Ron Paul supporters: Do NOT read this. Please!

READERS' WARNING: Supporters of Ron Paul should not read this item. Perusing the following paragraphs may cause dizziness, nausea, vomiting, disappointment and renewed anger at political polls, the mainstream media, all institutions holding financial power and anyone not terribly concerned about that mysterious planned highway across Texas that somehow threatens national security.

O.K., now that they're gone to their chatrooms or one of their impressive 1,200 meet-up groups, for the rest of you some background: The Ron Paul Conspiracy has received more news coverage and made quite an impression online in recent months for its followers' persistence, pervasiveness and, to put it politely, outspokenness in favor of their Republican candidate, the 72-year-old, 10-term Texas congressman with the libertarian ideals and the numerous books. He's even been on the "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" and this Sunday is scheduled for an hour-long grilling by Tim Russert on "Meet the Press."

With fundraising persistence, dedication to "Dr. Paul" and admirable political energy in recent days their growing numbers made a huge name for themselves by raising more than $6 million online (more than $18 million for the quarter, they say), a new one-day political record.

Yet these Paulites have always dismissed polls, hated them, even despised them. They have many reasons besides the fact that no polls have given Paul much chance of winning anything. Polls, some suggest, are fictitious summaries of the mainstream media designed to suppress the Ron Paul Revolution. Polls are fake because no Paulite can remember ever being phoned for a survey. Many Paul supporters are new to the political process, so not on voter rolls to be polled. And they mostly use cellphones, not landlines. So they'd be somehow under-represented.

They maintained this stand even when Ron Paul's polling numbers in New Hampshire, for instance, increased geometrically from 2% to 4% to 8%, twice the support of better-known Fred Thompson.

Now, here's the news that would drive Paul supporters berserk if any had kept reading down to here, which they haven't: Ron Paul's polling numbers are now plummeting. Yup, going down, down. Once, he got the money to afford TV advertising in the Granite State, his support as measured by these no-doubt fraudulent polls began crumbling.

The new CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll out today shows Paul's support falling from its high of 8% in early November to 7% at the start of December and 5% last weekend, when he had his big fundraising success. (The phone survey of 411 random, likely Republican primary voters was between Dec. 13 and 17.)

Of course, if Paul supporters believed in polls, they would point out that....

with a margin of error of +/- 5%, Paul could theoretically be at 10%. That also means, naturally, he could be at 0% too.

Belief in Paul's ability to handle terrorism held steady at 3%, to handle the economy fell from 7% to 3% and to handle taxes from 9% to 5%. His support for handling illegal immigration was steady at 4%, to handle abortion up from 4% to 5% and his ability to address the Iraq war (he's the only GOP candidate who favors withdrawal) was steady at 5%.

Now, in case anyone cares about the non-Paul candidates who have a chance of winning, Mitt Romney's percentage jumped from 32% to 34% from the beginning to middle of December, with the endorsement of the Manchester Union-Leader and Boston Globe John McCain increased from 19% to 22%, Rudy Giuliani fell from 19% to 16% and Mike Huckabee went from 9% to 10%.

Thompson and Tom Tancredo, who will announce the end of his candidacy Thursday, according to an Associated Press report tonight, held steady at 1% support while California's Congressman Duncan Hunter went from 0% to 1%.

On the poll's Democratic side, 469 likely primary voters produced a margin of error of 5%. After some troubled weeks when her support faded from a high of 43% in September to 31% at the start of December, Hillary Clinton's numbers surged back to 38%, while Barack Obama's slipped somewhat from 30% to 26% and John Edwards from 16% to 14%.

Bill Richardson went from 7% to 8%, Dennis Kucinich from 3% to 2%, Joe Biden from 1% to 2% and Chris Dodd from 1% to 0%.

If they were still reading down to here which, of course, they're not because they don't believe in polls, Paul supporters would say that none of this matters because only real votes count come Jan. 8. And, you know what, on that they would be 100% right.

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[K*Leister]

So what you're saying is, pay attention to polls so you can vote for the likely winner?

Whatever happened to "vote for the person who best represents your ideals"?

A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

I'll put my vote where it belongs -- where I think the good of the country belongs. And if there's any revolution to be had, it should be that people think for themselves and vote with their conscience.

[John]

You know if you say not to do something, we're going to do it.

Now I'm mad at the mainstream media again.

I did my own poll.... .0000037% of Ron Paul supporters have been polled. 99.32% of the others have been polled 80 times. This means that, with sample data usually about 500 people, all the others have about 1200 supporters total with Paul's numbers being somewhere in the billions.

[Shohadaku]

Polls? No Polls? HOW ABOUT THE STRAW POLLS! In history proven the most accurate of ANY! Ron Paul has won the majority of straw polls over every other candidate.
We are the majority. Even if your fake little "scientific poll" is the ONLY poll Ron Don't do well in.
Wake up America and stop allowing your media to lie to you.

[jeffrey]

I was all excited that you looked at the Washington Post/ABC poll and saw that he's tracking at third place in Iowa and just behind Huck in NH. But then it wouldn't have been, um, uh "funny?" At least you didn't call him a racist like everyone else who read the first line of the AP story. Adorable writing though. Exactly what I'd expect from a Los Angeles "newspaper." Hopefully Paris or Lindsey will drive into something before Christmas.

[cyclopsebunny]

I knew I should have stopped reading.

The great thing about consistancy (Ron is very consistant) is that when you are right, you are right no matter who else is jumping off a bridge beside you.

I didn't care about the polls on the way up, I don't care about them on the way down. If I wanted to know what people were told to think, I would go back to the Faux News channel and get it from the source.

See you at the primaries, Rain, snow or Shine and we will settle this like Americans.

[Bo]

The only poll that counts is on election day.

[K. Zawacki]

I thought or assumed that the LA Times was in the business of Journalism. This piece seems very biased and sarcastic. Why are you so defensive and bothered by other people's opinions?

[Mitt Romney]

I support Ron Paul, and He will get a great voter turn out, and the rest will have to eat their words

[Roberto Maduro]

I am not a Paul supporter but I must say the way you wrote this article even if it includes facts, it is so hateful towards real Americans

What are you going to do to get paul suporters to join any candidate who has constantly attack them

Crazy or not, you gotto give it to them for creativity and motivation

and not just that, two record breaking money bombs and another one in the works

(It is amazing and impressive, the money but also the dedication, which is why Dr. Paul is attracting so much more attention these days.)

[John Paul]

HAHA the LA times needs a history lesson...

Dec. 17th, 2003 John Kerry was polling at 4% nationally and won the nomination....

Historically POLLS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN INACCURATE...ALWAYS

[Tim]

"Paul supporters would say that none of this matters because only real votes count come Jan. 8. And, you know what, on that they would be 100% right."

That was the best part. You know you want to join the Revolution, why fight it.?

[Max Power]

Yawn, nothing to see here people, move along

[mike]

Ok, Let's see the poll questions, let's see the list of folks they called and if they are of the same sample they called previous, where are they located? See the problem with all these reports on polls is rarely do we know anything about them. Just blind information in which people are expected to believe as gospel. Here is something to put in your pipe and smoke: Where is the mention of the effort of supporters who come out to win straw polls for their man? Or that 57000 people donated their hard earned money - in one day? Or that in all these different cities you see people tirelessly waive their RP signs in support of their man because he barely gets a mention in the MSM, other than when he sets new fundraising records. And on top of that, our boy only gets mentioned in blogs???? I mean really, what gives??

[mketcher]

People are flocking to Ron Paul because they're sick-and-tired of the same old song-and-dance from all the other politicians. See this hilarious YouTube music video from the international award-winning feature film, "Song of the Dead," a zombie-musical and political satire. The video stars horror movie icon Reggie Bannister and is a great satire on the president, the MSM, and the war on terror. The filmmaker, Chip Gubera, is donating a share of his profits from the film to the Ron Paul campaign. Go to:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qQmkkoxSKYw

[Dan]

Andrew,
Do you resent us that much?
I hope you felt better writing the article than
I did reading it,... nevertheless we will go the
distance with Ron Paul with hopes of a better tomorrow.
Wish us luck Andrew

(Good luck! Dr. Paul is a good story, but his followers are even better. As the item says, the dedication is admirable.)

[Robert]

Polls are only useful for making uninformed people try to pick a winner, like it's a sports game.

[Corey]

Andrew thanks for the rant. You conveniently left out or even altered some elements I am my fellow "Paulites" would consider wrong. Firstly you denigrate Dr. Paul by calling him "Dr. Paul." Why the quotations? I think a better example of using the quotations around someone's vocation would be, I don't really know, how about calling you a "journalist." Just in case you were not clear the quotations around your supposed vocation are there because you are a sad excuse of a journalist. You are correct I wasted my time reading this garbage. All I can say is that I hope people look up the facts for themselves. Take the initiate to research and discover that the only connoisseur of truth is Dr. Paul and the rest of these "candidates" are at best liars guilty of blatant careerism (example, Rudy and 9/11).

(The quotes are there to show that is what his followers call him specifically. It doesn't say "Dr." Paul, making fun of the Dr. part. It says, "Dr. Paul." Relax a little.)

[David]

You sure like to generalize don't you? I'm a Paul supporter and I generally trust the scientific polls taken as a whole. The Paul supporters you're talking about are just the Paul supporters see Paul winning straw polls but aren't versed in statistics to realize those kinds of polls are unreliable. I think those are minority of Paul supporters. You're only hearing from the loudmouth supporters who are posting to blogs and what not. These are generally kids on the internet, so they're not going to be the most educated people in the world. So be careful about generalizing.

(Point taken. Thanks for reading.)

[James Adams]

So far the national polls haven't proved very representive of the public at large. Now these latest ones don't know the details, but most have been focused on the old pro Bush GOP bloc. At best a fading breed with delusions of grandeaur. Poll points or not, I'm voting for who the best canidate, in my researched opinion Dr. Paul. Now if everyone can bring themselves to look into the record, the ideals, and the vision of the canidates. And vote for what their gut says is right, rather than what media or the polls say. Then we can have a real election again, rather than another dog n pony show.

[Jim McD.]

This must be a joke? Complete garbage. Good luck getting a paycheck when old media dies.

Regards,
New Media

(Let's see, old media=newspaper. New media=online. And this is....online! Thanks for reading.)

[Jill]

I thought it might be appropriate to point out that this is not a competition about who is right or who is wrong about what the polls show and who will be the next president. This is about the saving the future of this country and choosing the candidate who can best protect our freedoms. The reason Paul supporters do not care about the polls is that they are committed to doing everything in their power to make sure this country stays free for future generations. If that means fighting the odds to get the best man elected, so be it. The passion felt by Ron Paul supporters is not irrational!

[Steve from Texas]

Right... 411 people. Very scientific. I am supposed to be worried by this?

Please.

(You were warned not to read it.)

[Sarem]

Funny you would point out polls, its amazing how much you exclude the recent polls (Rasmussen, Zogby) and include those polls which fit your argument? I thought objectivity was always a sought after policy for all supposed "respected" columnists.

Also, you have to look deeper into the issues. Simply looking at the polls like a brain dead zombie isn't going to convince a vast majority of the Americans that one candidate is more "electable" then the other. You forget complexities such as "first time voters", "inaccuracies within polls", "cell phone customers", and the most important - "demographics".

Perhaps a sophisticated, intellectual outlook on all issues outstanding is beyond the grasp of "reputable" magazines such as LA times. I don't blame you, with the glamor and allure of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears junk, the cracks are beginning to be a little more obvious. Clean up your act please.

[Zak]

What a pretentiously written article. I didn't even know it was possible to act pretentious when your only pillar is your steadfast belief in polls! This guy probably just wanted to use Ron Paul's name a million times so his lame article would get attention from the many Ron Paul supporters he knows are out there. Well it worked.

[T]

I'm a Paul supporter and don't care if he loses. My donation was to help get libertarian ideas into mainstream politics, which will hopefully impact future elections.

[paul Ron]

Who Cares ? Untill the electoral college is disbanded no-one has a vote that matters. Because while they are encouraged to vote with the electorate, the ellectors can, at their discretion, vote contrary to the people they are supposed to represent.

Untill this country switches to a straight up popular vote, no-one has a vote that matters.....except the members of the electoral college.

[PVK]

Something tells me they took your disclamer with a grain of salt.

[Paul]

*yawn*

[Scott]

Why would you equate these polls to getting votes more than the collection of many mass individual donations. If I'm willing to put up money then you better believe I'm going to vote no matter what. It doesn't seem logical to keep trumpeting these polls when we know they have problems. Follow the money. It works both ways. Mass donations from individuals and mass corporate donations that contribute to campaign machines which greatly increase their likelihood of being given more coverage from the MSM. Many people worked together outside any campaign to send a message. One that the Democrats didn't listen to. I look forward to seeing how you describe these upcoming primaries.

[James Christian]

I do believe in polls but most of the people I talk to that are Ron Paul supporters are Independents, Democrats and new young Republicans. Among the Democrats the young black males love Dr Paul, they even write Rap songs about him. I heard that in a recent Democratic straw poll that Ron Paul beat both Hillary and Obama. I am bringing a slew of voter registrations to the jail this week. It is a shame that the jails are full of non violent drug possessors. The Black on Black crime is a by product of the failed War on Drugs. No one addresses that with a solution except Ron Paul who believes that drug use is a medical problem, not a crime. The Democratic voter appeal for Ron Paul is because the party has failed miserably at protecting civil liberties and have just taken the black vote for granted. PS about that Highway, you must have missed the news lately, your the ONLY one who does not realize that the plans does exist, just ask the President of Mexico, Bush and the Canadian Prime Minister who had a big meeting about it. By the way, we are planing our next fundraiser in the honor of the great freedom fighter, Dr. Martin Luther King, care to join us?

[Zachariah]

Actually, I couldn't care less what the polls for any candidate are. These number are insignificant because voting isn't about following the majority into the voting booth - it is about making an informed decision.

Even if it is true that only 3% of the US "trusts" Ron Paul on his ability to handle terrorism - this isn't an actual statement on his actual ability to handle terrorism. This is just the opinion of the public - a public which I personally believe remains sheltered from truly educating themselves on the issues and making and informed decision.

So what is my responsibility? For one, it is certainly not to jump off a "sinking ship" because someone I support isn't popular. My job is to spread the word and start talking to people in depth and showing them why the ideas of the candidate I support are actually better. I already spend a great deal of time investigating and coming to an understanding of these issues.

Most Americans know about the issues what the most charismatic and well-covered politicians tells them to know about the issues. You won't see those Americans online because they're not wasting their time online reading about politics - they aren't wasting their time doing anything to find out about politics. Too bad they let politicians do their thinking for them, but oh well - all I can do is fight it and hope to teach more people to think for themselves.

In the end, it would be a complete violation of my integrity to not vote for the candidate whom I thought was the best candidate - no matter who else was voting along with me. That is true liberty, my friend.

[Doug]

Yes, Ron Paul's support is evaporating before our eyes! That explains why 25,000 new donors signed up to send him money this past weekend. That explains why he now has over 85,000 volunteers signed up nationwide, and why hundreds of them are descending on New Hampshire and Iowa.

The polls? You're kidding right? The last poll I saw actually came out and admitted that 60% of the voters hadn't really made up their minds yet, so it doesn't matter how "accurate" they are, they could change completely by next week. Or on election day, when those who are truly supporting a candidate turn out.

Do you think Ron Paul supporters will show up?

AND WHY IS THIS CONSIDERED SPAM BY YOUR FILTERS? GOOD GRIEF.

(Probably because you sent it so many times. But here you go.)

[Michael K]

Congratulations on your success! Despite your obvious lack of respect for a journalist's obligation to be neutral, you are still being paid!

(No obligation to be neutral on a blog. None.)

[j]

Congratulations andrew!
Your Stupid!!!!!!
Ha Ha Ha

Your like bill oreily,mainstream media and the reason we went into Iraq, all rolled into ONE!!!

Super!!!

Ron Paul 2008........VOte

[Gary Schor]

You publication must be purposely censoring post. I put in the right code and my comment was not spam. You and your elk are despicable!

[Tony L]

This article is meant to provoke. People are supposed to read the article and then read the comments and see the high number of comments as proving the article correct.

What I want to know is: how many people that answer that they are 'likely to vote' actually go out there and vote? Where could I go to read comments about people that are passionate about Giuliani? Why don't his supporters search the internet and comment in droves on every article posted about him? It is not at all unreasonable to think that Paul supporters are more likely to vote. The money didn't come from a conspiracy of spammers. People like someone bold enough to say what everyone knows but is afraid to admit.

The fact is that none of the other candidates are actually 'agents of change.' This country is headed in the same direction the Soviet Union went. We are spread too thin, we are seen as an empire, we are spending ourselves into oblivion. We are literally selling ourselves out. And yet we are using policies that do nothing but create enemies and isolate America from the world. I believe that a contract between a people and a government is a legitimate way to establish authority. But that contract, our constitution, is not what is being followed anymore. This isn't an exaggeration either. This country no longer runs on traditional American principles. We are not much different than the British that opposed our independence. We have become what we always hated. There are very few candidates that are even willing to tackle fundamental issues, but Ron Paul is one of them. Nobody is talking about monetary policy and the constitution, they are talking about making small adjustments to an already flawed system.

I believe that whether or not you believe the system is fundamentally flawed, it must be taken as a fair point to consider. We must challenge ourselves, as it is our duty as voters to fix our government's mistakes. The more people write mind-numbing articles like this, the more transparent they appear. Ron Paul rekindles the freedom-versus-tyranny debate, allowing him to unite people that previously considered themselves enemies. His supporters are often angry and passionate.

There is no reason to rule out the possibility that his supporters are more likely to vote than the supporters of others. The polls are based on if someone is likely to vote. Only time will tell who actually goes out there and votes. But to call political support and questioning polls a 'conspiracy' seems to me to be a form of propaganda. It's as emotionally charged and angry as any statement endorsing Paul. So far there are a handful of anti-Ron Paul strategies: writing under the premise that voting for him is a waste, discrediting his views based on the views of his supporters, talking of spam and conspiracies and trying to preemptively discredit reader comments, and criticizing the ideal libertarian world. They never, however, delve into what Ron Paul could actually accomplish as commander-in-chief, it's the ideal world horror story and the loony supporters they are after. These articles are a waste of time and a charade and attempt to be bold and get hits on a blog. How about being realistic for a change?

You've got to be kidding me, these poll numbers havent really changed even before the election season started. The Status quo anointed these clowns 9 months ago before even hearing there positions on the issues.

I guess this is how they do things in LA, give the public there opinion then reinforce the opinion given by just repeating the catch phrases over and over.

The Ron Paul candidacy isnt about Ron Paul its about the message as stated in the constitution, freedom for everyone. No slicing and dicing of groups think or amnesty for illegals, corporatism, militarism, welfare. People are getting screwed here, and finally there getting tired of it.

Keep trying LA, if the so called "top tier" hadnt been taking advantage of the public for decades this might have worked, but to even the novice political observer knows something is amiss and its needs to be corrected.

31 year consistent voting record, has been proven right on almost everything from the war in Iraq to the economy. You cant't fool the thinking American anymore.

[Moobi]

I think James Adams hit the nail on the head. The key to understanding the poll numbers is to understand the term "likely Republican voters". Typically, this refers to the (I believe it was) 6.6% of the Republican party that voted in the 2004 primary when Bush was the incumbent. This means that they are polling people who were showing support specifically for Bush and especially his policies. When you consider that Paul's policies are pretty much 180 degrees from Bush's, it's actually pretty amazing that he's getting the numbers he is.

So, folks, the moral of the story is to know the context of the polls you are being fed - Who is being asked, Who are the choices, How many are polled, What is being asked?

[rich]

What nonesense!

Going on with this gibberish about the polls rather have a thoughtful article on the issues. Our economy is in shambles, the dollar is plummeting, our sovereignty is being shipped to China and all you care to write about is the polls.

Maybe if you make an effort to educate the people of this country on the real issues, people would see that this country has no choice but to vote for Dr. Paul.

I challenge you to do some extensive research before spewing out the latest headlines repackaged in a sarcastic format. You might graduate into becoming a journalist worth reading. Please take this as constructive criticism because the shallowness of your reporting and others is hitting all-time lows every day. Or better yet, check out these two youtube videos and tell me why AlJazeera of all stations can put out a professional report such as this and none of our stations or media outlets can:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54MUm2P1jOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdrNbhdl7uU

[TJ]

I think polls are a good way to gauge the general public's understanding and application of the US Constitution, Natural Law, and Positivists Law in our society. And it's unfortunately apparant that they have no clue. Year after year, election after election, and poll after poll, we continue to have one side believing that the "Democratic" agenda can save us and the other side believing that the "Republican" agenda can save us. That is proof of the claim I'm making. We're a very very uninformed country.

If the general public knew and understood the constitution like they are supposed to it wouldn't matter if Lucifer himself were our president and congress were made up of hordes of demons b/c their jurisdiction would be bound by the people's enforcement of the constitution. But since the public is ignorant the federal government is pretty much allowed to do what they damn well please. I mean, we have the federal government regulating professional baseball now for Christ's sake! Where do they get all this authority? They don't have it. They just do it b/c the public and media are asleep at the wheel. There's a reason we have a 10th Amendment.

When picking a candidate or congressman ALWAYS see if they're abiding strictly to their oath of office. Check to see if what they're claiming they're wanting to do is authorized in the constitution. Then ask yourself how this policy is to be paid for b/c the tax payer is gonna pick up the bill.

Huckabee said, for instance, that he wants the taxpayer to keep paying for all these expensive NASA programs. Now, where the hell does he or congress get the authority to take money from me and fund something I may or may not support? I love NASA, but I don't have the right to make you pay for it if you don't want to if it's not authorized by the constitution.

Hillary and the gang want National Healthcare. Sounds great. But where do they get the authority and how is it to be paid for?

If they want to fund NASA and National Healthcare then the Constituion has to be amended first. Otherwise it's completely unconstitutional.

This is the purpose of even having a constitution. It's to be followed if it's to be a check on power. Since it's been ignored and since the public and media are ignorant the government does, again, whatever they want. The federal government is, and has been, WAY outside it's jurisdiction for a long time.

Shame on all of us.

[zeljko]

Obviously, Ron Paul's massive support is coming from places other than "more than likely republican primary voters"(those who voted for bush in 2004 when he went unchallenged).

Fact of the matter is, Ron Paul's support is coming from "ex" democrats, independents, republiucans more than likely not to vote in a primary, (especially bush in 2004), and liberatarians etc...

These are the facts, and on primary day, these facts will become more apparent.

Till then

Keep on keeping on with the wishful thinking.

[Tim]

My take on your polls,

The Republican primary is a horse race - and you don't want to be first until the end.

In this game they shoot at the front runner - See Huck duck.

I think Ron Paul is just where we want him:

In first place with the majority - Us!

...and in fifth place with the minority - The people who get polled.

[Nancy Edwards]

I do not agree with all of Ron Paul's views. He is the only one for whom I will cast my vote.

[Josh]

Paul's % remained within the margin of error during a sampling of 400 people somewhere.

Stop the presses.

I can't decide who just wasted more time and energy, the authors or me for typing this in response.

[cindi andrews]

Obviously, Ron Paul's massive support is coming from places other than "more than likely republican primary voters"(those who voted for bush in 2004 when he went unchallenged).

Fact of the matter is, Ron Paul's support is coming from "ex" democrats, independents, republiucans more than likely not to vote in a primary, (especially bush in 2004), and liberatarians etc...

These are the facts, and on primary day, these facts will become more apparent.

Till then

Keep on keeping on with the wishful thinking.

(THIS IS NOT SPAM)

(No, but the other 6 copies were.)

[Matt]

so the optimal Ron Paul situation is at 10% and Rudy at around 12% (Ron up hte max, Rudy down the max). Yeah ... polls makes a lot of sense. How did they determine the sample size as one being significant? I'm sure they did somehow, but that doesn't make the selection process any more random, especially when considering Ron Pauls support doesn't come from.

BTW -- Cheers Andrew ... on the best use of a blog/headline to lure Ron Paul people to your blog. Yeah for Andrew.

[Justin]

guys. lighten up. he is pointing out how ridiculous polling is. did you real the last line of the article? cuts these guys some slack from time to time!

[Justin]

Excellent article on the upcoming generational war and Ron Paul that all should read...

http://wisdomknowledgehappiness.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-ron-paul-in-generational-war.html

[Adam S, Chicago USA]

Sorry for the obnoxious posts, but you have to admit, with your tone you were kind of asking for it.

I wonder if you've actually taken the time to examine the ideas behind the Ron Paul's campaign. The reason why so many of his supporters are so angry at the MSM is that Dr. Paul was ignored until he started making headway, then the media started ridiculing him. Your remarks at the beginning of the blog fit the stereotype, but aren't as bad as some others.

I think you should seriously consider whether the US should be the global policeman; whether spreading democracy by force is really the best path; whether our far flung bases and our war in Iraq (2 trillion dollars) are really necessary or if the money could be better spent at home; whether it's the job of the government to take care of everyone or should it get out of the way; whether warrantless searches, suspensions of habeus corpus and other assaults on civil liberties are really justified; whether international institutions like NAFTA or GATT are end runs by large corporations around local democratic institutions.

I could go on. Pick an issue, any issue of Ron Paul's, and there's a serious philosophical underpinning to his position. Maybe it's not the 'common sense' approach, but then again, maybe the common sense approach is what got us into trouble in the first place. Why not try to have an intelligent discussion about the role of America in the world in your next post? Or the role of government in people's lives? Or the role of religion in government?

If, on the other hand, you're after heat rather than light, then keep the snarky comments coming, Ron Paul's supporters are legion and I'm sure they'll be happy to fight fire with fire.

(Thanks for your good comment. And for reading.)

[Nancy Edwards , Pinellas Park , FL 33781]

Dr. Paul is the only candidate who will recieve my vote. I know nothing of polls . I do know this country will not survive if we do not elect someone who is not catering to special interests. I do not agree with all of Dr. Pauls views.
As I told my friends flying the blimp , explain to confused ; there is NO PAC.
This is a wolf PACK of new gray ghosts. Find our our ancestors in the library of congress. They signed those documents. The ones we intend to reinstate.
We want our country back.