Posted on 12/06/2011 7:14:19 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Rep. Ron Paul rarely makes news, and his candidacy is frequently ignored by Beltway reporters. But headlines, his aides say, are overrated. In fact, the Texas Republican’s low-key autumn was strategic. As Paul’s competitors stumbled and sparred, he amassed a small fortune for his campaign and built a strong ground operation. And with January fast approaching, his team is ready to surprise the political world and sweep the Iowa caucuses.
“This was a movement when he first started running in 2008,” says Trygve Olson, a senior Paul adviser. “Now it’s turned into a highly professionalized campaign, but the energy from that last run is still there, and at the heart of what’s keeping up his momentum.”
The latest polls back up that confidence. In the influential Des Moines Register poll published over the weekend, Paul placed second. Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, captured 25 percent of likely Iowa GOP voters, but Paul garnered 18 percent, two points ahead of Mitt Romney, who in 2008 placed second in the caucuses.
If Paul wins Iowa, the upset could upend what many politicos say is a two-man race between Gingrich and Romney. According to state GOP insiders, a Paul victory is a real possibility. In background conversations, many say Paul is much stronger than outside observers believe, with deep and wide support among a frustrated electorate. With Herman Cain’s departure from the race, operatives see Paul potentially collecting a quarter of caucus attendees.
“Ron Paul is definitely for real out here,” says Tim Albrecht, the communications director for Iowa governor Terry Branstad, who has not endorsed any GOP candidate. “He is going to get 18 percent in the caucuses no matter what. If there’s a snowstorm, he’ll probably win, since he has such dedicated, passionate supporters. The question is whether he can move higher than that.”
Paul, for his part, thinks that he can close in on Gingrich, who has seen a recent bump in both state and national polls. “We’re getting pretty close to it being within the margin of error,” Paul told CNN on Sunday. “I think we continue to do what we’re doing. We’ve had the flavors of the month up and down so far this campaign. I’d like to think of myself as the flavor of the decade.”
Indeed, Paul’s consistency, his strategists say, is integral to his strength, especially in Iowa, where GOP voters have shuffled through an array of favorites. “Iowans, after testing Bachmann, after testing Perry, after testing Cain, and now Gingrich, are realizing that Ron Paul, all along, has been their candidate,” says Fritz Wenzel, Paul’s pollster. Unlike many primary fights, “this is becoming a race about principles,” he says, “and Ron Paul has stood up for true conservative principles for decades, not just in the last month.”
But campaign strategy, of course, has also played a major role in sustaining Paul’s poll numbers. The campaign combines a strong online presence, centered on volunteer organization, with prolific fundraising. Perhaps more important, however, is Paul’s “traditional” strategy in Iowa, which combines a heavy candidate presence with constant mailings and outreach.
“He’s run the most traditional caucus campaign of the year,” Albrecht says. “Multiple mailers, multiple ads, and multiple visits. Rick Perry has run ads, but hasn’t really visited. Mitt Romney has taken the shy approach, and Newt Gingrich hasn’t been here as often.”
“We’re following the traditional model because it works,” says Drew Ivers, the campaign’s Iowa chairman. “This is the fifth time I’ve chaired an Iowa campaign, and in this state, you can’t beat grassroots politics. The caucuses are like a business meeting. You don’t just come and vote; you go to participate. You need committed supporters; we have them.”
Steve Grubbs, who recently worked as Herman Cain’s Iowa director, has seen the enthusiasm for Paul up close. “I was driving down Interstate 80 two weeks ago and saw a hitchhiker carrying a Ron Paul sign. I didn’t pick him up, but I’m sure a Paul supporter gave him a ride,” he says. “I spot them everywhere, wearing their T-shirts and carrying signs.”
You’ll also find thousands of Ron Paul backers on the web — on message boards and on social-networking sites — talking about Paul and his criticism of U.S. foreign policy and the Federal Reserve. As Paul’s team invests in the ground game, it is taking care to intertwine its above-ground legwork with that web world. And it’s paying off, his advisers say, not only through donations, but in building a cohesive network of voters. An early example of its power came in August, when Paul nearly won the Ames straw poll, finishing a close second to Michele Bachmann.
“Ron Paul’s Internet operation is to Republicans in 2012 what Barack Obama’s Internet operation was to Democrats in 2007 and 2008,” Olson says. “It’s very grassroots and national, with thousands of very active supporters who spread the message in every state. That energy is the undercurrent to what’s happening on the ground, where people are going person to person.”
Still, even with the top-tier showing in Iowa polls and recognition by Iowa operatives of their on-the-ground prowess, Paul’s advisers aren’t taking anything for granted. In coming weeks, “Ron Paul is going to be living part-time in Iowa,” says Dimitri Kesari, Paul’s deputy campaign manager. The entire focus will be on coordinating turnout and stoking enthusiasm. Over 500 college students, for example, will move to Iowa over the holidays to participate in an initiative called “Christmas Vacation with Ron Paul.”
“He’s a different kind of candidate,” Kesari acknowledges, a “highly organized outsider.” But in January, he could also be a winner. And Iowans, at least, wouldn’t be surprised.
— Robert Costa is a political reporter for National Review.
More leftist propaganda talking points. Accuse the wars being waged to defend the United States for the financial ruin caused by leftist’s welfare policy and massive expansion of domestic government programs and workers. Trillions of dollars in bad loans prompted by government being intertwined in the housing and banking industries was certainly not caused by our military defending the nation.
The United States can afford the strongest military on the face of the earth and defend ourselves if we resist massive domestic programs that look to pick the winners and losers in the market. Massive entitlements and government intertwinement in healthcare, education, housing, energy, etc…. has to stop and not National Defense.
Sorry don’t agree with you and I am not voting for Ron Paul.
We are going to be cutting back on our military just like everything else. The country is BROKE, maybe you just don’t understand how bad our financial situation is.
Europe and S. Korea can pay for their own defense. Europe actually has a larger economy than the US.
First you have know idea why they divorced.
In the mean time BHO is destroying the country and what appears to be important you is if someone stays married or not. Fine I don’t care what your qualifiers are however that is not a deal breaker for me.
There really is no discussion to add anything to on a Paul thread...
And I could give a flip about Newt, not my first second or third choice though maybe the default one...
But thanks all the same...
The Muslims want to be our friends!
That whole Iran orbiting satellites and trying to get nukes is no biggie...
We have to do it all there pal...
We have issues both here and abroad that could have impact. The family killed by a dropping Iranian bomb will give squat about the bills...
Absolutely, I think you might like to see this thread.
The “not legislating morality” is an puerile libertarinism idiocy.
What are laws against incest? Bestiality? Rape? Child molesting? Prostitution?
They are laws legislating morality. You want to get rid of all of them?
BTW RPaul voted to repeal DADT and is just fine with homosexuals in the military. He is pro-”gay” rights, including marriage.
So you are comparing having a beer with being a practicing homosexual. That is disgusting. And TheBigIf also made the point that every law is "legislating morality".
Cut everything else, but don't hurt our defensive capabilities.
He was one of the 5 Repub Congressmen to vote for the repeal of DADT and I posted an article about that recently. He was quoted directly in the article as saying that homosexuals shoudl be allowed in the military and they won’t cause problems. I don’t have time to find that now.
He also thinks they should be allowed to marry if they want.
Excellent point - wiccan morality [sic].
Have to run, I’ll get back to this thread later, JR’s been using the button on Ronulans lately. Fun.
Darks, another thread full of Ronulans.
Lets just continue with out genius foreign policies, spending the American treasure on every other country on earth, borrowing from the Communist Chinese putting the next 6 generations into a cesspool of endless debt, and rewarding tens of millions who enter our country illegally from foreign lands...
Don't worry about surrendering to anyone slick...At this rate, your government is giving away and selling what's left of America, as they demand we pay the bill for this epic disaster. All created by those you call, responsible "adults".
What a terrible sham...
You are right. I have seen the light. The Muslims want to be our friends! That whole Iran orbiting satellites and trying to get nukes
Muslims? Ya fear Iran?
lol
Ya might as well take our fleets of nuclear submarines which are roaming the seven seas, take the biggest baddest meanest air force on the globe, our thousands of nuke weapons and delivery systems, the biggest baddest armies and military on the planet, and run and hide from those big bad Muslims in Iran you fear so much.
wow..
JR’s had some things to say to them on this thread, and he spoke his mind pretty clearly:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2816719/posts?page=82
Including gun laws?
“Trillions of dollars in bad loans prompted by government being intertwined in the housing and banking industries was certainly not caused by our military defending the nation.”
__________________________________________________________
Ya, that too.
Question: Ya think it’s a different set of government politicians involved with running compassionate wars against moronic sand dwellers for 12 years at time, while looting the American treasure the tune of multiple trillions at home? Hello anyone home?
Here’s your former Commander in Chief Bush, pushing home loans for totally unqualified minorities, just a few years prior to the collapse....Yeah, it’s the same guy..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqR15H0gNBU
________________________________________________________
“The United States can afford the strongest military on the face of the earth”
________________________________________________________
Can?
We already got one, which is probable 20 times bigger and badder than anyone on this planet. Hello??
Iran? We’re a 10,000 times more capable, and could destroy that country by dinner time. We could bounce Iran off the lunar surface and back. Reboot and update yourself.
Some of you have clearly been played like a fiddle...
Including gun laws? Ahem - the right to bear arms is carefully spelled out in the Bill of Rights. What on earth does that have to do with the discussion? I'll answer - not a thing.
In typical leftist fashion you have to get out your ‘blame Bush’ talking points? Bush did plenty wrong but that is not the issue now.
And if we can so easily deal with Iran then fine let’s do it. But the fact of the matter is if we were to try then leftist libertarians like you will spend your every waking moment bad mouthing our troops and bad mouthing this country in order to give moral support to the enemy.
It is you that is claiming that we could take out Iran without a single problem but it also you who is complaining about our attempts to take out dictatorships up to this point as being something we should never try. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
All laws are the human determination of right and wrong. Morlaity is also the human determination of right and wrong.
That does not make any laws right or wrong in reality, sometimes laws are made for someone’s personal bad morality (they feel they should have power, for their own greed, etc...) but laws are human attempts at legislating morality nonetheless.
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.