Politics The Marginalization of Ron Paul (or How Media Plays Favorites)

the media bias never ceases to amaze me. in tonight's debate they tried to skip over ron paul on a question with only 4 candidates left. chants of his name from the crowd forced the host to allow him to answer the question.

 

And people think the GOP does not like Mr. Paul. Where do they get these ideas?

 

because all the talking heads tell people he shouldn't be liked i guess. the establishment gop definetly doesn't like him though.

this is just another moment of the type of thing that happens to him all the time. in post debate coverage cnn hasn't mentioned him 45 minutes in. they have mentioned perry and huntsman who have both dropped out though.

 

Well he's polling at an average of 16% (+ or -) and really has no chance of winning the state. Many would argue and I tend to agree he has zero chance of winning the nomination. So is it a case of them not paying attention to him because he has no chance or does he have no chance because they don't give him any respect? I honestly don't know the answer to that question.

It really doesn't matter, in my mind anyway. I said it before and I'll say it again... it's like he applying for a job with a company that not only knows him well but really dislikes him. Other then trying to create an opening for his son in future GOP politics I'm not really sure what are his motives. I'm absolutely sure he realizes he has no reasonable shot of winning.

 

Paul is not in it to win it, because he knows he cant win on a program of foreign disengagement and reducing presidential powers....positions that are counter to everything the Party stands in foreign policy and national security.

He will continue to delegate shop til the end, then make his demands on having some say on the platform, but IMO, at best he will get some language about significantly smaller government and lower taxes, a position they all share and will be otherwise ignored.

 

Or he'll pull a Ross Perot, run 3rd party, and hand Obama a second term on a silver platter

 

I dont think he will, despite many of his supporters urging him to do so. As others said, it would kill his son's future in the party.

The Paul crowd just doesnt get that his support is 10 percent liberal (anti-war, anti-Patriot Act and presidential powers), 10 percent fiscal conservative (smaller government, lower taxes) and 80 percent libertarian extremism (kill the Fed, return to gold standard, kill trade agreements, restore states rights, isolationism...). Not a winning mandate in a party that favors corporations as people, God, Israel, waving a big stick around the world and combating terrorists at home hiding in closets across the US.

Supporters consistently point to the 20 percent with broad (but not overlapping) appeal and ignore the 80 percent that has virtually no support.

Which is why he cant and wont rise above third place, with the exception of perhaps a few small caucus states coming up after Florida.

 

He might do well in Texas. Texas doesn't seem to like Romney or Newt. Other then that I agree, a couple small caucus state and maybe a few non winner take all states. So he'll collect a few delegates and have a possible speech at the convention.

His work now is solely to try to benefit his sons future with the GOP. Which is why you're also right he won't do a 3rd party run.

 

romney/paul 2012. that's the ticket. paul is the only one that can bring balance to the force.

i just realized they are the only two that never attack each other in the debates, but both have had go rounds with every other candidate.

 

So when Mitts makes statements like-

Or when Paul releases Ads that state-

They're not attacking each other? I'd bet a google search could provide many more examples.

Dude, face it the GOP doesn't like Paul's brand of politics. And he's not exactly fond of theirs. He's trying to change about 1/2 to 2/3's of the party platform, best of luck with that.

He's not going to be the Potus or the Vpotus.

 

Ron Paul is now 0 for 20 in the primaries/caucuses and a distant fourth in the delegate count and Paul having any influence at all at the Republican convention is less and less likely.

More likely, the "revolution" has peaked -- at about 10-12% of Republican voters, only marginally better than '08.' I dont think the "revolution" will have much steam w/o a Paul candidacy and his days have passed.

Paul was never a viable presidential candidate, but I will miss his voice in Congress.

I'll also miss the voice of Dennis Kucinich,who lost against another long-time progressive incumbent in OH as a result of the state losing two House seats in redistricting. I was looking forward to a Kucinich - Joe the Plummer debate (Samuel "Joe" Wurzelbacher won the Republican primary in that district).

Paul and Kucinich wont be easily replaced.

 

Ron Paul's son is a typical right winger and nothing like his father, even though the media is trying to get people to think they are similar.

The problem with dismissing Ron Paul is that he does have some good ideas, and this economy is a farce still able to crumble if we can't borrow money from China, Japan, or some other countries around the world...

 

Ron Paul wont be speaking at the convention later this week but he'll get a nice send off with a video tribute and a "dont let the door hit you on the way out" farewell in the form of new party rules regarding primaries and caucuses.

No more coming in second or third in a non-binding state caucus, then using the state convention to thwart the will of caucus voters in the manner in which Paul ultimately "won" states like Iowa, Minn, Nev...by gaming the system and getting the most delegates to the national convention.

Marginalizing the good doctor or fixing a system so that it reflects voters intent rather then actions by the most active voters?

Looking forward to how the Paul crowd will act at the convention.

 

I do enjoy watching them game each other.

I'm anticipating something along the lines of a WWF match. I hope I'm not disappointed.

 

The roll call of the states to "crown" the nominee, which is traditionally held in prime time, has been moved to tomorrow afternoon session (before 6:00 pm).

I suspect the weather-related cancellation of one day of the convention is the public reason given for the schedule change, but I suspect there is a fear of state delegate leaders among the Paul crowd stepping up to the mike and making a scene for a prime time TV audience.

 

If people actually paid attention to Ron Paul he'd have way less support, he should be thankful.

 

Ron Paul might have been the best bet at reaching a balanced budget. Sure, neither side would like the cuts, but he would try to get them done. I think something needs to be done with the size and number of people working for the government. Close down military bases, eliminate the Dept of Education (states can work together, local districts can help), eliminate the Coast Guard (transfer some jobs to the Navy, Border Patrol, Customs, and local law enforcement), eliminate oil subsidies, means test food stamps & disability, tort reform, require at least 10% down for a house, have college football conferences pay for the different branches (AF, Navy, Army) football programs through ticket sales/donation, build drones instead of fighter jets for a few years, promote and eliminate regulations on renewable energy, and go on and on.

 

I really don't understand this demonization of the department of education. The number of employees who work for the department of education are about 0.2% of the federal work force, and its share of the budget is a bit above 1% of the federal budget. And the bulk of the department of education budget (about 2/3s) are pell grants, with the next in line item being supplemental funding for special education at the local and state level. Things that I think most people would recognize as being generally good things.

Not to mention that federal employment is substantially down during the Obama administration.

Finally, with regards to the budget: first, it is not as big a problem as people think; second, it is driven mostly by entitlements and the military. Means testing disability, tort reform, etc. are less than rearranging the chairs on the deck of the titanic (and food stamps are already means tested).