Gallup: 1% Veteran Support For Ron Paul
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Military, PollsThey may be giving his campaign money, but he only pulls 1% in the latest Gallup poll.
Who’s ahead of him? Duncan Hunter.
Duncan who?
Here’s the thing that I think a lot of you Paul supporters don’t get that even if that 1% is giving him money like crazy, that doesn’t mean it’ll translate into real world votes. Okay, maybe you all do get it, but Dean was the king of fundraising in 2004 and while it got him buzz, it didn’t get him elected.
So who is winning the popularity contest with vets? Why, Rudy of course. He’s still pulling support across the board, from both veteran and non-veteran. 64% in uniform give him high marks, while 54% of the civilian pop. likes what he has to say. Those are the highest numbers for either group.
The poll also shows that Hillary has pretty high negatives when it comes to the military:
Hillary Clinton is the only candidate who is viewed much more negatively (59%) than positively (37%) by veterans. Clinton would seem to be at a decided disadvantage among veterans given that roughly 9 in 10 veterans in this sample are men.
I don’t think it has anything to do with the fact there aren’t more women in the group. I think people view her as wishy-washy like Kerry. They think she’ll say anything to get elected. That may not be the case, but that’s the perception and she’s going to have a hell of a time overcoming it.
Oddly enough, Barack polls highest among Dems in both the vet and non-vet categories, although his unfavorables are pretty high with vets. It’s to be expected since he was against the war from the start and is easily dismissed as anti-military in general. Again, that may not be the case, but he’s going to have to address that if he cares about this voting bloc.
More as it develops…
UPDATE:
You’re intrepid reporter here, finding the facts so you don’t have to.
This time we have a poll from Iowa voters. Lots to go through, but the biggest news here is that Iowa Republicans want to get out of Iraq in 6 months by 51% to 39%. So you’d think that this would translate into more support for Ron Paul because he’s the only Republican anti-war candidate, right?
Well, it does, but only by 2% more than the Gallup poll:
Mitt Romney 31%
Fred Thompson 15%
Rudy Giuliani 13%
John McCain 8%
Mike Huckabee 8%
Newt Gingrich 3%
Ron Paul 3%
Tom Tancredo 3%
Sam Brownback 2%
Duncan Hunter 1%
Undecided 13%
At least he’s polling above Duncan “Who?” Hunter this time.
More things to pull from this? It seems like Huckabee got a slight bump because of the straw poll “win.” Last time this poll was taken he was at 5%. But Romney got the biggest bump from 23% to 31%. Maybe Mitt really was the winner of the straw poll and the Huckabee hype is just that….hype.
This entry was posted on Thursday, August 23rd, 2007 and is filed under 2008 Election, Military, Polls. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:29 pm
I am a Veteran, and a Ron Paul supporter. I think that these polls are worthless because they get random samplings of people and most people who are not on the net have never heard of Ron Paul.
His supporters are more dedicated and active than any other candidate, and that is going to translate later in the election cycle.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:38 pm
I respect that Jason…but the point I was trying to make is “beware”, because just because Paul is seeing a lot of money from the military doesn’t mean he’s got the military vote.
And we can all say that poll numbers don’t matter, but that’s if Paul was 13 points behnd Giuliani, not 63 points. Being realistic, that’s a hell of a lot of ground to make up.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:48 pm
I don’t think it has anything to do with the fact there aren’t more women in the group
In that case you’re confused. There’s a significant gender gap in support for Hillary. There may well be an additional gap due to the military viewpoint or whatever, but there’s no reason to believe that the male/female gap is somehow absent in the military respondents.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Justin, you continue to refer to poll statistics in making your point. You argue that Paul is 63 points behind Giuliani based on poll statistics which isn’t really being realistic either. Perhaps you should check the latest straw polls that actually counts real-world votes to see how well Ron Paul is really doing.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
I’m a veteran, I work with another guy who is also a Navy vet, and we are both hard core supporting Ron Paul.
This country’s foreign policy makes no sense, and Ron Paul is the only person running willing to say so.
Iraq never attacked us. Afghanistan never attacked us. We have troops in 130 countries, we have something like 730 bases overseas according to the DOD. Doesn’t that seem insane to you?
Give up this “Ron Paul can’t win” nonsense. Whether he wins or not, it’s time for all of us to stand up, be counted and say, ENOUGH. We WILL NOT continue to pay for the world’s police force.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:01 pm
I really wish that Rudy doesn’t get the nomination… I feel that he is too far out there to do any good for our country, and even if he were elected, not much of his ideas will be passed by Congress, most of which are fairly moderate (when not voting with their own parties). Although Ron Paul also has many radical ideas, such as removing DOE, Homeland Security, etc. I still think that he has a stronger grasp on the reality of what is going on in the world, the US Constitution, and history. Sure Rudy can put on a good show, pretend he’s strong against terrorism, but on the other end, those firefighters and police officers really could’ve used better funding such that they had better and more equipment and had better communication systems installed for such a tragedy that happened on 9/11. I look to either party now for some ray of hope that someone will at least tell the American people the truth, rather than keeping EVERYTHING a secret or taking “executive priviledge” when subpoenaed as this current administration does. This election, I only support those who tell the truth and can support it with FACTS.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Justin, take a hike. get lost.
“More as it develops…”
Yea OK Mr. Reporter lol
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Don’t be stupid. Veterans aren’t supporting Ghouliani, they are much smarter than that. I hate when media trys to create a voice for the people and put words in our mouths. Veterans are especially smart because they understand what is behind political motive. They once risked their lives for it.
The Gallup poll is crap. It alswyas has been. Don’t trust the poll trust your heart.
Ron Paul 2008
End War
End Taxes
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:07 pm
I don’t get the backward sheep logic. Somehow I am an idiot for supporting Ron Paul because some other people do not? Somehow I am supposed to change my position?
I will stand for right, even if it means standing alone. If millions of others “stand alone,” then something will emerge.
Polls show that most people have never heard of Ron Paul. Perhaps they will. Perhaps they will respond. Ron Paul supporters are winning converts. Ron Paul is winning converts. Each person who opens his eyes to liberty is a victory. Though the campaign is a revolution of ideas, it is a campaign for nomination for president. This is reflected in the nature of the excitement.
I don’t buy the circular reasoning.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:12 pm
I am an Air Force veteran as well, as well as my two neighbor’s. We all support Ron Paul. We support him because of his stand for the constitution and not voting to raise taxes.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Looks like the propaganda machine is out in full force. Giuliani, McCain, and Romney have no real support - only bought and paid for support. They all fail against Ron Paul.
Now it is time to try pumping up Duncan Hunter. Well, thats fine. Everyone wants a shot at the real winner.
In the end, the populace will win.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Why do you keep doing Ron Paul entries? What’s the matter? Scared he’ll take votes away from the Dems?
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:20 pm
amongst peopel who actually hear Ron Paul he dominates. Thus the post debate polls amongst people who just watched the debate. That is why it is maddening to see the media go out of their way to avoid talking about him. Sure Guiliani is the king of people who have never watched a debate or turned on a computer. The media does a poll and determines this and so then they use this as justification for pushing the king of the idiots.
good reporting Gardner
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:20 pm
This again goes to how bogus these “scientific” polls of 400 people are - and to the fact that Ron Paul’s internet popularity won’t translate into that many votes he we would win the election by a landslide. The answer is somewhere in between.
Ron Paul is number 1 in campaign donations by active military and veterans of all candidates for both parties, yet this “scientific” Gallop poll says he has only 1% support of vetterans. I’d say his support by active military and their families is higher than by older veterans. I’d say his true support is again somewhere between the Gallop poll and all the military donations he gets - just like with the “scientific” polls of 400 registered Republicans who voted last election versus the high internt traffic. Realize that many first time voters, Democrats and Independents will go for Paul.
I am a Ron Paul supporter and I am realistic. If this exact same election were held 20 years from now with virtually all 60 year olds being internet savvy, I’d say Ron Paul would be top tier and it would be a horse race.
For the under 35 crowd, Ron Paul is top tier. Where he will struggle is with “set in their ways” people in their 50’s, 60’s and 70’s who have been brain washed by the mainstream media and the establishment.
Still, I see Ron Paul as the only candidate who is not bought and paid for and will be true to the American people. His popularity keeps growing while the other candidates stagnate or lose support. The question is - is there enough time for the two lines of gaining and losing support to intersect. Many say no. I say you never know.
Realize the Gallop poll in Iowa the week before the staw poll had him at 1%, yet Ron Paul got 9.1% of the vote form real Iowans who had to show up at the polls. Thus, I don’t buy this veteran Gallup poll of 1%. As a guestimation, I’d put Paul at 10-12% with veterans. He will ge the vote of many young veterans.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
“In order to reduce the inaccuracy between two polls conducted by the same pollster, vote multipliers are added, which can be based on earlier polls, prior elections, “scientific” analyzes or just simply guesses. Here is how they work. Let’s say that a vote multiplier for Rudy Giuliani is 1.2, for John McCain 1.5 and for Ron Paul –3.0. If the pure poll gives Giuliani 25%, McCain 10% and Ron Paul 10% of the vote, the opinion polls are counted to show 30% for Giuliani, 15% for McCain and only 3% for Ron Paul. The chances are that opinion polls for Ron Paul have negative multipliers, since no-one conducting the polls believes that he can win. The same phenomenon has happened in various European countries during the last five years when so-called far right parties (with anti-immigration, anti-EU and fiscal conservative views) have taken many land-slide victories, even if their results in opinion polls have been often either poor or mediocre. ”
Ron Paul and Opinion Polling
http://tinyurl.com/2fqf2u
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
I support Ron Paul, I guess, all those 5 straw polls he has won do not count right?
You are an ignorant, who still beleives that Americans are stupid
Liberty and Freedom, that is what Americans Want.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Since when have the Gallup polls done ANYTHING but give the media an excuse to push their agenda?
Carter, G.H.W.Bush, Clinton and Kerry were each VERY low in the Gallup polls.
Here’s the rub. The people who become involved and informed go for Ron Paul. The people who are not involved, but motivated to vote, vote for the name that they recognize.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
OK, let’s say the Gallup Poll is accurate. I doubt it, since Gallup is under the MSM umbrella of RP suppression, but let’s say it is. What’s the demographics of the poll–i.e., where was it taken? Hunter is in a primarily Navy/Marine Town in San Diego so he does have a little more name recognition with the Navy and Marines, even if he never served at all, let alone in wartime like Paul did. I bet if you polled Colorado Springs Army and Air Force and rated Joel Hefley vs. Paul you’d get a similar result if Hefley was running instead of being retired. The point is that Paul’s support is nationwide and Hunter’s support is primarily local to Southern California, and most vets tend to live where the military and their VA hospitals are, so they know who the local congressman is to cover their benefits.
And comparing Paul to Dean is not only disingenuous, but downright fallacious. Dean tried to use the Net for fundraising but still had a top-down campaign operation. That was a direct contradiction that was destined to fail and the Dean Scream just was the catalyst that made it all implode. Paul has a bottoms-up campaign and has taken the Dean idea and properly applied it since fundraising is bottoms-up as well. That and Paul doesn’t go around screaming like a lunatic.
Yes we do get it. It’s another “scientific” (meaning engineered or rigged) poll targeting a specific group that makes up an honorable minority of the population that is being spun to say “Paul has no support” and “Paul can’t win”. Justin, when it comes to OD’ing on the anti-Paul Kool-Aid, I can only say, GET OFF IT, WILL YA? You’re a broken record that makes only nonsense. And arguing that he should run 3rd party instead is just cover carp for the other GOP candidates to keep him from spoiling their orchestrated garbage that we’re sick of seeing and hearing.
Newt Gingrinch, of all people, got one right today in the LA Times, of all places, when he called for the nominees to go Lincoln-Douglas across the country. Why don’t you report on THAT idea and do something constructive for a change?
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Apparenty the author’s point (ok all the medias point) is that no matter what Ron Paul does it won’t translate to votes.
We get it!!
So just leave us alone then and let us keep winning straw poll after straw poll. We are up to 5 now. I know, I know, the only straw poll that counted is the Iowa one…well that’s the only one reported on anyway…hmmm.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:07 pm
I hear the old refrain “Ron Paul can’t win”, from many people, even those who like his ideas. Why won’t he win? Because the media doesn’t like him? Screw the media, since when do they decide who our president is? We decide (supposedly). The elections are still over a year away, although primary season is fast approaching. Why do we keep trusting polls that sample people, the majority of whom probably haven’t been following the race thus far. It is too early to write off a candidate simply because of low poll numbers. If you recognize that our country is teetering on the edge of fascism, you should recognize that Ron Paul is the only candidate that will stop us from falling. None of the mainstream candidates that the media is collectively masturbating over will do that. If you realize these things, you hopefully tell everyone you know, and there’s a snowball effect. The establishment and it’s media ostensibly run this country, but remember that governments only derive their power from the consent of the governed. This country belongs to all of us, so let’s take control of it and put it on a sensible path.
Power to the People.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I agree with I am not a Roniac,
Look Justin, It’s pretty clear that there is something wrong with telephone polls in general. Look at the iowa straw poll versus the surveys about the iowa straw poll.
In the telephone surveys prior to the straw poll, McCain and Huckabee were neck-and-neck with 8%. In the actual straw poll Huckabee got 2587 votes (18%) and McCain got 101 votes (.5%). That pre straw-poll claimed to have a 4.5% MoE. looks like at least twice that ~ 9%
here’s another recent story about people in a telephone survey who just make stuff up…
http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/primarysource/2007/08/a_trick_questio.html
Every other indicator of popularity (straw polls, # of individuals contributing $, blog entries, rally supporters, yard signs, bumper stickers, page hits) show consistent growing support for Dr. Paul in about the 10-15% range. (never mind a few outliers)
Only one indicator has remained flat and mired in 1-3% territory. Strangely enough it is the one indicator that is prepared behind closed doors, and subject to various manipulations.
Ask your self this question - why are Dr. Paul’s telephone polling numbers so steady? from poll to poll, he gets 2-3%. Most of these polls have a 4-5% margin of error. That means we should be seeing several different numbers randomly grouped around 2% or whatever, including at lease one 7% and a couple of goose eggs. but we don’t see that. We see a steady ebb and flow of 1-2% 2-3%, then smoothly back down to 1%….
It should look something like:
1%, 3%, 5%, 2%, 4%, 1%, 0, 6%, 2%, 4%, 1% … not
1%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 2%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1%
In college chem lab we called that “dry-labbing”, and it was grounds for expulsion. Even if you think Ron Paul has peaked, you have to admit that a lot more people know about him now, than did 3 months ago. One would have expected to see a modest rise in polling numbers for all of that hard work (even a 4% rise since may 15th, would make me think telephone surveys are legit) but no, the telephone surveys seem oddly smooth and stagnant. Good thing party affiliation is not.
Ron Paul will win, because we won’t quit.
Later.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Justin,
Instead of accepting Gallup poll as an absolute truth and writing your entire article based on that assumption, why don’t you start explaining first to all readers what are the scientific bases that makes YOU believe so strongly that Gallup number is correct independent of their intentions?
Also why while Ron is winning in most of the Straw Polls and Debate Polls, “scientific” poll numbers do not reflect them at all?
Maybe you can enlighten us Paul supporters with your uncontestable scientific explanation why Gallup is correct.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:17 pm
My Galluup Poll has Donald Duck at 99% for President.
Who cares what the polls say? If you want to make a useful article, make one on the corruption and percent fixing and outright sillyness of these so called “official” polls.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Ron Paul is low in the polls? Oh well I should probably stop supporting him. God knows I want to follow what the rest of the country thinks instead of the candidate I like.
Thanks for explaining how I should vote. /sarcasm
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Justin -
Forget about Gallup polls.
Why not get a crystal ball instead?
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:32 pm
So what you are saying is that in a head to head between Hillary and Ron Paul, Ron Paul will win.
Isn’t this what we have been saying all along? She cannot win against him. He has the record and she does not.
The republican party better wake up and nominate Ron Paul or it’s going to be all over for us, and we will deserve what we get, more of the same.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Uh…I don’t think the polls are THAT far off. I think there is a clear demographic missing that would add a few points for Paul (young people without landlines/people coming into the Republican party for the first time).
Check out the pollster at USA Elections dot com. He’s got a lot of incredibly fascinating inside-scoop-type points about where the numbers could really be. A lot of these polls still don’t list Ron by name.
That being said though, I agree that the military contributions shouldn’t have been taken by anyone as proof that “the military backs Ron Paul.” The military pretty much hasn’t heard of him, or they’ve only heard of him as “that guy who wants to pull out now.”
I don’t make wild predictions about the future, but I do think Ron Paul has a better shot than people realize. A 9% turnout at Ames, following consistent 2% telephone polling proves that his motivated base is bigger than a lot of people were expecting.
-Chad
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:44 pm
New Rule for the Military:
From now on, money equals votes, got that?!?
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:44 pm
I have ZERO doubt that Ron Paul will WIN the election. Just wait and see…
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:52 pm
People have used fear for years to make others behave as they would like them too. A wasted vote, if you vote for them then the other horrible evil will get the office.
Those who still play the party game are discounting the fact that 42% of voters NO Longer will play the party game. Ron Paul pulls from all walks. My best guess is they hope they can still create fear. After four years of terror, terrorist, Weapons of mass destruction, terrorist, terror, terror. We have heard enough. This is not only about this election. The movement is much bigger than that. It is decades of disenfranchise, it is many, many tens of thousands of people who are tired of being raped, robbed, and lied too.
It’s about people like you who want to enslave people like me.
August 23rd, 2007 at 2:54 pm
If even he doesn’t get big votes on election day, he’s given the limited-government movement a big leg-up in recognition and self-confidence. It will continue to build in years to come.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:01 pm
If the presidential nominees were selected by calling 1,000 people in their living rooms and asking them who they like, whether or not they know much of anything about where the candidates stand, I would be worried.
But they’re not. The nominees are selected in caucuses and primaries attended by people who care enough to find out about who is running, when the primaries are, and how to participate in them, and then get motivated enough to go out and do it in the cold of winter, despite demands from their job, their friends, their kids, and their favorite TV show to do something else, and ignore the primaries along with the other 80% of Americans who don’t vote in them.
Judging from Republican straw polls around the country, it is Giuliani and McCain who should be worried — their support is very close to non-existent among people who actually have to get out and do something (besides answering the phone or mailing a check).
If the straw polls are any indication, the only genuine Republican contenders are Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Fred Thompson (if he runs.)
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:12 pm
I didn’t take this as a “Ron Paul can’t win” post. But this thread is just going like many Ron Paul discussions go on the Internet:
- Justin: Ron Paul’s support isn’t as widespread as his Internet supporters seem to think. (with statistics to support the argument).
- RP Supporter X: Bias!
- RP Supporter Y: I support RP, and my friend does too. So these polls based on thousands of responses must be wrong!
- RP Supporter Z: People like YOU are holding RP back by daring to repeat negative news!
It’s nice to see a candidate generating so much enthusiasm, but to Ron Paul supporters: You’re not going to get him elected by playing the “media bias” victim card and shouting down anyone who reports bad news about him. Be enthusiastic, but don’t be delusional.
And come on, some of you are dismissing Gallup polls in one breath and citing straw polls in the next. Do you really think the latter is a better indicator of his support?
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Navy veteran and Ron Paul Supporter here. Just checking in…
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:13 pm
“A 9% turnout at Ames, following consistent 2% telephone polling proves that his motivated base is bigger than a lot of people were expecting.”
To expand on this I’d be a lot more concerned if our primary elections were also conducted calling random people on landline telephones as opposed to motivated voters who go to the polls.
But they aren’t.
Primary elections have very small turnouts. The people who show up to vote are activists that are more interested in the political landscape than the “average voter”. In fact, in an early primary like New Hampshire they don’t even have to be an “average republican voter” to vote for Ron Paul since it is an open primary.
The New Hampshire primary is going to be filled with a demographic of people who have never voted before or lately, who don’t have landlines, who aren’t complacent or typical and who aren’t even Republican. Almost all of them are going to vote for Ron Paul.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:13 pm
People…
Why do you think I spend so much time talking about Ron Paul? Because it’s good for my health?
I think he’s a viable choice for a 3rd party candidate. And Paul is one of the most interesting politicians to come to the stage in a long, long time. This is a moderate/centrist/independent blog after all…one that supports the rise of a third way…hint, hint.
Also, I was in the Dean campaign, and whatever you think about how different those two campaigns were, they share a lot of non-superficial similarities. But hey, keep ignoring it. That’s fine. I’ll keep writing and you’ll keep ignoring and we’ll see if Paul becomes a contender.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Straw polls:
Straw polls are real people getting off their duffs and going out to actually vote. In some cases there is a fee required, up to $100 in at least one case. Of the last 18 straw polls, Ron Paul has finished in the top three 17 times. He finished first 5 times. And a couple of his first place finishes were blow outs were he got over 70% of the total.
There may not yet be millions of Ron Paul supporters out there, but there are tens of thousands and they are motivated.
BTW - have you seen road side signs for ANY candidate other than Ron Paul? I haven’t, but I’ve seen quite a few Ron Paul signs along side the road, in people’s yards, in windows. I’m also seeing Ron Paul bumper stickers and car magnets. None for the other candidates. Just Ron Paul.
It’s not just on the internet any more.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Romney wins Iowa Straw Poll after HOURS OF DELAY from DIEBOLD machine “glitches”, and the mainstream media is on the results like white on rice. And NO MENTION of the EXIT POLLS THAT HAD Dr Paul WINNING IT HANDS DOWN!
Dr Paul WINS FIVE Straw Polls, (Washington, Alabama, New Hampshire, and South Carolina) BY LANDSLIDES (coincidentally absent DIEBOLD and its “glitches”), AND NOT ONE PEEP on ANY OF THE Mainstream Media Outlets.
And these corporate run polls have NO TRANSPARENCY and are MUCH EASIER to doctor than rigging straw polls.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:38 pm
As a Marine veteran and Ron Paul supporter, I can definitely tell you that Ron Paul’s message of strict Constitutionalism and a peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy is very attractive to a lot of us military folks. In particular, those who are on their third or fourth deployment to Iraq, who see bungling and mismanagement at the highest levels of the Chain of Command, and who think that “victory” in Iraq is extremely ill-defined are more than ready for a change of course. This includes some of my brothers-in-arms who initially supported the war. I don’t pay too much attention to telephone polls, because they, like the copper-wire telephone services upon which they depend, are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Hillary’s lack of military support is incredibly unsurprising, and has less to do with the fact that she’s a woman than with her husband’s legacy. Service members will recall Bill Clinton’s presidency as one where many good officers were forced into early retirement, where the social experiment of “don’t ask, don’t tell” was implemented, and ultimately they see him as a draft-dodger who had nothing but disdain for the military. This all transfers to Hillary, justified or not.
I’m not sure why Obama’s numbers are so low, though I would again point out that telephone polling is increasingly irrelevant. There is also the fact that, as a generalization, military members tend to lean more toward Republicans than Democrats.
I am reminded of Michael Barone’s comments about Ron Paul’s fundraising successes among veterans. He said that it could be attributed to a large network of libertarians, which happens to include a lot of veterans. He did not ask the obvious (and intellectually honest) question: why are so many veterans interested in libertarian ideas? Now that would be a topic worth covering.
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:43 pm
It’s EASY!
The main stream Media is F#*king over the American people!
Plus landline phones are a bad way to poll….. Plus there probably demographically “chosen” or fixed.
Ron Paul really pulls at least 10 to 12% without the Medias help….
DONKEYELEPHANT, Please do what’s truley good for your Country and help this simple visionary and stop trying to put a man down that’s better than 98% of all mankind!
RudillaryMcromneybama- will not save us from the crap flying our way- WE NEED REAL FUNDAMANTAL CHANGE!!!!!!!!!
WHY CAN’T YOU SEE THAT!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Paul Revere II
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Why do you feel the need to even put the effort in writing this when not many people have even heard the news about military members’ donations to Ron Paul’s campaign? Who cares…
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I’m also a Navy Vet….. 94-98!
Ron Paul is the MAN!!!!!!!
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Anybody who can rationalize that Dr Paul’s “1%” support in the military is “giving him money like crazy” such that his campaign received MORE THAN 10 TIMES that of the “64%” who supposedly supports Guiliani needs to get his head checked.
You mock Ron Paul supporters as being irrational, but look who’s running the asylum here.
Like Dr Paul said, they call us radicals,…the radicals are in charge!
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:55 pm
If you studied statistical analysis and political polling like I did, you would know one of the biggest issues facing America is the fact that our public polling system is horribly flawed. Since it is based on outdated technology(the lan line) the polling results are usually always inaccurate. This is a serious problem even for the best political scientist. Embedded journalists such as yourself continue to perpetuate the problem.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Justin -
What was the name of the last 3rd Party candidate to win the Presidency? What year?
“Here’s the thing that I think a lot of you Paul supporters don’t get that even if that 1% is giving him money like crazy, that doesn’t mean it’ll translate into real world votes.”
Real World Votes…like straw polls?
Giuliani is Gallups favorite how is that translating into real world votes?
ZERO wins at straw polls! (2 seconds & 3 thirds…wow)
He should be running as a Democrat anyway
- Federal funded Abortionist
- Pro gun control
- Pro big government
I love how you like to have it both ways,
“Ron Pauls internet support won’t translate to real world votes.”
“Ron Pauls 5th place at the Iowa Straw Poll proves his internet presence does not translate to real world votes.”
Why don’t you suggest Giuliani, Thompson, and Romney switch to a third party called the “National Pandering Party”.
Platform:
- We will be prolife every other year* (except during elections)
- We will support big government* (but say we are for reductions)
- Promote a national health care program (but not explain that we will pay for it with loans from China)
- We will nation build until every country is like us. Because they hate us because of our Freedom.
Justin, while you are doing this because you got our backs…please be sure to take the knife out first.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:13 pm
“I think he’s a viable choice for a 3rd party candidate….Also, I was in the Dean campaign, and whatever you think about how different those two campaigns were, they share a lot of non-superficial similarities. But hey, keep ignoring it. That’s fine. I’ll keep writing and you’ll keep ignoring and we’ll see if Paul becomes a contender.”
I don’t think he’s a viable 3rd party candidate RIGHT NOW specifically because he doesn’t poll well with gallup and that means he wouldn’t get invited to the debates.
I stand by my belief that these gallup polls don’t indicate actual voting patterns but that is unfortunately irrelevant in a general election where the MSM decides who gets invited and getting cut out of the televised debates makes it completely impossible to win the presidency.
If you wish to look at his current run as a Republican as a means to a 3rd party presidential victory so be it. That also makes sense.
But first thing first. He needs to get up in the Gallup Polls in order to get invited to general election debates as a third party candidate. He does this by appearing in the current republican debates and by winning or placing well in straw polls and primaries. Once he gets the name recognition with joe public who doesn’t actually vote then he can run as a 3rd party candidate with limited funding and get into the debates.
Once he gets into the debates with warmonger democrat clinton and warmonger republican mcromney he’s suddenly the only guy on stage who 1) actually wants to bring the troops home 2) is for 2nd amendment rights 3) is pro life and 4) is anti-amnesty for illegals.
Then he can win.
But to do this he has to get into the debates and because he isn’t Ross Perot he doesn’t have to money to do TV ads so this is the path he has to take to do it.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:19 pm
I’m a vet and ex member of the army usasoc (2nd ranger battalion) and I support Ron Paul because he is the only one that supports the constitution. I remember swearing an oath to defend the constitution against all “enemies, foreign and “domestic”. So my question is who gets to decide who is the domestic enemy? Because there are allot of politicians who are stepping on the god damn peace of paper i swore to defend and die for!
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Actually this is the first good evidence the Gallup polling method is suspect, because the percentage of military money donated to Paul is so out of whack with the poll percentage of support. Dollars is a valid polling measure, especially when you consider the fact Paul’s supporters make small contributions on average. That means there were a lot of them.
I think Gallup has problems…though that said I think Paul’s actual numbers are around 9%. That won’t win a nomination.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:24 pm
First, Gallup is known for being a very poor polling company. Rasmussen and Zogby use much better polling methods, but even they are still usually landline only.
But let us say those numbers are right, 15 months from the election. Some other past candidates polling in that range at this time include Jimmy Carter - 75, Ronald Reagan - 79, Dukakis - 87 (won nomination) and Bill Clinton - 91. Heck, Clinton even lost Iowa miserably.
It will be a lot of work to get him nominated, but it has been done and it CAN be done.
JM
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:37 pm
It’s amazing how many articles I’m finding putting Ron Paul down. Why are there so many articles like this one out there? Hmmm, maybe I should check into Ron Paul. Well, I’m off to check him out.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Justin, please correct your biased “math abuse” statement that Flight Surgeon Paul is hypothetically 63 points behind Judy. You combined Paul’s free-for-all twelve-way share of 1% with Judy’s yes-no approval rating of 64%. Since Judy got 28% there the difference (less 6% margin of error twice) is 15 points. If Gallup even bothered to ask Paul’s approval rating, Judy might be trailing by those 15 points. There is no proof Gallup even listed Paul separately on the twelve-way preference question, that 1% might be all write-in votes. Then there are those multipliers. I can talk to the same 277 Republican veterans with different questions and get any answer I want. And y’know, a lot of these straw polls have a lot more than 277 entrants.
When you write so much about Dr. Paul, you give away the fact that he is the only contender for the Constitution, the only Reagan conservative. The batch of other Republicans, it was wisely said, are a bunch of CFR tag-team whack-a-moles. McQueeg is down but– FRED IS IN! Wait, Fred is dead but– Willard M. Romney is up! Willard is down but– here comes Judy!
No, the big news here is that a mainstream statistician actually allowed Dr. Paul to be even mentioned! Ah, statisticians … when you absolutely positively need to know the answer was what you expected.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Seriously…enough with the “can he win?” question. That is the LEAST IMPORTANT question in a presidential race. Assuming you are seeking a president..and not trying to appear smart or think your smart in some meaningless way.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:33 pm
OK it might be a legit question for a commentator…but it is so very early to pronounce anyone dead or even too far behind. Right now I think Thompson has it but if he wakes up with a dead girl or a live boy before the primary process has ended then Paul will be well positioned.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Leave the anti-Ron Paul pieces in the papers and on the news, where people can’t reply in real time… that way, there will be a higher chance your propaganda will be effective. It’s not going to work on the internet, you tool. Ron Paul owns the internet.
Sorry for your luck. Good day.
~Jessie
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:46 pm
What you don’t get is that Gallup and other “we call you” polls are a fraud. Who does the over sight of these polls? There is no transparency to these polls at all and should be considered no more valid that any other type of poll. By the way where is your Straw Poll article on how Ron Paul is winning with boots on the ground all over the country? These “we call you polls” are obsolete in todays world of do not call lists VOIP and cell phones.
August 23rd, 2007 at 6:01 pm
At this stage of the game, give me 1 dedicated Ron Paul supporter instead of 10 other Republican supporters who are merely for Romney or whomever the frontrunner is as the lesser of two evils against Hillary - Ron Paul’s support is bankable already while the other candidates’ support, like their candidates, are likely to flip-flop.
No other republican candidate has any base of support aside from the pragmatic notion that their candidacy can beat the democrats in ‘08. These are candidacies built on sand.
It appears that a discussion of the issues and positions of candidates is too complex for the media who wishes to focus on single and double digit polls. On the other hand, perhaps because the positions of most of the candidates are indistinguishable (with one notable exception of course), the media has an excuse.
Furthermore, I think Justin is clever in running Ron Paul stories because he knows, contrary to what he says, there is a large base of Ron Paul surfers who will want to read about him.
As for a third party candidacy, it will achieve nothing and furthermore Ron Paul is far more Republican than any of the other candidates.
August 23rd, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Sorry for the double post, but how often do you see a candidate issuing this kind of message:
http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/08/message-from–2.html
No wonder the party establishment wants to push the primaries forward. The longer this kind of stuff remains, the less chance that any candidate has of standing up to Ron Paul.
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:08 pm
You know what? Your wrong Mr. Gardner.
Your so called polls are only from Register Republicans. They do not represent the people Ron Paul is attracting.
In my oppinion, you sir are a bloated shit for brains. Go back in your hole and pray Ron Paul does get elected, because if he does not, your freedom of speech here on the internet will go bye bye.
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Earth to donklephant, if you haven’t figured it out yet, most people are no longer using land lines. Heck, my 62 year old mother no longer has a land lind. The age of land line polls is done and was proven in Iowa, where your beloved Guiliani received less than 2% of the vote.
Ron Paul is crushing everyone else with momentum and numbers at rallies, straw polls etc.
The old fashioned polls are dead - give it up
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:12 pm
The Ron Paul Revolution may be exposing a hidden fact: that the mass media “polls” are in fact NOT truthful. These so-called polls may have been a key tool in controlling America for the last 50 years. At every ACTUAL event where REAL PEOPLE vote Ron Paul scores better than anyone else. In every ACTUAL online poll where ANY REAL PERSON can vote Ron Paul scores better than anyone else. And then the mass media pollsters keep trying to tell us that Ron Paul only has 1% support. They’ve been saying the same 1% for six months now! Meanwhile 800 Ron Paul Meetup Groups have sprung up! Meanwhile Ron Paul has scored 81% in Alabama, 73% in New Hampshire, and 60% on huge national online polls. I think that Ron Paul has exposed a heretofore hidden fraud…the mass media polling companies.
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:18 pm
I’m tired of the “third party candidate” stuff (holding back my language)! In America there is no third party. The only way you have a chance of winning is if you have an (R) or a (D) next to your name! We are not here to make a statement. We are here to take back this country! Peace.
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:43 pm
Steve said,
“People have used fear for years to make others behave as they would like them too. A wasted vote, if you vote for them then the other horrible evil will get the office.”
Amen to that brother. My friends are so myopic, afraid of the other party, they don’t see what’s happening to their own. George Washington was right - political parties suck!
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Active duty Marine here and I support Ron Paul, My father is still an active duty Marine and he also supports Ron Paul. My brother who is also a Marine is voting for him also.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:05 pm
A couple of months ago I signed up on the Ron Paul website http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Every couple of weeks or so I get an email from the good Dr. It usually ends with a request for help in the form of a donation. Even though I really am in no position to give, I immediately send him some money. Whatever I can afford at the time. Why? Because in spite of this country’s many flaws - I still love it, and hate what this government in doing to our constitution , to its own people, and to the world. The fact that the media is so ignorant and complacent to what is going on is even more upsetting. Dr. Paul may be our last chance in my lifetime to turn this country around.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:09 pm
There are plenty of reasonable responses here but some that seem off. Ron Paul’s straw poll performance has been encouraging, but it’s a single drop in a huge bucket. All of the straw polls which Paul “won” had close to 300 people TOTAL, and some had even less. It’s a definite stretch to suggest that because Paul won these polls that it is a reflection of anything except Paul’s support among a small group of fervent supporters in a few equally small area. Despite all of the great news (fundraising, myspace friends, etc…) about Paul’s campaign, there’s just not a way to get a good read about his popularity, at least not yet. Even the best news about MeetUp growth still doesn’t guarantee that Paul’s won’t end up with 100,000 -200,000 great supporters. That’s enough to hang around until the campaign, but it will take 100 TIMES that to win in a primary (assuming 10 million votes are needed to win in a split election with approximately 25% turnout).
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:16 pm
Sorry all, I was wrong with the 63 number.
He’s 31 points behind Giuliani.
Again, my apologies.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm
How should people select who they vote for? Should I try to guess who most of the other voters will vote for? That sounds a little error-prone to me. Maybe I should just wait for the election to be over, and then cast my vote for whoever won. Then I’d be sure to have been right.
“Right.”
…yes…hmmmm…
Maybe (and you may want to read this a couple times) the right choice has to do with where you want the country to go, not whether you’re likely to have voted for the winner.
Thanks for the information, but I think I’ll go with the candidate who best supports what I value for America. Not only because I don’t want to vote for another pandering drone just because some group guesses that he or she will win, but also because if I don’t vote for the best choice, then I’m the problem.
Will Ron Paul win? Which is a more accurate forecaster: phone polls, straw polls, campaign contributions, burning goat entrails? I actually find it surprising, and irrelevant, that anyone cares.
Being fairly libertarian myself, I would never presume to intrude on your pursuit of happiness. If tea leaves make you happy, knock yourself out. :)
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:58 pm
I can’t believe they hired you, you suck as a journalist. Get a life Justin and read the real news about Ron Paul.
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:10 pm
I don’t believe the Gallup polls. They are nothing but lies. Ron Paul is huge on the internet, winning straw polls all over the country or placing well, he’s had more donations than any other candidate from the military (the other 99% didn’t donate I guess, that’s a whole story other in itself) and yet Gallup puts him at 0.000040005%. I’m sick of it. It’s total bull. Just like how they’ve been trying to ignore him. It’s B.S. and I for one don’t believe a word of it. Ron Paul will win because the people want the truth. The end.
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Iowa Republicans want to get out of Iraq in 6 months by 51% to 39%.
For the love of god Chuck Hagel - Get in the friggin’race!
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Take Back America In 2008. Vote Ron Paul!
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Wow, interesting discussion. At this point I don’t care why the article was posted, any publicity is good publicity as they say. Look at the discussion it got going here. Not everyone will change their minds and run out and vote for Ron Paul but it at least got people thinking and the facts commented on. Our country is in sad, sad, shape and if you look into what’s been passed as law with no defense by our Congress we are worse off then many are willing to admit. Our rights are systematically stripped away while anything off center is used to justify it especially the words “national security”. Heck, if it weren’t for the words Patriot Act and shoved at Congress at the last minute without time to study the pages and pages of writing, it probably wouldn’t have gotten passed. Noone wanted to look like they weren’t a Patriot. Yet, a patriot would never have passed the act. MHO
Gallup, if I read correctly, only polls approx 1000 “probable” voters. They exclude anyone who has never voted before no matter what age, the young voters who are voting for the first time, and anyone who has recently changed parties (since the last election) no matter what age or how many times they voted in the past. It doesn’t say if it is random across all 50 states or if they do it regionally etc.
The MSM will NEVER allow too much Ron Paul publicity. They can’t “afford” to. They are bought and paid for. Look who owns them and the subsidizing they receive. That’ll give you a clue. It’s “hidden” but it’s out there. Just snoop around a bit. Of course they will promote those that fit within their personal agendas to the largest extent and snub those that would cause their money and agendas to be pulled.
Wake up America, we ARE headed to a one world government, it’s inevitable it will happen sooner or later. My hope is Ron Paul will win because there will be enough who will look at the real facts and timing on bills that have been passed and realize that we are being played. Let’s not help promote this one world agenda. It’s why we’re in the war, the leaders want the oil and the control. JMHO
Thanks to all the servicemen (and women) who are trying to make a difference. Let’s get Ron Paul in office and get them home where they belong.
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Hi,
Great entertainment in all this, but I have a question for the author.
What is a ‘land line’ ?
Ron Paul supports the constitution which, unfortunately,
is just a another piece of paper in our society.
If you don’t understand that, just go ask King George.
More and more Americans don’t accept the constitution anymore,
and that’s why the Clinton/Obama message can’t get sidetracked.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:25 pm
There are a lot of Bloggers out there that are doing everything they can, working at a feverish pitch just to inform Ron Paul supporters that he JUST CAN”T WIN. Why? If Ron Pauls is a sure loser, why bother?
Personally, for me, Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate. If doesn’t make it, I simply won’t vote at all (unless Ron Paul goes independent). Virtually everyone else in the race is a bought and paid for CFR member, and they ALL sound like they are in an echo chamber pounding war drums, crying TERROR, TERROR. No thanks! America is VERY sick and desperately needs a doctor. Ron Paul 08′
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:37 pm
“So who is winning the popularity contest with vets? Why, Rudy of course. He’s still pulling support across the board, from both veteran and non-veteran.”
I find that extremely frightening.
I would love for Ron Paul to win, but if he doesn’t, please-god-don’t-let-it-be-Giuliani.
And not just because I have to look up how to spell his name if ever I want to write it!
I think our country is in deep trouble already, and to vote into office most of the people up for nomination, from either the Rep. or Dem. party, will just send us further into the hole we’ve been digging for oursleves for years.
We need to get back to the basics before it’s too late.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Believe the polls, believe the TV, believe advertisers. And buy a used car with this information. No one would do it–because this information is steeped in business interests and self-serving motivations. Now, I’m getting tired of the so-called “analysis” by the “hit-squads” who want to reduce Paul’s supporters. Who cares what they have to say? If you, Donklephant (whatever the Hell that means) were concerned about numbers and facts and logic, you’d report on the speciousness of the polling process (as noted by Gallup). And, you’d investigate the incongruities between the “poll numbers” and the number of people who turn out to support Paul. I can’t get that. (Can you?) And, I don’t understand the poll numbers. I admit that. But, if my brain were affixed to the television set and what is “reported,” I’d be as jaded as you are. So, just try to consider that there MIGHT be some difference between the reported facts and the reality. It just seems amazing to me that there is so much dialogue by the “hit squads” to reduce Paul and very little dialogue to promote the level of interest that is being shown by his supporters. That’s amazing. So,why don’t you come clean–what’s YOUR AGENDA?
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:52 pm
A pollster called my house yesterday. They asked for me, but I was at work. My sister-in-law answered the phone. They were conducting a Presidential Preferrence poll. So, they asked her the questions. They asked her what party she belonged to. She said Republican. So then they asked her which candidate she would vote for if the elections were held today. They listed off all the candidates, except Ron Paul. This included Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich, who aren’t even declared candidates yet. They EVEN mentioned John Cox. But not Ron Paul.
So my sister-in-law said “other” and then they asked her who she supported. She told them Ron Paul.
She asked them why Ron Paul was not on the list and they told her that the list was compiled of who the national news media considered to be “credible candidates.” Nice, huh?
Moral of the story? When you see “other” or “none of the above” on poll results, that is Ron Paul. And in many of these polls, that is the category that is winning.
So, put that in your pipe and smoke it!
When you get a call from these pollsters and they do not list Ron Paul, CONFRONT them. Find who is paying for the poll, what organization is conducting the poll, how large is the sample, etc.. Ask to speak to a manager. We have to stop this crap. Confront them.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Ron Paul will win !!
http://jimcotton.blogspot.com
August 23rd, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Navy vet here and I 100% support Ron Paul…and yes I voted for Bush twice. I regret that decision more than you know. I have other vet friends as well that support Ron Paul…I served to protect our Constitution…Iraq is not defending…it is pure capitalistic imperialism! Google Mussolini with corporatism, a fascism…down the rabbit hole you go :P Even better yet go to wikipedia and search corporatism and see what Mussolini had to say…you want the red pill or the blue pill?
August 24th, 2007 at 1:40 am
Gallup who?
Why are you quoting a polling service that no one believes is objective?
Too bad Gallup is the backbone of your entire argument, huh?
Gallup — isn’t that what a horse does?
August 24th, 2007 at 6:18 am
The polls are bogus, half will not even include Paul, the poll taker says. I don’t see his name, so undecided. Undecided seems to be winning. Main st. is not awake yet, I gaurantee that. When they do I gaurantee he is in the top three til the end. Virtually any polling expert will tell you its a name recognition device at this point, anyway but the media play it up like only the CFR candidates deserve a shot. Top teirs run away from any event they think Paul can win. Any debate has been proven to have given the top teir 3X more time to speak. No wonder people do not know him.
August 24th, 2007 at 6:53 am
After seeing loose change in december of 2006 I spent the next 6 months researching 911 3 to 4 hours a day and 8 to 10 hours a day on the weekend, my wife can attest to this fact, I can say without one single doubt that the Bush Cheney administration was absoloutely involved in 911,sadly the mountain of evidence is ill refutable, I am still amazed at the number of people who are in denial.
with that said the only obvious choice for our next president would be one that wants to have a new 911 investigation and get to the bottom of it.
with that said there are only two choices Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich,
Both have said we need a new investigation, Ron Paul has went on record as saying that 911 was not an inside job but wants a new investigation to reveal governmental incompetency, Dennis Kucinich has went on record saying 911 was an inside job and it was planned.
I live in Cleveland and I have to say that Dennis Kucinich is a great guy, but the fact is that even if there was a remote chance that he won the democratic primary it would come out that when he was mayor of Cleveland that he bankrupted the city,
there is no way Dennis can get elected!!
Ron Paul on the other hand is a financial genius,has a huge loyal following!!and wants to eliminate the federal reserve,
The federal reserve is the root cause of 911.
Our next presidential election will be the most important election in the history of the united states, all people who understand who was responsible for 911 need to come together and vote for Ron Paul, its now or never!!
Together we stand, divided we fail!!
sincerely
Matthew D Miller
August 24th, 2007 at 8:12 am
another interesting article cretiquing ron paul’s stance/policies on important issues.
good thing you’re not focused on reporting non scientific numbers in order to draw baseless conclusions.
i mean, who needs more of that?
August 24th, 2007 at 8:27 am
Anyone who still has this much faith in Gallup, is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
August 24th, 2007 at 8:32 am
It seems to me that Paul can translate online action into actual votes…
Straw Poll Results Compilations.
April 21st, 2007, Greenville, SC
Last 0.24% 1 / 421 votes
April 21st, 2007, Spartanburg, SC
Last 0% 0 / 700 votes
April 21st, 2007, Richland, SC
Last 0% 0 / 126 votes
June 16th, 2007, LibertyPapers.org conference
2nd 16.7% # of votes NA at press
July 7th, 2007, Concord, NH
1st 61.9% 182 / 294 votes
July 28th, 2007, Georgetown, SC
2nd 18% 40 / 223 votes
August 4th, 2007, St. Louis, MO
3rd 14% # of votes NA at press
August 11th, 2007, Ames, IA
5th 9.12% 1,305 / 14,302 votes
August 13th, 2007, Gaston, NC
1st 36.6% # of votes NA at press
August 17th, 2007, Springfield, IL
3rd 18.87% 174 / 922 votes
August 18th, 2007, Stafford, NH
1st 72.7% 208 / 286 votes
August 18th, 2007, West Alabama
1st 81.2% 216 / 266 votes
August 18th, 2007, Tippecanoe County, IN
4th 11.7% 21 / 180 votes
August 21st, 2007, Ronald Reagan Club, WA
1st 28.1% 45 / 160 votes
*August 22nd,2007, HRCC, MN
3rd 16%
1st place x 5
2nd place x 2
*3rd place x 3
4th place x 1
5th place x 1
Last place x 3
August 24th, 2007 at 8:34 am
Justin, How old are you 13? A third party candidate CANNOT WIN, unless you are a billionaire and Ron Paul is NOT.
I have been on many third party campaigns and helped independents run and guess what they all lost. You cannot beat the two party system with the election laws we have at this time. Change the laws and we have a chance. To even suggest that Ron Paul go third party is crazy. As a matter of fact its actually an old Republican trick that was tried with Reagan during his 1976 run for President and he refused. Its a way for as they use to call them (Rockafeller Republicans or NeoCons today) to get rid of unwanted candidates. Nice try, but no takers.
Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination
August 24th, 2007 at 8:54 am
This war is just like the nanny-state we’ve gotten for the last 50+ years. People inside the beltway tell us that we need them to take care of us. And then people get hooked like those on drugs.
They say… You don’t know how to run your schools. You can’t own a gun, you can’t talk in private, your at our mercy because you can’t defend yourself. Essentially, you can’t make decisions for yourself. We’ll tell you what’s right or wrong. blah, blah, blah. You need us to protect you from all these evil people in the Middle East.
There’s always something that gives the government more control and us less liberty and less of our own money! Rudy will be the master of this, which is what he did in NY. Ran it like a dictator.
August 24th, 2007 at 10:00 am
You’re not a reporter. You just keep pushing your ‘he can’t win’ opinion. Your ‘net hits are up solely because your articles use Dr. P’s name.
No Paul supporters will continue to read you if he loses. Then it’ll be back to the day job for you boyo.
August 24th, 2007 at 11:01 am
I’m a vet and I have to say I am very dissappointed in this disinformation. First off RUDY GULIANI IS A PIECE OF SH!T, war mongering, NWO supported LIAR.
I swear, it’s either Ron Paul supporters this and that…
Ron Paul won’t win
Ron Paul is low on land line polls
Ron Paul is ugly
JESUS CHRIST can’t you report a relevant issue? Can’t you actually judge his ideas??? I mean after all that is what is waking everyone up from this matrix of a government we have, that is what is making people like me take 5 hours a week to help spread the word because the MSM news stations completely ignore him and fill Americans and “vets” (meaning old people who are clueless to what is happening).
75% of people under 30 didn’t vote last year. 95% of them are waking the other 25% up and spreading the word to the older folks who are duped by the media.
WAKE UP fool, we aren’t believing the propoganda
August 24th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
I am a six year navy veteran. I love my country and the founding Constitutional principles which established her. Ron Paul is the only candidate who stands for what I believe in. If Rudi wins the nomination I will no longer support the Republican Party.
August 24th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
They say Ron Paul wins all these straw polls because his supporters are dedicated and will vote enmasse. Umm… I thought that was the point? To get people devoted to you and get out and vote for you enmasse, so you can win.
Just what exactly is the message here. He can not win no matter how much the people want him or vote for him, because the establishment doesn’t want him? Does THAT sound like the America you pledge your allegiance to?
Time for an armed revolution, perhaps?
August 24th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
They say Ron Paul wins all these straw polls only because his supporters are dedicated and will vote enmasse.
Umm… I thought that was the point? To get people devoted to you and get out and vote for you enmasse, so you can win.
Just what exactly is the message here. He can not win no matter how much the people want him or vote for him, because the establishment doesn’t want him? Does THAT sound like the America you pledge your allegiance to?
Basically, they are telling you that votes don’t matter. So when the winner is picked for us, they will just say, “yeah, but the other guys just looked like winners because people actually voted for them and skewed the results.”
Time for an armed revolution, perhaps?
August 24th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
The reason the media tries to censure Ron Paul is that once people hear what he has to say, withot the media’s twisted interpretations, people can equate with him. He is very intelligent in economics and a great statesman for freedom which is a powerful message and our monetary and tax also needs to be exposed. He wakes people up and they start to think on their own. I talked to a wealthy elderly couple this morning, who asked me about him. I gave them some info and directed them to the website. They agreed that the economic system is failing and we are on the verge of a huge depression. That usually does it. The only downfall is these poll numbers which I do not believe are truthful at all. RP08!
August 24th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Obviously this “reporter” and I say that in the loosest sense, writes defaming articles about Ron Paul so that he will get lots of hits. What his editors may not realize is that by printing this they show no credibility. A real story can be found on gambling911 where it shows that Mitt Romney is now stealing Ron Paul’s lines. A real story is that in spite of all this “wonderful” gallup polling that is oh, so realistic, Ron Paul just ran away with several polls that count - the kind people actually vote in. Alabama, NH.
I sure hope that lawsuit goes through where some guys are trying to sue media outlets who continue to defame Dr. Paul and mislead the public.
Justin, I hope you are named in the suit.
One question for you - do you really hate the United States this much to do this much damage to the only man who can actually save our country from economic ruin, just so you can get a few “hits.”
The word traitor comes to mind. Seriously. This junk is evil, has some effect on the public, and never once do you think about what will happen if one of those other jokers becomes President. Your prices will rise, you salary will decrease, you may face hyper-inflation, if you are under 40 you may get drafted - I sure hope you are the first - you face a crumbling nation and instead of giving it a hand you grab for a sledge hammer.
You are an appalling person. And stupid. So very stupid.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
This is in response to Jackson specifically…
Donklephant is a blog, not a news source. If you found this post via Google it’s because their algorithm spidered our site and posted this entry prominently in their news results. I’m neither pro-Paul or anti-Paul, but I am intrigued by his campaign. So please, for everybody’s sake (including your candidate’s), don’t post comments that make it clear you don’t know what you’re talking about.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Another blogger has come to tell all us Paul supporters that the sky is falling…
What else is new?
Next…
August 24th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Dear Justin:
You called yourself a reporter, sir, not I. And I quote: You’re intrepid reporter here, finding the facts so you don’t have to.
Apparently YOU don’t know what you are saying, rather than it being I that do not know of which I speak. Bloggers are not reporters. Reporters report the news. By calling yourself one, you are claiming to be a news source no matter what site you are posting on. In case you think you can get off by using the modifier intrepid, all that means is: audacious: invulnerable to fear or intimidation; “audacious explorers”; “fearless reporters and photographers”. You sir have claimed yourself to be a news source, not I.
You are obviously anti-Paul because the only stuff you print is negative and you ignore all of the positive. That is bias. You may wish to pretend you are not, but that does not change reality.
Your bias is clear to the rest of us, I wonder why you have such a hard time seeing reality? Well, I suppose a blogger who calls himself a reporter and then attacks a guest for pointing out the obvious may not have such a firm grip on the real world.
Now quit being a child, realize you actions have consequences and stop spouting junk just to get ratings. It is pathetic.
August 24th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
After reading this thread I think that there is a strong relation between enthusiasm for Ron Paul and paranoia, conspiracy theories and complete and utter fanaticism. There is a complete lack of understanding of the difference between a straw poll or other self-selected small audiences and a true attempt to select a representative sample from the population even among those who don’t decry the polls as rigged or part of the anti-Paul conspiracy.
I have looked at Ron Paul’s positions on the issues. That is why I would never support him.
August 25th, 2007 at 12:55 am
To Jim S,
I might suggest that there will always be some number of fanatics devoted to each candidate, and therefore judging any candidate based on his or her most disturbing supporters might result in supporting no candidate yourself. But there is another point that could be made here. That is: why one candidate seems to attract more zealous support than others. When one looks at a highly political chameleon (such as Willard Romney for instance), just what exactly is there in the candidacy to become passionate about? “Hurray. He looked great today, didn’t say or do anything offensive, and appeared to promise to tailor America just for me!” Doesn’t really inspire me. You?
All that said, I should be clear that at least one of Ron Paul’s zealous supporters does not support ad hominem attacks in either direction. They are worse than dissuasive; they immediately surrender the point to any person still discussing the issue at hand.
But this is a good segue into your other statement:
I want to thank you for actually mentioning Dr. Paul’s positions on the issues, rather than anyone’s guess as to whether he’ll be Homecoming King. Seeing as you did mention them, however, I would be interested in which positions you disagree with, and why. Any would do. I’d just like to hear that in the discussion for a change.
August 25th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Ron Paul believes that everything would work out just fine in the “relation” between individuals and corporations if all regulatory restraints on corporations were removed. I am not aware of a single regulatory agency that he is not in favor of eliminating, including the parts of the FTC that protect against consumer fraud, the FDA, EPA and OSHA. I think that is a completely delusional idea. His form of individualism is too extremist for my taste and conflicts with what I’ve seen in the real world.
His supporters say that he believes in individual freedom but in fact he has no problem with individual freedoms being limited in the name of morality so long as it is done at the state level instead of the federal government.
Those are my objections in a nutshell.
August 26th, 2007 at 12:44 am
“His supporters say that he believes in individual freedom but in fact he has no problem with individual freedoms being limited in the name of morality so long as it is done at the state level instead of the federal government.”
Right, because you have no control over what your state or city does? The Federal government is the answer. If one state must be opressed, all states must be opressed. Good luck trying to change anything in Federal government.
Sorry, but I don’t care how ‘extreme’ you think Ron Paul is, you are debating the constitution, and until people like you succeed in finally burning it, it is the law of the land. All I want is our government to obey the law.
The authority goes: individual, state, and then federal. Not the other way around. Try reading the constitution sometime, before spouting of ‘progressive’ ideas about how you ‘think’ government should be. Either change the law or obey it, we are sick and tired of the selective enforcement that just leaves our laws and freedom in an unpredictable state every 4 to 8 years.
August 26th, 2007 at 12:49 am
All of those regulatory agencies you mentioned should be maintained by the state and/or private sector. In fact, I would argue that this is would increase competition among the states as they try to be more business-friendly to attract companies, which would increase revenue, jobs, and quality of services.
August 26th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Scott proves my point about Ron Paul supporters who don’t have a clue. He says that the private sector should be trusted to regulate itself. Or maybe the states could be allowed to so long as they compete with each other in a race to the bottom to sell out the rights and health of their citizens for the sake of promises of jobs that could well turn out to be illusory as has happened so often in the competition that states and cities already have. Private corporations good, government bad. It appears to be the limit of what politics he can understand and he has absolutely no grasp of history.
In addition he has no apparent ability to understand that just maybe letting minorities have rights is a good idea and maybe that even on the state level theocracy or laws derived solely from the religion of the majority aren’t a good idea. Of course his hero doesn’t understand that either.
August 26th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Looks like the straw men are really taking a beating on both sides of this debate :-) Regardless of what group a person appears to represent, I’ll try not to assume anything not in evidence here.
There are two classes of things we can discuss, and I want to try not to mix the two. One class is what’s true and legal, the other class is what changes would be desirable.
Given that even “what’s true and legal” (which should be the easiest to answer) has been a full time profession for the entire judicial system from the start, I’ll just state my understanding. I have not yet found a section of the U.S. Constitution which provides for the FTC, FDA, EPA, and OSHA. Given that they not are provided for there, Amendment 10 would place the definitions of those (and all other possible extensions) in the hands of the states, or the people themselves.
As for class two, I see that as much more open, and perhaps the thrust of Jim S’s comments.
I can see where it would be easy to view our vast array of regulatory bureaucracies as a security blanket, without which we’d all be at the mercy of evil corporate giants. The problem I have with regulatory bureaucracies, besides no constitutional basis for them, is that there is no practical check on their power. They tend to wield that power with the same disregard that all unchecked bureaucracies do. One size will fit all, or it will not be allowed to exist. Presidents and congressmen at least have to bow to the voters occasionally. Companies have to bow to reactions from their customers and shareholders. Voluntary interaction with private companies yields the most responsive arrangement available.
Life, and especially liberty, does indeed come with risks. I would just maintain that by giving in to fear of voluntary associations with businesses and opting for the perceived security of mandatory interactions with an ever-growing number of government bureaucracies, you trade away your right to control your life to other people. The magazine Consumer Reports exists because of a viable market interest in comparative information about products, but Consumer Reports will never be able to tell you that you have to die before trying a new cancer medication.
Given Dr. Paul’s spoken and written record on the issues, I’d doubt he has no problem with individual freedoms being limited in any arena, except perhaps abortion (where he defines a fetus as a legal person who should be protected from murder), and even on that one, he does not propose a one-size-fits-all answer.
August 26th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
I think if more people were informed they would see that Ron Paul is the only intelligent choice for this country. If he does not become President we will have a Verichip implanted in our bodies as directed by the Real ID Act. The North American Union will happen. The first, Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendments have been critically weakened by Bush legislation. With the exception of Ron Paul it really doesn’t matter who wins the Presidency. The Illuminati, Jesuits and Bilderburgs control the Republican and Democratic parties as well as the House and Senate. They control all media outlets with the exception of the Internet (for now) and that is why you never hear about Ron Paul except on the Internet. It is for this reason that Ron Paul will not win. Has anyone ever heard a mainstream media commentator very confidently state that Ron Paul won’t win? There is a reason for that. I will support Ron Paul because I love his message and I would love to have my freedoms back. I also know that it won’t do any good because electronic voting machines will be used. There is a reason for that too. Maybe if we stop fighting among ourselves about trivial things and do some research on the big issues we may have a chance to save our country before it is too late for all of us.
August 27th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Ron Paul has apparently bought into the “War on Religion” and “War on Christmas” memes. To quote from one of these articles:
In addition he introduced the We the People Act in 2005. Basically it states that the federal courts would have absolutely no jurisdiction over social issues. To quote from the Wikipedia article (which also has a link to the full text of the bill):
So any state or city could pass any law they wanted circumscribing individual rights based on sexual orientation and it would be legal and unchallengeable. They could return to the good old days of teacher lead school prayer that ignores the children in the classroom who might not be Christians and there would be no appeal. The list goes on. And yet the Paul supporters insist on believing that he supports individual rights. Sure.
August 28th, 2007 at 12:10 am
To Jim S:
This argument is (intentionally?) misleading. You seem to imply that the referenced quote is from Ron Paul. Is it? If so, do you have a link or reference to the source? Until I see one, I’ll reserve comment.
Thank you for the link to HR 4379. This is hard information I find interesting. Again, it doesn’t surprise me much, given Dr. Paul’s interest in a much-smaller, constitutionally-limited federal government. Having read the bill, and rereading the pertinent portions of the constitution, I can see why Ron Paul proposed it, and possibly why you oppose it.
Ron Paul’s position remains consistent: “The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.” HR 4379 and other bills like it are based on two principles:
Dr. Paul is opposed to abortion, based on his experienced as an obstetrician.The constitution does not empower the federal government to decide these issues one way or the other. It’s the wrong venue.
I’ve already mentioned that I disagree with Dr. Paul about when a fetus should become a person with rights. With the nation split almost evenly in half on the issue, I do not see how enforcement at the federal level in either direction would be anything but a tyranny of the majority no matter how it came down. And again, unconstitutional.
HR 4379 also enumerates issues of sexual orientation, marriage, etc. The text simply reiterates what Ron Paul espouses: the Constitution of the United States does not define these issues as federal, in either direction.
Amendment 10 states that issues not explicitly given to the federal government are to be handled by the States and the people.
Amendment 14, Section 1 states that no State shall “…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This is pretty clear to me.
Without an appeal to fear, or an assumption that everyone agrees on highly-controversial issues which should then be enforced federally, and unsubstantiated assumptions of explicit religious motivation, I find it difficult to disagree with this method of resolution.
Again…any suggestions of a better way to handle it?
August 28th, 2007 at 2:32 am
I found the source of your quote, and it is indeed from Ron Paul. My apologies for implying you might be pulling a fast one.
As with abortion, I disagree with Dr. Paul on several points in this statement. Not being a member of the religion in question, I’m just as happy to see a wall of separation between church and state. I prefer that governmental organizations continue to be barred from using my money to support any religion, or any business unrelated to the government’s narrow functions, or any private person.
I have no problem with being wished a “Merry Christmas” or a “Happy Holiday”. I’m not aware of any governmental limitations on expressing either.
And seeing as how churches are voluntary associations, I have no trouble at all with them “…serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance.” People should be free to make churches as important as they like in their own lives.
Also, while I believe that there are certainly other ways to develop morality and civility than religion; government is indeed a most inappropriate instructor.
The constitution does not provide for religious entanglements at the federal level, so Ron Paul is unlikely to support any. But I don’t see him opposing any State-level efforts to embrace religion.
Definitely one for the “con” column, but not nearly enough to my revoke my support of Dr. Paul’s platform in general. 90% agreement instead of 95%. Will that shift me to a 30% candidate? What would you guess?
August 28th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
If churches eclipse the state in importance then we cannot maintain a civil society with the variety of religions we have in the United States. We might as well eliminate the country right now. Look at the constant denigration of the concept of secularism engaged in by Ron Paul and many other conservative religious people. If you think that religious differences won’t lead to violent disagreements just because we’re the United States, think again. After all, once churches eclipse the state in importance they will also eclipse the state in who people identify with. And Americans do not show a particular tolerance for the “other”.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Stephen…
\”…Remember, main goal of using a call center is to expand your business…\”…
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Justin,
I must say, you have convinced me! I was a paratrooper 1972-1975. I have never voted because until Ron Paul, there’s never been a politician I felt was worth voting for. But I guess I’ll give up and vote for Girliani, …when pigs fly!!!
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Could Jim S repeat his post in English???