Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sprocket
No, but it certainly says something, when he has more contributions from individual contributers, than any other candidate. But I'm sure its just because every single one of his few, but fanatical supporters donated 
I don't think there as many of these as you think. Looked at Bush's and Congresses approval ratings lately? If it looks like republicans overwhelmingly support Bush, its because they drove many out of the party all together. The party as a whole, shrank, and it is mostly the fringe remained. For the record, I am one of those independents. I will be registering republican to vote for RP in the primaries, here in NC.
I don't think his ability to attract "mainstream" voters has been put to the test yet. No one has heard of him (outside of internet news junkie land), largely due to lack of media exposure (aside from the internet). Now he's got the budget to blow some money and we'll get to see what effect that has.
I keep thinking of the old time story... Tortoise and the Hare. |
Actually, Barack Obama has the most contributions from individual contributors.
I agree that BUsh drove many out of the republican party, not through his war record, but rather through his spending record.
The fact remains that Paul needs Republican voters to win the Republican primaries and the majority of Republicans who have not abandoned the party and/or Bush are pro "stay the course" and pro Patriot Act (national security/terrorism) as their most important issue. These will not be Ron Paul voters.
Now that he has money, he needs to attract Independents. You believe he can with his positions, I dont agree, as I stated earlier...while majority of Independents agree with his Iraq war/no Patriot Act positions, they disagree with Paul on other issues that are important to them (abortion rights, social services, government regulatory role, etc)
The tortuise better hurry up....time is running out. The primaries start in less then three weeks and will effectively be over by mid-Feb (after Cali, NY, FL).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Maybe, maybe not. host could be onto something that all the candidates are on the fringe. Huckabee was sitting at 3% I think for quite some time before spiking recently. It's quite possible that Ron Paul could as well.
I don't think you can paint all Ron Paul supporters with the same brush as obsessed money-raisers.
Howard Dean and his Deaniacs had this problem too.
Awesome chart DC, please keep them coming. Do you have a larger one or maybe a link? My eyes aren't that great; the detail is a bit fuzzy.
|
Jorgelito, the chart is from
Pollster.com and represent aggregates of the major national polls (click the table to enlarge). You can also find polls for the state primaries.
I think the Huckabee surge can be directly attributed to the tanking of Fred Thompson. Thompson was presumed to be the social conservative candidate, but his campaign has been lazy and ineffective... Follow the blue and green lines..as Thomspson dropped, Huckabee went up..as the new hope of social conservatives
And, I think the Paul "army" is similar to the Deaniacs in another way that spells doom for the campaign...and that is relying on an army of young "outsiders" to spread the gospel of their candidate.
Put yourself in the place of a middle age undecided religious conservate couple in Iowa (the steretypical profile). Who is likely to influence your vote more...a neighbor who attends your church, shares your values and is trying to convince you that Huckabee is the best candidate or a young stranger from Chicago (or Kansas City or even Des Moines) who was bused in to promote the Paul candidacy?
The same applies in NH. Paul campaign is busing in hundreds of volunteers, but do you think NH voters want to be told how to vote by young guns from NYC or Boston?
And whats with the blimp? A nice gimmick, but IMO, not a very effective campaign tool.
Campaigns are won and lost on personal connections, either directly between candidate and voter or through surrogates with whom voters can relate...not money bombs, buses of young outsiders or blimps.