Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL Colin
None of this addresses the question of what Paul has done to generate press.
So, what has Paul done to DESERVE more press? The best press he got was the money bomb which I believe was the result of grassroots support and didn't even come from Paul himself.
|
Ok. He is the only Candidate to support smaller government. He is the only republican candidate to purpose a withdrawal from Iraq. He is the only candidate talking about eliminating the tax code and IRS. He is the only candidate talking about closing military bases oversees and really changing our foreign policy. He is the only candidate that stated he will veto all spending bills congress submitted with unconstitutional spending.
I know this isn't sexy, but contrary to popular opinion, he is not a clown out to make headlines. The overriding theme this election cycle is change, yet I rarely hear his name. In fact, I did not know his positions until November after the previous televised debate. I had heard of him before, but I didn't know he was running for POTUS. I have always considered myself politically astute, but since my main source of news was FNC, I was not getting his message. I do believe the US media have a responsibility to allow the public an unfettered presentation of all views concerning US elections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL Colin
What evidence at all is there that FOX didn't include Paul in the debate "because of his views". The only person who said that was Paul himself. He's a bit biased about it. Don't ya think? 3.3% nationwide! Duncan Hunter is not in the debate either. Was he excluded because of his views? Duncan Hunter wasn't in the ABC debate either but Paul was. So does that mean Hunter and Paul were excluded for their views? Which views of Hunter's got him banned from the FOX and ABC debates?
|
This was a debate in New Hampshire- sponsored by the NHGOP, for the votors of New Hampshire. Paul will get more votes than Thompson and Giuliani probably combined there. Financial strength of the campaigns is a better indicator of public support than polling. Thompson is dead and so is Hunter. Ron Paul has the financial backing to carry the campaign throughout the general election. And take note that his warchest is not filled by corporations but by individual donations that average less than $100 per. So I am just guessing here that public support wasn't the real reason behind the snub. Oh, thats right- the studio wasn't big enough for RP. OK.
BTW, there are many, many other people that do not support Paul who feel he was unfairly left out of the NH debates. I will be glad to get a list together for you along with links if you want to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL Colin
Paul's average poll result was 7.3% before Iowa. He finished at 10%. I just don't see that as really surprising or even worthy of discussion. Who really cares that the 5th place candidate beat the average of the pre-election polls by 2.5% but still finished in 5th? The average Ron paul supporter seemed to think he was going to finish 3rd in Iowa.
|
I was HOPING he would finish third, and he was within 3% of finishing third. Not bad for a guy whose only free media coverage was dwarfed by the rest of the field(except hunter).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL Colin
The point about Huckabee is that he is a candidate who really HAS gained ground and generated momentum. He "really has gained ground." Paul is at less than 4% nationwide. He hasn't. He is the 5th or 6th candidate with no evidence that he will do better in the long run.
|
I don't disagree about huckabee. He will win the bible belt for sure. He has not done anything miraculous like changing the course of government as Paul is trying to do. Huckabee is filling the void that any "man of God" could have. He has not made any real inroads anywhere else, and he won't because he is more of the same of what we've got.
While Huckabee's momentum is stronger at the moment, I don't see it growing past the the support he has now. He has had his 15 minutes and those that don't vote from the pew will have a hard time voting for him. And my point was that RP has much more upside potential than Huckabee because he is not as well known.
I take exception to the last part. There is evidence that Paul is not a 5th or 6th place candidate. I expect guiliani, thompson, hunter to be gone feb. 6th.
So how does 4th place sound?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL Colin
Well, I'm not suggesting that paul's candidacy would be immaterial in the general election. He would do well enough to effect the outcome but enough to win.
|
Sorry Colin, I wasn't trying to imply that either. I was agreeing with you and saying the republicans(FOX) should take him seriously or he will damage them as a third party spoiler. They need to move Ron Paul's way fiscally, on the war, on immigration and the attempts to socialize healthcare. Ignoring him will not make these issues go away and these are issues that can win with a smarmy used car salesman pitching them (read Mitt Romney).