Posted on 11/22/2007 8:25:31 AM PST by George W. Bush
The Ron Paul Factor
By Matt Towery
Thursday, November 22, 2007
As we continue to poll and observe the various states involved in the early caucus/primary battles for the Republican presidential nomination, one thing is becoming increasingly clear to me: While Ron Paul may lag behind most of his GOP competitors in the polls, the intensity of devotion from his supporters makes his candidacy deserving of more attention than it's gotten to date.
His sometimes-quirky mannerisms and oddball demeanor fly in the face of what most Republicans traditionally look for in their presidential nominees. And his comments startle many for their bluntness and contrariness to long-running establishment GOP thinking.
That's exactly why Paul could have an unexpected impact not only on the Republican nomination process, but also on the November general election as well.
Consider that over 600 people turned out for a rally for Paul in Reno, Nevada, recently. The media described the crowd as a mixed group that included many college students.
That's another indicator of the potential impact of the Paul campaign. I recall in 1980 when establishment Republicans and conservatives were backing George H.W. Bush, John Connally or Howard Baker for president.
But on college campuses, the birth of the modern College Republicans movement was feeding off of the support of frustrated college students for the maverick in the race, Ronald Reagan.
Don't get me wrong. I am not predicting Paul will pull a Reagan and somehow beat out the GOP's establishment contenders. I will suggest that Paul may fatally damage several potential candidates, and perhaps the entire Republican Party, if he breaks away and runs as a legitimate third-party candidate after Tsunami Tuesday's primaries in early February.
Paul blends a unique mixture of cynicism over the health of the economy, loud opposition to the erosion of civil liberties, plus a stand as the only GOP candidate who's flat-out opposed to the war in Iraq.
Those issues unite a seemingly disparate group of voters who collectively feel that 20 years of the presidency being shared between two families -- the Clintons and Bushes -- is more than enough. They are voters who have found their mouthpiece in Paul, who's willing to voice their frustration over Republicans, Democrats and whoever and whatever else represents "The Establishment."
Paul could be deadly to someone like conservative Mike Huckabee, who is steadily rising in many polls but can't be assured of the devoted turnout of his supporters, as Paul almost surely can.
Paul's words have also taken away some of the ink that should have gone to Fred Thompson, who entered the race as the supposed "I'll say anything and throw caution to the wind" candidate, but whose measured and often boring campaign speeches have consistently fallen short of their billing.
Unlike many GOP candidates, Paul hasn't tried to have his cake and eat it, too, on the subject of President Bush. He has little or nothing charitable to say about the president. And with new revelations coming from Bush's own press secretary about "who knew what when" in the CIA leak scandal, Paul's distance seems all the wiser.
How do I think Ron Paul will impact 2008? It's at least possible that he'll fare better than expected -- and not just eventually in scattered primaries, but as early as next week in the much-awaited CNN/YouTube debate in Florida. Paul is often quicker and less plastic than his counterparts, and could do well in such a format.
But where will Ron Paul really do his damage? It could be by seriously damaging the Republican establishment his followers so despise.
How? By running as a third-party candidate. In critical "Red States," where the vote may turn on just a small percent, Paul could block any hope of a GOP victory.
That would likely mean a Hillary Clinton presidency. But it might also mean a true remake of the Republican Party for the future. The abandonment of the get-along, go-along Republican Party is something that many, including and beyond Paul's supporters, would like to see.
Matt Towery is a former National Republican legislator of the year and author of Powerchicks: How Women Will Dominate America.
RM, all I’m saying is that Paul deserves a seat at the table too. Some of the views he has are valid, and they’ve been ignored by the GOP for years. Now if you want whoever is the GOP nominee is to win the election, you’re going to need Paul’s support and the army of people that’s supporting him. Where are the huge rallies for Fred? The money bombs? The passionate support? AIN’T NONE, OK? Antagonizing Paul and denigrating him is counter-productive. DO YOU WANT TO WIN OR NOT??
>>>>>Where are the huge rallies for Fred?
Obviously Fred hasn't caught on like I thought he would. After a good lead up in the polls to his official announcement and a solid October. Fred seemed to hit a brick wall. The pounding from the mainstream media and the hammering from the so-called rightwing punditry, helped to drive down his numbers. Fred isn't the best campaigner, but he does have the most viable conservative message of all the candidates. And that is the problem. Fred`s overall message is being obfuscated and undermined by political operatives who don't want to see a conservative get the nomination and possibly become the next POTUS. The RudyBoosters over at Fox News are the best example of that. They've given Rooty multimillion's in free advertising. Sean Vannity has practically made Rooty the co-host of his radio show.
Actually, none of the candidates are pulling in huge crowds. Paul has had a few, but that has more to do with his hyper-extremist supporters, then a consistent campaign message which appeals to more voters. According to reports, Rooty doesn't really do retail campaigning anymore. He just shows up to townhall meetings. That is his best venue and that is where he's having success. Romney does more retail politics than anyone and along with his millions in advertising, his message is getting out in the early primary states. Huckabee has won over most of Fred`s lost socon supporters. The Tancredo and Hunter campaigns are on life support and McCain is hanging on for dear life.
Bottom line. If we don't start letting go of those candidates who can't get the nomination, we'll be left with the worst choice of all. Rooty as the party standard bearer would deal a seriously blow to the Republican Party for years, if not decades to come. Many conservatives would quit the GOP, while others would simply not vote for Giulaini in the general election. Leaving Hillary and the Democrats a wide open opportunity for easy victory.
Same question backatcha: "DO YOU WANT TO WIN OR NOT??"
Well, in a way he is rebuilding the party. After all, look at all the people who simply don’t bother to vote because the candidates are so similar. Look also at all the young people who, out of pure cynicism haven’t bothered to vote yet. Ron Paul is gathering up these “lost sheep” and making a new and perhaps powerful flock. If the mainstream GOP doesn’t find some way to keep them happy they’ll just whither away along with the future of both parties. We’ll be left on an increasingly steep and rapid slide toward Socialism.
I make no bones about it - I hope he is elected President but I don’t think that’ll happen. So I’m left with hoping the Republican Party will wake up and embrace its original ideals of small government, limited expenditures and keeping out of other people’s business - as Ron Paul would like us to.
Again though, I don’t think that’ll happen either.
“If Ron Paul is such a uniter, why do sane people detest him?”
Who says they’re sane? The same people who say Ron Paul is insane?
Ah, another Paulite who thinks 9-11 was our fault.
Did I say that? Gosh somebody must have inserted a few words into YOUR version of my post.
One of the reasons I don’t post very much here is because too many people try to read their tea leaves and discern what I “really” meant. I try (not always successfully) to say exactly what I mean without resorting to hidden clues. Thus I might say “the sky is blue” and someone would then accuse me of being a Democrat.
Read what I say, not what you think I say!
Your boy Ron Paul sure has said that.
One of the reasons I don’t post very much here
Thank you.
is because too many people try to read their tea leaves and discern what I “really” meant
More like you try to backpeddle when you are called on what your words really mean.
90 percent of that flock was backing antiwar Howard Dean in 2004. So much for being powerful. But living in abject ignorance of history does tend to blunt one's power over time.
Yes, but as George W Bush said about the Nov. 5th thing, it might be better for the campaign to have a steady flow of money. The Tea Party (Dec 16th), which probably will generate more money than Nov 5th, comes too late to use much of that money in Iowa and N. H.
You are probably aware that the “time is money” call for donations generated 250 T. the other day. Daily donations had slow to a trickle prior to that. It looks like they are picking up a bit now.
The tea party might be an example of too much of a good thing, but there was no way the official campaign could do anything about it without breaking some (?) election laws.
“people try to read their tea leaves”
Was reading my tea leaves and EEE’s post and I see that RP has over 9 Million dollar purse and growing.
103,000 donors in Q4. Over 18K signed up for the 16th of Dec Tea Party bringing in anywhere from 1 to 5 plus million dollars in one day.
EEE, who are these insane people, besides myself.
Sorry, but 90% of the flock wasn’t old enough to vote then.
I’ve been around here about 10 years and Ron Paul used to be revered around this site. Gosh what happened to the conservative movement. Just another big government socialist party...sigh.
Wait a minute...it's not? ;)
Let's face it, the GOP has completely ignored fiscal conservatism in favor of pushing socon socialism
Spot on. I'm a social conservative. But I don't believe everything should be taken to the altar of Washington DC either. I'll take limited government and a much weaker federal government than some nanny in Washington what I can and cannot do. Frankly as federal officials it's none of their business.
“I will suggest that Paul may fatally damage several potential candidates, and perhaps the entire Republican Party,”
I believe that fatal damage to the entire Republican party is the objective of the hardcare Ron Paul supporters.
This I've never understood. I stand behind the candidate who I know will represent my views. That was the original intent. This party voting of follow the crowd or you're not as good as we are is childish. I should vote for someone I don't believe in because why again? The 'other guy' gets in? What the hell kind of reasoning for voting is that?!?
Tell you what, you keep voting for the 'lesser of two evils' and I'll vote my conscience. I may not get as many politicians elected my way but the ones that are I know will represent my views. Watching Tweedledum and Tweedledumber every year act as if they have vast differences is getting boring.
Jonah Goldberg was right. It's disconcerting that the one man whose views represent conservatism is ridiculed while the 'mainstream' marches by on the path to socialism.
“It’s disconcerting that the one man whose views represent conservatism is ridiculed while the ‘mainstream’ marches by on the path to socialism.”
Agree and it explains why the three most conservative voices are low in the polls, Tancredo, Hunter and Dr Paul.
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.