Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Has Happened to Ron Paul?
The National Ledger ^

Posted on 01/14/2008 2:28:06 PM PST by mnehring

It was supposed to be a revolution. Ron Paul was set to take America and the world by storm by winning primary after primary on his way to the White House. The supporters of the ten-term US Congressman from Texas were convinced that the money he raised would equal support at the actual ballot box. Now in the cold hard days of January, the truth has broken though.

So what has happened to Ron Paul? The answer isn't difficult; his support was never very large to begin with. It was magnified by a presence on the Internet (or the "Internets" if you prefer) and it would never push through into the real world of voting. This was never really anything more than an online revolution that could never come close to cracking the mainstream of political thought.

***

For a dark horse candidate, he made all that he could out of his Libertarian philosophies. He brought forward a whole bunch of young folks that didn't really understand the political process and they are now excited and involved. Of course, Iowa and New Hampshire slapped many of them across the face and Michigan and New Hampshire will do the same. Come February 5 even the staunchest Paul political supporter will have to realize that it isn't going to happen.

The problem that many didn't really understand is that Paul wasn't preaching anything new. This was the same Libertarian Party line that had been regurgitated over and over in one form of another for election after election. I'm not certain why so many thought it might be "magical" this campaign season.

***

There is a reason that the Libertarian Party exists in relative obscurity. Though many of us hold several of the ideas of the party dear to our hearts and believe them fully, once the movement of the fringe takes hold it is too much to bear for most people.

Many scoffed at the "mainstream" and believed they didn't need them as their man Ron Paul would rise above and dominate. They didn't believe the polls that showed little support and the true believers don't even believe the votes that have been cast at the ballot box. I'm not certain if Paul and his supporters will go away quietly, but one thing is certain, they won't win this election or even come close enough to move the political debate.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911truth; libertarian; lies; obviously; paulestinians; ronpaul; shootthemessenger; shrimpforsale; slanders; smearcampaign; stormfrontlosesagain; thebuchananeffect
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 281-299 next last
To: mnehrling
Good summation of the Paul “phenomenon”. He was never more than a political sideshow who never had a chance of winning a single state.
61 posted on 01/14/2008 3:15:53 PM PST by North American Elite (Free Trade means a Free America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
This was an internet deception anyways. Ron Paul is done.

Internet deception? Ron Paul is 4th in popular vote primary totals and he has two delegates. I suppose those votes were "spammed" too, right. There is another Money Bomb commencing on Dr. King day.

62 posted on 01/14/2008 3:17:25 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GIANT SUCKING SOUND AT LAMBEAU FIELD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Revelation 911

The first six and only visible freeper names in your ping list are all banned. Maybe you should consider updating your ping list.


63 posted on 01/14/2008 3:18:26 PM PST by jrooney (Ron Paul called Reagan a Dramatic Failure and thinks he is smarter than Abe Lincoln.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"A new generation of conservatives have been born."

That is a huge insult to us Conservatives. Why is it that not even Ron Paul calls himself a Conservative, but you Paultards find it nessessary to spew this Al Qaeda dupe all over FreeRepublic and try to link Conservatism with it.

GTFO!!!!!

Please, take this insanity to some more favorable forum which harbors this uber-idiot.

It is Paultards with Freerepublic accounts that don't get it.

Where is the Zot kitty when it is most needed?

64 posted on 01/14/2008 3:20:25 PM PST by lormand (Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

I didn’t know New Hampshire was going to have a 2nd primary (along with Michigan).

Huh!


65 posted on 01/14/2008 3:20:40 PM PST by bcsco (Huckleberry Hound - Another dope from Hope!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"Ron Paul is 4th in popular vote primary totals and he has two delegates."

Al Zawari and Bin Laden right?

66 posted on 01/14/2008 3:21:33 PM PST by lormand (Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: lormand; Extremely Extreme Extremist
"Paul will be spoken in the same breath 20 years from now as Reagan is now"

Looks like Baghdad Bob as reinvented himself as a freeper.
67 posted on 01/14/2008 3:22:36 PM PST by jrooney (Ron Paul called Reagan a Dramatic Failure and thinks he is smarter than Abe Lincoln.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
Of course, Iowa and New Hampshire slapped many of them across the face and Michigan and New Hampshire will do the same.

Who writes this garbage?

68 posted on 01/14/2008 3:23:37 PM PST by shekkian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kellis91789
Who will Ron Paul endorse when he quits ?

Dennis Kucinich.

Will it help or hurt whoever that is ?

100 votes instead of 50.

69 posted on 01/14/2008 3:24:06 PM PST by bcsco (Huckleberry Hound - Another dope from Hope!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lormand
Al Zawari and Bin Laden right?

Well of course. White supremacists, anti-war kooks, and Troofers make up Paul's support, according to you guys - why not add in Al-Queda terrorists too! Let's throw in some Russian gangsters too.

So you guys won't have any problems if Paul goes 3rd party then, since you know, only the aforementioned people are going to vote for him anyways, right?

70 posted on 01/14/2008 3:25:24 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GIANT SUCKING SOUND AT LAMBEAU FIELD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: jrooney
If history is a guide, you have two pairs of individuals, Churchill and Chamberlain, Bush and Paul.

Who do you think Paul will most be associated with? Recent history is not trending favorably towards Paul either.

71 posted on 01/14/2008 3:25:50 PM PST by lormand (Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: lormand

Paul is Chamberlain’s American clone, unfortunately for us.


72 posted on 01/14/2008 3:27:52 PM PST by jrooney (Ron Paul called Reagan a Dramatic Failure and thinks he is smarter than Abe Lincoln.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"So you guys won't have any problems if Paul goes 3rd party then, since you know, only the aforementioned people are going to vote for him anyways, right?"

What I do mind is Ron Paul spammers with Freeper accounts.

73 posted on 01/14/2008 3:28:04 PM PST by lormand (Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
Any politician with national ambitions generally aims to assemble a coalition. He may appeal to more than one constituency, but if each group at least tolerates the others, he can form a coalition.

Paul appeals to two totally disjoint, diametrically opposed demographics. There is no way that they can be reconciled.

74 posted on 01/14/2008 3:28:49 PM PST by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrooney
Looks like Baghdad Bob as reinvented himself as a freeper

Right now, Baghdad Bob is the spokesperson of the Republican Party, saying that the Republican will win because of Hillary. Never-mind the fact that the Dems have more money and bigger numbers than the GOP.

You guys are laughing at Paul now but I think the good Doctor is going to have the last laugh come the general election.

75 posted on 01/14/2008 3:29:07 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GIANT SUCKING SOUND AT LAMBEAU FIELD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: lormand

paul will be compared to benedict arnold and chicken little also


76 posted on 01/14/2008 3:30:17 PM PST by italianquaker (Is there anything Ron Paul doesn't blame the USA for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: lormand
What I do mind is Ron Paul spammers with Freeper accounts.

I'm not allowed to comment on the article or what? Am I breaking up your echo chamber here? Where am I spamming Ron Paul? Actually I haven't been on a Ron Paul thread in the past few days.

77 posted on 01/14/2008 3:30:32 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GIANT SUCKING SOUND AT LAMBEAU FIELD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

“So you guys won’t have any problems if Paul goes 3rd party then”

It’d be nice to see, perhaps, if Hillary beats Obama for the nomination, many on the anti-war left will vote for Paul to punish Hillary for her vote to go to war.


78 posted on 01/14/2008 3:30:33 PM PST by death2tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: lormand
If history is a guide, you have two pairs of individuals, Churchill and Chamberlain, Bush and Paul.

Your boy Bush is currently sticking the shiv in Israel's back and siding with D.C. on its gun ban.

Nothing to see here though. Let's just go to a "Pray for President Bush" thread and everything will be roses again.

79 posted on 01/14/2008 3:32:11 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GIANT SUCKING SOUND AT LAMBEAU FIELD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: lormand

Bull.

He was about cutting government to the bone. In his mind that meant cutting the military too. That’s where he and I differed. I would’ve gone along with the military cuts IF he first proved to me he was going to do the other cuts first, and then win the war on terror...THEN CUT THE MILITARY. I’d be fine with that. I’d give him his first 4 year term to make good on his promises...win the war, cut the government to the bone, fix the trade imbalance, secure our borders...then if he succeeded I’d give him 4 more years to do his military cuts.

But that’s not what he wanted to do. He wanted to start out by cutting the military. THat’s a deal breaker for me. WHat we’d end up with is spending up the wazoo, unsecured borders, losing the war on terror, worsened trade imbalance, and NO MILITARY. Not a good situation. No ronpaul for me, thank you.


80 posted on 01/14/2008 3:33:16 PM PST by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 281-299 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson