Ron Paul, loser again

For months now the growing thousands of Ron Paul supporters across the country have been saying virtually everywhere they could, including the comments section of this blog by the hundreds, that the media, the polls and the prognosticators were all wrong. There was a conspiracy.

Those Paul supporters were actually correct. The media, the polls and the prognosticators were, indeed, all wrong -- about Barack Obama handily beating Hillary Clinton in the New Hampshire primary. The media that the Paul camp loves to hate was actually dead-on right about Ron Paul. He was a long shot. He misfired again. And he got pretty much the same share of New Hampshire GOP votes as the progressive polls, that Paulunteers also despise as frauds and fixed, unrepresentative statistical snapshots, had indicated he had all along.

As he did in Iowa, Paul, despite raising the most money of any Republican presidential ....

candidate in the fourth quarter -- nearly $20 million -- (and another $600,000 this month) and despite the vociferous support of many young supporters, once again finished in the back of the GOP pack. He was in single digits this time, versus his 10% in the Iowa contest last week when he thumped former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who got a meager 4%. And the zero delegates that Paul got in last Saturday's Wyoming county caucuses.

The 72-year-old, 10-term congressman from Texas with the libertarian ideals and the strict views of the Constitution vied with Giuliani for fourth or fifth place all night with 8% or 9% of the record New Hampshire primary vote. His diverse supporters hoped -- indeed, expected -- that their political passion and heartfelt donations combined with Paul's candor, constitutional clarity and congressional consistency would reach critical mass in New Hampshire and ignite the Ron Paul Revolution. But apparently the match broke.

Despite his enthusiastic supporters. Despite all the hand-painted signs and chants. Despite the long hours handwriting letters to voters in other states. Despite the yard signs that bloomed everywhere like winter dandelions.

Despite his millions of dollars. Despite his growing political infrastructure in other states. Despite his book. Despite the 1,400 meet-up groups nationally. Despite all the positive publicity surrounding his being snubbed by Fox News for the Sunday night debate and his second appearance on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno." (Click here for the Paul-Leno interview transcript.) Despite all of his advertising in the Granite State, which seemed fertile soil for his less-government approach.

Paul lost. Again.

Paul has the money to continue his long-shot campaign. He says he plans no third-party run. But we'll see. Running for president and getting the acclaim of friendly crowds is a heady experience. For now, only Fred Thompson did worse in New Hampshire. And the former Tennessee senator wrote off that cold little place long ago.

For now, for a real change, we're not going to try to explain Ron Paul's candidate's defeat. We're going to leave it to his earnest and vocal supporters in the comments section below. Maybe they know better what went wrong. Please, spare us the rants and blaming secret neo-con conspiracies. Don't claim that fourth or fifth place is really winning. Nobody questions if Paul is a straight-shooter who sticks by his guns and his word. We can all go to his website here for the details of his platform.

Here's your chance to explain in specific detail to a major blog and its thousands of readers why Ron Paul lost so badly in New Hampshire and what he needs to do to realistically resurrect his candidacy for the Republican nomination in the other states coming up so rapidly. In fact, everyone is invited to offer their own analysis. Does Ron Paul's political fate even matter in the larger picture?

The floor -- or the page -- is yours. Let's hear it.

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Steve]

I called it weeks ago; they'll use the fixed polls as an "I told you so" after rigging the electronic voting machines and the private vote counts. Freedom is down the toilet; they decide everything. You are just slaves and pawns.

[Jess T.]

VOTE FRAUD. What, you think that's impossible in the corrupt USA, where the filthy rich own the government?

[George T. Miller]

You are basing your viewpoint after only 3 primaries? 14 electoral votes? There is a long way to the White House and only losers are you people in the media. Only Dr. Paul has a chance to still run as an independent once all the other posers are out of the way. A brilliant strategy

[Jim Ostrowski]

Okay.

First, Ron has been marginalized by the MSM forever. When he is covered, it's always qualified by saying he's a long-shot, or "fringe," or a "flake."

Second, even that unflattering coverage disappeared for four days before the election.

Third, a tiny number of "supporters", if they were in fact supporters, engaged in some very obnoxious street tactics just before the primary.

Fourth, the media gushed over Obama as the change candidate when he is no such thing. He’s the status quo candidate--he wants to continue the growth of the federal government that has been occurring at least since 1917.

Fifth, Ron has been the subject of vicious smears all along.

Sixth, he’s played it too nice. He needs to take the gloves off.

Seventh, it's way early to write him off.

Eighth, he's ahead of Rudy after two states have voted. Why not ask what's wrong with Rudy?

[Todd T]

Dr. Paul lost in New Hampshire for a multitude of reasons. Perhaps one of them wouldn't be enough to defeat a candidate, but combined they create a toxic mix for a candidate. 1) Dr. Paul's message attracted his supporters, not so much his charisma. He's message is primo. His delivery is akin to W. Bush. 2) Dr. Paul did not wrap his message in a positive fashion, such as Ronald Reagan did with his smaller government message in the 1980s. People this cycle are searching for optomism -- See Obama's success. 3) Media blackballing didn't help. Fox last night included the delegates earned by Hunter, but not Paul. 4) Paul's message, as he delivered it, does not play well on television soundbytes. Reagan's message was very similar, but Reagan was able to communicate it in a TV-friendly way. Paul has not spent his money on speech/sound byte writers. 5) Paul has fallen into the role that libertarians in this country too often like to play. He's the victim of an establishment. Because he plays like a victim, he is a victim. Perception is reality in politics. And no one wants a victim as their president. 6) Paul's supporters are both what got him this far, but they are also what helped hold him back. Many people were annoyed by the rudeness of his supporters. In a group of 20 supporters at an intersection, it only takes one to be overly annoying to leave observers with a bad impression.

All of these things combined is why Paul is losing and will lose. We Paul supporters never really supported the man. We supported the message. As you can see in the last three days, Huckabee has quoted Paul twice (without giving credit). For the message to continue to have life, Paul's supporters must continue to support Paul. This is how you change a party from the inside. Because in our system of government, you can forget about a third party ever playing anything but spoiler.

[Chris]

You know, maybe if the msm actually did some positive reporting on Ron Paul he would actually do better. I mean seriously, look at Huckabee, he has raised hardly any money and yet the media hypes him up and he wins Iowa. Maybe if the media would give Ron Paul the same respect, he would actually win, but all the slanderous articles and reporting the media does on Ron Paul is not helping him in the primaries and I think the media is happy with the job theyre doing.

[jayhawk10]

Here's the main reason Paul came in fifth in New Hampshire: he opposes the war in Iraq. The vast majority of Republican voters still support the war, while the vast majority of voters who oppose the war find Paul's economic, social and legal views anathema. For a time, it looked like Paul might be able to build an unlikely coalition of libertarians, hard-right populists and anti-war liberals, but the difficulty of bringing such a diverse group of people together into one camp appears to have been beyond the grasp of Paul and his campaign organizers.

[robert]

Gee, what would have happened if he'd been included in the Forum. Don't you think that accounts for something??? you sound really afraid of him, if not downright hateful!

[James Bowery]

My home state is Iowa. My friends there reported zero mass media exposure of Ron Paul -- not even his ads made it to them. If he'd been given at least 10% of the Republican mass media exposure in Iowa and 7% in NH that he would have done far better in both states.

[chris]

I am still very hopeful that this will turn into a movement that will get as big as Ross Perots did(with more substance)
I still dont get how anyone over a 50 IQ would vote for anyone not fixing our debt and spending…Are they blind and deaf??
They say things have to get worse to get better sometimes..
How much worse can we make it and survive?
They say government dosent do anything well…Thats not true..They dumb down society better than anyone.

[Freddie]

No matter what the outcome has been or will be regarding Ron Paul's bid for the presidency, he should be thanked by EVERYONE for energizing so many Americans to become involved in the political process. He has captured the attention of so many young people and given them a lesson in politics and fiscal responsibility unlike any they have ever been exposed to before.

If Ron Paul was given the same attention by the MSM that the other candidates have received, he would be able to get his message out to more Americans. This is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Those of us who have heard Dr. Paul's message will not give up the fight! GO DR. PAUL! and THANK YOU!

[chris]

I am still very hopeful that this will turn into a movement that will get as big as Ross Perots did(with more substance)
I still dont get how anyone over a 50 IQ would vote for anyone not fixing our debt and spending…Are they blind and deaf??
They say things have to get worse to get better sometimes..
How much worse can we make it and survive?
They say government dosent do anything well…Thats not true..They dumb down society better than anyone.

[ACUTS]

When push came to shove two things happened.. independents were stilll mesmerized by Obama.. and the conservative ones went with someone they felt could win.. McCain..

some Republicans and indies have always expressed their love for Dr Paul.. not the supporters, but people who like him, think he is a decent man, agree with most of what he is saying and then finish that comment with.. he will not win the nomination. so they go for the second choice. For the people I know who are like that they are leaning towards Romney and Huckabee... and I am sure for many others leaning for McCain.. He is the old straight talker.. the one with name recognition..

I love Dr. Paul... I think he has what it takes.. but I also know if he does not WIN Nevada... come in second or third in Michigan or South Carolina.. he might as hang it up..

and he cannot run as an indy because he will come off as a Romney... wishy washy and changing his mind.. yes circumstances can change that.. strong finishes on feb 5th...more money...but that does not mean the most principled man in the race should change what he has said since the beginning of this race..

I am not running as a third party candidate.. even if I WANT HIM TOO... in fact he should have to begin with..

the odds have been stacked against him.. I love underdogs.. but when FOX refuses to let you in the debate after you met their qualifications.. and they say we just dont have room.. that tells you the party insiders hate you.. the media is scared of you.. and those in power do not want your message heard.. and when it does.. You get slandered... you get made fun of... and you get marginalized..

WELCOME TO POLITICS... maybe he ought to cry like Hillary.. ;-)

[Lou Eastman]

I voted for Ron Paul yesterday. I will vote for Ron Paul in the general election if he wins the Republican nomination, runs as a third-party candidate, or if I have to write him in. I am voting for Ron Paul because he stands for the things that I believe in: liberty and responsibility, both fiscal and social. I won't let anything get in the way of my right to vote my conscience.

This isn't a sport. This is about representation for everyone. There should only be one winner in this race. The smallest minority of all: The individual.

[Tess101]

Thank you Andrew for this write up on Ron Paul. Thank God Ron Paul didn't get 4% like Giuliani did in Iowa. I guess the Foxnews forum didn't help poor old Thompson, but I really believe it may have helped Giuliani. If Foxnews had been smart they would have included Ron Paul, but they don't want the truth about our economy to be told. Ron Paul has done well considering the lack of attention he has gotten by the media, and the out of line jabs, and snickering by the other candidates during debates. Ron Paul taking 5th place in New Hampshire considering the odds have been totally against him all this time by the bias media groups is nothing to sneeze at. I was watching the Glenn Beck show last night as he was speaking with one of the Government Accounting/Audit Officers, and I actually heard Glenn Beck say "Oh, that's what Ron Paul has been talking about all along", my jaw hit the floor, and I realized Glenn Beck is finally understanding Ron Paul's message and the information Ron Paul has written about our economy and the monetary system. If anything folks, just realize Ron Paul is reaching people with his knowledge of the economy and how we have to cut spending, abolish the Fed, the IRS, and Social Security system. The writing is on the wall, and the sheep are waking up. So please don't give up hope. I will not say that foul play was a factor in the counting of votes, but there was a young man in New Hampshire that has claimed his mother worked at a polling precinct and the votes were not counted properly for Ron Paul, so if there is any possibility of fraud I hope it is addressed. Ron Paul and Giuliani were fairly close in votes, so there is a possibility they could actually be tied, remember that. Ron Paul will do well in South Carolina, and I predict he beat Giuliani there, and McCain. Ron Paul has my vote and support, and I will continue to spread his message. Freedom and Liberty will prevail but we have to cut government spending drastically or this country will go under, and it is not that far off in the future. Please know that I am not a doom, and gloom type of person regarding our economy, but I am realistic. Remember the old saying "People don't plan to fail, they fail to Plan" So all you Ron Paul Supporters, and those that know what our country is facing, don't give up, continue to be involved, we must do whatever it takes to make our country strong again, and Ron Paul will continue with his efforts.

[Jake Ripley]

I knew the L.A.Times had already lost most integrity it once had as a actual News Paper but this article is a perfect example of why. It is now a tabloid and nothing more.

[Ben Peckham]

Ron Paul was only 3.6 percentage points behind 3rd in Iowa and 4 points behind third in New Hampshire. Yes it is disappointing but not over. What is most disappointing, however, is that despite Dr. Paul's "candor, constitutional clarity and congressional consistency," and despite that in your own words, "Nobody questions if Paul is a straight-shooter who sticks by his guns and his word." Dr. Paul only garners 10% of the vote. And then you guys get a "nanny nanny boo boo attitude toward paul supporters. Sad. So very Sad. HEY MSM, try being a part of the solution and not the problem.

[Mark]

If Ron Paul doesn't mind voting alone for his principles, neither do I.

I'm convinced that the philosophy of Liberty--where each individual respects the life, liberty, and property of others--can bring us a future of peace and prosperity. This is why I follow it in my daily life.

Of course, I am disappointed that not everyone feels that way towards others. But apparently 8% of those who went to the Republican Primaries in New Hampshire felt that way, heard that supporting Ron Paul was a way to voice those feelings, and got out to vote. A year ago, I thought that only one in a hundred people I met understood the importance of Liberty.

It was definitely worth the time, money and effort I've spent on the Ron Paul campaign to see these ideas being discussed in the national media. I plan to continue using the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential campaign to promote Liberty as long as I can, even if the electorate isn't ready for it yet.

[Mike]

yeah --- i was watching it on CNN so i was watching more of the numbers and less of the % points --- the percentage points never wavered more than 1% ---- but the numbers were way too orderly

it seemed as if 1 person went up 185 votes the next person would go up 140 votes and the next 55 etc.... very little wavering --- as if a machine was getting the total number of votes cast and distributing them according to a pre-determined ratio

it was all way too clean and concise

[Rob231]

Leaving Ron Paul out of the Fox republican debate cost him more credibility then initially recognized. Way more damage then the racial smere piece that hit the media hours before voting.

Fox has a huge following. Why would a boarderline independant/republican even bother with a candidate that doesn't get included in their debates? My money says Ron recieved the least "swing" votes in the largest "swing" state primary because of this.

File it under neo-con conspiriacy, just my honest opinion.

[Scott McDonnell]

All I can say is that it is peculiar that Ron Paul has gotten EXACTLY what he was polling at, when the polling was "likely republican voters" didn't take into account any new voters, voters, switching parties, etc... He got EXACTLY the percentage he was polling at. While the polls were mostly wrong about every other candidate. This happened in Iowa AND New Hampshire. Paul was placed at 8% in NH and 10% in Iowa in the polls and this is EXACTLY what he got.

I'm really not much a conspiracy theorist, but something very odd just occurred not once, but twice. No poll is ever that accurate, and that can be proven simply because they were NOT that accurate about any other candidate.

Not much that can be done about it, though. Claiming fraud is political suicide because those in power have framed it that way (gee, what happens when fraud actually DOES occur? Sounds pretty stupid to set the stage for someone to actually do it, KNOWING no candidate would be stupid enough to call it.)

I don't know what to say, honestly. It seems so unlikely that Ron Paul only got 8% in NH of all places. Especially when it was next to impossible for a reporter there NOT to run into a Ron Paul supporter. And from the reports, there clearly must have been more than 18,000 signs for Ron Paul in NH. But, what evidence do we have of anything nefarious? Nothing, because electronic voting equipment was used. No paper trail. No proof. Before a single Republican starts slamming anyone for having a problem with that, they really should stop and think. No matter how much you hate Ron Paul, it is becoming very clear that NO Republican is going to win in November. The dems have been pushing Huckabee, the dems have been outraising us, etc... If the election is being rigged, it will NOT be in ANY republicans favor. THAT you can be sure of.

[James]

Ron Paul seemed tailor made for New Hampshire. I will say that I expected him to do a little better than he did. I think the voters of New Hampshire are educated but that only goes so far. Ron Paul simply doesn’t have the name recognition that the other candidates have. On the flip side, Ron Paul is still showing growth. It’s only the beginning (I hope). His grass-roots followers are a serious and educated bunch. Despite his low percentages at the polls, I find it fascinating to watch his growing crowds of supporters. His signs are absolutely everywhere. No other candidate has such devoted supporters. Dr. Paul is a true American and he has reinvigorated my hope for this country.

[ACUTS]

anyways He should at least stay until feb 5th and see what happens.. and if anything he is acting like a Nader like counter balance to the conservative side.. pushing the right farther right in many aspects and he has made an impact all the candidates.. you see them saying Ron Paulish things.. which is good.. but its just talk with them unfortunately.. anyways it sucks, but oh well.. elts see what happens.. and to not say 8 percent and fifth place is dissapointing would be intellectually dishonest with ones self. He needed third...

[Barry Clifton]

It's pretty obvious why Dr. Paul is not doing better. He is not promising to provide anybody with anything for free. He believes that freedom is defined by lack of government intrusion, not freedom from need. Nearly all Americans have come to believe that the federal government is responsible for their health care, their retirement, and many other things the government has no Constitutional authority to provide. The reason he is not getting more votes is mainly because he isn't paying the going price for them.

[RP Supporter]

Loser again? He hasn't lost one yet. Guiliani lost the first one, Thompson lost this one.

The losers will be the american people if we end up with a socialist or a warmonger in the whitehouse.