Is San Francisco Ron Paul territory? (Duh!)

The Los Angeles Times ^ | October 29, 2007 | Scott Martelle

[2ndDivisionVet]

Stephanie Burns and Ben Parkinson strolled down sun-drenched Fillmore Street with political thievery on their minds.

Both are grass-roots volunteers for Republican presidential contender Ron Paul, a Texas congressman whose libertarian views might seem to make him a tough sell in this legendarily left-wing city.

But Burns, Parkinson and other Paul supporters have been spending their weekends marching, staffing tables and knocking on doors in an improbable quest: picking up some of California's 173 convention delegates in the Feb. 5 primary.

On the surface, the plan seems quixotic given general assumptions about California: that the state is too big for retail politics, and that campaign victory requires expensive TV ads in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego and Sacramento.

But for the Republicans, that changed when the state party amended its rules before the 2004 primary. Instead of awarding all the state's delegates to whomever wins the statewide vote, the GOP doles out three delegates to the winner of each of the state's 53 congressional districts. (Eleven at-large delegates also go to the top vote-getter in the state, and three more delegates are unpledged.)

The rule change might seem arcane, but it has forced campaigns to reach into the state's nooks and crannies beyond key media markets.

And it has emboldened Paul supporters to organize here in San Francisco, across the bay in Oakland and in other districts with relatively few Republicans, under the theory that it's easier for a small fish to campaign in a small pond.

"We don't have to chase that many people," said Burns, a construction site manager from Sausalito who leads a 345-member group of Bay Area Paul supporters who came together through Meetup.com. "That's what makes it attractive."(continued)

[2ndDivisionVet]

Anywhere that Birkenstocks outnumber Johnston & Murphys is Ron Paul territory. I wonder if Dennis Kucinich will be his running mate on a third party ticket?

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Typical Ron Paul "conservatives":

[rightwingintelligentsia]

Anywhere there are kooks is Ron Paul territory.

[Badeye]

Yep.

If you hate George Bush hard enough, any liberal enclave will welcome you...til Hillary says otherwise.

[drpix]

I think this RP campaign office is in SF - but I'm not sure.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

I bow to the master. ;)

[traviskicks]

lol, did you put in all those keywords yourself?

btw, this article doesn’t mention who ‘colins’ is, who is quoted at the end.

[traviskicks]

LOL

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Where's the enthusiastic supporters for Fred! at? How come people aren't driving hundreds of miles to attend his rallies?

Here's a suggestion. Why don't you worry about the Big Guy and let the whackjobs and kooks support Paul. Let Paul destroy his own candidacy then, why even worry about him if Fred's! going to be the nominee in a cakewalk anyway?

Right now Fred! is behind Paul in NH. Tell the medic to clear Fred! to go out and do some campaigning.

[rineaux]

Right now Fred! is behind Paul in NH. Tell the medic to clear Fred! to go out and do some campaigning. LOL

[calcowgirl]

But for the Republicans, that changed when the state party amended its rules before the 2004 primary. Instead of awarding all the state's delegates to whomever wins the statewide vote, the GOP doles out three delegates to the winner of each of the state's 53 congressional districts.

Thanks to the ex-chairman, who wants to turn the CA GOP into the "purple party," we get stupid changes like this. Desite what the article says, Rudy has been tuned into this strategy from the beginning. Now he'll probably be one-upped by Ron Paul. Ahhh... the law of unintended consequences.

[calcowgirl]

btw, this article doesn’t mention who ‘colins’ is, who is quoted at the end.

"...Jerry Collins, a retired workers' compensation analyst and Paul volunteer."

[John D]

Right now Fred! is behind Paul in NH.

But Fred is the ONLY one who is behind him.

[SierraWasp]

"who wants to turn the CA GOP into the "purple party," ???

I think this would make an excellent poll question at the bottom of FR's sidebar!!!

[N. Theknow]

Is San Francisco Ron Paul territory? (Duh!)

Maybe because Ron Paul is bringing up the rear.

[traviskicks]

ah thanks, not sure how i missed that!

[mnehring]

Don't be fooled.. Paul is no Conservative. Votes speak louder than rhetoric.

Ron Paul's 2006 American Conservative Union rating: 76% Lifetime Rating: 82.3%

Ron Paul's Voting Record (ya, ya, I know, there is an excuse for all of these, state's rights are more important than stopping abortion and fixing the border, Ronnie is making a statement, or everyone else was voting against it and he was just playing the game, yadda, yadda, yadda)

Here are some more ‘Conservative(sic)’ votes by Paul:

Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.

Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.

Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.

Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime.

Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.

Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.

Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.

Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy.

Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.

Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects.

Voted NO on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.

Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations.

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits about obesity against food providers.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.

Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.

Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers.

Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients.

Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks.

Let's also not forget Paul's Pork Projects (that he voted for before he voted against when he calls them unconstitutional but he is just playing the game when he submits them because everyone else does it.. yadda yadda yadda..)

Paul also supported the NAU superhighway by funding the TransTexas Corridor

[april15Bendovr]

Whats next Greenwich Village NY for Ron Paul

[mvpel]

So overbearing, intrusive government is fine as long as the conservatives get to decide who’s going to be overborne and intruded upon, right?

Do you want a President Hillary at the reins of a Congressional authorization to attack any nation anywhere in the world as long as she explains it within 48 hours, for example?

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

According to the Paul-haters, only lefties and anti-war kooks support Paul. So that should be a good thing, right? Because it's draining support from the Dims and independents will take another look at the Republican candidates then, and Paul will destroy himself. So why is the GOP candidates and their dwindling supporters are worried about Paul then?