Ron Paul makes his move

Rep. Ron Paul, the oldest person remaining in the presidential race and the only one who's also simultaneously running for Congress (you know, on the off chance he doesn't reach the White House), came in second in the Montana Republican caucuses, right behind former Gov. Mitt Romney.

The 72-year-old onetime ob-gyn, who was the most successful fundraiser among all Republicans last quarter, got 25% of the GOP vote in Big Sky Country to Romney's 38%. Paul also beat Sen. John McCain, who got only 22%, and Mike Huckabee, who trailed with 15%.

In North Dakota, Paul, with 21%, fell behind McCain, at 23%, and Romney, at 36%.

Elsewhere, Paul, a strict constitutionalist who opposes the Iraq war and in 1988 ran for....

president on the Libertarian ticket, slipped back to his familiar single-digit showings, despite the determined, earnest efforts of thousands of outspoken Ron Paul Revolutionaries, including an endorsement from THE Jane Roe, an eight-state ad campaign, not one but two appearances on Jay Leno's show and stunts such as hiring a plane to circle downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday dragging a giant Ron Paul banner.

With incomplete results, Paul looked to finish in the Golden State with about 4% of the GOP vote, way behind Huckabee at 12%, Romney at 25% and McCain at 44%. Alaska, where Paul had thought he might do well, also turned out to be disappointing, as Romney easily won.

In West Virginia, Paul's forces did gain three of the state's 18 GOP convention delegates in a deal to throw in with the winning Huckabee supporters and deny Romney his expected win there.

In Maine, where the arcane uncommitted caucus system defies explanation, Paul forces finished third in voting recently but believe they will end up ahead of McCain in terms of state convention delegates and second only to Romney. Paul also finished second to Romney in the Nevada caucuses and ahead of the now departed Rudy Giuliani in Iowa.

In other Super Tuesday states, some with incomplete results, Paul's showing was not so super. He finished last virtually everywhere -- with 8% in Colorado; 6% in New York and Tennessee; 5% in New Jersey, Arkansas and Illinois; 4% in Missouri and Arizona; and 3% in Oklahoma, Alabama, Massachusetts and Utah, though he beat Huckabee there.

Many in Paul's dedicated legions of supporters profess incomprehension over how he does not attract wider support among voters. The only explanation they can imagine is that he would do much better in elections if it wasn't for a mainstream media bias that forces supporters to conspire on the Internet, has barred him from a major New Hampshire debate and often eliminates him from regular candidate listings.

For instance, The Times' recent tepid Editorial Board endorsement of John McCain in the California Republican primary discussed every remaining GOP candidate except Paul, who's outlasted more famous competitors like Giuliani and Fred Thompson and is the only GOP candidate to increase his fundraising  every quarter last year.

Many will now fill the comments section beneath this item with complaints about the mainstream media's bias and little recognition that the words themselves in this item contradict that claim in this forum. And, of course, they are welcome, as always.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Chad_Underdonk]

Malcolm, I hear you. But there is some validity to the claim that if he had gotten a free conduit to the general audience as have other candidates he would have done better. This blog from West Virginia gives credence to that: http://deathby1000papercuts.blogspot.com/2008/02/ron-paul-speaks-at-wv-gop-convention.html

The truth is that we will never know what could have been in an honest competition. But considering the number of people that I hear and read about talking about voting based on values that Ron Paul embodies more than any other candidate I can only assume that they were thrown off scent of a candidate that was worth their attention.

Thanks for the opportunity to soapbox for a moment ; )

[Ron]

"Many will now fill the comments section beneath this item with complaints about the mainstream media's bias and little recognition that the words themselves in this item contradict that claim in this forum. "

Strange wording, Andrew. Surely you're not stating that the fact that you have a Ron Paul blog proves that there wasn't blatant mainstream media bias against Dr. Paul? Exclusion from the Fox debate, six minutes or so in the msnbc debate, etc. Not to mention truly strange things. Why, for instance, such focus on those newsletters, and the question of whether or not Dr. Paul is homophobic when he clearly is not, wearas Huckabee is on the record saying homosexuality is an abominible sin and AIDS patients should be quarantined? There is a mainstream media bias against Paul. But thanks for the blog.

[Bob A]

Andrew and Don... thanks for your unbiased coverage of Ron Paul throughout the election cycle. Kudos.

[Stephen]

Voter fraud! Do you really think people are that excited about McCain or Romney? NOT. The country has been stolen. I witnessed fraud in my precinct and we're suing, but it won't do any good. A bill should be passed into law that anyone who commits voter fraud is executed for treason.

[Jacob]

Okay, my comment on the biased media ;-D
Maybe if the news woulda mentioned that endorsement by "THE Jane Roe", instead of going on and on about some celebraties endorseing mccain the same day.
Maybe a little news about how Ron Paul received more money, from more indivisual donors, of our active service men, then the other three rep. canidates combined. Little news about that on cnn the night before primaries woulda done him some good. I think these leading news agencies need to be sued for their bias, and made to actualy give fair and balanced news.

[Stephen]

Voter fraud! Do you really think people braved the weather because they were so excited to vote for "son of" Cain or Romney? NOT. This country has been stolen. Your vote doesn't matter. It's the ones that count the votes. I witnessed fraud in my precinct (candidates for delegate who are old guard politicians were counting the ballots) and we're suing, but it won't matter. A bill should be passed into law that mandates anyone caught committing voter fraud must be executed for treason.

[Drew]

Andrew, I'm sorry, but just because a blog posting is sponsored by a major print outfit does not make it mainstream. It is subject to the same audience that is already educated enough to go out and find out about the candidates on their own.

The problem is that broadcast media is just allowing these candidates to outright lie to the public and they do nothing to counteract that. When Ron Paul DOES get mention in the media, it is often accompanied by some snide or dismissive remark.

But tell me, why do the Fox News goons allow Romney to stand in front of the people of the United States and trumpet that he is the best candidate for the economy because he was a CEO? Or even a governor for that matter? Any dimwit with a high school economics course can tell you that monetary policy, tax policy and government waste (generating more taxes and pouring money OUT of our economy through defecit spending) are THE most important factors to the US economy.

Romney has ZERO experience in monetary policy or currency control, meanwhile Ron Paul has written books on it.

Romney is well-known for underhanded tax raises in Massachusetts. With one hand he cut taxes and with the other hand he simultaneously instituted a complex system of "fees" that resulted in the average taxpayer dishing out more of their hard-earned wages than before. Ron Paul wants to end the unconstitutional Federal Income Tax and abolish the IRS. Which, by the way, would leave the Federal government with the same revenue it had in 2000. To put that in perspective, ending the Iraq war and closing down the IRS would leave us in BETTER shape than we were WITH the taxes.

Romney almost made me puke when I heard him talking about making healthcare affordable for everyone. He takes a near-socialist position on this and wants to do it through government regulation and subsidies. This is just one example of how Romney intends to be yet another false Republican and grow government. Reagan was a great uniter, but even he grew government.

If we're ever going to fix this country, it isn't by eliminating pork barrel legislation and saving what amounts to a few pennies here and there. It is going to be by ending a war that is going to end up costing us $1 trillion dollars. For effect, that is $1,000,000,000,000. To put that a little bit more in perspect, if you counted as fast as you could 24 hours a day with no breaks for the rest of your life, you likely wouldn't even reach 1 billion.

We can save this country by closing agencies like the IRS and National Council for Women that receive hundreds of millions of dollars in financing each year. The NCW is responsible for terrible waste and achieves little to nothing (have you ever heard of them?) and yet they continue to exist. Meanwhile, there are children who are digging through the dumpster at your local McDonalds hoping that someone couldn't finish all their fries. Does that sound right to you? Who is the true humanitarian?

Ron Paul wants to give you 20-30% of your paycheck back every week immediately. That sounds a whole lot better than a measly $300 once every 3 years when the economy recesses.

For educated America, Ron Paul is the only rational choice. We realize that some of his ideas may be a little wacky, but you know what? That is why we have Congress and the Judicial Branch. Checks and balances. Before we can fix anything else, we HAVE to fix our economy and Ron Paul is the only candidate who can do that.

Not Mitt Romney.
Not John McCain.
Not Mike Huckabee.

None of them have the experience.

Ron Paul does. Think about it. It's your country.

For more information on Ron Paul, please visit ronpaul2008.com

[Matthew Glover]

I hate to ruin your delusions of grandeur, but an op/ed blog buried in the LA Times website doesn't exactly qualify as mainstream media.

(It must be too hard to find since you did. Actually, it draws so much traffic it's always also listed on the homepage. But I am glad you and hopefully others finally agree with me that this blog is not MSM. I've been arguing that all fall with you guys. Glad you came around.)

[Karen]

Thank you Andrew. I couldn't find any news online last night, nor could I find much through watching either CNN or ABC. In frustration I finally just took a sleeping pill and snoozed. Thanks again for the information I wanted so badly on the candidate my friends, family, military family and I think would do this country so much good! I'd hug you if you weren't so far away.

[brent]

Thank you, Andrew. We all knew deep down that Ron Paul's campaign was an uphill battle. I appreciate the numerous columns you've written and the obvious desire to take him serious as a candidate and do your part to give him equal face time.

[brent]

Thank you, Andrew. We all knew deep down that Ron Paul's campaign was an uphill battle. I appreciate the numerous columns you've written and the obvious desire to take him serious as a candidate and do your part to give him equal face time.

[Mike Clapp]

America and the world know we Americans say one thing and do another. This is not a big surprise. Too many people I know say they believe he is most qualified and has the right integrity. Someone needs to ask the people if Ron Paul led by 60% in polls, and there were no partiy affiliations, "would they vote for Ron Paul".

If a political party leadership told their members to vote "yes" on a bill they didn't read, is it treason? Afterall they have pledged their loyalty to this group over the american people. PATRIOT ACT

Who will recall/impeach the congress when they are the branch empowered to impeach?

I for one have taken Dr. Paul's course "conservatism 101" and passed. By scientific polling principles the 5-10% of the conservative country represented by those that actually voted translate to about 5 million people who believe in these ideas. That will grow as apathy wanes.

Take a look at those candidates that are now taking (saying) similar stands and compare this to what they were saying just 6 months ago. Once Ron is gone, I am sure you will see the adoption of a lot of his ideas.

[Delling]

Is it possible to "lose" nearly every battle and still "win" the war?

However disappointed I may be by the lack of state victories on Tuesday, it was still a good day. Huckabee and Romney did better than I expected, leaving the Republican race more wide open than it was before.

Ron could be in much worse shape. He still has boatloads of cash and dedicated supporters willing to see this thing all the way through. September is far away yet so lots of interesting things could happen.

Let's hope for a decent showing in Washington state. The first county won by Paul was Jefferson county. If he won Washington as his first state, that'd be sweet.

Paul got good percentages of support in Alaska, Montana and Minnesota, not too bad in Colorado, so hopefully he'll build on that momentum in the NW.

[Michael]

Andrew, thanks for you column.

Hopefully everyone realizes that 'news' does not count towards the 'equal air time' that the FEC requires. And when you have 3 24hour national news stations mentioning nothing but McCain/Romney and Clinton/Obama, that tends to skew the polls they then conduct.

Look at how Huckabee won more states than Romney WITHOUT the media gushing news stories all over him. Just imagine if the media covered Paul with that intensity?

How can anyone not vote for someone who wants to uphold our Constitution?

How can any news stations/paper not report on the fact that the Patriot act directly violates the Constitution, yet there are 3 candidates running for office who violated their oath of office and voted to allow the government to perform warrantless searches/seizures?

[liam malone]

Silly person

[Sameso]

This ONLINE BLOG may be an exception to the media blackout, but online support is clearly not the issue. Have your blogs been printed in the LA Times? Even then, the LA Times would only be one paper in the crowd of the entire media. On the rare occasion he was mentioned, he was often marginalized. Therefore the media, in general, dissuaded possible supporters from voting for a candidate that "can't win."

[R]

"and little recognition that the words themselves in this item contradict that claim in this forum."

Ah yes, the irrefutable influence that the LA Times BLOGS site enjoys, from the breadbasket to the beltway. The Ron Paul Revolution hereby acquiesces to the apparent balance and objectivity that has fallen over the TV, Press, Radio, and any news site beginning in "www" made apparent by a single blog post that may or may not appear on the third or fourth page of a Google News Search today. Fair at last. Fair at last.

[Trent G.]

Thank you once again Malcolm for even mentioning Dr. Paul. It's more than many other media outlets are willing to do.

[Kevin]

Just because you mention Paul here doesn't mean you vindicate the rest of the corporate media for ignoring Ron Paul or for ignoring the fact Gravel hasn't called it quits either.

The corporate media should really clarify its coverage and say---We cover those who we do not disagree with and anybody else who rubs us the wrong way will not be compared closely with those we think can win. "Can" being deceptive because any amount of coverage similar to the coverage Clinton got for injecting race into the election could skyrocket Paul's or Gravel's numbers.

[Jim]

This was a fairly good article until the last paragraph. I think you will find Paul supporters generally praise anyone in the media that gives our candidate any positive attention.

The fact is when people hear Dr. Paul’s message they get it, too bad they are not hearing all sides before they have to make a decision.

[Norma Sullivan]

I have always been a republican. I voted for Ron Paul.
I will not be voting for McCain if he wins the primary election. I know there are many republicans who feel the same way. As a matter of fact, I have decided to change my party affiliation to independent in order to vote for the independent party who will be in this November election.

[Andy Brown]

The fact that Paul has gained as much support as he HAS comforts me. Republican primary or not, Paul is a Libertarian. Some would call him a progressive Republican but he's really just an old-fashioned Constitutionalist. The man wants this country to be what is was ALWAYS intended to be: a union of states run by the PEOPLE.

The other candidates are opportunists and virtual carbon copies of each other.

[Dave]

Don't forget you guys in the media called him kook/longshot/crack pot... just like children in grade school.

[Robert]

I'm a Paul supporter and maybe it's not the media. Maybe Americans are just plain stupid. They spout "change" yet vote for the status quo. Idiots! No wonder the rich rape and pillage these morons!

[Steve - San Francisco]

Ron Paul is fighting the good fight. You'd think his plan to abolish the IRS and to bring the troops home would be a huge winning strategy. But, voters are sheep, and they can't think beyond what is spoon fed for them on the tube. If there were a history test required to vote, Ron Paul would win in a landslide.

[Tyranny]

Contrary to your insinuations, I think this was a fair article. You did not start off mentioning Ron Paul as a "longshot" or "dark horse" candidate as EVERY other article Ron Paul has been mentioned in has done. You stated the facts and kept your opinions of Ron Paul to yourself. This is reporting as it should be. At least there's one true journalist remaining in the world.

You do have to admit though, if more outlets have covered Ron Paul's campaign with an open mind, like Romney or McCain - would people still be saying, "Ron who?" But, in a world where Britney Spears makes the Nightly News and Natalie Holloway updates make it on to Entertainment Tonight - it's becoming harder and harder to differentiate between what's considered "entertainment" and actual "news".

Pop-Politics maybe? Sounds like exactly what Romney is looking for. "Let's sit in a debate and argue about who said what when instead of discussing health care or foreign policy. Americans will eat that up." And it appears they have.

[Mike Byers]

Thank you for writing about candidate Ron Paul. I am a supporter of Dr Paul and I am disappointed in the lack of media coverage he gets as are most of his supporters. My local newspaper shows pictures of all the remaining candidates in there coverage of the race except Dr Paul. Whether this is intentional or not I can not know. It does hurt his campaign as it leads the casual reader to think that he is no longer in the race. Now his only viable option is probably a 3rd party run and he will most likely face the same media exclusion. So much for democracy and so much for a free market of ideas. We'll be left with the choice between two pretty terrible evils and a very narrow range of debate. The two major parties only disagree about trivialities. On the man issues like a sound monetary system that does not promote inflation or an insane foreign policy that we can't afford and actually makes us less secure the two parties march in lockstep towards disaster. Thank you for providing this forum.

[Stephen]

Andrew,

It's one thing to get mentioned in a blog on the LA Times, it's quite another to be systemically removed from every single broadcast television station's coverage of the elections. Some even go so far as to say there are only three candidates running on the Republican side. The media should be proud of the election they've masterfully orchestrated for us.

[TBone]

Andrew,
Thanks for the objective report - especially reporting the difference between the preference polls (which are the only results reported in caucus states and have no direct effect in getting the candidacy) and the delegate count.

In my precinct in MN Ron Paul had only 18 pcnt of the straw poll votes, yet we captured (at least) 40% of the delegates.

[Greg]

Andrew, I've been following your writing for the past month or so, and I'm pleased with your fair and balanced reporting. As a Ron Paul supporter and voter, I do not see our effort as failed. Congressman Paul has ignited almost a million people over the past year into a very important message. A message of non-nation building, constitutional wars, ending the Patriot act, limited government, and securing our country from terrorism the way the 9/11 Commision report suggested.

As a result of the election there is now a movement to chenge our government. We the supporters will run for office to try and implement these changes. Dr. Ron paved the way, and it is up to us donors to make the changes. This campaign did not fail. It was an enormous success. And in time, I believe we will look back on this election, and remember the message Dr. Paul delivered.

America will come their senses once we bankrupt our young. Let's hope we don't get there, and we can make these changes from the bottom up.

My best to you and our country. Let us together work for freedom according to our founding fathers. Without remembering our history we are doomed to fail.

[mana]

Nice article Andrew. thanks...
I will forgive all the people who didn't vote Ron Paul but history will never forgive you guys. You guys will keep paying these endless wars for at least four more years.
Ron Paul won already for standing against mass media and corrupt politicians and silly party politics.
Go Ron Paul

[Eric Sundwall]

I suspect that Mr. Malcolm will begin to miss the paternal I told you so's to the yearning Paul masses.

[Josh]

Ok, it was not the best showing that a candidate could have.
But I could well say that about any of the republican's.
McCain is halfway there and Ron Paul is living on a prayer. (He could well be dead an gone but I would like him to stay and fight on and keep getting the message out.)

To me there still seems to be a long way to go and just maybe with the delegates that he garners he may still be able to make a difference in the current primary.

I know for myself he has already made a difference as I am no longer a life long democratic and I am certainly not a republican in the Bush, McCain , Romney, and Huckabee sense.

Thanks Andrew, good article and thank you for pointing out that he has been left out of many MSM events. I know friend who even asked is he still on the ballot as close as a couple of days ago because they never heard about him on the news and didn't see him listed as a candidate.

Hmm , let me point them to this blog just maybe they will get a better knowledge of what is going on :-)

[Jeff]

Man...I'm bummed. I expected a much better performance than we had last night. I just checked the daily dose on RP's website, and a nice post about fighting the good fight and hanging in there, but...I'm afraid he's done. And if he's done, I'm done as well, as I refuse to hold my nose and vote.

[Charlotte]

Four reasons for Ron Paul's failures:
(1) Certainly, the lack of media coverage figures. Not being mentioned by any of the major networks' Feb 4 nightly broadcasts is indicative.
(2) People don't vote for candidates who are perceived as sure losers.
(3) Paul's campaign hasn't been able to reduce his message to soundbites.
(4) The welfare state is today part of the fabric of America. An old-school, Herbert Hoover Republican is an anachronism at a time when people look to the federal govt for every kind of hand-out, bail-out, and entitlement.

[Mike]

Thank you Andrew, you've been one of the few rare "MSM people" to honestly report on and talk about Dr. Paul and his supporters.

Under FEC rules ALL candidates (even Gravel! ;-) ) are supposed to get equal air time on all shows, papers, etc. and yet that most definitely didn't happen this time. The MSM picked our leaders and we are going to suffer the consequences of their actions.

Dr. Paul isn't done yet, nor are his supporters. People are talking about the actual delegate counts (which nobody is actually committed yet, debate the MSM's idealized view), the half of the nation that hasn't voted yet, and even a third party.

With the continuing collapse of the economy, the Iraq terrorists now looking outside the nation, and more incidents of torture and subversive tactics from our government Dr. Paul's predictions as well as his words will just continue to ring more soundly.

Why?

Because Dr. Paul is the only one speaking the truth.

[Vic]

I think a lot of voters think he's a kook. I did, until I actually did some homework. To understand Ron Paul it takes effort. He truly is the only respectable, uncompromising candidate. I think if more conservatives were brave enough to be intellectually honest with themselves, they'd come around to Dr. Paul's views on the Iraq war. His basis for opposing the war is rooted in a completely different ideology than the left's, and a sound ideology as well.

[Anthony]

Thanks for the coverage, you are one of the few... ABC's big coverage of Paul is "when will he drop out", while their poster boy, John McCain is shown as victorious though most of the delegates they list are not even bound yet... we all know most of media is just BS. The small portion that is well reported, is for the 20% or so of Americans who have taken the time to discern.

[Daniel Fard]

Andrew, a good article summarising Paul's results - especially for a UK citizen like me!

I think Ron Paul is doing very well - both in terms of election polls & delegate counts - considering his censorship by the majority of your national media. I find it' hugely impressive & exciting that the grassroots has managed to co-ordinate their common passions, many of whom were completely apathetic to politics (and especially politicians) before this election.

You could argue that Paul supporters are making excuses for their candidates low polling, but it's plain to see the large news networks have appointed their own front runners, and allowed them millions of dollars worth of free publicity in the form of news articles - Guiliani still gets more publicity from Paul, and he was flattened by the congressman in almost every caucus.

A disastrous consequence to this is many people now believe Paul has dropped out or 'can no longer win', therefore they are choosing to vote for another candidate.

I've done a fair bit of research about the U.S.A - and of late, it has truly lost it's way. I've learnt more of the torture you force people to endure at Guantanamo contrary to UN resolutions, you attack countries & murder innocent people to further your own corporate interests, you have very little regard for the civil liberties of your citizens and your politicians will lie to protect your corrupt actions, you care very little for supporting those who need basic healthcare (or even provide viable alternatives), you destroy your economy by spending trillions you simply do not have, causing widespread economic turmoil around the world, you allow corporations to dominate politics in the form of lobbyists, big military contracts and multi-national media companies - even your elections are severely flawed and wide open to corruption, with evidence they might even be rigged.

But above all that, America has forsaken it's constitution. In light of all the things above (and too many more to list unfortunately), you have ignored the one document which protects everything America stands for - liberty, justice, freedom, prosperity.

The Bush administration has made America the laughing-stock of the world and made enemies with many other countries needlessly. Unfortunately, the national televised media has censored the one man who stands against all the crimes committed against American's citizens and it's values, whose record and public standing are a truly outstanding example.

I have a lot of confidence the Ron Paul supporters will eventually unite and make their voices heard after this election - when many people will be suffering the painful consequences of your existing leader's actions.

Only then will America begin to heal.

[Paul Magliochetti]

here in ct I was handing out literature for Paul all day Tuesday, NO ONE not one person I talked to out of 50-75 people I talked to ever heard of him, NEVER HEARD OF HIM! The media has done an outstanding job of making sure this great man and his message of hope never gets heard

[Eric]

Do you that most American's are not educated enough to know that you can't continue the debt train forever. I don't know how the average American can not see that the government will have to take away almost everything we own one day to repay their debts and what they owe the seniors. No one else will repay them. But at that point will China own all the banks and companies because they have all our money? What will the government do when they have squeezed the lifeblood out of every hard working American with a 40-50% tax rate federally and 15% at the state level? At what point will they stop? Fascism? What if we want to be free? I want to be able to live in my debt free house and have the government leave me alone. Do you think the founding fathers meant this land to be a place that if you worked hard to pay for everything you own you could never stop working because of property taxes? What is wrong with this country is we have become a slave state. We cannot remember what it was like with out the shackles of debt on our hands and feet. Today I am sad for our country.

[Kelly Tucker]

Thank you for the article Andrew. My husband and I both voted for Ron Paul yesterday. We live in Tennessee. We really thought he would do well in this state. We were a bit disappointed at the results this morning. However, we weren't surprised. I do believe that the majority of the msm have treated Ron Paul unfairly throughout this process. I also believe that the majority of people in this country have been so dumbed down that they have lost all understanding of what once made this country great. My hope is that the few people, especially the young people, who have rallied for Ron Paul will now run for political offices on his platform. I just pray that it's not too late to turn this country around!

[Keith]

It's difficult for RP supporters to believe that the general public just doesn't support Ron. I don't understand why they have such a hard time grasping this concept. Most people who follow the races enough to make the effort to vote last night know who Paul is. And they declined to vote for him in droves. It's not the media's fault.

I hear the waaahmbulance coming.

[Daniel Castellano]

This Ron Paul supporter is willing to give you credit for covering Dr. Paul, as have several other online newspapers. Television appears to be the medium where the "media blackout" is most prominent; for example, last night a Philadelphia network affiliate showed Giuliani with 0 delegates, but omitted Ron Paul's count! Giuliani still gets more coverage out of the race than Ron Paul, even though Dr. Paul regularly outperformed Giuliani when he was in the race.

Since even local stations are in on the act, I doubt it's a deliberate design to ignore Ron Paul, but rather a symptom of a more general problem in the media to come up with a storyline, and be very slow to change its storyline in light of emerging facts. The media has been fixated on a McCain-Romney storyline for some time, ignoring Huckabee and Paul, even though Huckabee, as it turns out, was surprisingly viable in Super Tuesday. I wonder how he would have done if Anderson Cooper actually let him talk in the debate, and the media actually treated him as a viable candidate. Sadly, perception can shape reality.

[Flavia]

i can only think of a few reason why all this is happening; the media bias...the invisble ink(yeah invisble!),the inaccurate counting of ballots and the very low numbers of people who actually voted for Dr. Paul.

I think people Love the IRS, the CIA, Microchips and WAR but HATE HATE HATE FREEDOM thats it people hate freedom and they also hate thier rights and the constitution! Makes lots of sense!

AM I TAKING CRAZY PILLS WHY DON'T PEOPLE GET THIS????

WE ARE LOSING HERE WHEN RON PAUL LOSES WE LOSE! HE GIVING US A SHOT TO KEEP OUT LIBERTY AND OUR RIGHTS AND KEEP THIS COUNTRY THE WAY IT WAS WHEN YOU HAVE ABSOLUTE FREEDOM IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT YOU HAVE/HAD FREEDOM MOVE TO IRAQ!

BUT DON'T F* IT UP FOR MY GENERATION GIVE US A CHANCE!

[Brenda]

Andrew, thank you for your continued effort to keep journalism at what it should be, fair and honest. As a Ron Paul supporter it is difficult to get the word out to everyone you know when they go home and watch the news and he is no where to be found. Many friends and family explain that they wouldn't vote for someone that has no chance. Where do they get this idea from? You and I know that the medias constant "longshot", "don quixote", emphasis on "Libertarian" was all to discredit him. I can't help but think if the mainstream media gave Dr. Paul equal coverage how different yesterdays results would have turned out. So many programs never mentioned him and yes some media outlets did, but so many more did not. I am disappointed but I will continue to spread his message because it is crucial to saving America. I just lost a good friend in Iraq yesterday and I am mad at our government because he didn't need to be there. Dr. Paul knows we can not afford to continue our current foreign policies they are costing us everything here at home. With my apathy cured I will continue spreading Dr. Paul's message of freedom and liberty!

[Fielding Hurst]

Sorry to say, but it's over. At least Ron Paul got his ideas out there. I guess the country needs to go further down the tubes and become more broke before more people wake up. http://brushfires2008.com/2008/02/05/dont-blame-me-i-voted-for-ron-paul-bumper-sticker/

[DavidH]

I believe that Ron Paul had a vision, something that is missing from the empty rhetoric of the Minister, the Millionaire and the McModerate. No, I do not believe he can win, nor do I believe that Dr. Paul is naive enough to believe that either, but his vision is what is most important to him. A vision where the states govern themselves, an America free of tyranny, just like our founding fathers saw. No, he won't be the next president, but I have never in my life been inspired any more by a presidential candidate as I have been by the good doctor.
The author said that he expects comments that say the Media has ignored Dr. Paul, which is true, but it is ignorant to think that the Media is the sole reason that his campaign does not attract hordes of votes. The reason is that we have become so apathetic in this country that we BELIEVE the media, and the majority of people follow blindly and do what they are told. If CNN, NBC, ABC and Fox had all gotten behind Ron Paul and pushed him to the nomination, he would not be the icon he is to many of us today. He would be just another puppet. I for one am not disappointed that he is not "winning" the race, for he has changed my entire political outlook and for that I am very excited and grateful to him. I am just disappointed that people in this country have short changed themselves by not believing that our constitution is good enough to govern us anymore.

As for me, give me LIBERTY or give me death. (Patrick Henry)

[CW]

At least you are writing about Ron Paul.
Thank You.

[martialartist]

So when can we expect a 3rd party run?

[Nicolas Martin]

Mainly journalism is a conspiracy of dunces. This entire campaign one might have lucked onto a handful of MSM columns with a spritz of insight about an issue, and none of those came from the keyboards of Frederick and Malcolm. Mencken smirks at the circus and its media clowns.

[patty]

"Many in Paul's dedicated legions of supporters profess incomprehension over how he does not attract wider support among voters."

THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT. How could people NOT vote for Ron Paul????

One message that ought to be heard loud and clear: people should STOP the "don't waste your vote on longshot candidates" argument and learn to vote their conscience.

I'm so sick of all the fearmongering, disgusted with all the pressure coming even from my friends and family to vote "strategically" for second-rate candidates like McCain or Romney (twisted logic being that only THEY can defeat Our Ultimate Enemy, Hillary). I wish there were some kind of indoctrination about the duty of voting one's conscience going on in public schools and a real movement in the country to make that message a popular belief. Until that belief takes root, and until we return to paper ballots counted publicly, we are essentially screwed. Remember what Ghandi said: "BE the change you wish to see in the world." That means vote as you would want the whole country to vote.

Andrew, I salute you. You are faithful to us "revolutionaries" even in our dark times.

[Derek Traise]

What a disengenuous submission. Taunting a candidate after the primaries might make your boss happy, but it doesn't quite count as positive media attention.

[Ron]

The Ron Paul Revolution is DEAD.

[JD]

"For instance, The Times' recent tepid Editorial Board endorsement of John McCain in the California Republican primary discussed every remaining GOP candidate except Paul...Many will now fill the comments section beneath this item with complaints about the mainstream media's bias and little recognition that the words themselves in this item contradict that claim in this forum."

I appreciate your mentions of Dr. Paul, but a mention on a blog doesn't carry the same weight with the non-netters that a mention in the newspaper or newscast does. It's a stone cold fact that the larger media conspired to keep Dr. Paul out of the running.

For months, we heard about the 'electability' of Giuliani, Thompson, etc. The media treated those eventual also-rans as if they were serious candidates while telling all of us that Dr. Paul was unelectable. Once Dr. Paul outlasted Giuliani and Thompson, there were no more mentions of Dr. Paul. Many people thought he'd dropped out of the race as many people still don't pay attention to politics unless it's fed to them by the larger media.

In other words, the media showed that it was 100% incorrect in determining who the American people would favor and the cure for the wrong was to push, with all of its might, a walking advertisement for narcissism like John McCain.

It's cured me of taking anything that the media says seriously anymore. Down's Syndrome women as suicide bombers in the Mideast? Ain't buying it. The market dropped because of XYZ? No go. The surge is working? Yuh, right. 30% approval for George Bush? Try 15-20% and quit fudging.

With the exception of a few outlets such as this blog, the way the larger media has treated Dr. Paul and his supporters has earned it the eternal scorn of millions.

[basiltaco]

Without letting mainstream media completely off the hook, I can only conclude from the Super Tuesday results that Ron Paul's percentages reflect the percentage of people in this country who actually pay close attention to what politicians say--and have realized the nothingness of it. I predict that, with the way this country is going, in 10 years, even the mainstream media will have a difficult time denying that Ron Paul's message was ahead of its time.

[outsider]

Ron Paul is not ignored by the MSM, they just have no reference point to include him. The last thing MSM want is a candidate or president who sticks to their message, or no hidden skeletons in the closet. The MSM is wise in the one sense. They have learned not to ask Ron Paul any questions. The resulting answer generally flattens them.(Congress Paul, please keep your your answers vague and obscure) So, Ron Paul is left out. Better that we hear about what might happen, and have endless debate.

Watch, (if you can) the reports put out, how the the MSM broadcasts.....everything is immediate, now, now, now.

God forbid they have to wait for something to happen.

When they wait......they start rummaging.

The best example of this is the movie "The Right Stuff", everytime the media is portrayed, you hear in the background the munching sound of locusts.

MSM desperately want a RACE, to continue to report and pontificate on, things to poll, and unfortunately, if everyone heard RP's message, there would not be one. And with nothing to report, even the most insignificant tidbit, (oh look, Hillary is wearing a pantsuit!), it is in the mind of MSM, death.

Good Luck America!

[Tony Bothwell]

There's a joke amongst Ron Paul supporters that goes something like "Dr. Ron Paul cured my apathy", but what makes that funny, is that it is true. Without chasing conspiracy theories about miscounts, you cannot argue that the mainstream media almost completely ignored Ron Paul in spite of his record earnings and large support base. Which is disheartening as clear media bias has taken the place of strict reporting. "Anchors" like Bill O'Rielly shout his guests right off the air... fair and balanced?

I do appreciate your fair commentary though, as much as I wanted Ron Paul to do better, clearly not enough Americans believe in the constitution these days.

And now, unfortunately as in past elections, we're given the illusion of choice as we are offered 2 candidates from the same party.

[Judith Sharpe]

How could Ron Paul win when most people have not even heard of him and/or know so little about him that they discount him? The media bias is real, every supporter knows that. We have eyes to see and ears to hear.

[Jason]

To be honest, it has a lot to do with the campaign itself which seemed more than happy to sit on its hands and wait for the convention than to actually go out and campaign.

No one mentions that Paul has had fewer campaign events than almost any other candidate. He had fewer total events this month than Hilldog had in Cali alone.

You can't win like that, even with millions and hundreds of thousands of supporters.

I have been following this thing since the exploratory committee was formed, and I have no idea what in the heck the national campaign has been doing since the money started coming in.

Now we can work towards getting Paul some allies in congress using our network. PaulCongress.com

[Robert]

I want everyone to be made very fully aware, that the media blackout wasn't as orchestrated as it seems. take for example this.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html

no this is just a link but if you dig you will understand that just by leaving him out of all of these polls, (and yes he was just left out in most of them) or only listed once.
The exposure thing is big, and the media isn't doing their job. this is problematic and frustrating.

No one cares about getting the honest answers out of politicians?

[Kelly O]

Media bias against Ron Paul is not a fantasy - it is real. From the very beginning, the media has been saying that Ron Paul has no chance to win. All the other candidates have been snickering and laughing at him since day 1.

The major media outlets consistently ignore Paul. For example, 1010wins, a major radio in New York never mentions Ron Paul in its election coverage.

Also, during the debates, Ron Paul always is allotted the least amount of speaking time and he is continuously cut off by the debate moderators. This has been the case from the first debate in 2007.

Most people I have talked to STILL don't know who he is! Or, if they do know him, they have no idea what he stands for.

I don't know if the Ron Paul campaign could have done things differently to attract voters' attention. I suppose there is always room for improvement.

But, the simple fact remains: the mainstream media and the Republican party have never taken Paul seriously.

I do hope Ron Paul starts a 3rd-party run. If anything, he will steal votes from the Republicans and tip the election to the Democrats. This will teach them a lesson for their hypocisy: wasteful spending, unecessary wars and the gradual theft of our civil liberties. And, let's face it, between the Democrats and the Republicans, there really isn't much difference.

[cees]

No media bias..... after the election. THanks for the Happy ending piece.

[sean truitt]

it's up to his supporters now. he has said he will run as long as we support his campaign. whatever happens at the convention, the ron paul revolution will continue, probably in the form of people being motivated and inspired to seek public office in his model. andrew, thank you for mentioning the media bias. maybe you can take some of the revolution into your world. do you think the media should be allowed to manipulate the country the way it does?

[DX10]

My bride and I have given the $4600 to this campaign and more to ads in Utah and the Blimp. We have talked to folks until we are blue in the face. We tried our best to get the campaign to simply concentrate on slogans rather than trying to educate the masses. And, I don't regret any of it. We can sleep peacefully knowing we gave it our best shot.

The post mortem will discover many causes. Just recently I spoke for the second time with a person here in our town to see if he had studied Dr. Paul's positions as I had asked. He said, "I thought he had dropped out!" So, the MSM had done their job. The campaign was not without fault and there are surely other things to blame.

I employ people and so I know they come out of our educational (?) institutions rarely prepared. Even the engineers can't answer the simplest questions. But judging from the results of this election to this point I must confess that I had no idea that the ignorance and stupidity of the population ran so wide and deep.

E Pluribus Unum hardly fits this country anymore. Divide and conquer seems more appropriate.

I have to tell you boys and girls it is tempting to just say every man for himself, plant your victory garden, and pray that the depression comes quickly. I don't think there is anything less that will wake this sleeping giant up.

I will donate to Dr. Paul's congressional campaign as I have done for years here from New Mexico. But, unless there is a strategy that will permit us to vote in the general election for Dr. Paul, then me, my bride, our four children, and ten grandchildren will be sitting this one out.

[Jason Krider]

I won't complain, Mr. Malcolm. You've been the only consistent writer to cover RP in a major paper. You may continue to get hell from others, but I'm grateful for your voice.

[Berol Schaeffer]

As disappointed as I am in the lack of broad-based response to Paul's message, I have to say that the main stream media represents the main stream. (Duh.) And unfortunately, the main stream populace does not want to think through the issues. So I cannot fault the MSM entirely. Because most people are sheep, I suppose that if the MSM had proclaimed Paul as the darling all along, he would have received significant support -- but that would have been just as wrong as the exclusion of Paul's message that mostly took place. At the end of the day, if you presented all the candidates' positions in an objective and balanced way (a myth in itself), most people would still rather fear and rely on the government to run their lives than to take responsibility for themselves.

[Jeanette Doney]

The Ron Paul rEVOLution is the most fantastic political experience far surpassing my wildest dreams of what grassroots could be. I am one of the LUCKY Americans to have found Ron Paul and the rEVOLution.

[Ron]

You really think that the words themselves in your ONE little column contradict the claim of media bias? Mr. Malcolm, you may not have such a bias and I wouldn't claim you do, but go to news.google.com and do a search for Ron Paul then compare it to Rudy Giuliani. 30,000 results versus 49,000. Then compare the news outlets that the names are appearing in. The results do not represent articles that are about each person, but merely that reference each person. You will notice when searching for "Ron Paul the actual news outlets that mention him are overwhelmingly not mainstream. When Fox news does not mention him, it's with a headline that he's eliminated.

Immediately after he placed second in Nevada, you could do the same thing in google news and not only would you not find mention of him in any mainstream media, you'd also notice that the mainstream's coverage, which up till then had mentioned the first and second place people at least, largely came to only mention who won.

Spending some time with news.google.com and going through the history of the articles to see whose saying his name and who isn't, will demonstrate a strong mainstream media blackout of his name to any objective observer. I've been observing this since the first time FOX denied him entry into the debate, from that time forward, it seems to have become an unspoken rule that you don't talk about Ron Paul in the mainstream media.

I'm not going to be one who claims this is the sole reason why Paul isn't winning, I think it's obvious that people in this country are scared of living free lives and they love the false security of big government programs being done in the name of protecting them, a false security that Ron Paul simply does not offer. Even so, to say that the very real and obvious media blackout is not impacting his numbers is closing ones eyes to the obvious.

[John Lim]

I don't think people are interested in the truth. Certainly, the media has a responsibility, but citizens in a society have a responsibility to research their candidates. Each voter has a self interest in promoting his interest through the candidate he choses. This selfish pursuit is suppose to yield a candidate that is good for the masses. Given that politicians simply blow with the and give thirty second sound bites for complex issues, they only reveal that they do not have a depth of understanding to truly combat tough issues. The public similarly is not interested.
I hope I am wrong but I don't see a bright future for this country. The fundamentals are no so suppressed that they may as not well be there.
Let's see what happens in the coming year.

[John Lim]

I don't think people are interested in the truth. Certainly, the media has a responsibility, but citizens in a society have a responsibility to research their candidates. Each voter has a self interest in promoting his interest through the candidate he choses. This selfish pursuit is suppose to yield a candidate that is good for the masses. Given that politicians simply blow with the and give thirty second sound bites for complex issues, they only reveal that they do not have a depth of understanding to truly combat tough issues. The public similarly is not interested.
I hope I am wrong but I don't see a bright future for this country. The fundamentals are no so suppressed that they may as not well be there.
Let's see what happens in the coming year.

[Serval Djingic]

There probably are many more explanations for these results.
- Many voters want genozide in iraq to continue
- Paying paper for oil is great for all of us
- We cant catch osama, but need to punish someone, so lets kill the persians next
- Many terrorist live in the US already, so patriot act is appropriate
- Terrorist hate us cause were free, so lets abolish personal freedoms.
- Rule of Law is irrelevant anyway, we go to war for the UN.
Ron Pauls message would work great with educated, selfrespecting and responsible people; It is not suited for the US, it would be more for switzerland or skandinavia.
Paultards ought to "just leave". The US that is.

[Alex]

It is truly incomprehensible that Americans choose to vote not in the favor of a candidate who believes in making decisions based completely on the constitution, the supposed oldest in the world. I find it remarkable that Americans are so proud of their liberty when you can't even watch the candidates debate at a so called "debate," or that main stream media fails at their job of true investigative non biased work instead filling their days analyzing the dumbest things without effort waiting for an end result that pleases them. Yup, it’s pretty sad to live in a country that has forgotten its roots in true liberty, and it will only continue to worsen without the concern of many Americans. I hope Ron Paul runs third party and takes the vote away from the so called republicans, because the ideas of Mitt Romney and More Wars McCain aren’t even close to being conservative, they don’t deserve to be elected running on a lie.

[Arno]

a quote from the Noland chart; "The main stream media only projects where they think the delegates will go. The GOP race is so wide open it is killing the media. They want to crown the candidate prince now. They are so proud that they resurrected John McCain from the dead that they are salivating to end the GOP Primary and get to the upcoming Hillary showdown. And then they are going to turn on McCain and chew him up for breakfast in a Hillary love fest.

But the reality today is that all four GOP contenders are still in the game. It is absurd for the main stream media to convince Americans that one candidate or the other is out based on one day's totals. "

I second that...

[Ed]

Quite simply, America hasn't reached the point where people are willing to expend the effort to understand the economy, foreign policy, and the constitution. We've drifted too far in the direction of socialism and government parenting.

Ron Paul won't win. Neither will the next strict constitutionalist. Nor the next. But perhaps, in time, we will come to embrace the document and concepts that laid the groundwork for our great nation.

[Jim Harris]

Andrew, as much as you want to BELIEVE this blog is the mainstream media, it is barely a blip on the radar. Blogs have a tiny audience. The mainstream media continues it's blackout of Dr. Paul and, when he is mentioned by the likes of a Rush Limbaugh or Michael Medved), It is with derision. The truth is, Dr. paul IS virtually ignored by the real mainstream media. I know you write for the L.A.Times, and I appreciate your generally unbiased (with exceptons) coverage of Dr. Paul, however this is still the L.A.Times BLOG. Big difference.

(I'm glad you finally agree that this blog is not MSM. We've been accused of that all fall. And my theory is that notnhing online can be mainstream, there are so many sources and currents. And as for tiny, I'm afraid not anymore. Would wager a political story here gets read by many thousands more real people than one in the newspaper. Glad to have you here as one of several hundred thousand per day.)

[William Bell]

Ron Paul is almost totally ignored by the media. In order to find out anything about how he is doing, I must always do a search of the news, otherwise I will waste hours reading about every other candidate, including some who are no longer in the race. Your article is one of the few exceptions.

The other day, NPR described Dr. Paul as the top GOP fundraiser . . . then they never mentioned him again. That would not be so bad, but the entire piece was about fundraising. Considering the topic, I would have expected at least a few other comments. As you said, he is the only candidate whose funding is increasing every quarter. Why isn't that worthy of mention in an segment devoted solely to fundraising among the candidates?

When the media makes comments about Dr. Paul, they usually describe him as a fringe candidate with little or no chance of winning. It is a self-fullfiling prophecy. I know of many people who embrace Dr. Paul's positions, but will not vote for him because he cannot win or they are afraid that others will think that they are a kook for supporting him.

The real story should be that he is doing as well as he is.

I have been involved in many political campaigns. Ron Paul's campaign is the best organized and funded that I have ever seen. He may not be nominated, but neither Dr. Paul or his message is going away.

[rockster]

The sad part about the american public, is that they don't know or do not have the time to find out about the candidates stand on issues...heck...americans rather wait for the media to tell them who to vote for...This democracy is just communisma with food. Watch how the country keeps getting screwed by backroom delas between politicians that really just say whatever their writters tell them to say....Come on america...you can do better then this....you're beggining to look stupid..."here's the american attitude" USA! Go USA! the best couyntry in the world...even if we have corrupt politicians....

You all will be sorry once another 4 years go by, and realize we have giving this country to the control of corrupt politicians, and sweetheart deals between rich politicians and big business...keep your blinders on America...you just do not want to see how screwed you'll be in another year or two..and you know what? You deserve it...since you forgotten what freedom REALLY means.

And to think we fought a war over 200 years ago to achieve our freedom...lololol...since the 1900 our freedoms have been sold to the highest bidder...so really, we've only been free from corrupt government for only 100 years...sad...but true...Now go vote for whomever looks better on TV. Since you no longer care what happens to this country soon...dummies....

[Donald Bosch]

I am a Canadian and have followed this campaign since day one. Even here in Canada, every time I hear a radio show, Ron Paul is rarely mentioned. It seems that it is an unwritten rule that any politician in the U.S. who actually shows character, consistency, vision and total integrity simply gets sidelined by the media. What I have seen of FOX and some others is quite telling.

The forces that be wish to keep Dr. Paul sidelined, but in the end, the power of the internet, the strong message and the idea that young people who ultimately will run the U.S. some day will all combine and Dr. Paul will manage to wake up the masses, hopefully before it is too late.

As a Canadian, I am happy to say that finally the U.S. has shown me one politician that restores my faith in the future of our neighbor to the south.

The Ron Paul supporters will get their day. If not this time around, then the next. Let's not forget he has a son who shares his views. His message has time on it's side, so to speak.

I hope that it is heard clearly before it is too late.

D. Bosch
Quebec, Canada

[Dave]

Ron Paul cured my apathy. Then the election system re-instated it. As a combat vet, I can't believe that more Americans don't want the kind of freedoms that were guaranteed us in the Constitution. I wasted my life fighting for those freedoms, only to have them stripped away by greedy politicians. It truly sickens me to know that my vote means nothing. The voice of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands!) means nothing. All that matters is the money and the power. Morally right and ethics are now bad words in politics, and for some reason, millions of people are OK w/ that. The only thing I can do to preserve my own freedoms now is to build a cabin deep in the woods and hope to stay hidden from Uncle Sam until I die. Oh yeah...I can't, because that damn national ID will track my every move. God once blessed this nation, and now we are damned.

[David]

Contradict? Your words cite examples of the bias. And this article is on the internets. More soldiers donated to Ron Paul in the last quarter than to all the other remaining candidates combined, Republican or Democrat!!! This should have been front page news since the 1st. The fact that this has not been front page news on every newspaper in the country is ample evidence of media bias, and media's complicity in the war agenda at the expense of our military and our country.

[tim anderson]

this was actually a pretty straight up essay. even if you write like a second grader...nice ending paragraph too.. in your attempt to be clever you just sounded like a dumbass, maybe next time.

.

[Patrick]

Good article! For once, someone actually pays attention to the Good Doctor. As a freshman member of the mass media, I find it appalling how often he is simply omitted from coverage. It's quite disillusioning to see that the newspapers and news sites I grew up reading are not nearly as honest and responsible as I once thought. It almost makes me wish I'd gone into business instead of journalism!

Thank you, Mr. Malcolm. You've done your country a great service simply by doing your job.

[Chris Uchman]

Just because you do a story in the LA times to satiate the complaints---- doesn't mean that the MSM is not intentionally ignoring PAUL......

Your scoffing at the Idea, shows that you pay way to much for a commoditee that exist abundantly in this land of the free..

Ignorance.........

I am tired of seeing the elections in the country run on the equivalent entegrity scale of THE BEST MAN ON CAMPUS in HIGHSCHOOL-------

Wake up world...... You are missing your opportunity

[Anita]

Thank you for reporting on Ron Paul's results. You are just about the only person who has...in fact, I've had trouble finding his results on multiple google searches.

[Michael]

I don't so much blame the media as I blame Americans who are too lazy to spend the effort to educate themselves on the candidates more than what the television tells them to think. I blame Americans that believe that it doesn't matter what happens in the primaries.

Finally I blame Americans that vote for someone not really knowing what that person stands for (such as those voting for McCain to get them out of Iraq). These Americans are the most disgraceful because they vote based on feelings and looks instead of facts and evidence.

[Ray Jackson]

There's no doubt the mainstream media tried to sideline Paul. Fox news cut him from their debate despite him finishing ahead of other candidates they allowed on in the one caucus that had taken place, and then when they allowed him onto their debate they gave him different (and ludicrous) questions from the other candidates and cut his better moments from the rerun. Fox are only the most obvious case. This was the candidate who raised more money than any other Republican, all from small donations, yet to hear the mainstream media you'd think he didn't exist. In the end, they guaranteed he did not. But at least one thing came of all this.... it's becoming increasingly possible to raise money and awareness without using the msm. I spent more time watching blogs and youtube this season than attending to the msm. The future is that either you guys start reporting the news instead of trying to make it or you get increasingly irrelevant.

[Dan in B-more, hon.]

As a longtime Ron Paul supporter (since I heard him speak in late 2002), I appreciate what you're doing with this blog, Andrew. It is true that there is a bit of hysteria surrounding Ron's campaign, but I do believe there is a silent majority in this country that, while not support Ron Paul explicitly or his views implicitly, are looking for a system that more fairly treats individuals as just that: individuals. Ron Paul is the candidate who most closely represents that ideal.

I continue to be heartened by his respectable showings in a number of states. (His 7% in NY is a bit more than I ever would have expected.) A bit more MSM coverage would be nice, but to be fair, Ron has to prove that he deserves that coverage. His results on Super Tuesday, and his continued uptick in results (10% IA, 14% NV, 17% ME, and 20+% in AK, ND, and MT) are moving his campaign in that direction.

It's clear that the rank and file of the GOP are not thrilled with their choices. McCain is too contrary, Huck is too populist and quasi-liberal, and Romney is just, well, fake. Ron Paul is really the solution for the RP. I hope they see it before it's too late.

[Roger]

The only thing I can say is that the Majority of the American people need to wake up and stop being sheep.
Those individuals not voting for Dr. Paul need to research and discover that All of the Democratic and Republican’s Presidential runners with the exception OF Dr. Paul had and will allow the continuation of our Be loving Constitution to be handle as if it is JUST a piece of Paper as if it is not the HIGHER LAW OF THE LAND.

Dr. Paul Message is well and alive, changes we need and changes will occur in the coming years, 2,4,6,8 where finally those individuals in Congress which are allowing the Constitution to be chipped will be put to pasture and the new youth who cares for the Constitution will take over and restore OUR REPUBLIC TO ORDER where the Constitution is preserve, Protected, and defended against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

VIVA LA CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA!!!
VIVA Dr. RON PAUL and HIS MESSAGE!

[Barney Rubble]

This is a 2-bit blog and coverage here of Ron Paul, though appreciated, hardly constitutes fair coverage by mainstream media. But forget all that, let's just grant out the argument and move to the safer conclusion: Americans by and large do not vote on platform and voting record. They vote on style, image, form, big talk, and hype. Those factors collectively explain time and time again most of the variance in voting patterns, not substance. Paul had substance, but no exciting form. Only chance for Paul now is if the general election comes down to Hillary v. McCain and he can make an independent appeal to substance-minded voters to capture at least 35% of the vote. Otherwise, hey, it was fun while it lasted, now let's move over and let the welfare-warfare state get back to business.

[Jake]

Too little too late...
the msm is only reporting what they have been "predicting" the entire election cycle thus far. I think it is interesting that in such a diverse and complex race this time around the polls seemed to nail it on the head more than once. Especially when it came to Ron Paul. Interesting.
Google Hacking Democracy

[poppatml]

Well written article. No I won't blame MSM for RP not doing as well as hoped. His message falls on deaf ears. Come november we will see how this election shakes out. So, congrats to all the pundents for getting it right. Now live with the results.

[Phil]

Congratulations for mentioning Ron Paul, even if you couldn't resist that dig at the end. But I just wanted to comment on the "coverage" Paul has tended to receive.

Yes, there have been a number of appearances on a few specific shows. But Paul's simple message, namely that we need to abide by the limits to government in the constitution, rarely got aired in comparison to the "viable" candidates. If he was mentioned on any specific news program it was usually to try to heap derision on some aspect, invented or not, of what he'd said in a given debate. In most debates, he was lucky to get a third of the questions of any other candidate. He hasn't exactly been reported on fairly as a candidate with a snowball's chance in heck of winning, and *gasp* egad! He doesn't finish first in any state and the prophecy of the reporting (or lack thereof) is fulfilled! That would be what Paul supporters are incensed over.

Let's look at the other choices we're being presented with as "viable voting options". We have socialists on the democrat side promising to tax us incredibly heavily and treat us like we were little children. For instance, have you noticed that Hillary is effectively going to force us into taking insurance if she has to do it against our will or fine us if we don't get it? And before anybody tries to correct me by saying "but she only wants to do it to people that can afford that," I'll mention it here myself. It's still a darned dirty trick, and she's pretending like we don't know what to do with our own lives. To say nothing of the fact that she voted for the war, for the patriot act, for re-authorizing the patriot act (Obama joins her on that one, though when he was looking at the presidential run he voted against extending wiretapping). Hillary's promise for trying to withdraw will have us out of Iraq just shortly after the next inauguration. Obama's promises aren't much better.

On the other side, we have warmongers who want to continue acting like an empire. They seem to be content to run up the debt like it'll never need to be repaid. They don't seem to understand the meaning of a free market. Their plans to cut taxes are laughable, like offering the passengers on the Titanic a discount on the buffet as the ship breaks in two and sinks beneath the waves. Their understanding of foreign affairs is pre-school at best, since they seem to genuinely subscribe to the "they hate us for our freedom" nonsense and tend to talk about the US needing to seem strong in the international arena by constantly bombing something. You may get ten people to follow by preaching against another's liberty, two or three willing to suicide attack. You don't get a structure with hundreds if not thousands of members, like Al Qaeda. And what you get by attacking sovereign powers and occupying foreign nations is, can I get a drum roll? A lot of people who hate us for the damage our attacks do to their families, their economies, their homes, and their lives. Not to mention for usurping their power of self-government. Even if it means that for the moment they've got to deal with a despot. And they don't seem to understand either the rights of the States as defined in The Constitution or the rights of the individual.

So pardon us while We The People feel like we're being squeezed of our lives, liberty, and sacred honor between the two-party vice-pincers. Most of us who realize what we're losing get a bit cranky when the only candidate who actually wants to preserve liberty gets ignored and ridiculed by the major media pundits.

[Sascha]

The only interesting story about Mr.Paul right now is simply the disproportion between his online support and his poor results at the polls.
He didn't disappear like other 'also ran' (Tancredo, Hunter, Giuliani...) but he didn't do well either: a lot of money with nowhere to go.
What interests me is the relationship between old and new media: if it was all a conspiracy of silence on the part of old media it won, despite all the talk about new paradigm and social networking. Right now (and I don't think it'll change) Internet has a parasitic relationship with tv and print, so it is not really an alternative
On the other hand, Mr.Paul's support may have been 'soft': a lot of talk, a lot of superflous money, a lot of clicking away, a lot of googling but no real commitment.
In my opinion, Mr.Paul's ideas were radical (and bookish and dogmatic and unpractical): if implemented it could have been a real revolution in american politics and society and economy. But they would have caused unrest, dislocation, misery (at least on the short run) and the resistance of those who had to lose something: And with such a soft support (people who can't even be bothered to get out and vote) what chance of success there was?
Remember an old revolutionary saying, revised for the times: the revolution wont' be downloaded...

[poppatml]

Well written article, left out Alaska thats OK. No I will not blame MSM anymore, they seem to have gotten it right. Hope is an amazing feeling, Hope that someday MSM will have no choice but to cover a canidate with RP integrity and honesty. Sadly that time has not come yet. I will regrpoup and as usual try to pick the lesser of Two Evils and make an informed choice.

(No, actually Alaska is in there. Check it again.)

[Joshua Earlenbaugh]

Hi Andrew,

I am confused. I guess I don't understand the article. I like the fact that you mentioned many facts (besides Louisiana) about the race thus far. However, I thought you were going to talk about a "move" that Ron Paul made. I guess I am truly interested in what you believe about this "media bias" hypothesis and whether or not it is very accurate or not. After all, you did note one putative instance of the LA Times showing media bias. It would be great, however, for you offer some analysis of the "media bias" hypothesis. You've been around journalism for a long time and I think your readers and Ron Paul supporters would love to hear what you think. Thanks in advance for the elucidation.

[Zechariah C.]

Great post, Mr. Malcolm. I hope we seen Ron Paul in this thing all the way to St. Paul.

[Tim]

Ha? Have we become that predictable?

Funny: I didn't catch any MIKE GRAVEL coverage last night, did you?

No. The media isn't the problem. The fact of the matter is: Americans love inflation. They love it when the Fed prints monopoly money for them. They hate the debt ceiling. Why are we limiting ourselves with psychological contrivances like debt ceilings?-- And they really love the Prison State. The more of their friends and neighbors that get thrown in jail over drug addiction, the better! And you know what else? Americans especially love perpetual wars against invisible enemies.

I guess I'm just out of step with the mainstream. I guess I just need to learn to stop worrying and love the American Empire.

[David, OH]

Mr Malcom,

Thank you for a straightforward, truth-telling article. The writing is on the wall, Ron Paul is dead in the sense that "God is dead."

Freedom loving people need to expend their time and treasure locally in an effort to win back Congress for the people. Get out there and run as a "Ron Paul Republican" and let's take our Nation back to it's founding principles, back to the rule of law.

[Mark]

Oh please, Andrew, are really you really trying to say that Paul got fair treatment from the MSM? How long did they fawn over and provide millions in free advertising to Giuliani and Thompson? My God, time was when a day would not go by without every single major media outlet providing them significant coverage.

At any rate, I really don't care. If there is anything that this election has made clear, it's that Americans prefer to vote for creeping statism and socialism rather than take a stand for freedom. It's easy for people to blather on about "land of the free, home of the brave" but when someone offers them the chance to act on this - to vote for a candidate who really would reduce the government - they go crying looking for big government politicos to make them feel safe.

We have a $3.1 trillion budget coming up. And the budgets will only get bigger, the programs multiply, the taxes increase and the regulation get thicker.

[Timur Rozenfeld]

I am not sure what you mean by the sentence before last but the bias is in the main stream media, except here where you have been following Paul for a while.

[Jemison Thorsby]

Yes, the LA Times blog has given regular coverage to the Paul campaign. This does not negate the criticism of inequitable treatment of the presidential candidates across the media spectrum. In addition to much less overall "face time" with major outlets, the placement and tone of what stories do run inevitably minimize Paul's candidacy and positions. The stories focus on his "long-shot chances," his "maverick libertarianism" and "quixotic appeal to legions of internet followers," rather than discussing what about his stance distinguishes him from the other candidates. The American public has not been well served by this coverage.

[Jemison Thorsby]

Yes, the LA Times blog has given regular coverage to the Paul campaign. This does not negate the criticism of inequitable treatment of the presidential candidates across the media spectrum. In addition to much less overall "face time" with major outlets, the placement and tone of what stories do run inevitably minimize Paul's candidacy and positions. The stories focus on his "long-shot chances," his "maverick libertarianism" and "quixotic appeal to legions of internet followers," rather than discussing what about his stance distinguishes him from the other candidates. The American public has not been well served by this coverage.