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

[American Citizen]

Here's the thing...I support Ron Paul because the guy is the only person running that has tax paying citizen's interests as his first priority. He wants to protect our rights, privacy, hard earned money, and constitution.

People don't support Ron Paul for silly reasons like he belongs to a certain party. They don't support him because he promises them government money. They don't support him because he is a front runner. They support him because he is ideas are the most American.

Bozo journalists such as this take pleasure in poking fun at Mr. Paul for what ever reason. However, please keep in mind that this man has gained support despite the media's efforts. Unlike with other candidates who have their message trumpeted almost like advertising daily in stories from the papers and networks, people had to exert effort to find out about this man. The had to show genuine care and enthusiasm brought about not from hype but substance. When they found out about him they liked what they saw / heard.

Yet instead of seeing the beauty in what Ron Paul has done, writers more interested in being witty and creating a buzz than being good men and women providing fellow citizens solid information make jokes and take shots. The way I see it the jokes on them. Here we have a man willing to serve for us in way laid out by our founding fathers and what was supposed to be one of our greatest establishments mocks him.

Regardless of outcome and what the Andrew Malcolms of the world say, Ron Paul is the person I would to be our leader.

[Justin Daw]

The American people have become comfortable with tyranny. So called "economic conservatives" have become comfortable with policing the globe. The democrats are still looking for ways to spend even more money that we don't have in the form of universal health care.

Those seem like a few reasons.

Whether or not Ron Paul makes it to the top or not, the message of true freedom and liberty is spread further and further with every interview, every speech, every townhall meeting. People are becoming excited and active. The match didn't break, the fire of liberty was ignited in 1775. Only a few of us still remember that.

[anon4rp]

I think Ron Paul's loss stemmed from a combination of factors.
1. Inefficient and ineffective use of campaign resources (only $300k in TV ads in NH, most of which are quite bad and show little of the candidate)
2. The rudeness and obnoxiousness of some supporters (e.g. the bunch that yelled at Bill Clinton "9/11 was an inside job -- Go Ron Paul!"), as well as the over-saturation of Ron Paul propaganda in the State, and the fact that some supporters were very, very, in your face (e.g. showing up at almost every other candidate's event and yelling, being disruptive)
3. Losing the focus on Ron Paul's anti-war message, which is what initially attracted so many people to him. It's shocking that John "100 years in Iraq" McCain got 44% of the anti-war Republican vote according to CNN's exit polling.
4. Really bad official campaign advertising. Hell, 30s from YouTube of Ron Paul speaking would have been better than the fake, plastic tripe we got.

Where to from here? I'm not sure. It's a pretty sad day as a pro-life, anti-war Republican who has no one else to vote for in this election, because there's no one else who holds my views on those two decisive issues.

The official campaign seems to be running a 50 state strategy, with the goal of garnering as many delegates as possible, but I don't think they accounted for the anti-momentum of coming in 5th twice in a row. He'll probably come 4th or 5th in Michigan, and I expect he'll come 5th again in South Carolina.

I think the question going through many supporters minds is "If not New Hampshire, then where?" NH was supposed to be the state tailor made for Ron Paul's message, the state with the fierce independent streak that would embrace him and start the long trudge to the nomination. Instead, we had better luck in the cornfields of Iowa.

I don't think he's down and out, but the campaign can't just run more of the same if they want to win. They need to reign in rude supporters, focus the message on a point that wins over Republican voters, hit McCain and the other warmongers hard where it hurts, emphasize Paul's conservative values and faith. They haven't been doing that very effectively. E.g. I can't believe Huckabee got the Home School's endorsement, when Ron Paul's record is amazing on home schooling and Huckabee's is horrendous.

Honestly though, at this point, barring a miracle of campaign management, I don't see much of a chance. It'll probably be McCain/Huckabee v. Clinton/Obama in November, with predictable results (Democratic blowout).

[Dr. John Grassam]

Since I see no others I might be the first. It is sad that people still vote for who they think looks the best or instills the most hope speaking in generalities (Obama and Clinton). Or they vote just to say they voted. The fact that the people of New Hampshire think that Senator McCain reflects CHANGE leaves me speechless. Ron Paul is the only candidate speaking of the potential economic crisis headed our way. He is a true Republican (fiscal conservative and small government). This is not doom and gloom( unfortunately it sounds that way) but a potential reality. Buckle up America we are in for a bumpy ride. I pray it will not turn into a depression. As a doctor I here it from all my patients(times are tough or the money is not there). I will say it must be nice for politicians to know their checks always cash indifferent of the economical situation. I will cast my vote here in Florida for Dr. Paul knowing that I did more than just vote on face value or typical campaign rhetoric about hope or change. We desperately need more honest politicians(like Paul) in Washington who won't pander to the different crowds they address but stay on principle. No matter what the outcome Dr.Paul has lit a beacon of light of what can be. That politics and honesty can go hand in hand even in Washington D.C. Thank You Dr. Ron Paul I do hope you run as an Independent

[Ben Yogman]

"Does Ron Paul's political fate even matter in the larger picture?",

If you don't think Ron Paul's fate matters, why is any of this worthy of your attention? It's pretty obvious that this is sour grapes. If you dislike the man and what he stands for, that's fine, but address it honestly.

Ron Paul matters because of his libertarian ideals, which are quite a departure from the both the Republican party line, and an even larger departure from the largess and big brother state they create once elected. He matters because of his "candor, constitutional clarity and congressional consistency".

No, fifth place isn't a victory by any stretch of the imagination. But, if you're looking at this as a sign of a campaign that has peaked, you'll be very sorely disappointed. Remember, a couple scant percentage points separated him from Giuliani, the supposed front-runner in this race for a long time. You'd look awfully foolish asking whether Ron Paul matters if he had beaten Giuliani again. Does it really make sense to do so now? Nope.

[Paul C Graham]

When I began backing RP in the late spring/early summer, I never imagined that he would have gone this far. My hope was that he would stay in the debates long enough to cause people to question the current political paradigm.
I admit that I became hopeful that he could have gone farther and that the polls could be, in fact, be wrong a la Dewey vs. Truman. I think he will show stronger in SC and elsewhere, but this does not mean he will win the nomination. I very muchg doubt that.
BUT, what he has done by awaking thousands of people to the ideas of liberty and strict constitutionalism is not going away regardless of how the election turns out. It is, truly, the first shot in a revolution, of which this is but the first battle. RP is not the message, but the messanger. If you don't get that, then you don't get what it is that is going on at all...
Paul C. Graham
Columbia, SC
"Dixie"

[Walt]

What's to say, we need to work harder to get Dr Pauls word out. You only have to look at the stock market to understand the monetary crisis and the news to see the crisis of our Iraq intervention. It does amaze me that the economy has been left out of the debates and Americans are looking through rose tinted glasses while the ship is sinking.

[Charles]

I appreciate the chance to give my thoughts. I support Ron Paul and I have to be honest, I did expect more support in New Hampshire. That said, I don't think it changes the fact that Ron Paul has the best platform. He is telling the truth about the Constitution and how it can cure the problems we face.
Almost all of the problems our country faces come from not following it.

Even if Ron Paul does not win the Republican nomination, he has done a huge service to our country by talking about the real solutions. The Democrats have no answers, nor do the Republicans. The money he has raised and the support he does have shows I am not alone in agreeing with him.

I will not vote for a Republican or Democrat ever again that is a choice between the lesser of two evils. I will support the one who honors and obeys the Constitution. If I have to vote Libertarian or Constitutional Party so be it.

Another great thing about his candidacy is it shows me the hypocrisy of those such as Fox News and the talk show hosts who rightly point out the hypocrisy on the left. They have no solutions either. How sad that the majority of Americans don't realize how true the statement is that the founders of our country would be ashamed of us.

And as for the media who think they can control the message and fool the people forever, you are in for a rude awakening. We will start our own media, learn from our mistakes and continue fighting for the truth. We will do our homework and bypass your gatekeeper controls and take our message directly to the people.

I will continue trusting in God, the Constitution, and working to solve the problems we face. I'm glad to see the message of freedom being passed to another generation and excited how the message of freedom is not extinguished.by the enemies within our own government.

This is a movement...We are not going away...We are more connected than ever. We will support Ron Paul and we will be back if we lose. The Revolution is growing and the establishment will see that they cannot stomp out our message. Why? Because we have the truth on our side. I always knew that this would be an uphill battle all the way. There's not a dime's difference between the two parties. Long live the revolution!

[Jim]

Maybe this country is not ready for the truth, but the truth is coming in the form of a heavy economic recession. Maybe when the dollar is 10/1 against all other currencies which causes gas and groceries to cost as much as gold, the country will be ready for a candidate who actually discusses flawed foreign, economic and monetary policy. Otherwise let's go status quo.....

This article, by the way, is dung....

[Thomas Lewis]

Ron Paul, did not get $20 million until Dec. 16th, not a lot of time to spend it between then and now. He did receive $5 million in Q3 and used that to stay competitve with Guliani and Thompson and Huckabee. The other candidates clearly get better press and have better name recognition. If pundits would treat all candidates as viable rather than write them off before the first vote is cast it may appear to be more fair. Clearly the Obama is going to win in a landslide press prediction shows most insiders are caught up in their own glory rather than letting people make the right choices for themselves. I will give another $100 to Ron Paul just to keep the message alive, it is worth every penny.

[Talcott]

Winning is getting your ideas thought about.

From the very liberal firedoglake...

CasualObserver January 9th, 2008 at 5:34 am
37

Nothing has changed, in my opinion. Clinton remains the old-guard, heavily processed, shrink-wrapped democratic offering. Obama and Edwards are as close as the Democratic party can come to a truly different course. True, fundamental change–including drastic reductions in military spending, a reaffirmation of constitutional principles, and a rejection of american empire–will not be offered to american voters.
reply

[Jacques Poirier]

Gee...I don't know. We are all monkeys. Female chimps travel in the middle of the pack to feel protected. They swoon on MacGorilla's large jaws, Gugu's promise to protect them from the terrrists, Romulus prominent eyebrow and dirty little eyes, the tearful Clit, etc...But they gave 3% only to a 72 yr old waiving ideas they cannot really understand. As for the male monkeys, their fear of ridicule, being caught with a loser...that really sucks! I am not American, but a monkey I am also. My deepest salute to the 10%+ of American monkeys who stood behind the man with the biggest cojones of all, Ron Paul. Do not feel sadness, give yourself 4 years and the events will vindicate you. Let your organization grow and develop all the 'YES' stuff that follows the 'NO' ideas of Dr Paul. Your ranks will lose a few monkeys but gain a lot of serious chimps. By default the entire colony will swing your way. Organisms purify themselves naturally every so often. Ron Paul ideas are finally riping and the banana will be grabbed in 4 years. Unless of course economic pandemonium occurs before next fall, a possibility that the present administration is trying hard to postpone until Clit is sworn in.
I know this comment sounds awfully biased against females and I apologize to all woman inculding my own who thinks ron paul is 'cute' but a little 'nutty'. We love you as you are, keeper of the status quo in the middle of the pack.

[Larry]

Live Free or DieBold!

[Rob]

One thing I believe we have learned (after beating Giuliani in IA and now Thompson in NH) is that RP is now a proven top tier candidate. The Money raised and his Primary showing proves that he deserves more respect. Of course the RP "A" plan is still on the table which is to continue to educate the public while at the same time continuing to be a "thorn in the side" of the GOP. SO IN MANY WAYS I WOULD SAY THE FUN IS JUST BEGINNING!!! The "Revolution" was never about the man RP as much as it was about the ideas he represents, so if we must go-down let's go down in a Blaze Of Glory...Sometimes Andrew even if you lose you still WIN... As we ALL REMEMBER THE ALAMO and the Power which was unleashed as a result. People are waking-up (PERHAPS MORE SLOWLY THEN WE ORGINALLY HOPED) to the fact that there is no longer a Left / Right but only and up / down... So Vote for any Candidate you choose (besides RP) and the end results will be the same More WAR, More BIG GOV, More "Illegals" weighing down the system...as long as those facts remain their will always be fertile ground for the seeds of Revolution!

[greg]

there is no doubt in my mind that there is a certain amount of election fraud going on which has already been documented. however we also have a general public who can not understand any of the important issues. maybe if we all just get an increase on our credit line and we allow another 10 million immigrants to enter our country things will be ok. we can elect someone like
Obama to appear with Oprah Winfrey to solve our current issues. Or we can allow our monachry of Clinton/ Bush to help propel oil to $200 per barrel and invade Iran. After all the speed boats ( Irans powerful naval insurgency ) that threatened our paltrily aircraft carriers in the gulf the other day could be a provacation for " world war 3 " which the Bush/ Clinton war machine would see as justified. Then we can all invest in Haliburtun with our new currency the "Amero".

[Bill B]

I'm a Ron Paul supporter and I can't help but be happy that Fox snubbed him from the debate. At the ABC debate, Paul did a good job of explaining his views like a civil gentleman. What the country saw was a man that appeared somewhat frail and courteous, get overtaken and ganged up on by a group of sharks that are at the top of their political game. I believe they stripped him of what the public may perceive as leadership skills (that the public looks for in lieu of common sense). The political gamesmanship was in full swing when the candidates all smiled when Paul spoke (check this loon out America!), or rudely spoke over him in a posturing manner of dominance.

In a country where statistically, tall men receive better opportunities in the work force, are considered to seen as leaders, Ron Paul's brilliance is diminished by the "perceived". John Kennedy sure was a good looking leader when he stood next to Richard Nixon.... The perception was good enough to give him the nomination.

[Josh]

The sky has fallen..or has it ?
He needs to continue to do what he has been doing, stay on message. I like and support him because he is straight forward. If he started backing the Iraq war and speaking about terrorism and islamo fascism I would not take him seriously.
I personally like the fact that he stays on message and does not really change it based upon the situation. The problem with wanting to win so badly such that he would start changing his message would mean that when he got in office he would do anything to stay there. Nobody needs that.
He would be wise to get some one to write him some one-liners to explain his positions. It is really kind of sad that Huck can take his positions and explain them in the needed sound bite to the ill informed and clueless. However, I really like the fact that he can articulate his positions so well, something that Huckabee does not seem to be able to do.
We can say for sure that his support is not 4% and considering that he was at 0 when he started and completely written off these were good showings albeit disappointing but good nonetheless.
I donated to his campaign so that he would stay and fight for what he believes in because I believe that his goals are admiral, smart, well thought out and will be of economic benefit to everyone.
If anything he has shown that there is a large part of the population that wants change.
I was really hoping he would do a little better in New Hampshire but with 4% of married women voters voting for him. Ooo boy there is something that needs to change; however, if the good people of New Hampshire want to take someone that is willing to commit to 100 years in Iraq over someone like Ron Paul then quite possibly you are right and I am wrong about what the country wants but that would not change what it needs. It needs someone like Ron Paul more than it knows and no amount of goading by your self will change that reality. Just think if he loses you get to tell us what sorry little people we are and if he wins in the end, there are still a 1000 delegates to go I believe so this is far from over, you get to blame his sorry bunch of supporters for restoring the republic, the economy, removing the empire and moving towards peace.
100 more years of occupying Iraq or peace and trade with Iraq , I wonder which one looks better ? Hmmm , what do you think ?

[Pujete]

No big deal. We'll get 'em next time.
S.C. has a lot of military families and the troops support Paul.
Deal with it.

[Ron Throop]

I think Ron Paul campaign won. He didn't claim that the polls were wrong.
Now, as a media, get to work, and cover all platforms equally. Your job, my friendly fourth estate, is to report to the public. Let them decide.
Where the media hacks lose credibility is in their claim that nationwide, Ron Paul polls low... So why give him equal coverage.
Well, maybe he polls low because the media fails to equalize the field. All candidates with multi-state access to ballot are viable Presidential candidates. For a year and a half all we hear is "Clinton," "Guiliani." It is the Paul supporters who have lifted his candiadacy—specifically NOT the media.
If your paper gave equal word count to all candidates, Paul's numbers could soar. That is your failure. The Los Angeles Times are establishment gossip columnists. Like People magazine with corrupt politicians flashing toothy grins on the cover.

[Edward Mann]

And I'm sure the SLANDEROUS newspaper article THE MORNING OF the election had nothing to do with his low numbers? And the polls telling people he couldn't win didn't have any impact on their decision whether to vote for him or not? The fact is the media controls the election results.

[Mall]

Quite simply, most Americans have gotten used to a government that takes care of them...no candidate platforming on personal responsibility will ever win.

[ALL4CHANGE]

Its really all about educating the masses. Unfortunately we don't have the help of the MSM like some of the other candidates. I mean really, if you look at all the other so called change agents, do they really have a plan for this change, do they even have a platform they have stood by, the answer is no, and you will see that if you take the time to look. All of Dr. Pauls stances have real substance and are backed by the education history provides. To say that there are not consequences to the way we interact with the rest of the world is either arrogance or ignorance. Since we were kids we have been taught to treat people the way we would like to be treated ourselves, does this not apply to us as a nation? Are we to continue on our present course and expect things to be different for our children? Again, arrogance, ignorance or insanity.
The people of New Hampshire just voted in a candidate that has publicly announced he would approve of an additional century in Iraq, not to mention
the other nations of the middle east. Granted McCain, even if nominated, would have little chance of success against the democratic nominee; this is a disturbing situation. On top of this, we have growing economic concerns that no other candidate other than Ron Paul is willing to adequately address. Why not bring back the gold standard, why not cut way back on spending, why not do away with government agencies that serve very little purpose other than to cause higher taxes and why not bring our troops home from places like Germany, Korea, and the many countries in the middle east. Just this one measure would make us a much strnger nation than many people seem to realize. Well, I could go on forever about this. Hopefully at least one reader will take notice because it really is all about educating the masses.

[Bryan]

The problem is that "the media" is biased and there is a very good chance what they chose to cover will turn into a self fulfilling prophecy.

The media has been putting Obama's name everywhere they could for the last 2 years. Before they started doing that he was a no name junior senator from Illinois. Now everybody knows who he is. There was no reason for it, at the time there was no notable characteristics (I would even say there still is none) that distinguished him from the crowd except if you chose to play the race card.

Ron Paul was systematically ignored the entire time (even by republican and conservative new sources) while other candidates were promoted because of their perceived name recognition (Rudy and Thompson). Then when the media outlets were forced to give Paul some form of recognition they called him a long shot with no chances, a maverick, and nut job.

Say something often enough and it'll come true, it is a very well known psychological principle and the media knows this. Coming back and saying "I told you so" when you hold that kind of position is both irresponsible and unfortunately, all too expected.

[Bernie Schillo]

Ron Paul may not have won the primary, but any politician who speaks with integrity, refuses to take cheap-shots at his opponents, and has a consistant voting record is a winner in my book. I would rather vote for a man I disagree with who means what he says than someone who says what I want to hear & will not follow through.

Bernie

[Steven Yantis]

Why he lost? It's simple. Vote fraud.

What he needs to do to realistically resurrect his candidacy for the Republican nomination in the other states coming up so rapidly.?

His candidacy isn't dead yet.

I suggest that he just shake it off and go for the gusto.

Transparent ballot boxes and hand counted, color coded ballots would be great for all elections..

Continued pressure upon the mainstream media via boycotts and lawsuits is a must.
They have no right to decide who our candidate choices are to be.
It's so obvious to me what they are doing that it disgusts me to the point of nausea.
They are to report the news not make the news.
This "Wag The Dog" crap needs to stop or "unintended consequences" will most likely bring them two their knees.