Ron Paul's secret weapon
By Libby
Paul's impressive $5.1 million fundraising gain this quarter shows he's a contender. As I've been saying for months, the man is going to be a factor in this race. So what's the secret behind his appeal? While the limited government position is surely a draw, it's his anti-war stance that I think resonates among the non-Libertarians and most interesting is his support among the military.
As the piece notes, the redmeat crowd that picks the candidate is pro-war, so his anti-war stance may well prevent him from receiving the GOP nod, but it leaves him positioned well for an independent run at the White House and the name recognition he's building through this current run will only help if he goes that route.
Meanwhile, Ron Paul supporters take note. The discussion on this point is at my Newshoggers post, but let me point out here that the subtitle on the ABC piece is: Young, Rabid Internet Supporters Boost Congressman's Fundraising. Like it or not, politics is all about superficial impressions these days. I'm no political genius but I think somehow the Ron Paul community has got to change that meme if you want the campaign to go mainstream.
[cross-posted to The Reaction]
Paul's impressive $5.1 million fundraising gain this quarter shows he's a contender. As I've been saying for months, the man is going to be a factor in this race. So what's the secret behind his appeal? While the limited government position is surely a draw, it's his anti-war stance that I think resonates among the non-Libertarians and most interesting is his support among the military.
Another Paul constituency, interestingly enough, comes from the military. A study by the Center for Responsive Politics found Paul received more campaign cash from members of the military than any other Republican presidential candidate.
The study of contributions of $200 and more during the first two quarters shows that Paul has raised three times as much from members of the military as what's been raised by GOP fundraising front-runner Romney, and four times what Giuliani garnered.
As the piece notes, the redmeat crowd that picks the candidate is pro-war, so his anti-war stance may well prevent him from receiving the GOP nod, but it leaves him positioned well for an independent run at the White House and the name recognition he's building through this current run will only help if he goes that route.
Meanwhile, Ron Paul supporters take note. The discussion on this point is at my Newshoggers post, but let me point out here that the subtitle on the ABC piece is: Young, Rabid Internet Supporters Boost Congressman's Fundraising. Like it or not, politics is all about superficial impressions these days. I'm no political genius but I think somehow the Ron Paul community has got to change that meme if you want the campaign to go mainstream.
[cross-posted to The Reaction]
Labels: Election 08, Republicans
posted by Libby Spencer at 9:52 AM
9 Comments:
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your post, but it sounds like you want to see RP fans all act the same. It might work for a more communist type campaign like Clinton or Obama, but not RP. It's just not going to happen. What you see is not rabid but raw emotion. It drives the zeitgeist. Raw emotion has its flaws but they are respectable flaws. I, for one, enjoy colorful use of the English language by some Paul fans. Eloquence has long been the secret weapon of the elite. Many RP fans don't even know what eloquence is. I like that. I like that a lot.
some one on another board said it best. that's a whole lot of "phony soldiers"!
as far as the behavious of the Paulists hey freedom is untidy. Isn't that what Don rumsfeld taught us?
lester,
"as far as the behavious of the Paulists hey freedom is untidy. Isn't that what Don rumsfeld taught us?"
Umm, in other words, from chaos comes order? Yeah, I think he did say that once, or maybe it was Dubs who knows.
I think hauling out that hoary communist shibboleth is a bit - hydrophobic as they used to call it and perhaps so is the translation of a call for pragmatic politics into a demand for unanimity. Calling either Clinton or Obama communist is so absurd as to suggest Rush Limbaugh, not Ron Paul.
One of the things I like about Doctor Paul is that he doesn't indulge in that kind of tactical hyperbole or litter the landscape with flaming straw men and rivers of slime. Plain speech is the most eloquent to my ears.
There is nothing secret or elitist about eloquence - it's available to anyone of any status and attacks on fictitious elites are most commonly used by Nixonian types to stampede the herd toward the slaughterhouse. The way to smear someone who speaks the truth is to call him an elitist or a liberal or indeed a communist and it allows you to do so without explanation. I've never heard Paul do that.
Eloquence is not about adornment, hyperbolic metaphor and vague statements of blurry principle and that's what I like about the man. He says more in a few concise words than his opponents do in a lifetime and that gets my respect even when we're not in agreement.
It's raw emotion that drives people into accepting tyranny and exploitation and it's eloquence that sometimes tells them that the pain in the ass they feel means they're getting screwed.
Somehow his ideas about getting the government's nose out from where it does not belong scares me less than the current Republican ideas about selling the government to the highest and most religiously correct bidder. Listen to Bush and then listen to Ron and maybe the definition of eloquence becomes more clear.
Chris, you are misunderstanding my post but maybe you would have had to be following the convo at Newshogger to get the point. I'm not suggesting a homogenous response but simply remarking that RP supporters have a reputation for being kooky and I think it's undeserved but it was born and is reinforced by the nutty and aggressive types that tend to overrun comment sections.
I think that needs to be overcome with more reasonable commentary if the supporters want to grow their base.
It's free advice, so take it for what it's worth to you.
Lester, I don't think I would want to take my lessons from Rummy.
Fogg, as always, you give voice to my thoughts better than I can articulate myself.
I like RP for his anti-war stance, but I could never vote for him simply because he doesn't even address the issue of providing health care for all.
The best I can hope for is that he becomes another Ralph Nader and draws votes away from other GOP candidates. That would sure put a crimp in GOP plans to steal another election. ;-)
My problem as well Kathy. His domestic stance seems to be to eliminate the federal gov altogether and I don't think that's the right answer but I want him to stay in the race because his stance on personal liberty and ending senseless wars is so good.
That message needs to be heard.
I agree. I don't want, for instance, to eliminate Social Security or public education, but then I don't think any president could accomplish that. I do think he could accomplish a more non-interventionist foreign policy, appoint a diplomatic corps that was a diplomatic corps, perhaps end government involvement in personal choices regarding what we eat and with whom we choose to make a family, etc.
Even where I disagree most seriously, he isn't screaming or pontificating, condescending or braying slogans, but explaining calmly and rationally. Just the difference between Bush's sneers and smirks and his way of presenting himself is so refreshing that I have to like him and I have to consider that although I don't want to close the public schools, perhaps between him and me, we could figure out a better way to run them.
kathy- the feeling is mutual for us Paul supporters and the democrats. That is, the dems are right on the war and that's it.
and they are condescending as hell and combative for no reason. Who's ever heard of someone passionately and violently defending big government?
Didn't Clinton say " the era of big government is over"?
yay taxes! beaurocracy!! yay!! these are wonderful things!
"the government is really doing AMAZING things with our tax dollars"
^statement I've never in my life heard
Post a Comment
<< Home