Hey, Ron Paul folks, Rudy Giuliani pays tribute to your guy

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has been on the, uh, naughty list of all loyal, dedicated, fervent and vocal supporters of Rep. Ron Paul since he appeared to scoff at the Texan during one of the early Republican debates last year, gave a formal tip of the hat to the good doctor during his Florida concession speech last night.

As one result of that debate incident, which involved Giuliani taking offense at Paul's suggestion that Americans were at least partly responsible for 9/11 by their occupation and offensive actions against Arab countries, some Paulunteers have hounded many of Giuliani's public appearances with chants and sign-waving throngs. And they have often filled the comment section of The Ticket with scores of denunciations of the man who successfully turned life in New York City around.

These thousands have also reveled in the several times that Paul drew more primary or caucus votes than Giuliani in early states where the New Yorker did not seriously compete, starting with....

Iowa. Many will no doubt delight now in the expected end to Giuliani's campaign later today followed by his anticipated endorsement of Sen. John McCain. Ron Paul, on the other hand, has the endorsement of THE Jane Roe, is working on Tom McClintock. and has launched an eight-state ad blitz including California.

But Tuesday night as he was preparing to bow out, as first reported on the Ticket Monday noon, Giuliani gave a gracious concession speech in which he listed all of his Republican competitors and called them good men.

He added Ron Paul on the end, smiling, and said after all the debates he'd go back to his hotel room and watch television and how every time, according to the texted tallies, Ron Paul won all the debates, much, he did not say, thanks to the determined voting of his many busy-fingered followers. "Ron Paul won every debate!" Giuliani said.

Alas for Paul's followers, who have given many millions to his campaign treasury,--nearly $3.8 million so far this month, according to his website -- Ron Paul, a 72-year-old, 10-term House member who ran for president previously on the Libertarian ticket in 1988, did not win in Florida. In fact, Paul came in fifth, dead-last, well behind even Giuliani and Mike Huckabee.

In fact, the former ob-gyn received only about 3% of the vote, way less than 100,000 votes, which was about what pre-election polls measured as his support in the Sunshine State and what Paul supporters will argue was caused by a mainstream media conspiracy to run those fraudulent polls, to under-report Paul's support and to minimize his chances.

Under Florida winner-take-all rules, McCain now takes the state's 57 delegate votes at next summer's Republican National Convention in St. Paul.

So tonight's Republican debate at the Reagan Library near Simi Valley, co-sponsored by The Times and live-streamed here on this website at 5 p.m. Pacific, will likely have only four surviving Republicans -- McCain, Paul, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. Paul will be the strict constitutionalist who opposes the Iraq war and proposes to slash the federal government. Chances are, he will be given less time to speak than the other three.

On CNN last evening Wolf Blitzer went way out on a limb about the future of the Republican race going into Super Tuesday, Feb. 5. He boldly predicted that the results next week were "anybody's guess."

And you can take that to the bank.

--Andrew Malcolm

Photo: Richard Sheinwald / Bloomberg News

Comments

[Andrew76]

Well, at least Giuliani has a faint bit of class. I for one am overjoyed that the "mayor of 9/11," is being forced to go home, and why shouldn't he? Ron Paul has beaten him handily, several times already. Ron Paul has the most 1st place wins from Rep. straw polls of ANY repub. candidate, the most money donated by active military personell, and has set TWO recent fundraising records (beating out any U.S. candidate EVER, dem. or rep.), AND, by Giuliani's own admission, Ron Paul won all of the debates. So, heheh,... it's a bit of a hard pill to swallow when someone puts the phrase -media blackout conspiracy- in quotes when you look at how purposely little time and attention he is given by the MSM as compared to other candidates, with less money, less support and less clout. What is the alternative? "Oops, we forgot?" Puuhleeeze.

[Kelly O]

Andrew,
Giuliani was not "the man who successfully turned life in New York City around." As a New Yorker who lived in the city on 9/11, I know that is not true. New Yorkers turned life in New York City around. The rescue workers, the firemen, the policemen, the volunteers and the whole New York City community turned life around. Rudy just said pretty words to make everyone feel better.

Ron Paul for president. Never never never give up!

[JDC]

"As one result of that debate incident, which involved Giuliani taking offense at Paul's suggestion that Americans were at least partly responsible for 9/11 by their occupation"

Here we go again. Doctor Paul NEVER said that Americans were at least partly responsible for 9/11. The Doctor said It was blowback to the American interventionist foreign policy that was responsible for 9/1.

[Pierre Lefeuvre]

And you forget to mention the massive fraud going on in every state. Bev harris from Black Boc Vote just uncovered the extend of it. It is a purely criminal activity.
As Staline said: it is not the one that vote that count it is the one that count the vote that count!
Now Jebb Bush-Florida does that remind you of something?
Mr Fraud still in business, what else is new?
Americans people need a Relovution a la Ron Paul!

[Pier Johnson]

Andrew Malcolm amuses with his expressed childlike intellect when he explodes into a nerdy tirade:

"Ron Paul ... did not win in Florida. In fact, Paul came in fifth, dead-last, well behind ... [with] about 3% of the vote, way less than 100,000 votes, .. [and] about what ... polls measured ... and what Paul supporters will argue ... a mainstream media conspiracy."

Straighten out your panties Andy, the nomination happens awhile from now.

If you want to know why all polls report false numbers, read:

http://pier23.pbwiki.com/Polling+Lies:+How+the+Mainstream+Media+Gives+You+Fake+Polling+Results+to+Trick+You

This is true for all candidates and not only Ron Paul.

Afterword:

Andrew Malcolm needs an editor. He mixes tenses and does not understand the rudiments of English.

[Erick]

Well, if nothing else, Rudy and all the other RP denouncers do have to face the fact that Ron Paul was able to pull a 2nd place finish twice already, something neither Fred Thompson or Rudy Guiliani could do. But lets not talk about that. Lets talk about what Rudy "I can't place higher than 3rd" Guiliani has to say in taking parting shots at a candidate who outperformed him. Thats much more constructive and usefull...

[grizzle]

Hey Andrew,

I feel bad about hating on Giuliani so much now. Although, I do think he was largely responsible for the beginning of the media's dismissal of Paul. Even if the media never promoted Giuliani to first place, I think it sided with him on the issue of the terrorist attacks. From there it launched into regular criticism of his "conspiracy theories", implying that Paul believed the U.S. was a proximate cause of the attacks on 9-11. From there, journalists have been a little too free-handed to use the word 'conspiracy' with regard to Paul and his supporters. Then again, I feel bad for every candidate when they drop out. Go Fred, 2012.

I have a few short critiques that I don't expect you to take to heart, but they're really eating at me:

1. Giuliani's most fabricated story is that he didn't make an effort in Iowa. He made more trips to the state than Paul, most of them earlier in the season than Paul. (source: Paul's website). I hate how Writers try to rob us of that.

2. If you're going to handicap states for candidates, you should mention that when Paul was asked, in the Florida Uniision debate, how he would handle Hugo Chavez, he told them he would employ diplomacy. After a round of booing, he added that he thinks it's time to lift the embargo on Cuba, too. If Giuliani gets a pass for not campaiging in Iowa, Paul should get a pass for anti-campaigning in Florida. The temptation to lie must be great, but I admire that Paul simply explains his platform to the people, popular or no.

3. I think there was more appeal to revel in Paul's victories over Giuliani because he was considered *the* front-runner for so long rather than a genuine loathing for Giuliani. But who knows?

4. I can't speak for all Paul supporters, but I don't think Paul's minimal airtime is due to a conspiracy, but more of an unconscious parallel among media outlets (to borrow more antitrust terms). It seems far more likely that they decided Paul was a waste of time from the beginning, which is a mindset that is hard to overcome. And yes, I do think that has an effect on election results. But conspiracy? No. I've never met a Paul supporter who seriously suggested that they conspired, while simultaneously knowing what the word really means.

5. However, I make an exception for Fox News. I don't think, given the legal definition, a company can conspire within itself, but I believe there was a very conscious parallel to dismiss the last of the Goldwater contingent in the GOP. I think that's clear when you witness the outright mocking tone of Fox. I think that became clear in the last debate where one question was so blatantsly disrespectful and Paul's answer so poignant, that Fox cut it out altogether on the debate rebroadcast.

I have asked you before not to paint Paul supporters with the same brush since I think a small minority actually hold these hysterical views. You don't have to listen to me, of course, but I think it's bad enough that we're misreperesented by the media-ocre. I'd like it if you smarter bloggers saw through this.

That said, thanks again for more thoughful analysis.

Greg

[Darren D.]

Andrew,

I think the debate tonight will be the turning point of Dr. Paul's campaign. The media has made him the brunt of their jokes since there were 11 candidates and now there is only FOUR.

In a TV ad now running in the Super Tuesday states, Dr. Paul finally acknowledges the relationship he had with President Reagan.

Tonight, at the Reagan Library, I look for Dr. Paul to expand on how close he and Reagan were and how Reagan confided in him on defense policy and economic policy (including the gold standard).

I would like to see Dr. Paul expose John "let them win" McCain for the liberal that he is. John McCain only cares about our troops succeeding when they are sent by a Republican. Please watch the following youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPyKpcivQYQ

Mitt Romney has now flipped on another issue. SHOCKING. He used to be against the Department of Education now he thinks it is important. So here is a synopsis of Mr. Romney's platform though the years:

Pro-Choice and for federally funded abortions
More Pro-Gay then Ted Kennedy
Tax raised his state from a deficit to a $2 billion surplus.
(Hey Mitt, that $2 billion is not a bragging point, it is your tax payers money that you overcharged.)
Was against Reagan, now wants to be him.

"I have changed" is his battle cry. Yeah, I know. I changed my thoughts about issues in my 20's and early 30's. Oh wait, you were almost 60 when you changed on these major issues. If you are not rock solid on positions like abortion at 60 how can I trust you will ever be.

Two months ago, you media types were calling John McCain a joke and saying he had no chance. Who knows what will happen in the next two months? Dr. Paul is in great financial shape to see that unfold.

[Simon9]

Guiliani didn't like Ron Paul's "many busy-fingered followers?! So where were HIS many enthusiastic followers to offset? Nowhere.

And why? Because Mr. Guiliani doesn't elicit strong support the way Ron Paul does. Except perhaps for Huckabee with evangelicals, none of the other Repubs do. They have a large, watered-down support base of people who have a surface interest in this race. They don't think seriously about the issues or the solutions necessary. Just business as usual. Bumpersticker slogans. Pretend everything's OK. Don't question the war, that's unpatriotic. Don't worry about your rights dwindling. The dollar is fine. Don't rock the boat. Everybody loves us. Let the Federal Govt take care of you since it does such a good job. Don't worry about the debt.

Vote the same as always; you'll get the same as always. Ron Paul IS the only vote for change. Do you really WANT change?

[mw]

David -- Nevada and Louisiana were caucuses. And, the Louisiana caucus was only to elect delegates to the state convention and is one small part of the delegate selection process. In Nevada, Paul came in second and was one of only two republican candidates who campaigned there. And he still only managed 13 percent of the vote -- well behind Mitt Romney's 50-plus percent. Ron Paul is a 3-7 percent candidate who is going nowhere and that is why he gets much less play in the mainstream media.

[Trans-Mutant]

Hi Andrew,
"On CNN last evening Wolf Blitzer went way out on a limb about the future of the Republican race going into Super Tuesday, Feb. 5. He boldly predicted that the results next week were "anybody's guess."

I think Huck will drop and possibly Romney as well. I think with the intense campaign by the GOP against Paul, which includes the media blackout, McCain will come out a winner on the 5th. But Dr Paul will have an impressive show that will set him up to be the perfect candidate and contender as an independent. I know he has denied he'll run independent but I belive that he will. Think about it, to come this far and then say "I quit?" I doubt it and probably the majority of supporters doubt it too.

After the 5th I see Dr Paul in the MMA octagon, finally, for the UPC (Ultimate Political Championship) against the Clintons and McCain; Dr Paul will overcome by submission!! their worst nightmare in front of them.

What do you think?

[Thomas Braun]

There is no way ANY objective mind would regard that Ron Paul has not been railroaded by the media. The problem is the media is owned by a select few who dominate the message hitting their airwaves/printing presses. As such they hire folks who are willing to mold the truth to conform to the best interests of it's ownership. The main message that there is no conspiracy against Ron Paul comes FROM the media--and that is about the only thing they report on Ron Paul (unless of course a juicy hit story can be assembled)! Anyhow--if you'd like PROOF that there is decided censorship, please GOOGLE "Trends" and put in the GOP candidates (first & last names) ..the resulting top graph will show who has been searched most by the PEOPLE (hint.. it's Ron Paul by over a factor of 2!). The second graph shows who the MEDIA covers online (one guess who is WAY on the bottom). Call it what you will--it's censorship any way you slice it. The PEOPLE are pleading for one thing & we get nothing of the sort! Further proof can be found on youtube & searching on "Ron Paul is being censored" & "Fox News: Fair & Balanced".

I dare you, Andrew Malcolm, to go against your first impulse and print this. Look for yourself (at the above proofs) & please relay how there is not widespread suppression of the info you are paid to report on!

[julie]

1. reading the transcript of giuliani's speech gives a different impression that hearing it. when you watch the video, it appears that giuliani's making fun of ron paul "winning all the debates"

2. you can't dispute that the media statistically has given less coverage to RP. if they had given balanced coverage, it would have raised his numbers, if only because of name recognition alone (people are still asking "who is ron paul?") c'mon, the time RP gets in debates (not counting the ones he's excluded) and the types of questions he gets demonstrates to everbody the MNM bias, not to mention using words like "long shot," "fringe," and "dark horse" when they do. perception is everything (where's marshall mcluhan?)

[Sascha]

What happens in the Internet stays in the Internet.
The enthusiastic and dedicated followers of Mr. Paul simply couldn't be bothered to get out and vote.

Simply said, if the traditional media were engaged in a conspiracy of silence to banish Mr.Paul from the race why the new medias with their wonderful new social networks like MySpace, Youtube and Facebook weren't able to make his voice heard?

As a European I regret that there'll not be a President Paul wrecking the Usa for good; thinking like an American I think it would have been a terribile idea: the man has no idea from where american wealth comes from...

[Matt Kerbouchard]

Hello Kevin from Europe.
Thank you for chiming in, we are very glad to have you here. Andrew Malcolm is an establishment hack and he has been writing this way about Paul for a year now. I live in Studio City and my wife and I canceled our sub to the LA TIMES. We have found many great places to find our news, it's difficult to find unbiased reporting, yet it is still out there.

Good Day.

[Elizabeth]

Dear Mr. Malcom,

Thanks again for giving Dr. Paul the exposure that the other big media has been instructed to withhold from him. Let's see . . . what might they be afraid of . . . ?

So, now there are four. What will the big media do when we are down to three candidates, and Ron Paul is still going strong? How will they ignore him then?

[Benito]

Andrew, first I must say "wow". I'm am surprised you're using Paul's name at all in your op-ed. I was sure he was being referred to by the media as "He who must not be named."

I read the headline and I thought, "Either this article will marginalize Paul's efforts or this guy is risking his job."

Looks like it was the former.

You said "These thousands have also reveled in the several times that Paul drew more primary or caucus votes than Giuliani in early states where the New Yorker did not seriously compete, starting with...."

Oh, so anytime Paul won over 9iu11iani was because Rudy wasnt even trying in that state.I see.. thank you for educating us. Silly Ron Paul..

Then you go on to say "In fact, Paul came in fifth, dead-last, [in Florida] well behind EVEN Giuliani and Mike Huckabee." (caps mine)

In your previous examples you're quick to point out that Rudy wasnt really trying but no fair mention that Paul wasnt even in Florida while Rudy spent 56 days there! The fact that he still got 3% is impressive anyway.

Pull up footage of any moment the media says "Who will win the GOP nomination?" and you'll never see Paul's face in their graphics. Any stories of Paul are usually negative or minimize the man's efforts. And no one talks about his message. He's immune to attacks, both personally and ideologically.

I appreciate your story on Paul but jeez, show a little journalistic integrity and balance it.

[Cameron, Redondo Beach CA]

True, he didn't do too well in Florida, but given the amount he campaigned there (i think... not at all?), it didn't really matter since it was winner take all anyways. I think his strategy of rallying the other states like Maine, Nevada, North Dakota, Alabama, etc is much wiser given the fact their delegates will add up to more than Florida's anyways.

I'm hoping for a Ron Paul surprise on super duper Tuesday!

[Matt Kerbouchard]

Hello Kevin from Europe.
Thank you for chiming in, we are very glad to have you here. Andrew Malcolm is an establishment hack and he has been writing this way about Paul for a year now. I live in Studio City and my wife and I canceled our sub to the LA TIMES. We have found many great places to find our news, it's difficult to find unbiased reporting, yet it is still out there.

Good Day.

[steve - san francisco]

Ron Paul can win. If you vote your true beliefs, it is not a wasted vote. There is no such thing as a wasted vote for Ron Paul. Have a conversation with a Ron Paul supporter. You will be impressed. We are educated on the issues and intelligent in conversation. Tell a friend.

[Ozzy]

How did Julie Anne pay tribute to Ron Paul?
I missed it.
Was it when he insinuated that Ron Paul only won those debates because a few people were 'busy' fingered and spammed the voting?
It's only one vote one vote. Do Ron Paul people own multiple phones?

Whatever, I'm glad Julie Anne is gone. There is one less RINO in the field now.

Ron Paul is the only real conservative in the field.
he'd cut taxes,
pull our troops from Iraq on put them on our Border with Mexico (The Huckster, McAmnest and Rommey are all open borders guys)
he'd cut spending in half

Go Ron Paul!

[David]

Care to show any evidence that the post debate polls could be hijacked by multiple votes? The only ones I saw would only allow one vote/phone number.

[Nannette]

You make Guiliani's comments sound so supportive, when in fact he was being sarcastic. You know he thinks those online and text polls were "fixed". After the MSNBC debate I voted in the online poll, and kept checking it to see how it was going. At the point that about 26,000 people had voted and 61% of them thought Ron Paul had won the debate, it disappeared from the website and was never mentioned. The text poll was talked about because Romney won by 1%. My text vote was blocked for some reason. I guess us grandmothers just aren't as nimble fingered as the youngsters.

[DefendTheConstitution]

Surprise, surprise. The media goes out of it's way to marginalize and ignore Ron Paul and then it ponders why he hasn't swayed the masses?

It's rubbish and you know it Mr Malcolm. It's like a gardener saying "tulips don't grow in my garden", then watering only his favorite flowers the roses and not providing water to the tulips and then saying "well I always said tulips couldn't grow in my garden" when the tulips whither and die.

Journalism is so pathetic in this country.

[Yuri Butinas]

Americans are not responsible for 9/11 attacks. It's the policy makers that are. Americans are just the just the ones who pay the price for bad foreign policy. Get it right!