Paul proving to be a Force

[Elfshadow]

From Fringe to spoiler. We are gaining traction.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2011/10/02/paul_proving_to_be_a_force_in_2012_gop_contest/

[acptulsa]

Do you suppose that if we work long and hard enough, we can promote him to 'insurgent'?

The first words spoken on Meet the Press just now: Is the G.O.P. contest a two man race between Romney and Perry, or will Chris Christie be a factor? Seriously.

'Insurgent' is definitely the next goal we need to be working towards. :rolleyes:

[ventron]

Ron Paul, antagonist of the Federal Reserve and advocate for the gold standard, probably won't capture the Republican presidential nomination.

WHY. THE. FUCK. IS. THIS. AT. THE. START. OF. EVERY. RON. PAUL. ARTICLE.

Sorry about the French, but seriously, what is it? If they say it enough, they hope it will come true? Is every Ron Paul article in the world written/edited by one person who wants this line?

[Elfshadow]

because if they didn't people would think he could win.

[kylejack]

WHY. THE. FUCK. IS. THIS. AT. THE. START. OF. EVERY. RON. PAUL. ARTICLE.

Sorry about the French, but seriously, what is it? If they say it enough, they hope it will come true? Is every Ron Paul article in the world written/edited by one person who wants this line?
Can you blame them? We didn't win last time.

[ventron]

Can you blame them? We didn't win last time.

That isn't stopping them from pushing Ken Doll from MA.

[TexMac]

This is the Washington Post title for this article:

Fundraising prowess, better campaign, fiery message making Paul a powerhouse in 2012 GOP race

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/campaigns/fundraising-prowess-better-campaign-fiery-message-making-paul-a-powerhouse-in-2012-gop-race/2011/10/02/gIQA3WQ5EL_story.html)Pretty good for WaPo!

[sailingaway]

sorry, I'll delete mine. I looked for a longer title (the title I had was longer)

On the other hand, mine came with a picture :p

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/34/83496917-a113-556a-b3f8-d078cbd9c948/4e886e95a8c22.preview-300.jpg

[TexMac]

sailingaway, you're probably going to be chasing this article around all day. It's an AP article that was printed everywhere, and most papers put their own title on it.

[sailingaway]

Can you blame them? We didn't win last time.

No one now running won last time. Romney didn't and they don't say the same about him. Ron didn't come 152 votes shy of winning the Ames straw poll last time, didn't win the California state GOP convention straw poll last time, didn't win CPAC last time nor SRLC. Nothing now is like it was last time.

Reagan won the third time he ran, as well.

[Voluntary Man]

WHY. THE. FUCK. IS. THIS. AT. THE. START. OF. EVERY. RON. PAUL. ARTICLE.

Sorry about the French, but seriously, what is it? If they say it enough, they hope it will come true? Is every Ron Paul article in the world written/edited by one person who wants this line?

it's just the whores' way of saying, "we acknowledged your candidate, so please give us traffic. and, everyone else, this guy is very popular, and his ideas have been mimicked by the 'real' contenders, but YOU don't need to seriously consider voting for him, because, despite his popularity and the profundity of his issues, he couldn't win, even if everyone voted for him, because we say so, and we are your masters. get it? got it? good!"

[Fr0m_3ur0pe]

WHY. THE. FUCK. IS. THIS. AT. THE. START. OF. EVERY. RON. PAUL. ARTICLE.

Sorry about the French, but seriously, what is it? If they say it enough, they hope it will come true? Is every Ron Paul article in the world written/edited by one person who wants this line?

Writings are getting more positive slowly, but they are evolving. There isn't going to be a one night change in the tone, but by step by step. Paul isn't "crazy old man" and "fringe with no hope" anymore but some writers actually say that he is a powerhouse in GOP. I belive the "Unelectable"-tag will be taken off after few months, maybe even sooner.

[sailingaway]

http://www.chron.com/mediaManager/?controllerName=image&action=get&id=1640950&width=628&height=471

this picture was in another version of the story

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Paul-proving-to-be-a-force-in-2012-GOP-contest-2198860.php#photo-1640950

you have to click through the slide show

Here's one from Iowa -- I copied the caption, too....

http://www.chron.com/mediaManager/?controllerName=image&action=get&id=1640992&width=628&height=471
FILE - In this Aug. 27, 2011 file photo, Republican presidential candidate, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, rests his foot an the wheel of a tractor as he waits to be introduced at a restaurant at the Polk County GOP summer picnic event held at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines, Iowa. Paul is empowered by unconventional but successful fundraising techniques, a more sophisticated campaign than his two previous attempts at the presidency, and a fiery message he's preached for decades but only now is resonating with Americans concerned about the nation's debt. In short, he could prove dangerous for the early front-runners, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Photo: Nati Harnik / AP

[acptulsa]

Think we can become enough of a force to force the media to admit that they don't pick the winner, We the People do?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/28/Deweytruman12.jpg

[sailingaway]

Think we can become enough of a force to force the media to admit that they don't pick the winner, We the People do?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/28/Deweytruman12.jpg

Let's give it a shot, shall we?

[Travlyr]

Think we can become enough of a force to force the media to admit that they don't pick the winner, We the People do?

With all our might in 2012!

[Steve Teters]

My comment on WaPo to this article:

For the record, I am a Republican, have been for years. That being said, if Ron Paul is not the Republican nominee, I will not be voting Republican this cycle. I will write in Ron Paul because I refuse to vote for any "lesser evil" instead of Obama. "No one but Paul" is a feeling that is growing exponentially and Republicans better think about just how much "Anyone but Obama" means to them, because the idea of offering up another big government candidate is not acceptable. Our government is broken and putting another corporate hack in office won't fix it. Look at where the money comes from in the other candidates coffers, big donations from big business, military industrial complex, big Pharma companies, big bankers, gee, just like Obama, and they expect a "return on investment" that is not in my best interest. Dr Paul is the ONLY candidate that is interested in our personal liberty, that our rights are more important than the big business interests that make massive contributions, that the Constitution is more than a pretty piece of paper, and that your vote really does give you power. That belief in Dr Paul is so strong that I am unable to compromise and vote for the "lesser evil". If that is characterized as childish, and "taking my ball and going home," so be it, but my belief in the greatness this country could be borders on a childlike awe that has been missing for far too long, and that is to our detriment. Dr Paul believes in YOU, all the rest believe in the checkbook held by big business. I, for one, will not compromise my principles and vote for “anyone but Obama”. If Dr Paul is not the nominee, then he will still get my vote, and if that means that Obama wins because of lack of Republican votes, oh well, because there is no difference between Obama and the other candidates. Dr Paul is not a spoiler, he is the only choice.

[RKoho]

My comment on WaPo to this article:

For the record, I am a Republican, have been for years. That being said, if Ron Paul is not the Republican nominee, I will not be voting Republican this cycle. I will write in Ron Paul because I refuse to vote for any "lesser evil" instead of Obama. "No one but Paul" is a feeling that is growing exponentially and Republicans better think about just how much "Anyone but Obama" means to them, because the idea of offering up another big government candidate is not acceptable. Our government is broken and putting another corporate hack in office won't fix it. Look at where the money comes from in the other candidates coffers, big donations from big business, military industrial complex, big Pharma companies, big bankers, gee, just like Obama, and they expect a "return on investment" that is not in my best interest. Dr Paul is the ONLY candidate that is interested in our personal liberty, that our rights are more important than the big business interests that make massive contributions, that the Constitution is more than a pretty piece of paper, and that your vote really does give you power. That belief in Dr Paul is so strong that I am unable to compromise and vote for the "lesser evil". If that is characterized as childish, and "taking my ball and going home," so be it, but my belief in the greatness this country could be borders on a childlike awe that has been missing for far too long, and that is to our detriment. Dr Paul believes in YOU, all the rest believe in the checkbook held by big business. I, for one, will not compromise my principles and vote for “anyone but Obama”. If Dr Paul is not the nominee, then he will still get my vote, and if that means that Obama wins because of lack of Republican votes, oh well, because there is no difference between Obama and the other candidates. Dr Paul is not a spoiler, he is the only choice.

Well written! I'd be particularly impressed if I read that by chance!

[Spanky]

Let's keep pushing the message. Along with writing in to papers in the editorials and getting his name out there. PUSH!

[PaulConventionWV]

From Fringe to spoiler. We are gaining traction.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2011/10/02/paul_proving_to_be_a_force_in_2012_gop_contest/

It doesn't matter. They always put that "he can't win" somewhere in there, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. As long as they stick that line in there, they can write anything they want about him and it won't actually gain him support for the nomination because "he can't win." Why do they do this? Why can't they see the media shouldn't be propping up candidates and playing kingmaker? The media is supposed to be neutral, dammit!

It's so freaking blatant, it's amazing. It doesn't even have to be in context. They just have to insert those few little words in there, "little to no chance, probably won't win, can't win," and guess what, nothing else freaking matters! It makes me so angry!!

[PaulConventionWV]

WHY. THE. FUCK. IS. THIS. AT. THE. START. OF. EVERY. RON. PAUL. ARTICLE.

Sorry about the French, but seriously, what is it? If they say it enough, they hope it will come true? Is every Ron Paul article in the world written/edited by one person who wants this line?

You have no idea how close to the truth this really is. And yes, it's very frustrating.

[Cleaner44]

Can you blame them? We didn't win last time.

Neither did Romney... do they say the same about him?

[PaulConventionWV]

Writings are getting more positive slowly, but they are evolving. There isn't going to be a one night change in the tone, but by step by step. Paul isn't "crazy old man" and "fringe with no hope" anymore but some writers actually say that he is a powerhouse in GOP. I belive the "Unelectable"-tag will be taken off after few months, maybe even sooner.

Where have you been? There's absolutely no sign this is going to go away. They have been doing it only with increasing frequency as far as I can tell, and if I guessed their motivations right, they're not about to stop. Don't you dare think they're not doing this on purpose. They want him to lose, and that's why they say it. Anyone who can remain ignorant to the fact that the media is blatantly trying to ignore Ron Paul is just kidding themselves. It won't stop, we have to force it on them.