Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Ron Paul Movement
reason ^ | July 16, 2007 | Jesse Walker

Posted on 07/16/2007 8:31:51 PM PDT by JTN

Among the other firsts of his campaign, Ron Paul is probably the only presidential contender to be compared to a Samuel L. Jackson movie. The Texas congressman, a dark horse candidate for the Republican nomination, was being lightly grilled by Kevin Pereira, a host on the videogame-oriented cable channel G4. "Young people online, they were really psyched about Snakes on a Plane, but that didn't translate into big ticket sales for Sam Jackson," Pereira said. "Are you worried that page views on a MySpace page might not translate to primary votes?"

The reference was to the Internet sensation of 2006, an action movie whose cheesy title and premise had sparked a burst of online creativity: mash-ups, mock trailers, parody films, blogger in-jokes. Hollywood interpreted this activity as "buzz," and New Line Cinema inflated its hopes for the movie's box office take. When the film instead did about as well as you'd expect from a picture called Snakes on a Plane, the keepers of the conventional wisdom declared that this was proof of the great gulf between what's popular on the Internet and what sells in the material world.

Ron Paul is popular on the Internet, too, with more YouTube subscribers than any other candidate, the fastest-growing political presence in MySpace, a constant perch atop the Technorati rankings, and a near-Olympian record at winning unscientific Web polls. Like Snakes, he is the subject of scads of homemade videos and passionate blog posts. When Pereira mentioned the movie, he was making a clear comparison: Yes, your online fans are noisy, but will their enthusiasm actually translate into electoral success?

It's an interesting analogy, because the conventional wisdom about Snakes on a Plane is backwards. The reason the online anticipation for Snakes didn't translate into big ticket sales is because there actually wasn't much online anticipation for the movie. Yes, some of those parodists were interested in seeing the finished film, whose notoriety has given it minor cult status. But the others couldn't care less about the studio's product. Their online activity was an end in itself, a great big belly laugh at the expense of goofy high-concept movies. Their riffs and spoofs were far more entertaining than any actual feature about airborne reptiles was likely to be. Those fans weren't waiting for a show. They were the show.

That's one difference between Snakes and Paul: The congressman's fans really do want him to do as well as possible in the polls. But victory isn't the only thing on their minds. For many of them it isn't even the topmost thing on their minds. Like those Snakes on a Plane spoofs, the grassroots activity around Paul's campaign is interesting and valuable in itself. Here are three reasons why:

It's transpartisan. Paul's fan base stretches all the way from Howard Phillips to Alexander Cockburn. His libertarian message has resonance, as you'd expect, among free-marketeers dismayed by the GOP's love affair with federal spending. It is also attractive, as you'd expect, to lefties who like his opposition to the Iraq war and the post-9/11 incursions on our civil liberties. But the race has no shortage of anti-spending conservatives and antiwar liberals. Paul is especially appealing to people who don't fit the narrow stereotypes of Blue and Red: to decentralist Democrats, anti-imperialist Republicans, and a rainbow of independents.

The Internet makes it easier for such dispersed minorities to find each other, and the congressman's candidacy has given them a new reason to seek each other out. When Pittsburgh's Paul backers gathered via the MeetUp site, which arranges get-togethers for users who share a common interest, the blogger Mike Tennant attended. He found at least one Democrat, at least one anarchist, several disillusioned Bush supporters, a member of the Libertarian Party, a member of the right-wing Constitution Party, "and a whole roomful of folks disillusioned with the two-party duopoly... The one thing that unites us all is a desire to have a president who actually believes in liberty and has a record to match his rhetoric." Paul fans have been arguing forcefully for their candidate at both the conservative Web hub FreeRepublic and its liberal counterpart, Daily Kos—where, to be sure, they are met by angry opposition from more conventional Republicans and Democrats.

It's idea-driven. Were you wondering how Paul answered that question about Snakes on a Plane? He said, "I don't worry much about that at all. I worry about understanding the issues and presenting the case and seeing if I can get people to support these views." Some politicians are in this race because they really want to run the country. Some are in it because they want to be vice president, or be secretary of state, or extract some other prize from the eventual nominee. Paul is in it to inject ideas into the campaign. He wants to get votes, of course, but like Henry Clay he'd rather be right than be president. (Unlike Clay, he really is right most of the time.)

For Paul, it's a victory just to be on stage with Rudolph Giuliani arguing for a non-interventionist foreign policy, because it serves as a reminder that it's possible to be a fiscal conservative with bourgeois cultural instincts and yet oppose the occupation of Iraq and the effort to extend that war into Iran. That novelty, coupled with his fans' online activity, has earned Paul a rash of TV interviews: In the last two months, he has appeared on This Week, The Daily Show, Tucker, Lou Dobbs Tonight, and The Colbert Report, among other venues, raising his profile far above the other second-tier candidates. Each appearance is an opportunity not just to ask for votes but to express his anti-statist ideas, spreading a message rarely heard in the context of a presidential campaign.

It has a life of its own. After Jesse Jackson's populist campaign did unexpectedly well in 1988, many of his supporters hoped the Rainbow Coalition would become an independent grassroots force. But Jackson was more interested in his own political career, and he opted to make it a smaller group he could control. Similarly, Ross Perot resisted every effort to make the Reform Party something more than a vehicle for his presidential ambitions. When it slipped out of his control anyway, and in 2000 gave the world two competing presidential nominees, he stiffed both and endorsed George Bush instead.

A different fate befell the left-wing "netroots" that embraced Howard Dean in 2004 and Ned Lamont (among others) in 2006. They've maintained their decentralized character, and they're obviously larger than any particular pol. But unlike the Perot movement or even the Rainbow Coalition, which included left-wing independents as well as Democrats, the netroots aren't larger than one particular party. They may hate the Democratic establishment, but they're still devoted Democrats.

The Paul movement is different. Unlike the Jackson and Perot campaigns, it is open, decentralized, and largely driven by activists operating without any direction from the candidate or his staff. Unlike the netroots, it has no particular attachment to the party whose nomination its candidate is seeking. Paul himself left the Republican fold in the '80s to run for president as a Libertarian, and he still has friendly ties to that party. When he returned to the GOP and to Congress in the election of '96, the national party establishment threw its weight behind his opponent in the primaries, an incumbent who had originally been elected as a Democrat. Paul turned to independent sources to fill his campaign coffers, raising substantial sums from the libertarian, constitutionalist, and hard-money movements. Those have always been his chief base of support.

Barring a complete meltdown of the party gatekeeping apparatus, Ron Paul will not be the Republican nominee next year. And he says he has no plans to run as an independent. But you can't erase all the traces of a self-directed, transpartisan, idea-driven movement. Long after Snakes on a Plane was relegated to the cult-movie shelf, the people who spoofed it online are still writing blogs and editing mini-movies, applying the skills they honed mocking an action flick. Howard Dean is just a party functionary today, but the troops who assembled themselves behind him are still active in the trenches, their original leader nearly forgotten. I suspect that Paul will have a longer shelf life than Dean or Snakes. But whatever becomes of him after this election, his fans will still be there, organizing rallies, editing their YouTube videos, launching their own political campaigns, and spreading ideas.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: elections; fantasy; grppl; moonbats; paulbearers; paulestinians; paulistas; paulnuts; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-263 next last
To: NewLand

Then the term “fearless leader” wasn’t snide or sarcastic?


201 posted on 07/20/2007 3:58:12 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government, Benito Guilinni a short man in search of a balcony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
I have (intentionally) insulted some mostly former FReepers from the Darwin Cult...just to see them self-implode and, in many instances, get themselves banned.

From what I can see around here, a more accurate picture is that science-literate people just get frustrated with the stupendous level of ignorant tripe spouting forth from overconfident medieval-minded bumpkins and decide to move on to greener pastures while getting in a last swing against an easy target on the way out, just for fun.

Funny, some of the insignificant things people actually stroke their own egos about online. I guess that's the beauty of the internet.

202 posted on 07/25/2007 6:29:38 PM PDT by ok_now ((Huh?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: ok_now; Admin Moderator
Ugh. Yet another previously banned re-tread back for more. For someone who has positioned themselves to be so 'enlightened', how is it that you think we don't immediately recognize your scent?

Admin; Eyes open - surely this is a returnee from TOS (the obscure site) looking for a star, or whatever they reward each other with for getting banned on FR.

Now, what did your PHearless leader used to say...you're on "virtual ignore"? Speaking of ignorant tripe...

203 posted on 07/28/2007 6:11:55 PM PDT by NewLand (Always remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: NewLand

I admire you.


204 posted on 07/29/2007 6:17:55 AM PDT by ok_now ((Huh?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
I have (intentionally) insulted some mostly former FReepers from the Darwin Cult...just to see them self-implode and, in many instances, get themselves banned.

Good job. Jesus smiles on your lust for inflicting pain on your enemies. You will reap as you have sown.

I wonder what the FR rules are about instigating flame wars with intentional insults.

205 posted on 08/01/2007 12:02:12 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: js1138; ok_now; metmom
Matthew 22:15-22

Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"

But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"

"Caesar's," they replied.

Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

206 posted on 08/03/2007 6:36:53 PM PDT by NewLand (Always remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: NewLand; js1138; metmom
Deuteronomy 23:12-14

Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement. For the LORD your God moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, so that he will not see among you anything indecent and turn away from you.

207 posted on 08/04/2007 7:27:51 AM PDT by ok_now ((Huh?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: ok_now

exactly.


208 posted on 08/04/2007 4:25:45 PM PDT by NewLand (Always remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: NewLand

Do you really see yourself as a Phrisee in the role of trying to trick Jesus... I have the feeling something went wrong with that analogy.


209 posted on 08/08/2007 9:22:50 AM PDT by gondramB (Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
Do you really see yourself as a Phrisee in the role of trying to trick Jesus... I have the feeling something went wrong with that analogy.

Actually I think he sees himself as Jesus, and thinks the verse gives him the right to try and trap people, as long as they're only "Darwinists."

210 posted on 08/08/2007 9:30:38 AM PDT by CFC__VRWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: NewLand; Jim Robinson; 4woodenboats; abletruth; Accountable One; Aeronaut; AKA Elena; Alamo-Girl; ..
I have (intentionally) insulted some mostly former FReepers from the Darwin Cult...just to see them self-implode and, in many instances, get themselves banned.

It was like tickling a blowfish...LOL!

Prayer warrior ping. Is this the type of Christians we have now-a-days?

NewLand...I'm would not be proud to call myself a Christian, if that is what you think being a Christian is all about.

Jim Robinson...you see what some people are doing to rid the forum of people who don't believe the same way they do? I think the Scientists who have been banned should be offered the opportunity to come back if they so choose. They were goaded into being banned...hardley seems fair!

We all were able to express different opinions, and debate them without mass bannings before...what happened that we can now not get along with those who don't agree with us?

211 posted on 08/08/2007 12:23:32 PM PDT by trussell (Prayer is good for the soul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: trussell

I posted the following statement to our front page in response to the criticism I’m receiving lately as to not being fair and balanced and perceived mistreatment of trolls and assorted malcontents. Got news for all, I’m NOT fair and balanced. I’m biased toward God, country, family, liberty and freedom and against liberalism, socialism, anarchism, wackoism, global balonyism and any other form of tyranny. Hope this helps.

Statement by the founder of Free Republic:

In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I’m trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule.

Therefore, we wholeheartedly support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on known terrorist states and organizations that are believed to present a clear threat to our freedom or national security. We support our military, our troops and our Commander-in-Chief and we oppose turning control of our government back over to the liberals and socialists who favor appeasement, weakness, and subserviency. We do not believe in surrendering to the terrorists as France, Germany, Russia and Spain have done and as Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton and the Democrats, et al, are proposing.

As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.

Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money. We are not a publicly owned entity nor are we an IRS tax-free non-profit organization. We pay all applicable taxes on our income. We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. We sell no merchandise, product or service, and we offer no subscriptions or paid memberships. We accept no paid advertising or promotions. We are funded solely by donations (non tax deductible gifts) from our readers and participants.

We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.

Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable.

May God bless and protect our men and women in uniform fighting for our freedom and may God continue to bless America.

Jim Robinson

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts


212 posted on 08/08/2007 1:09:55 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

>>“fearless leader” was the term used on the rocky & bullwikle show by a pair of clods - Natasha and Boris - to refer to their totalitarian boss. Implication is that RP is a totalitarian, and anyone who supports him is an idiot.<<

You know its also a Coltrane album - I wonder which came first and if there is a connection.


213 posted on 08/08/2007 1:31:01 PM PDT by gondramB (Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: trussell

Thank you for the kind sentiment.

I suggest you now quickly don your flame suit and look for some cover. I expect you’ll have incoming very soon.


214 posted on 08/08/2007 1:32:48 PM PDT by CFC__VRWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: trussell
We all were able to express different opinions, and debate them without mass bannings before...

Greetings trussell!

Personally, I'm having too much fun reading the posts to spoil it with replies. ; )

215 posted on 08/08/2007 1:50:43 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Ron Paul is probably the only presidential contender to be compared to a Samuel L. Jackson movie.


216 posted on 08/08/2007 2:05:45 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Ron Paul is probably the only presidential contender to be compared to a Samuel L. Jackson movie.


217 posted on 08/08/2007 2:07:04 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Ron Paul is probably the only presidential contender to be compared to a Samuel L. Jackson movie.


218 posted on 08/08/2007 2:08:42 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

219 posted on 08/08/2007 2:10:08 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
your online fans are noisy, but will their enthusiasm actually translate into electoral success?

..only if he were running for governor of Minnesota

220 posted on 08/08/2007 5:07:52 PM PDT by WalterSkinner ( In Memory of My Father--WWII Vet and Patriot 1926-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-263 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
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

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