means is that the so called scientific polls are not worth s**t!

His support from an 'activist get out and do something' stance is immense in winning many of the GOP straw polls [that is about all such polls measure.]

His ability to draw crowds compared to the rest of the GOP candidates is equally impressive.

And now his mass of money from essentially $100 contributions says he may not win, but he WILL get attention.

And what is the R3VOLution without Ron Paul? Why it would be like a revolution with the love.

Posted by: Fascist_Nation | December 18, 2007 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Bill O'Reilly hannity Rush savage and drudge now run the republcain party.

Lying propogandists for profit. To save the country we must remove those that lie to the elderly and divide the nation to line their own pockets. Benidict aRnold?

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:53 PM | Report abuse

According to Washington Post's numbers, Paul has collected about five times more money from Political Action Committees than Obama has and he's only raised about a tenth of the total money Obama has. How's that for Paul being an independent voice?

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Q: We want to know what you think (or believe) is behind the amount of money that Paul has collected.

A push by regular americans to he is not a kook, not a crazy and definatly not fringe. the money was raise because of the lack or a fair democratic process.

I saw a republcain dinner in sf a couple weeks ago. When to many paulites showed up, the chair gave everyone their money back and closed down the dinner.

that is why paul gets the support. to be "that guy". Also because the gop is not playing by the rules. Propogandists and liars are running the gop. If they refuse paul they are done for a generation.

Good. they must sleep in the bed they made.\


Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Dr Paul doesn't want to run my life. Yes that is me the 20 year army vet on the street corner with the young people, the middle aged people, the elderly people all holding Ron Paul Hope for America signs.

I have voted in every election for 34 years, worked on campaigns twice, and been an activist since 2002.

I have never seen anything like the Ron Paul movement since the late 1960's.

Posted by: j.c.clifford | December 18, 2007 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and anyone who says Obama doesn't represent change in politics needs to pull their head out of the sand.

Obama has raised more money from more people than Paul could ever dream. Obama has more than 350,000 individual donors. And he's raised tens of millions more than Paul with no PAC donations. How does that sound, Paulites?

Obama sees the future of this country and has a remedy. Paul sees the past and mistakenly thinks it has the solution for our future, which history teaches us is never the case.

A vote for Obama is a real vote for change. A vote for Paul is a vote for a slightly less psychotic Pat Buchanan.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 6:46 PM | Report abuse

His campaign's success has nothing to do with his philosophies. It's more of a fad than anything else. Having questioned many Paul supporters (I was as befuddled as the fix), they seem to have no idea about his desire to demolish all the social programs that keep our least fortunate citizens afloat or his desire to toss women in prison for terminating their pregnancies, they just got caught up on the anti-war wave and the whole "Ron Paul" fad that has swept college campuses, taking up disaffected conservatives, liberals who don't know about Paul's policies, fed up anti-war extremists, and former political apathetics who get swept up into simplistic notions of libertarianism. Fortunately, we will not have to suffer Paul much longer.

Posted by: steimelkb | December 18, 2007 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Intense -- one might say "fanatical" -- devotion by a very small number of people.

Ron Paul has a few excellent positions. He also has a pile of irresponsible ones. Backslappers like "Abolish the IRS" may get votes from people who feel personally betrayed because their own interpretation of the Constitution isn't law .. but most voters who are as buyable as that are already bought.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | December 18, 2007 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Q: We want to know what you think (or believe) is behind the amount of money that Paul has collected.

A: 3 words "likely republican voters"
With these 3 words, all the polling companies got it wrong.

Then the mass media built their assumptions on this erronous data and are in for a big shock come the primaries.

"Likely republican voters" means "I voted for bush in 2004". If this is the case, you probably voted for bush at a time when the we pretty much knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction. This is definately not the Dr.'s target demographic.

He is bringing alive a large portion of the populace which hasn't voted in years.

Consider that %10-%15 of all voters voted in primaires last go round. So, if paul woke up %10 percent of non-voting republicans and took %6 of the rest, that's a win. It's this sleeping giant that's not being considered.

Ron Paul's support is real and it's bigger and more energetic than all the rest and these money bombs and the blimps and the giant signs over the freeway, these are 'we the poeple' trying to breakthrough this rockheaded adherence by the media to these erronious polls.

Enough allready! The polls are wrong. How many ways must we prove this?

This is what Ron Paul's money means!

Posted by: bilabrin | December 18, 2007 6:42 PM | Report abuse

There are a great many people who are angry about the way our nation is headed and how politics work. Not all of them are Democrats; those that aren't are attracted to Ron Paul as an alternative to Bush's religiosity and hawkish foreign policy. He is the Republican's anti-Bush in a time when Bush has come to represent a smaller and smaller fraction of his party.

Posted by: ctown_woody | December 18, 2007 6:41 PM | Report abuse

It's difficult to answer the question of what it all means, especially without just dropping into a list of why or why not Ron Paul is the candidate to pick. I think it means people agree with him, and are frustrated that he doesn't get more attention. He's stirring up a base that extends far beyond the typical primary voters, and since the real votes won't be counted until the primaries, they're trying to show support in the only other way that gets attention. Money. Money in political campaigns goes to buying media, usually radio and tv ads. And frankly, I think there are a massive amount of people frustrated that he doesn't get the free publicity that most of the other candidates get through media coverage. His supporters realize that if he's going to be heard he needs money. And if they can get him some publicity through unique fund raising tactics then so be it. That's my answer.

Posted by: dannyspraks | December 18, 2007 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Oh, as far as the horserace goes... It means Fred Thompson has to hit the road harder and spend more money to raise more money. Giuliani has to pull out of IA and NH. Romney has to buy a media outlet to ignore him. McCain has to get an endorsement from a lifelong Dem.

Posted by: jsu8233n | December 18, 2007 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Man. It seems I have more in common with the pualites than I do the democrats, especially the moderate democrats.

If only he wasn't for scraping most of the government. We can fix the system, with the courage. To scrap it throws in the towel, paulites. WE need to keep the government. We cna make it serve the people again. But ,lie I've said, we need to point out and give REAL JAIL TIME to those gutting it and sabotaging it. If "lobbyists" are given 30 years for bribery, what happens the next day?

Realease your fear. not to the leval of the pailites :). But so we can ditch our apathy and fix the problems together. those that stop it go to jail, for real. Or scrap the system with paul. Those are the choices. Choose.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's chance of becoming president = the FairTax's chance of becoming law = zero.

But it's at least fun to watch the Paulites shakes things up in the GOP.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 18, 2007 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I'll tell you what's up.

McCain is a liar (does not believe in special interest money however didn't have a problem taking boo koo bucks from American West Airlines and blocked a funding bill in Congress until concessions were made benefitting AWA); traitor (support of amnesty for Illegals so his big-money boys in Arizona don't have to pay taxes on labor), and obviously is more interested in Israeli interests than our own (once again, traitor) in hiring of JINSA chief

Huckabee is dirty (destroying state property -- hard drives computer debacle); used govt. funds to support his family's lavish lifestyle (Arkansas Times detailed how Huckabee and his family were using the $60,000-a-year Governor's Mansion fund as their personal piggy bank); and obviously didn't consult his faithful when he lobbied for a rapist/murderer out of prison before his time (and consequently raped again); oh, and violated numerous ethics guidelines (that's the leadership I look for in a president)

Romney, well he can take the award for being our new flip-flopper during his stint as governer; employed numerous illegals while taking a hard anti-illegal stance; was pro-gay and then became anti-gay overnight (hmmm...maybe he and Mr. Craig have shared a stall in the past?); and he's a Mormon, and nobody likes Mormons. I grew up out west and everyone shunned the state of Utah, as they are considered extremist zealots who can't be trusted...their words, not mine. I like Utah, and I believe in freedom of thought, however all of us non-mormons won't be partying in the celestial kingdom up above, and non-mormon americans don't like that, plus the Mormons believe in Aliens and have other eclectic ideas that don't bode well for the average American)

Guiliani...summed up in 2 words: mafia kingpen. We like to romanticize about them in our movies...we just don't want them to be running our finances and making the big decisions.

And Mr. Paul? Well he's downhome american pie with all the fixins. And this american won't sell us out to China, Israel, the Neocons and the fascist right, the communist/socialist left, and Corporate America. I feel sorry for you can you be so clueless about your own country? I guess you've resided inside the beltway too long, and been employed by a publication that stiffles these types of questions.

James, Washington DC.

Posted by: jamesstallman | December 18, 2007 6:35 PM | Report abuse

"Obama- Dodd 08"
Same people - different name.

Posted by: building-7 | December 18, 2007 6:32 PM | Report abuse

I dont think Rons support is a democratic or republican thing anymore. I think its about We The People. I think Ron Paul is the only candidate that is interested in restoring our country to what it was designed to be. This country wasnt supposed to be controled by big business and special interests groups. Ron Paul supporters can have a lot of differing oppinions and can still belong to the only group that stands for Truth,Liberty,& Freedom for We The People.

Posted by: wildedd | December 18, 2007 6:30 PM | Report abuse

P.S. Paul would get crushed so miserably by Edwards, Obama or Clinton it's scary to even think about it.

Seriously, how can Paulites think he has any chance to win? The vast majority of Americans would never vote for someone who pledges to essentially overthrow half of the government. Paulites seem to think that the President is the only branch of government. To the contrary, the Supreme Court and Congress would have to largely be in support of a Paul Presidency for him to enact any of the ridiculous things he promotes and fortunately none of them would go along with it.

Could you see Pelosi and Reid trying to negotiate with Ron Paul? Laugh.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 6:30 PM | Report abuse

"In the forty minutes since my earlier post, the Paulites have given testimony to my assumptions. I think their movement is honorable and heartfelt. I wish them well, and if Paul does not make it through to be the nominee, I ask them to stay involved."

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 18, 2007 06:14 PM

Involved in what? ALL the other candidates are baisically the same old garbage with slight differences in their putrid stench.
I will not support anyone I do not agree with, I can agree with none but Dr. Paul on the major issues.

Posted by: building-7 | December 18, 2007 6:29 PM | Report abuse

I am no Ron-robot, just a real person who sent him $100 on Dec. 16th for my first contribution. I sent it because I agree completely with him about Iraq, and think the rest of the Republicans are totally wrong on this critical issue. If they can't get this right, I don't trust them on anything.

Posted by: rbellows2 | December 18, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Yes, some Ron Paul supporters are disaffected, perhaps, some do have a hatred for government (but LOVE for the country). Some are just sick and tired of voting for the lessor of two evils. Some feel our leaders are no longer serving us but we are serving them. Some are no longer satisfied with a sound bite and actually research the issues and voting records of those seeking the highest office of our country and are tired of the 'say one thing but do the opposite' record they have. Some are starting to see Democrat and Republican as two sides of the same coin( perhaps why Paul has so many 'cross-over' supporters.) I think many are very well informed on the issues and passionate about them. I think most admire the man's integrity and honesty and feel that it's a breath of fresh air in the sewer of those running. I think many of them want change and they want it now. I think they all love this country and want a President that will, at least, try to lead us back to the path rather than sell the path to corporate interests and they are willing to 'put their money where their mouths are', as they say because they feel that this man deserves the attention he isn't recieving from the media (insert you conspiracy theory here) and the american people deserve a leader who actually cares about their country and cares about them.

Posted by: derekraugh | December 18, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

What does it mean? It means he is going to win, or come damn close to it. Look, even my yoga instructor has change her party affiliation to Republican in order to vote for Ron Paul! Something is happening...

Posted by: isar654321 | December 18, 2007 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris, that was very astute of you to draw a similarity between Paul and LaRouche. If you compare their philosophies they are almoat exactly alike -- right down to their belief in conspiracies and their antisemiticism.

The only major difference is that LaRouche once exceeded twenty percent in a Democratic primary -- something Paul has no hope of doing in a Republican one.

Posted by: sales | December 18, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Since the contributions come from the "little guys", and since one of his major messages is that he wants to get the Federal Government out of the "buying votes" business, the donation success does NOT reflect greed: "What will this candidate do for me personally?" Since self-interest does reflect virtually all PAC donations, this explains why Paul does not get many of those.

His adversaries in the the Presidential race are virtually all politicians whose successes have come from satisfying PACs and promising Government largess to perceived voting groups. That Paul is alone in not owing special interest groups for his election, makes him the only candidate who has a chance to address the serious problems facing the country with any chance of success. Since he is serious and intelligent, it is a no-brainer for thoughtful participants: Paul is the only candidate who has a chance for real success, and he cannot become elected without donations from the little guy.

He has a chance to win, and there has not been a candidate for many years with a chance to win who could actually make a difference if he did win.

It seems almost like a one-time opportunity. If you throw it away, you may never have such an opportunity in your life time. So you will regret not taking it (perhaps for the rest of your life). And taking that opportunity means supporting his campain either with action or money. Such is the way many look at it, and that is why Paul is getting volunteers and contributions gratis.

Posted by: laozu | December 18, 2007 6:23 PM | Report abuse

On point, thecrisis

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:21 PM | Report abuse

It means great things for the GOP.

Posted by: jsu8233n | December 18, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

liberty10 said it best, but I will add that Dr. Paul is the only person running on either side of the isle that seems to want to do something besides business as usual in Washington. He sees that the Federal government is way out of control and needs to get back to the basics of the constitution. He also understands that the PRIVATELY OWNED BANK known as the Federal Reserve has done enough damage to the dollar and the economy and needs to be done away with. I support Dr. Paul because I have a 10 year-old child and I would like to see him have a future with freedom to succeed.

Posted by: building-7 | December 18, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

"Now, a real question. Far as I know, the Guy Fawkes thing wasn't affiliated with Rep Paul's campaign - though the campaign was certainly the beneficiary. Is that also true of the Tea party? I ask because it is unclear to me whether Rep Paul really has any idea the number & passion of the people who're supporting his candidacy. I suspect not, since over the summer he was making comments like "Inter-what?"

Posted by: bsimon | December 18, 2007 06:10 PM

Same guy, simon. i saw it on pbs. The guy who did it has never voted or been involved in politics before. He had never met paul before sending him a check for 4 million dollars. they are passioniste. I can't really say nothing to the paulites, because they are right. I disagree wiht them on social issues compleatly. But I to am angry the demcorats lied to us. But I see the obstructionist gop (some in the democratic party). I'm willing to give the govenment one more shot before going independant for good. We can do it as a nation. We jsut must re-unite and realease our fear of change. and fear of words liek "socialism". Or not be scared to label fascists as fascists. Let's get real now. Play time is over

Obama- Dodd 08

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris it's been easy for you to write off Dr. Paul because you've been coming up with all sorts of excuses to do so. Now apparently you've been running out of them. $6.5 million in one day will do that to you.

But since you've asked nicely to better understand the Ron Paul Revolution, I will be happy to accomodate the uniformed:

1). Granted if money meant everything in Presidential politics we would have President Connally and President Forbes. That being said, Paul's average donation was just over $100 and 21,000 new donors signed on. That means he has real grassroots support. This isn't a millionare writing checks to his campaign like Gov. Romney.

2). It means RP can pay for TV ads and raido ads and campaign offices all over the country when other (and better known) GOP candidates cannot do so.

3). That support is all over the country, both in donations and in the groups which have over 100,000 members. It means Ron Paul is running a national, 50-state campaign. Right now Fred Thompson is running a one-state campaign as is McCain and Huckabee. They have to win to survive. RP can go on indefintely until the end of the primary season regardless of the outcome (of course I hope he does well).

4). It means unknown candidates with the right message can use the internet to attract online support and donations to turn their efforts into real campaigns. Howard Dean started down this road and Ron Paul is continuing to blaze the trail. All candidates raise money online but Ron Paul has been able to get support from people who get their news and or sources of entertainment online because they buy into what's he's saying more so than the other fellows. He has the support of the internet culture.

It's true that only one sitting member of the U.S. House has ever become President, let alone nominated (James Garfield and only because he was a compromise choice at the GOP Convention in 1880). Not even Speakers like Champ Clark and John Nance Garner were even nominated. But I would argue Ron Paul probably has as much if not more resources at his disposal now than any House candidate running for President has ever had.

5). It means he should be damn well taken seriously by the the regular media (like yourself) and given the proper coverage of a serious candidate. This is not a lark anymore. Any candidate with this kind of money would be given the proper attention and coverage he or she deserves. Mike Huckabee's rise from obscurity was no accident. It came about because of his performance at the Ames Straw Poll (which was greatly helped by supporting the Flat Tax who's special interest group had a big tent set up there on the ISU campus) and by his debate performances. The media liked him and they paid attention to him and covered him to the point to where people started to notice his name and started supporting him in what are basically name recognition polls. If you did the same for Ron Paul you would see his poll numbers rise too. If that's what is perplexing you Chris, it really shouldn't. It's called cause and effect.

6). Paul campaign is decentralized. This latest "money bomb" was not organized by the "official" camapaign. This is a group of can-do people with ideas and a spirit of innovation that connects back throughout U.S. history from the pioneers, the Horatio Alger stories, to Henry Ford, to all sorts of do-it-yourself businessmen and self-made men and autodiadacts. They do things on their own initative. They don't wait for "orders" from headquarters. They act on their own. They do things on their own. If Rep. Paul wants a decentralized country, don't you think he should have a decentralized camapaign? It makes sense.

Posted by: sean4 | December 18, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Congressman Paul has my vote, and he got part of my paycheck on Sunday too! I've NEVER given money to a campaign.

I am just glad that there was a little bit left of my pay check (after paying 50% of it in taxes and managed health care fees) to give Ron Paul what was left!

Posted by: mr | December 18, 2007 6:15 PM | Report abuse

like most republicians i do not believe that Ron Paul can be elected, however i know that we have to do something drastic to shake up the washington mindset, maybe Ron Paul is it. can we survive a Ron paul Presidency? we survived 8 years of clinton and 8 years of GW Bush, we can survive 4 years of Ron Paul. Can we really do away with the income tax? what would all of tose out of work accountants do? Can we really follow the constituition and live in the country that our founding fathers had in mind, Ron Paul thinks it can be done, i am not sure.
I think that the iowa Cacus will not show us much of what ron paul can do, but new hampshire and south carolina should be a wake-up call for some and a go to sleep move for the rest.

how whould Hillary and Barrak run against Ron Paul?

Posted by: lsdial2000 | December 18, 2007 6:15 PM | Report abuse

"Is it a validation of Paul's "out of Iraq now" position? A sign of widespread dissatisfaction with the two-party system?"

It is both of those, and so much more.Ron Paul's different approach: an honest politician who keeps his word. No slick packaging- a real, sincere person who tells you what he believes- even if he knows it's not what you want to hear. People can respect that man, unlike the other politicians. And his arguments make sense- for those that actually listen to him.

But there's also a strong rebellion against the media- their condescension, their pronouncements of who is a viable candidate, and who is not; their shallowness in restating, in every interview, that he WON'T win, like a mantra that they have to keep repeating because they have no understanding of what is happening. The media are losing their ability to be the kingmakers and control the process, and they cannot believe it.

Even when they deign to grant him short interviews, they still treat him as if we were an oddity- not as one of the "real" candidates. But he's unfailingly polite to them, as they call him a flake, kook, and tell him he has no chance of winning. A true gentleman, who shows up everyone else just by being himself.

Posted by: lizviering | December 18, 2007 6:14 PM | Report abuse

In the forty minutes since my earlier post, the Paulites have given testimony to my assumptions. I think their movement is honorable and heartfelt. I wish them well, and if Paul does not make it through to be the nominee, I ask them to stay involved.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 18, 2007 6:14 PM | Report abuse

It's almost surreal. I think that a growing number of Americans understand that "Something is rotten in the State of Denmark". I always knew the numbers were growing little by little --bit by bit--but WOW. I think everyone has felt for a long time that we were a small minority. That most people are to asleep or dumbed downed
to know or care. Many still are, in fact way to many, but I for one never realized how many like-minded people are out there and feel the same way. As Dr. Ron Paul has said the Freedom message is popular. It's not just the war. It's not just the Fed's or IRS or corrupt politicians who sell their souls. Or the coming one world government and the Elite Class. It's not any one thing, it's all that and more. This country was founded on the idea of individual liberty and a serviitude government. But as in history past--governments tend to get more and more powerful as indivduals allow them
the opportunity. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!! Men may mean to govern well..but they mean to GOVERN! For to long Americans have loved thier liberty but without the responsibility that true liberty demands. We allow to much power in the hands of the few and guess what happens next? Study history people--there is nothing new under the sun! I for one am so proud right now to be an American and see what is happening. I now realize, like so many others, that I am not alone! We have a real chance--OUR LAST CHANCE--to take back America and restore the Constitutional Republic that the founders framed. This is a REVOLUTION and Dr Ron Paul is the man of the hour. GOD BLESS AMERICA--AND GOD BLESS RON PAUL!!!

Posted by: tcidean | December 18, 2007 6:13 PM | Report abuse

What all this fundraising by Ron Paul means is nothing other than Ron Paul's ability to continue sticking it the eye of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani for a while longer. The disaffected libertarians who give money to Paul are no different from the disaffected lefty loonies who gave money to Howard Dean -- they don't vote. They never vote. It is too unclean for them to vote. Therefore, they never get what they want and can happily grouse away forever.

Posted by: greenmountainboy | December 18, 2007 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Paul's ability to raise money speaks to one truth:

The Republican Party has lost its libertarian core.

The fact is that social conservatives have more leverage over the Republican Party than fiscal conservatives because, surprise, they're willing to dump millions into the national GOP coffers to control the party and therefore exert influence over the rest of the country.

The large portion of Americans who have given up on the two political parties have joined forces with disillusioned libertarians and fiscal conservatives to fund the Paul campaign. However this isn't saying anything about Paul, this is only support for his anti-authoritarian message.

A Paul presidency would ruin this country as we know it. as we know it. For better or worse. I think for worse. His radical agenda would fly in the face of Congress and would result in a collapse of Washington D.C. Congress is not going to abolish the Department of Education, no matter how badly some psychotic Texan wants it axed. This is just one example of an unrealistic "change" Paul wants to make. He wants to disassemble government, which in this day and age of massively powerful corporations, would only lead to more scandals, more corruption and an exacerbated corporate influence on government and society - exactly what Paulites want to avoid. They forget that we got to where we are because we went through the times that Paul wants us to return to.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 18, 2007 6:11 PM | Report abuse

I think it represents nothing more than dissatisfaction with the two-party system and their bias toward rich and powerful interests. As a social libertarian/fiscal conservative, I looked at Paul's positions carefully, and other than trying to take reasonable steps toward controlling illegal immigration and ending the Iraq war, I found them all to be either unrealistic (abolishing income tax), naive (abolishing federal reserve) or just not important (federal rights for home-schoolers). To quote Bono, "I still have not found what I am looking for."

Posted by: merganser | December 18, 2007 6:11 PM | Report abuse

xyzzy35 writes
"Cute, except that not one dime of the blimp expenses is being paid for by the Paul campaign. Like the two big money bombs, the blimp was an idea cooked up by some Ron Paul bloggers and numerous Ron Paul supporters sent in money to pay for it, all independent of the official campaign."

Thankyou. Thankyouverymuch.

Now, a real question. Far as I know, the Guy Fawkes thing wasn't affiliated with Rep Paul's campaign - though the campaign was certainly the beneficiary. Is that also true of the Tea party? I ask because it is unclear to me whether Rep Paul really has any idea the number & passion of the people who're supporting his candidacy. I suspect not, since over the summer he was making comments like "Inter-what?"

Posted by: bsimon | December 18, 2007 6:10 PM | Report abuse

So is Paul going to mount a third-party campaign when he fails to get the GOP nomination?

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 18, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

There are broadly four categories of Ron Paul supporters, in no particular order:

* The true Randians: people who espouse libertarianism, the ideology of three-year-olds all around the world: "Mine! Mine! Mommy! Timmy is coercing meee!"

* Disaffected voters who are just so happy to see a politician who is consistent and honest that they are willing to overlook some minor issues such as evolution, science, gay rights and theocratism.

* Fiscally conservative, Goldwater-style Republicans.

* The Constitutionians, people spiritually wedded to the Supreme Benevolent Unerring power of the United States Constitution and sworn to protect the Beloved Document from sacrilege with their very lives.

Posted by: roo_P | December 18, 2007 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Congressman Ron Paul's online and monetary success is simply a "vote of confidence" from an electorate who has come to realize that "money" talks more than "message" to both the political elite as well as the mainstream media, both of whom have done their very best to ignore and ostracize Ron Paul in this campaign.

I think it speaks volumes to learn that this money (vs. other candidates' money) comes not from special interest groups or from matching fund campaign coffers, it comes ENTIRELY from "We The People" which should make this message via money all the more resounding.

And finally know this: it also means that those who have given, along with millions of others, are those who will also be "voting" in the coming primaries and general election!

Posted by: jmckissack42 | December 18, 2007 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Despite the fact that the main stream media, which is no longer in the business of reporting, but rather influencing, the news, have "decided" that Ron Paul has no shot at winning this election, millions of Americans have gone ahead and "decided" for themselves that they want their Constitution restored, their borders guarded, their brothers and sisters to come home from this bogus war, and their leaders to behave in a manner consistent with the principles of our Founding Fathers.

Ron Paul raised over $18 MILLION this quarter alone because



Posted by: thid1 | December 18, 2007 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul and John Edwards in one day, Chris? Turn in your MSM card immediately. You are off Sally Quinn's invite list and you are not getting any of the magical MSM cocktail weenies.

Posted by: havok26 | December 18, 2007 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success comes from followers who are not happy with current crop of half-hearted candidates. This is a huge demographic.

Ron Paul's financial success will allow the campaign to level the playing field by a small amount. There's nothing like free press, as evidenced by the response in traditional polling methods. The 6 o'clock news matters. But since free press coverage is denied Dr. Paul by the majority of the MSM, these funds can be used creatively to boost name recognition. i.e. more highway banners, blimps, advertising in print and radio/tv media.

Name recognition is the biggest battle Dr. Paul has. The same 68% (as per today's gallup poll) who are unhappy with congress are receptive to Dr. Paul's stance on issues. We just have to get the news out there! That takes money.

Posted by: gatorngrits | December 18, 2007 6:06 PM | Report abuse

What I see as the significance of Dr. Paul's success in fund raising is just the next step in his long and distinguished career as a public servant. I stress public servant rather than politician because Dr. Paul has never pandered to any group in order to gain votes. He has served as a stateman, who upheld his oath of office to defend the Constitution. This has been an oddity for years, but Dr. Paul has stayed true to his principles and one by one he has educated his constituients (myself included) Then each of us have accepted the responsibility to share this message with others. If anyone has ever built a successful network marketing business, you know it takes diligence and commitment to those below you, who are just beginning to learn the business. However, by the fourth or fifth level the principle of multiplication kicks in and at that point the process becomes unstopable. Dr. Paul's message of Freedom is nearing that level and the long awaited benefits are beginning to pay off. I started to say this is the culmenation of the process, but this is simply the next stage. The culmination will be when Dr. Paul is sworn into office and we begin to see the results of our efforts and the restoration of our Republic and our country returned to the rule of law as established by our Constitution!

Posted by: rraborn | December 18, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

bsimon wrote:
" 'What Does Ron Paul $ Mean?'

It means the guy who speaks most passionately about wasteful government spending has a campaign blimp."

Cute, except that not one dime of the blimp expenses is being paid for by the Paul campaign. Like the two big money bombs, the blimp was an idea cooked up by some Ron Paul bloggers and numerous Ron Paul supporters sent in money to pay for it, all independent of the official campaign.

BTW, Paul has made it plain that he will not accept federal matching funds for his campaign. Every dollar for his campaign comes from people who support it, none of it comes from tax dollars.

Posted by: xyzzy35 | December 18, 2007 6:02 PM | Report abuse

dArn paulites.

You making to good of points. Why are you trying to knock off my support for obama

You are converting me, to a paulite. Stop it, NOW.


do your thing ladies and gentlemen. We could do a lot worse. make your opinons know. forget the peanut gallery republicans who tell you nonsense. Bring teh truth to them. If they hide bring it to them anyway.

The fascists MUST be turned back into America citizns, as opposed to party loyalists. The results of america not reuniting is disasterous. Like the princeton stroy above. Paul's party does not want the coutnry to come together. Did Paul leave teh republcain party? Or did the republcain party turn into a fascist party.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 6:02 PM | Report abuse

I am 24/M/California. Just graduated from college. The thing that first made me notice Ron Paul was his stance on the Iraq War. His views were very unpopular at the first few debates, with very little cheering from the croud, and often a lot of booing. He struck me as someone who wasn't the status quo.

He is a man of integrity with an excellent record in Washington. You would be hard pressed to find someone who believes that Washington changed Ron Paul. Another aspect of Ron Paul that appeals to me is that he hasn't been packaged for the masses. He rarely sugar-coats his message, and he tells the cold hard truth of the Iraq War, the economy, and the role of government in our lives.

As for his supporters...we are diehard! The reason for this is that we STRONGLY believe that if his message is heard, people will vote Ron Paul across the board. People are desperate for someone different...someone out of the box. I truly do believe that this is a movement, and could spread like wildfire in the near future.

Another reason why so many people go to such great lengths for him is the inability of the television news to promote him. I used to be a Fox News fan; however, their inability to give Ron Paul exposure has made me look elsewhere. Furthermore, during the Fox News debates, Fox News had someone laughing everytime Ron order to dimiss him as credible.

All in all, we donate for the ideas that Ron Paul represents.

Posted by: ioneill | December 18, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

The country has been controlled by elite monopolists for 100 years. By engineering World Wars, it has created a debt enslaved world population. Now it is time for the overthrow. The Ron Paul rEVOLution is world wide.

Posted by: raftshol | December 18, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

You are over analyzing it!
The reason is summed up in one word... LIBERTY.

In reviewing the comments, it is obvious that many Americans have forgotten what principles made this country GREAT in the first place.
Has history taught us nothing!
There are different "ages". Technology changes, but principles remain the same.
The current world climate is as old as mankind.
Top down governance.
Ruled by a ruling elite.

The tools and principles utilizing concept of Liberty where drafted into the law of the land, we call the United States Constitution.
Today, all politicians, military, and other public servants take an oath to uphold/ defend and be bound by that constitution.
BUT, Few honor that oath.
In fact it has become an obscure document in the way of so called and mis-named progress.
But as we see, the so called progress is turned into regression to the principles of liberty and emergence to totalitarianism.

Ron Paul's Campaign is being managed the way central gov't was supposed to be under our constitution.
Get out of the way and let the people and free markets do what they want as long as they are not harming their neighbor.

The passion and love for Liberty, and self reliance, self governance, personal reasonability, etc have been asleep for awhile as 3 generations have napped. But the alarm has sounded and has merged alive and well and full of vigor.

The more people look to gov't for answers and solutions to problems, the bigger gov't gets and the bigger, more frequent and complex the problems get.



Posted by: liberty10 | December 18, 2007 5:59 PM | Report abuse

It's as much the source of the money, as the amount that's important. 100% grassroots donations from average americans opening their wallets for REAL CHANGE.

What does it mean? It means now, via the internet, and ( I can't stress this enough ) With the 'RIGHT MESSAGE', the people of america may actually have a voice in politics that is not controlled by the Media and political establishment.

It means we have something resembling democracy again. For the first time in a long time. & I hope & pray, & fight for it.

Posted by: talonfergusoN | December 18, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is the only man who will end the empire. We have military bases in over 100 different countries. Trying to rule the world costs us hundreds of billions of dollars each year, and what he get for it is a lot of hatred from people who don't want to be lorded over. When Ron Paul told the truth about how 911 was blow back for our interventionist foreign policy, while Giuliani snickered, a lot of people's eyes bugged out. My God, an HONEST politician!

Every other Republican is happy with annual $500 billion federal deficits, and every Democrat wants to make it worse with new entitlements. Ron Paul has the only sensible way to eliminate the deficit -- bring ALL the troops home and cut back on unnecessary domestic programs.

Ron Paul also believes we should control our own borders, just like other countries like Mexico do. It seems to be a requirement for a media approved candidate to favor illegal immigration, although the vast majority of Americans oppose it.

The media still ignores him. People who only read Long Island's Newsday have no notion that Ron Paul just raised $6 million in a day. I'd say McCain's odds are a lot worse than Paul's yet I never hear McCain's campaign called "quixotic". I never hear McCain called a "spoiler". Interviewers never ask McCain who he's going to endorse after his own campaign fails, as of course it will.

Posted by: xyzzy35 | December 18, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

What does Ron Paul's support mean? To me it means I'm tired. I'm tired of the lies and the half-truths that Americans have come to settle for from their elected officials. I'm tired of doing the right things in life -- working hard and being a good citizen -- only to see people get ahead by gaming the system. I'm tired of given handouts to people who don't take responsibility for their lives. I'm tired of seeing people who follow the rules get screwed. I'm tired of seeing my hard-earned dollar go to someone who the government has deemed more worthy of that money than me. I'm tired of big corporations, lobbyists and special interest running my government. I'm tired of my government embarassing me. I'm tired of losing my freedom. I'm just plain tired. And I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Posted by: lori.wright | December 18, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

What's it mean? It means that 1. A lot of fiscally-conservative, socially-liberal folks have money they're willing to spend on politics and 2. They want a candidate who is neither a prolific spender nor a religious zealot.

Posted by: herrin-postresume | December 18, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Polls are a scientific tool to reach an unscientific result.

The deception begins when you assume (mistakenly) that the expectation of people to actually take the trouble and go on a winter day to vote for their favorite candidate is equal among all campaigns. With this assumption it makes sense that surveying people's opinions would give an indicator as to the expected result of the actual vote. But the fact is, supporters are not equally enthusiastic about their candidates. Many supporters poll for a candidate cause he is the one they see everyday on TV, or cause he "looks" electable, not because they are truly enthusiast about his message. Come voting day, you probably wouldn't take the trouble to wake up and head for the booth unless you really believe in someone's message, no matter how many times you see him on TV.

You want a more scientific way to count the votes a priori? find a way to measure not only the size of the support, but the depth of it. i.e. Find the area under the curve, not the intercepts!!

Posted by: rar76 | December 18, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

The two biggest dollar amounts in histroy back to back. Nov 5 and the bosten tea party. Genius marketing and internet work, by paul's people.

Give then hell paul. The great thing is, the gop must listen to him and his supporters. If nothing else. Where would he gop be without paul in this cycle? How much farther would thye have went? NAzi germany late 30's?

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

You have to be completely, I mean completely, out of touch with mainstream America to not understand the appeal of Ron Paul. Professionals with both man and wife working can't make ends meet, government runs our lives and taxes us like serfs, and the current trend is just to worsen it. The average person is about ready to walk away from everything and just make a subsistence living because at least then you don't go in the hole. I guess the tone in Washington must be, "We give you almost enough to live, so what's the problem? Go make more bricks without straw and next year you can figure out how to make bricks without dirt."

Posted by: pictabbed | December 18, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul comes across as an honest, principled man, something that the American people have not seen in a long time. Individuals see in him someone whom they can trust and they WANT to support. Seems like every time Dr. Paul is slandered in the news, his many supporters get mad - and get even by donating furiously. You can easily see the ticker on his site climbing at a faster rate every time Big News comes out with yet another outrageous statement against Dr. Paul. I've heard time and time again from people how "Dr. Paul cured my apathy." Many of these people have never voted before but they registered in droves to vote in the primaries, are donating lots of money and lots of time to help his campaign. The "Ron Paul $" will be translated to "Ron Paul VOTES".

Posted by: hitbabe | December 18, 2007 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Also. the democrats have been weak. but the obstructionist gop has made their bed in regards to the war. This is no long bush's war, it's the republcains. they are voting liek the borg blocking any and all bills the dem's put forward. They forget they got swept in 06. Give the d's one more shot. Give them their 60 seats. Watch what happens. If they sell us out THEN go independant. We still have a shot. We need to get the moderate sell-out closet republcains (difi rockafeller, reid, kerry) out of the democratic party and work woithout sabotage. you'll be amazed what we as americas can accomplish without gop sabotage for profit infecting the system.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the invitation to provide my feedback. I promise not to be rude or unprofessional.

I think Dr. Paul's support means only 1 thing. He is THE front runner and the only candidate who can beat Hillary. Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, McCain... None of them have the support, energy or financial backings like the RP campaign.

Ron Paul's popularity also demonstrates that the American public is turning more and more to internet related news as opposed to television and newsprint related news.

Media organizations need to pick up and echo the sediment that appears over the internet or risk being left in the dark with no viewers. If you can't embrace the people and emotions that reside on the internet then it shows that you've lost touch with America.

Remember, you're now asking this question about the same man whom you called: Long Shot, Fringe, 3rd tier, Spammer, Few Supporters...

How exactly did Ron Paul's candidacy go from all those things to now being credible? The answer lies with the media organizations perception that they control how American's think.

Posted by: adam1mc | December 18, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

There are many candidates espousing "change". None of them reach into the depth of root causes like Representative Ron Paul who speaks of fundamental house cleaning in the areas of bulging bureaucracies, crippling foreign entanglements, the dwindling dollar, the strangle-hold of special interest money and the wide spread departure from the Constitution among other issues that threaten America's future. Thousands of enlightened, vigilant citizens are the source of Dr. Paul's financial support. Please understand that Dr. Paul is our messenger, our hope for America. He would be the first to tell you that.

Posted by: moutten_man | December 18, 2007 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"The people are disgusted, and the disgust isn't limited to the Republicans. The 2006 victory of the Democrats has brought essentially no change.

I feel you , cjh1 |. Believe me. It has been a tough year for independants supporting the dem's, that's for sure. But the scandels of the demcorat's are nothign compared to the last 8 years. Nothing. think on it. I wish the biggest national emergancy we had was not the destruction of our constitution, not fighting an illegal war for other countires resources, not destroying the doj with political lackies, the housing and job markets not being inn the tank. I long for the days where a bj or adultry is teh big scandel. Minus the clintons of course.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Even though I am a progressive, I know this country has a long and deep history of libertarianism, out west and particularly in Arizona. Ron Paul is their presidential candidate and in line with libertarian beliefs, if you don't like something, organize privately and support what you like and boycott what you don't.

Libertarians like progressives understand how bad our political system has gotten with corporate and special interest money corrupting genuine policy debates. Whereas progressives believe regulating the electoral process is the best way to clean up the system (I don't support contribution or expenditure limits, I believe in voluntary public financing), libertarians believe in organizing privately and outspending the special interests.

Just as Dr. Howard Dean used the internet to channel progressives' money into his campaign in the 2004 election, Dr. Ron Paul is using it to funnel libertarian money to his campaign. The traditional right wing coalition of economic conservatives, social conservatives and libertarians make up the Republican voting bloc. The question remains whether or not the economic conservatives which are split between Guiliani and Romney are so fractured that Huckabee the social conservative candidate or Dr. Paul the libertarian candidate can win. Just as Dean's educated middle class progressive supporters were not enough to overcome the tradition Democratic coalition of blacks, women and labor who coalesced around Kerry who they thought was more electable, I doubt that Paul's libertarians are enough to win the GOP nomination.

In truth, the reality is that John McCain (the maverick Senator from Arizona) is the candidate of reasonable libertarians and his support is what keeps Dr. Paul (whose support comes from strict libertarian ideologues) poll numbers low. Paul's supporters are like the Socialist party here in the US, but unlike the leftist, they are capitalist, thus they have more money than supporters.

Posted by: SinnedNoir | December 18, 2007 5:46 PM | Report abuse

I just want somebody who will lower my taxes and get our butts out of the middle east. A sound monetary policy that includes a balanced (and SMALLER!) budget and a scrutinous eye on the Federal Reserve Bank while allowing the free market to flatten banks and Wall Street i-banks who misbehave and operate inefficiently is just icing on the cake.

If ANY other candidate addressed these sincerely and had RP's history to back up their rhetoric, then maybe Ron Paul would lose some support. But since the others just promise hand-outs at my expense and can't be bothered by personal responsibility, then I can't be bothered with them.

Posted by: millionea7 | December 18, 2007 5:44 PM | Report abuse

The federal government is an out-of-control monster. Everywhere the people look they see another federal fiasco or worse: 1. The disaster in Iraq; 2. The 9 trillion dollar debt; 3. An administration determined to repeal the Bill of Rights in the name of fighting terrorism; 4. The "melt down" of the dollar; 5. Jack Abramoff; 6. The Katrina "relief" effort; . . . The people are disgusted, and the disgust isn't limited to the Republicans. The 2006 victory of the Democrats has brought essentially no change.

Ron Paul simply seeks a return to Thomas Jefferson's famous principle that the government that governs least governs best. His message has hit a deep chord.

Posted by: cjh1 | December 18, 2007 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Best of luck to the Paul supporters. Create havoc in the GOP ranks. Turn the convention into a free-for-all.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 18, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Why have most people not heard of Ron Paul? Why is he not showing up in the polls? Here is why.

I received a call from a "Republican Polling Organization." The call was fully automated. The call went like this.

"Hi, if you will be voting in the upcoming Republican primary, please press 1." I pressed 1.

"Please tell us who you will most likely be voting for in the upcoming primary. Press 1 for Rudy Giuliani, 2 for John McCain, 3 for Mitt Romney, 4 for Fred Thompson, 5 for Mike Huckabee or 6 for other." I pressed 6.

The message then said, "We are sorry. We will remove you from our list. Thank you. Good bye."

And rest assured if Paul gets enough attention and rises high enough in the polls he will be marginalized with something akin to a Dean Scream. Big media at work.

Posted by: bcolohan | December 18, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

The reaction Dr. Paul gets results from his plainspoken honesty. If I were a betting man, I would say that,regardless of how the mainstream media tries to spin away Ron Paul, the American people will not settle for anything less than the truth. No plastic candidate or amateur preacher, no man who knows but a noun, a verb, and 911 . . . no rendition of Bomb Iran (even with a Beach Boys backup) will do this time! Times are changing, and it has only taken the lonely voice of one honest man.

Posted by: jamesmcmichael | December 18, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

We, the people, are fed up with the media-industrial complex cherry-picking our leaders.

The political system is so slanted towards corporate interests that the average citizen is getting shafted.

Because of media monopolization / manipulation, the clueless majority of this country is asking for more of the same.

Into this rides Ron Paul, someone who has consistently stated and voted his convictions.

I don't necessarily agree with some of his views (I am a fiscal conservative, social liberal), but DO I know that when I vote for Ron Paul, what I see is what I get, unlike all the other sycophants running for office.

His attraction to intelligent men and women is that he has real character.

He is honorable enough that he will not use political manipulation to advance his agendas, outside the process of democracy.

Posted by: vaporland | December 18, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

You've got several factors that have enabled Paul to raise all this money:

-frustration with the war in Iraq
-"true believer" Libertarians who feel that they have a window of opportunity in 2008
-general dissatisfaction with the status quo
-the internet's ability to connect like-minded individuals
-frustration with perceived lack of "old media" fairness to the candidate
-an untested belief that "this time it's different" and an election can be won from the bottom-up

As much as donating to support Ron Paul's campaign expenditures, a lot of people are donating just for the political impact the fundraising is having -- blog posts like this one. Many Americans are just as frustrated with the media as they are with the politicians, and by supporting Ron Paul they feel they are attacking both.

Posted by: csen | December 18, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

" He is drawing support from a wide swath of Americans, and if he doesn't win the Republican nomination, my party is for another defeat in 2008. Paul is the only candidate on our side who can unite the country to defeat the democrat-socialists in 2008.

Posted by: philgaston | December 18, 2007 05:32 PM


Well said. it would be interesting, wouldn't it. I don't think the d's are socialists. I wish they were, more. But it is impossible for the r's to win, agaisnt anyone but hillary. If paul were to run it would be interesting. you want to talk about contrast. At least the gop would finally be allowed to acknowledge reality for a change.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I can keep this short and sweet.

Dr Paul's character. Integrity and principle is what marks the character of a man. This is the main reason I was originally attracted to the good man. And it's truely what sets him apart from everyone else running. And they know this, surely.

Posted by: guitarzan113 | December 18, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

I believe the support Paul is garnering is an expression of the disgust Republicans have with Bush's policy of big government 'compassionate conservatism' mixed with those who simply believe we should not be in Iraq and those who are looking for a candidate who is honest, direct, and unafraid of the consequences of speaking his mind. Paul is the small government, pro-constitutional war, anti-big money candidate. It's not that complex really. He is drawing support from a wide swath of Americans, and if he doesn't win the Republican nomination, my party is for another defeat in 2008. Paul is the only candidate on our side who can unite the country to defeat the democrat-socialists in 2008.

Posted by: philgaston | December 18, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

While I wish the messenger were not the unbending Dr. No, he is the embodiment of the hopes of traditional Main Street Republicans in many ways:

live and let live;
that government which governs best governs least;
no foreign entanglements;
asset money standard; and
oppose the unions.

Nobody else has captured quite the "purity" of the old small town middle American message.

McCain is both a Main Streeter and a military R, so he is not so "pure."

The others [m-a-y-b-e not Thompson]
are hopelessly identified with
either Wall Street globalists, or neocons, or theocons.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 18, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Paul's $$$ means people are waking up to the fact that we are BROKE! We have a choice we can either fund the military industrial complex and NOT take care of our people and go bankrupt in the process OR we can scale back and save our country and still take care of our citizens.

Posted by: ucjb2 | December 18, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

It means that the Ron Paul Revolution is real! Check this out:

Posted by: dmc4rp | December 18, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Why I'm a Ronbot: When the Rupublicans controlled the WH and congress in 2000, I thought that finally my dream of shrinking the size of government would be fulfilled. I voted for lower taxes, lower spending, and no-nation building. Now 7 years later, the government is larger than ever and Paul is the only candidate saying that the government should spend less, do less, and be less.

I don't agree with many of his positions, but he speaks his truth and is not spouting talking points. I don't see anyone else telling like they see it.

Go Ron!

Posted by: helsten | December 18, 2007 5:30 PM | Report abuse

They are trying to start a race war. Have been since the iraq war went south, for them. they needed more issues. In came illegal immagration as an issue.

Then fox and other repubclains started stiring up race relations. Imus. Duke rape case. jena 6.

Sad time in america. Do not fall for it people. It's all a ploy. Vote in the next election. We can end the gop games (and moderate sell-outs) one and for all. we have to vote correctly for once.

Obama-Dodd 08. End this nonsense Chagne is at hand. The only thing stopping it is fear of change. Do not let the gop turn back the clock 40 decades. The year is 2007. Teh future is now

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

CC The money is the manifestation of a real movement for Paul that speaks to a dissatisfaction with the direction of the country and the way both parties have governed. Just the other day, in an intersection, where over the past 15 I've never seen any political activity, there were Paul supporters lined up with signs and enthusiastically cheering for their candidate. They were loud and proud because they feel they have found someone to believe in. For what it's worth, Andrew Sullivan endorsed Ron Paul in his blog on the Atlantic citing his foreign policy as a reason for ultimately making this choice.

Posted by: rdklingus | December 18, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The money he raised could not have been possible without the internet and savvy young folks who are itching for political change. They want to throw out the baby with the bath water! For many Paulites it may be the first time in their lives that they felt truly involved in a presidential election. That's pretty inspiring stuff. The money is a function of inspiring young people to get involved and the power of the internet.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | December 18, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul represents a dissatisfaction with the criminal class in Washington. This criminal class is the repulsive and democrap hierarchy who have created an unknown entity to most Americans. This unknown entity, or criminal class, ignores The Constitution, the will of the people, illegals, and has a contempt for "We the People". The great silent majority finally has a spokesperson saying what they feel.
I have people come up to me every day and ask me if I am the man with the Ron Paul bumper stickers and when I say yes they always say that they are going to vote for him. They ask me about him and they like his honesty. They are all ages and men and women and appear to be all walks of life. Americans want their Constitution back and their self respect. They are tired of what the power brokers have been shoving down their throats. They are either ashamed or outraged by the behavior of the Congress. People seem to understand that Ron Paul is honest and has a true message they like and will make a difference.

Posted by: thenewyorktomesisacomicbook | December 18, 2007 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Not sure about anarchy, but i think it's great! here's a guy who came from behind the curtain and raises 18 mil! I'm not a die hard republican or democrat, but i will vote for him and it's not because of any party affiliation. (to be honest i don't think i'm alone in people who vote for the man/woman... not the party)

His platform is simple and refreshing and what's unique is he offers *gasp* creativite solutions to todays problems infused with peaceful leadership. I was taught if you're loud, angry and defensive, you're probably scared, confused or wrong.

Great article Chris.

Posted by: morcatio33 | December 18, 2007 5:25 PM | Report abuse

"quixotic"!!! Even with the 'seemingly' to modify it, that means "drink a shot!!!" (Sorry, I just *had* to invoke my "Ron Paul mediabias Drinking-game" when I saw the q-word again...) If you really know who's gonna win, the generous bookies of London & Moscow want to finance your luxury European vacation, so hop on a plane ASAP!!

But seriously...What it means, of course, is what we've been saying all-along. "Dr. Paul deserves fair media coverage, instead, even if you're biased against libertarians & our ideas."

Posted by: painintheass97 | December 18, 2007 5:25 PM | Report abuse

In a nut shell. It's the message. Those that here it like it. Those that haven't heard it will like it when they do.

He is on the majority side on every important issue, its just that most people don't know who he is yet.

I think the early primary states are now informed and he will surprise the world.

Money is everything to Dr. Paul, it is the only way to get his message out.

Posted by: dsryan | December 18, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Don't trust the republcains, even paul. It's all for show

"Conservative Liar of the Day-Francisco Nava: Princeton Student Admits to Staging Attack
By: John Amato @ 2:01 PM - PST It started with a David Horowitz type college story:

An alleged physical attack on a Princeton University student who is leading a movement to instill conservative moral values among undergraduates is rattling the campus here. A politics major from Texas who is a junior, Francisco Nava, said he was physically attacked Friday, beaten, and rendered unconscious by two black-clad men about two miles from campus, he told the student newspaper, the Daily Princetonian, in an on

That would have been pretty terrible if it had actually been true. Just when you thought some Conservatives couldn't get any creepier.

A student at Princeton University who said he was beaten unconscious by two black-clad assailants Friday has said that he fabricated the assault, and that he sent e-mail death threats to himself, three other Princeton students, and a prominent conservative professor at Princeton, Robert George, police said today.

The guy beat himself senseless. The proverbial "black menace" attacks the poor and sensitive Conservative--who only wants to bring a little joy and morals to the land. I'm sure the NRCC will take a hard look at Mr. Nava. And what does that tell you about religion in politics?

According to friends, Mr. Nava grew up as a devout Roman Catholic and converted to Mormonism. He served on a two-year mission trip to Russia with the Mormon Church.

Oh, look-Brit Hume is using it today with an update: "Little Outrage over Little Outrage Over Student Beating at Princeton University."

And here's a Holiday stocking stuffer for all in keeping with the Nava principle. I have no idea if this is real or not:"Perfect College Sinners"


If you have a problem with this blame bill o'reilly. this is all for him.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | December 18, 2007 5:22 PM | Report abuse

When I first started seriously assessing the upcoming field in early 2006, I was shocked to discover the lack of an heir apparent. At the time the people working Iowa were Mitt Romney, George Pataki and George Allen, with Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee and Chuck Hagel in the wings. The general consensus at the time was that none of them were different enough from the other to make a difference, and it left a large bloc of undecided voters. We were working on convincing a (then somewhat sane) Alan Keyes to run, because we knew at the time that a real conservative wasn't among the bunch. A year later, some names and faces have changed but the attitude remains the same. Nobody is carrying the torch.

Ron Paul's fans are borne of that 20% undecided bloc that's consistently shown up on the polls. For all of Free Republic's delusional insistence that nutjobs and George Soros are propelling the fundraising, the reality is that these are all average Joe conservatives who want less government, less taxation, more personal responsibility and a President with a backbone. The real indicator of the recent fundraising drive wasn't that Ron Paul raised $6 million, it's that he brought in 25,000 new donors and the average donation was 50 bucks.

It's not a complicated issue here, and this post is proof positive that the noses of political insiders are too close to the newspaper. Ron Paul has been unfairly tarred with the kook brush by the pundit collective, and now you're realizing just how grounded and realistic he really is. Once you take off the face mask, you'll realize there's quite a bit of fresh air to be had.

Posted by: | December 18, 2007 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Both parties have moved away from the Constitution. During election campains they insult us by pandering to whatever group to which they speak. Dr. Paul has proven two things in his public service: 1)He follows the Constitution, and 2) He speaks the truth as he knows it. A lot of Americans see this as refreshing. Many people claim and even take oaths to defend the Constitution, but most will deviate when it's their ox being gored. (no pun intended) I'm fifty-eight and I see this as a last chance to take the country back to the Constitution. Many young people just see their first truly honest politition.

Posted by: pete_keeling55 | December 18, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul's financial success is a result of his plain-spokenness and principles which resonate with Americans who are tired of being told what to think by the MSM. If you look at how "the issues" are framed by the media (and the "mainstream" candidates like Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, McCain), they are all so 20th-century, centralized government sounding. The fact is, the internet generation is accustomed to de-centralized, distributed power that resides in the hands of individuals who leverage their own merit and creativity instead of looking to a nanny state for sustenance and salvation. Ron Paul's message is essentially about individual empowerment and liberty. It gets your heart racing when you think in terms of the freedom that the founding fathers fought for, and that we've since divested to the Federal government.

Posted by: mattwittemann | December 18, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

in either party.

Posted by: jgee84 | December 18, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

I would argue that Ron Paul's strength lies in not in what we know about him but what we don't. I would guess that non-junkies would say that they know he wants us out of the Iraq War immediately and favors a drastic scaling back of our international commitments and the Federal Government. He can grab a voter's attention by being a Republican who opposes the war, and then the broad ideas can result in a package that is very appealing to both conservatives and liberals. After that, the voter can impress their own image on him. He hasn't gotten much attention from the media on his policy issue or record, so people don't have to reconcile their mental picture of him with a more complete one. That is why we have seen people on the far right and the far left flocking to his candidacy. As I side note, I think I have undersold his antiwar stance. I think he has done more to publicize antiwar sentiment with his "Mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" performances during debates than any other candidate.

Posted by: jgee84 | December 18, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

"What Does Ron Paul $ Mean?"

It means the guy who speaks most passionately about wasteful government spending has a campaign blimp.


Posted by: bsimon | December 18, 2007 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul has the ability to raise money because he speaks like the average person and has the views of the average person. He doesn' sound or act like a typical candidate and for that reason people want to help fund his campaign. The other candidates can get their money from the political machine that they work for, but Ron Paul draws support from real people.

Posted by: mrquentin | December 18, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Americans have grown distrustful of the government, be they Democrats or Republicans. We no longer believe politicians actually care about America's best interest, and are really just pawns of big corporate interests.
Ron Paul is the exception. His impeccable record shows that he is a man driven by his idealogy of what America could be and should be. He aspires to the vision of our Founding Fathers. An America where government is a liberator, not an oppressor. Where power is decentralized away from the Federal government and relegated to the States, Communities, and ultimately the individual. In his eyes, more government is the threat, not the savior and this is clearly the message of the Consitution as well. This is what Americans are feeling, and exactly what Ron Paul articulates in his campaign. As demonstrated by his record breaking one day fund raiser on Dec 16, many Americans agree, Ron Paul is "right on the money"!

Posted by: jmdecom | December 18, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I got here ahead of the legions of Ron Paul fanatics. Prepare to be overrun by Ronbots very soon.

Ron Paul's fundraising success means a few things that there are a lot of people out there who are very upset with the status quo. I get the feeling that Paul's donors don't usually participate in politics; they weren't out campaigning for Bush or Kerry in 2004. They're the people who disagree with the entire system, and want a major change. There's a lot of anger there, much of it justified.

His fundraising success also shows that it's possible for a low-profile candidate to make a lot of money, if their message appeals to enough people. Personally, I disagree with Paul on almost every issue, and I think he'd be a disaster as president. But I'm still glad that he's been so successful. I'd like to see his legion of devotees form a third party. They're certainly more numerous and vocal than the Greens in 2000. Maybe then we could finally get rid of this stupid two-party system, and have some real choice in our elections. If Ron Paul has some success in the primary, or as an independent candidate in the general, that's good for our democracy.

Posted by: Blarg | December 18, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

This should be no mystery, although it will strike many as one. And the reason? Because the mainstream media has chosen to blackout any news on Paul. So all but the best informed know who he is. Why? Because he caters to no special interest lobbying groups. In other words, he has principles, which is why he is so loved by so many, and hated by some. Even though Paul raised $4M back in November no one mentioned it. And even when they talk about him they have to add some derogatory comment or title, like Dr. No. And we thought we were living in a democracy...

Posted by: bcolohan | December 18, 2007 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul is about anarchy. A hatred of all government that has been fostered by Republican shills since Reagan. Just like the culture war they've been waging, now it's all come back to haunt them, in the form of Huckabee with his ad featuring a Christian cross, Mitt with his religiion some Christians think is a cult, and Paul with his Boston Tea Party fundraiser. The establishment Paul wants to overthrow is the Republican establishment. Now the chicken have come home to roost and the Frankenseins R's have created are threatening to wreak havoc on them.

Posted by: drindl | December 18, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company