Watch Out For Ron Paul

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]

Not that there aren't good arguments against RP's chances (I don't think anyone here would claim it isn't still an enormous long shot), but the "Bush is supported by 69% of Republicans" thing is a beyond laughable attempt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not its not. Yes there is a lot of wiggle room in what someone means when they say that they "approve" of Bush's job as president, but it is pretty safe to say that anyone who would be inclined to vote for Ron Paul would not even remotely consider saying they "approve" of what Bush has done as president. Any Ron Paul supporter who would say that they approve of Bush is either brain dead or has no idea of what Ron Paul stands for. I would love to ask a follow up question to that 69% of Republican and see what percentage of them might vote for Ron Paul. I bet it's a very small number.

[JuntMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, there are plenty of people (like me) who are currently registered nothings, but will soon be Republicans voting for Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're currently a registered nothing you'd better move really fast on registering Republican.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the state. In Texas, there is no need to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll have to look into it. I kind of thought I could just show up to city hall whenever I please and be like "this is who I am, count it" but I guess there is probably some inane process to go through. I could probably get away with registering in MA if I'm already too late for NY, so I might have 2 shots anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in NY, I think the deadline is October 12th.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm 'pretty' sure that you just have to register 25 days before the election you wish to vote in.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's 25 days then it's 25 days before the general election, not the primaries themselves. Go to ronpaulnation.com right now, it's the lead article.

[Bump_Bailey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am a registered republican now. 20-30% of the vote in the primary is usually good enough to get the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is your assumption that the 70% is split evenly amongst the other candidates because they happen to be more similar to Bush than Paul is. In reality two major "Bush-lke" candidates get 20-30% each and the other 50% is split by the losers 6 ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course their votes won't be split evenly, but as it stands now there is no clear favorite of the Republican base with Guilani, McCain, Mitt, F. Thompson and to a lesser extent Huckabee all seen as legitimate candidates. So its not unreasonable to believe that they garner a similar amount of votes in the early primaries.

Add to the fact that Paul garners support from outside party, and that his supporters are much more dedicated than his rivals he has a legitimate shot at the nomination.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
but it is pretty safe to say that anyone who would be inclined to vote for Ron Paul would not even remotely consider saying they "approve" of what Bush has done as president. Any Ron Paul supporter who would say that they approve of Bush is either brain dead or has no idea of what Ron Paul stands for.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true enough if we're talking about October 6th. Paul's support right now is from primarily principled libertarians. But if we're entertaining the idea that Ron Paul garners enough mainstream support to consider him a viable candidate, then clearly his base would need to expand to include a different demographic. Whether that could happen is of course something I'd agree is a long shot and fair grounds for debate, but you are basically trying to define the terms of the debate in a way that proves your conclusion.

RP talks about Iraq a lot, for example, because it separates him from the rest of the pack and gets him some fringe exposure. With more money and mainstream press, and if he sensed a growing viability of actually being elected, he could easily reconcile his language to appear less fringe, while still compromising nothing. He could focus more on gun rights, abortion, and illegal immigration. Most of his '88 clips (I think) actually do a better job of jacking off a typical Republican. He just talks a little differently now because Iraq is such a golden opportunity for him, and even if he appears fringe it's his best shot of making some noise.

All you're really saying is "Because people who currently support Ron Paul despise Bush, it is impossible that he could win over a different demographic of voter." Paul stands for a lot of the things someone who says they "approve" of Bush would claim to stand for, even if they don't realize it right now.

So rather than ask:

[ QUOTE ]
I would love to ask a follow up question to that 69% of Republican and see what percentage of them might vote for Ron Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should ask them how they feel about individual issues, and then ask yourself if it's at all possible that maybe they will begin to think differently of Paul in the coming months.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]

All you're really saying is "Because people who currently support Ron Paul despise Bush, it is impossible that he could win over a different demographic of voter." Paul stands for a lot of the things someone who says they "approve" of Bush would claim to stand for, even if they don't realize it right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush supporters and Paul supporters may agree on many things, but his isolationist stance makes him soft on terror and therefore untouchable in the eyes of many repubs.

And let's forget about this Bush approval rating stuff for a minute. The most relevant stats are Ron's polling numbers, which are still very low at this point.

[Bump_Bailey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

All you're really saying is "Because people who currently support Ron Paul despise Bush, it is impossible that he could win over a different demographic of voter." Paul stands for a lot of the things someone who says they "approve" of Bush would claim to stand for, even if they don't realize it right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush supporters and Paul supporters may agree on many things, but his isolationist stance makes him soft on terror and therefore untouchable in the eyes of many repubs.

And let's forget about this Bush approval rating stuff for a minute. The most relevant stats are Ron's polling numbers, which are still very low at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is going to make the case that is foreign policy would keep the country safer than the status quo.

[Dane S]

[ QUOTE ]

And let's forget about this Bush approval rating stuff for a minute. The most relevant stats are Ron's polling numbers, which are still very low at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one's disagreeing about that. The issue is his potential.

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, there are plenty of people (like me) who are currently registered nothings, but will soon be Republicans voting for Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're currently a registered nothing you'd better move really fast on registering Republican.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the state. In Texas, there is no need to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll have to look into it. I kind of thought I could just show up to city hall whenever I please and be like "this is who I am, count it" but I guess there is probably some inane process to go through. I could probably get away with registering in MA if I'm already too late for NY, so I might have 2 shots anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in NY, I think the deadline is October 12th.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm 'pretty' sure that you just have to register 25 days before the election you wish to vote in.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's 25 days then it's 25 days before the general election, not the primaries themselves. Go to ronpaulnation.com right now, it's the lead article.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, you are correct, I was referring to the general election, which really has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. My bad.

[Hoi Polloi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a maximum that can be donated?

[/ QUOTE ]
2,300 per person. If you're going to give that kind of money, I'd save it for when he comes to your town to do a fundraiser.

To add to what Borodog saw, here's a Wall Street Journal article devoted to Paul. $5m in a quarter is impressive for a 2nd tier candidate and the money is good for getting some ink in the "horse race" articles.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Congressman Paul is a nut, but for those intending to contribute, the earlier the better. The more money he raises early and the more press he gets about the money he's raising the more money he will be likely to raise.

Good luck with this guy.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a maximum that can be donated?

[/ QUOTE ]
2,300 per person. If you're going to give that kind of money, I'd save it for when he comes to your town to do a fundraiser.

To add to what Borodog saw, here's a Wall Street Journal article devoted to Paul. $5m in a quarter is impressive for a 2nd tier candidate and the money is good for getting some ink in the "horse race" articles.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Congressman Paul is a nut, but for those intending to contribute, the earlier the better. The more money he raises early and the more press he gets about the money he's raising the more money he will be likely to raise.

Good luck with this guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

It used to be impressive. At $40 average per contributor and the majority of that being internet fueled, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could raise $5 million in a quarter if he could get on the ballot.