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

[Justin]

It really doesn't matter. Republicans have no chance of winning the general election anyway because of Bush's track record and the current economic situation. The sad thing is, I don't even know what a Republican or Democrat is anymore. They certainly all seem to support an overblown, supersized beauracracy.

[Liza]

Women voters-- it's all about repackaging the message toward women voters. Paul took 11% of the male vote, but only 4% of the female vote.

Up until now, the grassroots for the Paul campaign has been dominated by men. This is all well and good, except that some of the appeals toward voters made by this coalition have aspects that are frightening to some women: references to "V for Vendetta," talk of "Revolution" and cries of "freedom!" may very well cause some women to shy away.

I propose that the Paul campaign (both official and *especially* grassroots) needs to work on a softer touch. More emphasis on freedom leading to more opportunities for self and families. More emphasis on sound money securing a stable economy devoid of the painful recessions that accompany fiat currency. More emphasis on personal responsibility for home and family, and a trust in mothers' ability to know what's best for their children.

In short, less William Wallace, more Donna Reed.

[missourimike]

He lost badly in New Hampshire because most of the voters there still support the war in Iraq.

Ron Paul's reduced government message also discourages many who think if he's elected, they will lose their jobs due to downsizing or elimination.

Traditional voters want a feel good platform with a charismatic personality to deliver it.

Ron Paul supporters should spend more face time with undecideds. It's called talking - not blogging. Zealous supporters at some RP rallies have hurt the campaign by their aggressiveness. They soon get labeled as nutjobs, etc.

Ron Paul needs to groom his supporters - set the agenda, rules of conduct, etc. It can't be a free-for-all because that is apparently not working.

His message is compelling but he needs to work on it's delivery. And time is running out.

[peter nickel]

It is only the beginning. There will be others after Ron Paul.
People are waking up.

[Dawn]

Yikes, you don't recognize a grassroots movement takes time to boil to the top...where were you educated???

Go Ron Paul

[lastnymleft]

Exit polls showed that people were concerned about the war, and about the economy. Dr Paul has superior positions on both those issues, so should have been a no-brainer, had he been fairly portrayed in the media, and given fair time.

But those people that identified war as an issue that they were very worried about went and voted for McCain, the candidate that the MSM had been pumping up in the last few weeks (along with Huckabee; after Romney and Giuliani failed). So why would all these people that are so concerned about the war go and vote for one of the most pro-war, same-old, same-old candidates?

Clearly, the sheeple have an "any means to an end" mentality. They have been convinced that the "surge" is working, and have ignored all that has led up to this point, and have backed a candidate that would also have no qualms launching more war, killing another half a million (AT LEAST!) Arabs, or Persians, for the next 100+ years, bankrupting America along the way.

My respect for the non-thinking voters of America has hit a new low.

For Dr Paul, and his grassroots following, nothing changes. Support continues to grow, organically, day by day. Once people are woken up to the message of Dr Paul, no-one ever turns away. Hence the passionate devotees.

We will continue to promote the message, right through to November. We will not accept Dr Paul not going right through. Having the nomination would make things easier, but freedom doesn't come free, or easy, and we are prepared to pay the price.

[Ken Allen]

Thank you Andrew for your opinion. Fortunately for you, your opinion is sponsored and propogated by a major news source. Americans as a group are naieve enough to assume that the opinions expressed by the Andrew Malcolms are the acceepted opinion nationwide simply because LA Times is attached. Americans as a group have been led to believe that its not necessary to develope their own opinion, but just to accept the opinion of major media sources. The truth is, if americans really knew what the true freedom of the consistution looked like, Ron Paul would be doing wonderfully. Unfortunately, the Andrew Malcolms never post articles about "THE ANDREW JACKSON OF THE 21st CENTURY" or "THE ONLY COSISTENT CANDIDATE" or "THE NEW FOUNDING FATHER". Instead, they only paint an "Evil or Really Evil" picture as the only choices. I fear that America is a decade away from pure socalism, all because "people do not think"

[Lewis]

It saddens me that you report Ron Paul: Loser again. A man that champions the constituion and possibly America's greatest cure to apathy. Yet he's still a loser in your eye's Mr. Malcolm. Isn't he. What pure glee that your speedily wrote your words of salt for the proverbial wound.

I'm from London, England and have been following the 2008 presidential elections avidly. The America elections affect the whole world and the Foreign Policy of America is almost directly related to the UK. Some could even say there scripted by the same folk. I'd go one step further and say that they are 100%. It's the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilaterial Commission and the meetings in the dark of the Bilderbergers that determine when we go to war in the name of corparate nationlism. It will also be these groups that determine who's in the Oval office.

If, Mr. Malcolm, you find such joy from the fact that your countrymen will die for the greed of a global elite, i say your the loser.
If, Mr Malcolm, you find such joy from the rapid destruction of the constitution and the transfer of rights to large multi-nationals, i say your the loser.
If, Mr Malcolm, you enojy living in a world where the most unqualified and un-intellegent peoeel rule, i say your the loser.
If, Mr Malcolm, your so blind to the trasversities of the western governments and the exploitation of fragile developing countries, i say your the loser.

It a dark time when the man with a heart for his neighbour, regardless of creed, race and religion is a loser in this world. Labelled weak in a world where evil and criminality is praised and profits; where the just and charitable man is slandered and discredited.

I hope that one day mankind will see the errors in our ways and rebuild our cultures with love and forgiveness, rather than profit and fear.

[Leland Thomas Faegre]

Although Dr. Paul has diagnosed their symptoms; the patients will ignore their condition until it is too late to begin treatment. The end of the nation-state is nigh...

[Buddy Whittenburg]

I donated $300 to Ron Paul's campaign. Ron Paul has always been a long shot in my eyes. I never really thought (I hoped!) that the majority of the US would buy change like that right off of the ticket. Too many people fear change - that's why it happens so slowly.

What you don't understand is that the "Ron Paul Revolution" isn't even about Ron Paul. It's about injecting fiscal conservatism and personal liberties into the federal government and rallying those that stand for the same principals. That is the reason I donated to the campaign.

I only hope that next election, after our outrageous spending has had a chance to bite us, a fiscal conservative - probably less extreme than Paul can win with our votes. The problem is that there are no other conservatives running right now that believe in personal liberty. So I will stay on the Paul ship until it sinks. I will undoubtedly have to perform the wretched practice of "lesser of two evils" voting this election.

Also, 10% isn't half bad considering where we started.

[Cabert]

Personally I think FOX succeeded in hurting the campaign with their exclusion of Paul on their forum. I think the media who continue to start every Ron Paul article with "He's not gonna win" has hurt the campaign. However that doesn't mean the campaign has stopped. Win or lose I will stand by who I think is best equipped to get the country back on track. That would be Ron Paul.

[G.S.]

When exactly did voting for a candidate turn into a baseball game?

I think we can all agree it's all become slightly irrational and tiresome.

[Bill]

I don't think it's all that surprising why Ron Paul does badly today. The dictum that our republic will last only until the people learn they can vote largess for themselves out of the public treasury comes to mind, along with the ever-sloping civic literacy in our country. The average American, including - judging from his bio - Mr. Malcolm, will tell you that America is a democracy. It is not, and was never meant to be so. America is a republic, and the differences between the two forms of government are night and day. The ideas that this country were founded upon have become obscured by half-digested truths, misrepresentation, and an overall failure of education. The Founding Fathers would not recognize their countrymen today. I'm not bitter about that, but it is frustrating to see the culmination of Greek and Roman ideas go down the same path of self-destruction over and over. Ah well, from the crooked timber of man, nothing straight was ever fashioned.

[Roland Tena]

While a Ron Paul supporter, I have never been under the illusion that he would actually capture more than a minority of voters. But his campaign has been a success in that it is only due to him that fidelity to the Constitution, fiscal responsibility and non-aggression have been part of the debate as much as they have. As an awareness-raising campaign, Ron Paul 2008 has succeeded beyond what his supporters expected 6 months ago.
Sadly, I feel that by the time a plurality of Americans recognise the wisdom of Dr Paul, it will be too late. Recession is in the air like a cold breeze, even as 41% of Federal revenue feeds the war machine. The leaves are starting to fall.

[Tom deSabla]

Yes, we are a little bit disappointed, but not discouraged.

Still, if he "lost so badly" then where are the calls for Fred Thompson to drop out? He got only 2% to Paul's 8%. Giuliani only got 9% - should he give up too?

I'm sure you know that there is no replacing front page media coverage with money.

There is no amount of Paul's money big enough to buy front page news and pics like what every other candidate has gotten in the last 3 weeks. Examples include pics of Huckabee playing the bass (frt page Wash Times - above the fold) and Romney, and McCain and Obama made the Post front page together. There are front page stories about these people nearly every day. Paul gets nada.

Paul couldn't even make the front page of any paper on Dec. 16th - when he set the all-time one day fundraising record. Also, when the San Fran Republicans literally canceled a straw poll to keep him from winning - there was no coverage of that shocking event. Had it happened to anyone else, it would have been front page news, and we'd still be talking about it now.

So, that explains why he didn't do better. But again, why aren't you asking for Fred's explanation for N.H. too? And what about Rudy in Iowa? Oh that's right, cause you're a statist shill and hack who wouldn't know freedom if it played footsie with you in a bathroom stall.

WE'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE!

Go Ron Paul!

[Jonathan Cohen]

While I agree that Paul's result in New Hampshire was far from a victory, I've never seen anything like the glee of members of the media that Paul couldn't crack the top tier of Republican candidates.

I naively expected that the media would put a positive spin on a long shot candidate with a populist viewpoint achieving high levels of enthusiasm in his campaign. Instead, Paul has been met with vitriolic opposition from the media.

One would be hard pressed to find an article mocking the Giuliani campaign for its disappointing showing despite Giuliani's fame and party backing.

Yet, here comes a blog from the mainstream media laughing in Ron Paul's face for having the bravery to do what few Americans do - run on actual beliefs, and to do so outside of the Washington establishment. Perhaps it requires more bravery to sit behind a typewriter...

[Mark Christian]

Good Morning Andrew,
My name is Mark and I am a Ron Paul supporter from Michigan. I can't speak for the multitude of Paulites but I will write what I think and feel.

There's a saying, "The hardest thing to do is change someone's mind." I believe that is evidenced by Dr. Paul's election results thus far. As you said, despite the effort, letters, and cheering, we finished 5th. However we are not trying to remodel the system, (different amounts of troops in areas of Iraq, tweaking the monstrosity that we call the tax code) we want a complete overhaul. This major change makes people uncomfortable. "What will we do if there is no federal tax? Who will pay for the highways, who will protect our oil, how can we defend the country?"

It blew my mind when I learned how our fractional reserve banking system works. If you ever have the inclination, try to explain the creation and operation of the Federal Reserve to someone. They will think you are crazy. "You mean to tell me that a private bank like Bank of America or Chase prints and controls the money supply. They are audited by no one. They are not a part of the government. They have shareholders (owners). Our federal taxes go to pay the interest on the debt of the very money that they loaned us in the first place????" This will be met by serious resistance.

Try to explain the constitution to someone who has never read it or hasn't read a book in the past year (like many Americans).

It's outrageous to think that by applying the constitution (that all members of government swear to defend) Dr. Paul almost gets laughed off the stage in the debates.

One thing I know. The fight for our country will not stop with two losses or 50 losses, or even a loss in the general election. We love our country too much to see it continue on this disastrous route caused by not heeding the constitution. This is a rEVOLution and if my memory serves me right, we are doing better than the American colonists that were fighting for their freedom. Our 8% support is much higher than the approximately 3% who participated in fighting to create this great country.

Good day.

Ron Paul 08 Hope for America

[Tiger]

Au Contraire....

He has already won.

Why?

Becuase his message is out there.

People are realizing why Thomas Jefferson killed the first bank,

and Andrew Jackson the second.

Central bank inflation robs savers,

and rewards owners of income producing property.

In addition he is a wiinner becuase unlike most of the

press he hasn't sold his soul/truth out for personal gain.

[William]

Apparently, all Ron Paul needs to do is to pull out a copy of the US Constitution and light it on fire on live T.V, then you'll see how he'll win the election. Obviously, the election results reflect this sentiment when the only guy who wants to follow the law (the Constitution ) receives the least amount of votes. What does this say about our nation and society? This is a travesty in US politics, I guess in the end we'll get what we deserve - fascism and perpetual war.

[SQ]

The article in The New Republic (which is factually baseless) did him in. I think the people who did vote for him in New Hampshire had not read it. How unfortunate that our system is so dirty.

[lono1]

there were more signs in new hamshire than ron paul got votes. there is only one way to explain why he didn't do better. the same reason saddam got 100% of the votes in his election. hey, you know, obama did win in the places where they used only paper ballots...what kind of conspiracy theory can you come up with to explain that.

[Jared Endicott]

I am a Ron Paul supporter, but I never had any illusions about him winning. I still intend to vote for him in the Washington Primary anyway.

I would say that the main reasons why Ron Paul is not getting more votes dispite his money, is that his message is too complex and likely too counter-intutitive to the casual voter. His message is too contrary to what most people have come to believe about the role of government.

It takes a bold leap into uncharted territory for people to support ending the Fed, and people don't want to hear about ending Social Security either. Regardless of political parrty, most voters in general support a nanny state in some way or another. Or they support our empire.

However much you want to belittle Ron Paul and his supporters though, his message has ignited a large cross section of America (even if it is just 5%) who now see that big government and empire is not the answer.

I for one was woken up by Ron Paul's message and I know that this is the case for so many. Our view of government will never be the same.

[Doug C.]

You say its not winning huh? It's no conspiracy, it's been a long shot the entire time. Although I am disappointed that he didn't have better results in New Hampshire, I am enthused that without getting mainstream media support he is still not blown away by the entire GOP field.

The push for McCain by all major networks was enormous as we got closer to the primary. If Ron Paul had any Mainstream Media support he would be very popular.

It is true that the corporations that control our media are scared of Ron Paul's message. We will defeat the NWO. I just wish we had more time!

[Lynn]

I wish I could tell you why Ron Paul lost so badly, but I'm scratching my head, too. For months now, Paul his supporters have been called "crazy," but I don't think it's crazy to uphold our Constitution. I do think it's crazy that we are rapidly losing our freedoms because of the Patriot Act, which is not a Constitutional amendment. I don't think it's crazy if we actually get to keep the money we earn instead of letting the government have nearly half; I do think it's crazy that we're producing money out of thin air, and that it's backed only by debt. (See "Money as Debt" on YouTube) I don't think our active and retired military members are crazy, yet they've given more money to Ron Paul than any other candidate. I do think it's crazy to say that it's okay if we're still fighting in Iraq 100 years from now. I don't think it's crazy to want our politicians to be honest and stop the influence of lobbyists, but I do think it's crazy that a few wealthy individuals and corporations are getting rich off of my tax money (read "Free Lunch" by David K. Johnston).

Maybe I'm crazy to hope that my fellow Americans will remember that this used to be a country honored and respected around the world, that promised freedom and privacy to its citizens.

Call me crazy, but I'm still supporting Ron Paul.

[Scott McDonnell]

Will the MSM start calling Romney a longshot now? Second place twice in a row? And no, Wyoming doesn't count, since it was decided solely by party establishment who just happened to be Romney's staff there.

We all know Romney doesn't stand a chance in South Carolina. He *might" win Michigan, but will have to contend with McCain's incredible strength there. I am predicting second for Romney again.

So, is the MSM going to call Romney a longshot now, and stop reporting on him?

Hmm?

Why the different standards? What if Ron Paul's campaign told you, like Giuliani (who Ron Paul generally seems to be doing better than) that his strategy is to do very well on Super Tuesday? Would you simply take his word on it, like you will with Giuliani? I have seen all the networks cover Giuliani multiple times per day all during the Iowa caucuses since and all during the day yesterday. Everytime Rudy wanted to speak, a news crew was there to oblige him. Yet he is doing so poorly that no one in their right mind would believe he will win the nomination given current indicators. But, do we expect the MSM to stop covering him? Will they start calling him a long shot, a spoiler, or a dark horse? It's obvious with how little support he apparently has that he is *fringe* (look up the definition.)

Why do I doubt that the treatment and respect all of these candidates will get leading up to Super Tuesday will be MUCH different than Ron Paul will get? Regardless of the fact, that he is essentially "hanging in there" just as much as these other guys.

So, there you go. Questions for you. Why don't YOU explain why this HAS been happening and will continue to happen? Dispel our "conspiracy theory."