How did you become a journalist? or is this just a hobbie? …. now you make stuff up and ad the name of Ron Paul to your title to get hits on your article?

Pathetic!

You are WAY OFF!

I haven’t posted on Donklephant for a long time because the site is so painfully full of intrusive and resource-consuming noise. But I do indeed remember your coverage from last year.

I just wanted to offer a quick explanation for the strongly-worded responses you tend to get. Ron Paul’s platform of liberty and constitutionally-limited government seems to be unique among the other candidates. The common response by media and his opponents to his championing of these principles has been sneering, derision, and dismissal. These reactions to the founding principles of our country tend to provoke frustration and anger which focuses on any reporter or blogger who mentions Ron Paul and implies Machiavellian or despicable agendas. We get a lot of that, and tend to fire back.

Reading your article again, I see no attack there. I’m sure the phrasing that Paul said Obama “would win the rat race to the Whit House” was more poetic license then accurate reporting. After listening to several dozen Paul speeches over the past year, I think we both know that isn’t anything like his tone, and might convey more certainty and cynicism that Paul would use.

Nonetheless, the Paul supporters tend to retaliate from conditioned response these days. I’d prefer we didn’t, but I understand the roots of the reaction.

Also, the idea that Ron Paul hasn’t gotten MSM coverage is completely false. He’s gotten TONS of it, but since you all were never able to turn that media coverage into primary wins, he went the way of the other candidates. Still, he got so much more coverage than lesser candidates, and any honest look back at the past year proves that.

As for this, I’d like to offer one source. Google Trends can graph comparative volume of internet searches over a time span. It also graphs the number of times those same search terms appeared in what the folks at Google deem “news” references.

In this search, I compared the terms for “Ron Paul”, “Fred Thompson”, Romney, McCain, and Giuliani. Note that Ron Paul did indeed receive competitive hits as the campaign progresses (possibly reflecting his notably-strong internet following actively searching for information about him). Note also, the “News reference volume” graph below the main graph. Where is Ron Paul’s light blue line?

I’d submit that Ron Paul did indeed get many internet mentions and searches, but his news coverage was miniscule.

The fact that he is still drawing votes and crowds, still has 4 million in the bank, and has several supporters (including myself) working to obtain delegate seats in the face of this lapse in coverage may well indicate how well his message has resonated with some of us.

Thanks for posting about Ron Paul. I think he probably meant what he actually said. We’ll need to keep searching to find what that was.

quit making a mountain out of a molehill. You are assuming way too much when you say that Paul must be sending some type of coding political message to his supporters. It could very well be that he just thinks Obama will win the Presidency and that he agrees with Obama on foreign policy more than the others. When questioned, Ron Paul has a history of answering with exactly what he thinks. Have you been living under a rock for the past year?

I organized the Ron Paul rally at UNC when he came here on Friday. (Go ahead; Google it.) I had dinner with the man and two of his staffers. From what little personal interaction I had with him, I got three very distinct impressions of him:

1) He is an extremely laid back person;
2) He is an extremely blunt person (didn’t have to have dinner with him to understand this); and
3) He likes being told his schedule and sticking to his schedule.

None of this really jives with the idea that he is sending a coded message to supporters here. Furthermore, based on my conversations with campaign staffers, I can say with 100% confidence that Ron is not exactly the only one in the campaign who thinks that Obama is going to be the next President.

As a Ron Paul supporter, I don’t mind if you imply hidden motives as long as you also acknowledge that RP is a straight-shooter so it’s possible that Ron Paul had no ulterior motive, and simply answered the question with a statement that Obama was likely to win. Your omission of that possibility elicited the comments that you didn’t like.

Also, the idea that Ron Paul hasn’t gotten MSM coverage is completely false. He’s gotten TONS of it, but since you all were never able to turn that media coverage into primary wins, he went the way of the other candidates. Still, he got so much more coverage than lesser candidates, and any honest look back at the past year proves that.

As far as endorsing…I never said Ron Paul endorsed anybody. I did say he “predicted” Obama would win, which is what the story I linked to said. And then I wondered aloud why he has brought up Obama’s name a couple times. That’s all.

Okay, moving on from this one. Sorry folks, but I’m spending too much time saying the same thing over and over again.

When you are rallying for a cause like this one, which could solve so much, it gets no attention from the MSM (to find out why, one should only ready RP’s new book). And that can make the day to day workings of the RP message a little frustrating.
Most people who have anything to say on the subject of Ron Paul dont even know whpo he is, let alone who he stands for.

As for the topic at hand. RP said “That is not an endorsement”.

It is what it is. He said of the 3, Obama would do the less damage with his foreign policy.

A lot of readying between the lines here. The thing is, RP paints in black and white, so its easy for the liberals to understand…

Best regards…

One note, I didn’t say Paul endorsed Obama for President…just that he thought Obama would win. Those are two different things.

Also, just because you’re pressed hard be an interviewer doesn’t mean you have to answer for a certain candidate. A perfectly reasonable answer is “none of them live up to my standards” and yet he mentioned Obama.

Be that as it may, I’m under no illusions that Paul will endorse Obama, but the mere fact that he’s mentioning him says something. What that is yet, I’m not exactly sure of. But I’m following it and when I’ve made a determination, I’ll let everybody know.

Oh well…

The piece I quote above (which, again, was written by somebody else…hence the blockquote) didn’t say he was asked a question. That could very well be the case, but the way it’s written it suggests he said it as part of his speech. I’m not trying to deceive anybody here, I’m simply going off of the story.

And then we have an instance where he brings up Obama unaided. There’s no mention in this story that he was asked a question. If that’s the case, show me the report or video and I’ll change the story.

On a sidenote, it always is such a pleasure talking to you reasoned, level-headed Paulites. Thanks for keeping it real.

To the owners of Donklephant: I hope your not paying this guy. Maybe you can justify it by recalling how much value the dollar has lost because of the inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve.

What’s your routing number Justin? I will wire you some worthless money for doing nothing also.

Truth in reporting,

John Huckans

In fact, on CNN a few weeks ago, Ron Paul called Obama a FRAUD for playing politics with his supposed “anti-war message.”

Get it straight. Any real supporter of Ron Paul realizes Obama is just a pandering puppet and a part of the pro-war, globalist machine.