Favorable Editorial in Seattle Times

[joshdvm]

Seattle Times: The GOP would be wise to listen to Ron Paul's message (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003726451_rams30.html)

I don't know why many who are sympathetic to Ron's view invariably have to add the "...but there's no way he can win" Seligman's-dogs-learned-helplessness tag.

But, hey, at least he didn't use the dreaded "isolationist" term when referring to Paul's position.

[DjLoTi]

To every person who says there's no way he can win, this will be my reply:

"Well if you can predict the future, maybe you can tell me what I will and will not achieve?"

haha...

[Bryan]

Sorry- not favorable: "That may be the usefulness of Rep. Ron Paul. There is no way this libertarian medical doctor from Texas is going to win the Republican nomination."

[kylejack]

Sorry- not favorable: "That may be the usefulness of Rep. Ron Paul. There is no way this libertarian medical doctor from Texas is going to win the Republican nomination."
Any article that agrees with the points he is making and articulates them properly is good media, in my opinion. The ones we should be worried about are the ones who say: "Ron Paul is a 9/11 Truther, Ron Paul is an isolationist, Ron Paul wants to surrender to the terrorists, Ron Paul is a liberal..."

[joshdvm]

I think 'mixed message' would have been more accurate.

[Bradley in DC]

Sorry- not favorable: "That may be the usefulness of Rep. Ron Paul. There is no way this libertarian medical doctor from Texas is going to win the Republican nomination."

Unfortunately we are still at the "so long as they spell his name right" stage of the campaign. That the article did spell his name right AND explained fairly well his positions--and in a pretty favorable light, I'll take it!

[ronpaulitician]

Unfortunately we are still at the "so long as they spell his name right" stage of the campaign. That the article did spell his name right AND explained fairly well his positions--and in a pretty favorable light, I'll take it!
Exactly. Our goal right now is two-fold:
a) Get people to know who Ron Paul is and what he stands for.
b) Convince people (who will vote in the GOP primary) who already know who Ron Paul is but who do not want to vote for him because he "can't win" that they should vote for him.

I believe Ron Paul and his supporters can really only control (a).

In order for (b) to happen, the offline polls will need to show Paul with a stronger following. I'm sticking to my magical number of 5%. Once he reaches that threshold, he's got a shot. The sooner he reaches that number, the better his chances are, because it gives the people that fall under (b) more time to realize that he can win.

[ronpaulitician]

What I wrote Bruce:


Hi Bruce,

As a Ron Paul supporter, I really enjoyed reading your editorial in today's Seattle Times.

The only thing I'd disagree on is that there "is no way this libertarian medical doctor from Texas is going to win the Republican nomination." I believe he has a miniscule chance of winning. As you stated, two-thirds of Americans want us out of Iraq. That doesn't mean they necessarily agree with Ron Paul's time table, but it does show that there's most likely a large group of Republicans who are receptive to the message of non-interventionism. I do not, like some of my fellow Ron Paul supporters, believe that the online polls are any indication of the strength of support for Dr. Paul, but I do believe that the internet is a useful tool in giving Congressman Paul's name the exposure he will need in order to win.

In my opinion, there are many Republicans who agree with Ron Paul's views, but who agree with you that there's no way he will win. If Ron Paul can somehow manage to get 5% in some of the "offline" polls, it's possible that some of these Republicans will chance their view to "there's a small chance he'll win". Once that happens, Dr. Paul's polling numbers would continue to rise, as suddenly GOP voters will start telling pollster that they will vote for Congressman Paul. This snowball effect is what a second-tier candidate like Ron Paul will need in order to win.

New Hampshire is probably the place where this will need to happen. Perhaps you're familiar with the Free State Project? They have literally hundreds of activists inside New Hampshire, who have already shown their willingness to put their money where their mouth is by moving to New Hampshire from across the country. If they throw their support behind Congressman Paul, and if he does well in the debate that CNN will host in New Hampshire next week, his numbers in the offline polls in that state may just reach that magical 5% mark.

He replied:


I'll stick with my "no way." But I would be happy to be wrong.