Cnn says Ron Paul Is A "Threat" In Michigan

[Runnerguy]

I was just passing by Cnn and they had a pollster on who said Michigan is up for grabs right now.
They said Romney, Huck, and Edwards are fighting, but also said Ron Paul has been pouring a lot of money into the state and has a chance of winning.
If the Anti-Paul media is reporting this Ron has got to be doing good in the state.

[me3]

I'll believe it when I see it. No more inflated expectations.

We have a lot of work to do.

[Talldude1412]

How is he supposedly doing so well? They haven't committed very many resources AT ALL to michigan? There are some good meetups doing some good work, but overall all I have seen are a couple measly mailouts and radio ads. If RP does well in Michigan, it will have little to do with the campaign at this point.

[itshappening]

they probably assume the dems will vote for the anti-war candidate

I hope they do

[mavtek]

Well we could be a threat, but we have got to get the democrats out in force! They can't vote in this primary. So that's the only way I see it.

[Ron2Win]

A "threat" wtf. He should be a "possibility" not characterize him as a threat.

[tfelice]

Well we could be a threat, but we have got to get the democrats out in force! They can't vote in this primary. So that's the only way I see it.


If the only way Paul is a threat in MI is by pulling in Dem voters then his threat ends there. Paul cannot win the nomination in this manner. He needed to convince mainstream GOP voters that he was a viable candidate and he failed miserably at that.

[lew]

The MSM also said Paul will probably surprise everyone in Iowa and could win NH. Neither happened.

I'm not getting my hopes up again.


Work hard and make it happen. But no more expectations.

[Mark Rushmore]

If the only way Paul is a threat in MI is by pulling in Dem voters then his threat ends there. Paul cannot win the nomination in this manner. He needed to convince mainstream GOP voters that he was a viable candidate and he failed miserably at that.

? Winning a primary would go a long way to doing what you just said he needed to do?

[partypooper]

Paul cannot win the nomination in this manner. He needed to convince mainstream GOP voters that he was a viable candidate and he failed miserably at that.

this has been the problem all along. a way too much energy was spent trying to woo independents, anarchists and far left and very little was done to engage the republican base. dr paul himself often equivocated between republicans and democrats and pushed his foreign policy into every issue all the time ignoring all arguments he could have used that could actually resonate with mainstream republicans. it's one thing to disagree with the base on one issue - it is another to habitually criticize the party.

[VoluntaryMan]

A "threat" wtf. He should be a "possibility" not characterize him as a threat.

How Freudian.

[VoluntaryMan]

? Winning a primary would go a long way to doing what you just said he needed to do?

Ronald Reagan won the 1980 nomination by drawing the Democrat vote. Remember the phrase, "Reagan Democrats." And, MI was one of those states. More of the states had open primaries in 1980. In fact, more states had open primaries than just prior to this election (within months), when it was determined that Paul was a "threat." GHWB drew straight from Republicans, like Rmoney, while Reagan attracted, and won with, the crossover vote. Don't knock it.

[Eponym_mi]

If the only way Paul is a threat in MI is by pulling in Dem voters then his threat ends there. Paul cannot win the nomination in this manner.

You're very right about this. Dems and Independents will not cross over unless they are very motivated on the anti-war issue, 2nd amendment, and possibly on economic issues (but that is less likely, IMO). Relying on these voters for a big turnout is going to lead to a huge disappointment. If these voters truly lean Dem, the only motivation I see is to muck up the primary, which would be great, but there is probably not much committed motivation for that.

[walt]

they probably assume the dems will vote for the anti-war candidate

I hope they do

if nobody knows he exists in the right way, they won't turn out.

[VoluntaryMan]

this has been the problem all along. a way too much energy was spent trying to woo independents, anarchists and far left and very little was done to engage the republican base. dr paul himself often equivocated between republicans and democrats and pushed his foreign policy into every issue all the time ignoring all arguments he could have used that could actually resonate with mainstream republicans. it's one thing to disagree with the base on one issue - it is another to habitually criticize the party.

Election are not won by wrestling committed voters away from other candidates. Votes are won, and support grown, by courting all eligible undecided voters (Republican, Independent, 3rd party, Democrat) -- whoever can vote for you, who hasn't already committed to another candidate. Of course, voters change their minds, and switch allegiances. That's that's due to shifting margins, in a landscape of ebbing and flowing spheres of influence (as uncommitted friends, family, coworkers, and neighbors ally themselves with candidates different from the ones were we considering). Everyone has a sphere of influences, and must work effectively within it; if you're a Democrat supporter, you'll probably be most effective persuading fellow Democrats. If you're a Libertarian, Republican, Independent, ...........well, you get the picture. Don't complain about the broad cross section of support, and that it doesn't look more like you. If it doesn't look more like you, it's because someone else is working harder than you are.

[stevedasbach]

Paul can become a threat in Michigan if:
1. The campaign focuses on the economy (tie economic problems to falling dollar, war, debt, spending overseas etc.).
2. He blankets the airwaves with ads focused on the economy.
3. Targetted appeals to antiwar Democrats (Obama and Edwards aren't on the ballot) -- it's an open primary
4. Targetted appeals to Arab-Americans on civil liberties

While all the other GOP candidates try to position themselves as candidates of change, Paul has a chance to own the economy, which is now the #1 issue to voters.

[Shellshock1918]

I'll believe it when I see it. No more inflated expectations.

We have a lot of work to do.

Yes, no more of the "he's got it" crap. We want it, we fight for it.

[ColdSoul]

Remember Michigan is one of the states in the worst financial situtations. They lost A LOT of car manufacturing money over the years.

I am sure the Economy and NAFTA and losing manufacturing jobs are BIG issues there

[tsetsefly]

they probably assume the dems will vote for the anti-war candidate

I hope they do

^^^^^^^^^^^

[Vendico]

Think about this, the meida is saying that crap to cover the butts and to take us off guard.

[speciallyblend]

it means HELLO,let them pump it up,so maybe some of the sheep,might just want greener pastures;) hint THE MESSAGE ello,this is great:) let the media report us as a threat a winner elloo this is what we want good reporting geez,anyone posting anything negative on this thread ill knock up side their head with my snowboard,geeez

[Lord Xar]

You mean, they will tell us he is a threat.. then the polls will show high, and then suddenly - they will falter and the final results will just coincidentally match the polls, while someone who is loathed will be thrust into the spotlight.

Who's turn is it now? Guilianis?

[speciallyblend]

You mean, they will tell us he is a threat.. then the polls will show high, and then suddenly - they will falter and the final results will just coincidentally match the polls, while someone who is loathed will be thrust into the spotlight.

Who's turn is it now? Guilianis?

no tell that to huckabee who has placed 1st and 3rd,thanks to the media,though he will implode.but we need those sheep baa baa baa,if they can be swayed to huckabee then they will love the better grass to eat;) ron pauls message sells itself,but if you rather they ignore him saying nothing positive then great.

but i say the more ron paul is seen on tv ,the better, we have been a threat and to be honest WE ARE THE THREAT TO THE HILLARY REPUBLICANS,if the gop doesnt nominate ron paul the gop loses,unless they nominate some other REAL REPUBLICAN thats not in the race then rp is a vp,but the rest of the republicans will lose to obama or hillary,americans in general treat the word republican as if they need a plunger for the toilet;)

RON PAUL will not accept a VP position from the hillary republicans.. and i havent heard about any real republicans running other then RON PAUL..

[spivey378]

we need to make anti nafta commercials that are geared towards the auto industry

[partypooper]

Election are not won by wrestling committed voters away from other candidates.

for months, there have been very few committed voters in the republican race. our problem is that most of those uncommitted voters are committed to be against dr paul. he had to deal with that BIG PROBLEM. instead, he made the problem bigger (e.g. in the eve of NH election he praised kucinich).

[pcosmar]

I am here.
I am optimistic.
I am just taking a break, going back out in a few.
Lots of folks like Ron Paul, I just hope they will vote and that there are enough of us.

[Goldwater Conservative]

they probably assume the dems will vote for the anti-war candidate

I hope they do

Unfortunately, that probably means they'll vote for "Make it 100 years in Iraq" McCain. :rolleyes:

[VoluntaryMan]

for months, there have been very few committed voters in the republican race. our problem is that most of those uncommitted voters are committed to be against dr paul. he had to deal with that BIG PROBLEM. instead, he made the problem bigger (e.g. in the eve of NH election he praised kucinich).

The problem with your blame-the-messenger approach is that the campaign is based on the message, not the messenger. Therefore, if you support the message, getting that message out is just as much your responsibility as Paul's. Take responsibility. Paul lost because he said something nice about a Democrat? Are you kidding me? MUCKain won, and HE was endorsed by a Democrat.

[partypooper]

The problem with your blame-the-messenger approach is that the campaign is based on the message, not the messenger.

this is the election for the president, not for the message.


Therefore, if you support the message, getting that message out is just as much your responsibility as Paul's. Take responsibility.

i will take the responsibility when dozens of thousands of people spend their money, wave signs for hours on icy cold weather and even leave their jobs for me.


Paul lost because he said something nice about a Democrat? Are you kidding me? MUCKain won, and HE was endorsed by a Democrat.

kucinich is not just any democrat. and it is not that kucinich endorsed him - it is that dr paul praised kucinich as the democrat closest to him.

[familydog]

Ronald Reagan won the 1980 nomination by drawing the Democrat vote. Remember the phrase, "Reagan Democrats." And, MI was one of those states. More of the states had open primaries in 1980. In fact, more states had open primaries than just prior to this election (within months), when it was determined that Paul was a "threat." GHWB drew straight from Republicans, like Rmoney, while Reagan attracted, and won with, the crossover vote. Don't knock it.

You're right it shouldn't be knocked. But today you have talk radio, internet, and a lot more television. Especially with Rush and the radio, the neocon, Christian, and regular GOP base are more organized, more informed, and more willing to vote against a "liberal" like Paul.

[IRO-bot]

why can't the dems vote?

[VoluntaryMan]

this is the election for the president, not for the message.

True enough, but this isn't a typical election. In fact, BECAUSE of the message, Ron Paul stands zero chance without a vigorous grassroots effort. The message, although correct, is just as much of an obstacle to nomination as you accuse the candidate of being. Certainly, if we take Rmoney's looks and money, and marry them with Huckabee-atch's glibness, while retaining Ron Paul's message (and record of consistency and sincerety), then we would probably have succeeded in building the perfect candidate. Sit around and wait for the 2nd coming of Ron Reagan, if you like, but I'm sticking with Ron Paul. Reagan had all the attributes you seem to long for in a candidate, but Reagan, although he was elected, dropped the ball (don't forget that).


i will take the responsibility when dozens of thousands of people spend their money, wave signs for hours on icy cold weather and even leave their jobs for me.

Every one of us, including you, needs to take responsibility for liberty. You want a campaign where you can win back your liberty by doing no more than showing up to vote? Good luck with that. Nice fantasy. Ain't gonna happen. For this to succeed, every one of us must fight, not just vote, FIGHT. If this campaign fails, things will get much uglier and harder. We are luck that it hasn't come to blood yet; it might. I still want to believe that the republic can be restored through a peaceful revolution, but never forget the revolution that made this one possible. Voting is your privilege. Liberty is your right. Fighting for your liberty is your responsibility.


kucinich is not just any democrat. and it is not that kucinich endorsed him - it is that dr paul praised kucinich as the democrat closest to him.

You think people voted for Kucinich because Paul told them too? Has it occured to you that we need every vote -- EVERY vote. When Kucinich drops his campaign, and he will, those votes should come to us -- even if Kucinich and Paul aren't a perfect match (and, yes, politically they are worlds apart, but they are both principled men -- an extremely rare commodity in politics). There are more open primaries to come, and even more Kucinich supporters in those states.

[VoluntaryMan]

You're right it shouldn't be knocked. But today you have talk radio, internet, and a lot more television. Especially with Rush and the radio, the neocon, Christian, and regular GOP base are more organized, more informed, and more willing to vote against a "liberal" like Paul.

Organized and centralized, I will grant you. However, if they were at all informed, they would know that Paul is the most conservative candidate in the race. That they have all those "resources," and still don't know that, that should make you question the value of those "resources."

[partypooper]

Every one of us, including you, needs to take responsibility for liberty.

this probably sounds good to you but is really a meaningless statement. dr paul got a lot of money from people who can not afford it (he himself is much richer than 99% of his supporters) and he is the one responsible for attracting new people to "the message of freedom". it's a sort of division of labor thing. i have my own stuff to do for which i am paid.


You think people voted for Kucinich because Paul told them too?

as far as i know, dr paul never told people to vote for kucinich and, given kucinich results, nobody votes for him anyways. on the other hand, saying nice things about kucinich is not exactly making you a great republican candidate.


Has it occured to you that we need every vote -- EVERY vote. When Kucinich drops his campaign, and he will, those votes should come to us -- even if Kucinich and Paul aren't a perfect match (and, yes, politically they are worlds apart, but they are both principled men -- an extremely rare commodity in politics). There are more open primaries to come, and even more Kucinich supporters in those states.

we can not have every vote - we need a strategy for getting as many votes as possible and praising kucinich is not a way to do that. no sane republican will ever vote for anybody associating himself with kucinich. kucinich has no support, and even if every single one of his supporters shifted to us (and many of them will not do that because they are fanatically devoted to him and care about difference between him and dr paul) we would still be where we are.

[ProfNo]

We need to attack McCain in Michigan as a warmonger so that he does not get the antiwar vote like in NH.

[Johnnybags]

speech and tell them they are in a depression, caused from Washington DC and all the hope and optimism poppycock in the world will not change it, only action.

[VoluntaryMan]

i have my own stuff to do for which i am paid.

Don't we all? Dr. Paul could be practicing medicine, instead of subjecting himself to this. This is a huge sacrifice for him. Certainly, establishment candidates benefit from running, but anti-establishment candidates do not. This isn't exactly a career boosting move for him.


saying nice things about kucinich is not exactly making you a great republican candidate.

Saying nice things about Leiberman didn't hurt MUCKain. Certainly Kucinich isn't as regionally popular as Liberalman, but your premise is flawed.


we can not have every vote - we need a strategy for getting as many votes as possible

True, but we don't need to turn any away either.

[familydog]

Organized and centralized, I will grant you. However, if they were at all informed, they would know that Paul is the most conservative candidate in the race. That they have all those "resources," and still don't know that, that should make you question the value of those "resources."

The problem is that the definition of conservatism is messed up nowadays. WE know that Paul is the most conservative, because our definition is different than theirs. Their definition of conservative is going after the bad guy at all costs in the name of protecting America. Paul needs to change that perception, the grassroots needs to change the definition. This is exaclty why the GOP voting base should be our number one target. If we pick up Dems and Indies on the way, great I say welcome aboard. This is why I am against mob rule and chasing talk show hosts down because their definition of conservatism is different. That will never change their minds.

[runderwo]

When Kucinich drops his campaign, and he will

Don't be so sure. He stuck it out until defeat in 2004 and has stated he'll do the same again this year.

[RPDelegate]

If the only way Paul is a threat in MI is by pulling in Dem voters then his threat ends there. Paul cannot win the nomination in this manner. He needed to convince mainstream GOP voters that he was a viable candidate and he failed miserably at that.

Sorry to say, but I have to agree with this to a point. He's doing a fine job promoting his message. But not very good at promoting himself.

[VoluntaryMan]

Don't be so sure. He stuck it out until defeat in 2004 and has stated he'll do the same again this year.
Good for him.

[VoluntaryMan]

The problem is that the definition of conservatism is messed up nowadays. WE know that Paul is the most conservative, because our definition is different than theirs. Their definition of conservative is going after the bad guy at all costs

They should read 'Moby Dick.'

[partypooper]

Don't we all? Dr. Paul could be practicing medicine, instead of subjecting himself to this. This is a huge sacrifice for him. Certainly, establishment candidates benefit from running, but anti-establishment candidates do not. This isn't exactly a career boosting move for him.

i am not sure he would even be practicing medicine if he were not running for president. sorry, but i don't see this is a that much of a sacrifice on his side. i have seen many supporters, many of them poor people, who have sacrificed more. how much money did dr paul contribute to his own campaign?


Saying nice things about Leiberman didn't hurt MUCKain. Certainly Kucinich isn't as regionally popular as Liberalman, but your premise is flawed.

kucinich is an extreme leftist shunned away by his own party. leiberman is a DINO, a "centrist", a republican in democrat clothing. and yes, some republicans are turned off by the fact that mccain is close to leiberman and some other democrats. and in fact if mccain doesn't win the nomination it will be because of that.

but that is nothing compared to kucinich.


True, but we don't need to turn any away either.

i agree. so why turn off many republican supporters by praising kucinich? i am not saying dr paul had to say bad stuff about kucinich, just not single him out as somebody he is close to.

but that is just one of many examples where he went over his way to annoy republican establishment. yet, he is running as a republican.

[VoluntaryMan]

how much money did dr paul contribute to his own campaign?

There's a rule in business: never fund your own projects. Money is a good objective indicator of support for an idea. If all the money is coming from the candidate (a la Rmoney), how broad is his support? The irony is that Rmoney should know better. So, why is he doing it?


why turn off many republican supporters by praising kucinich?

Outside of the Paul campaign, I doubt that very many Republicans even know who Kucinich is, and, of those who do, I doubt they could point to a policy difference between him and Leiberman, with the possible exception of Kucinich's opposition to the PATRIOT Act and the war in Iraq. If those two positions are what make Leiberman acceptable and Kucinich an unter menschen, then those Republicans weren't going to support Paul anyway.

BTW, who do you support?

[Cindy]

I'll believe it when I see it. No more inflated expectations.

We have a lot of work to do.

Exactly! This is the same media that said Paul could come in 3rd in Iowa and win NH.

Expect 5th to last in Michigan and WORK for achieving first.

[partypooper]

There's a rule in business: never fund your own projects. Money is a good objective indicator of support for an idea. If all the money is coming from the candidate (a la Rmoney), how broad is his support? The irony is that Rmoney should know better. So, why is he doing it?

nonsense. romney knows very well how much money he gave to the campaign and how much he got from the supporters. besides, there are polls and primary results to tell him how he is doing.

in addition, there is a big difference between "all money coming from the candidate" and "no money coming from the candidate".


Outside of the Paul campaign, I doubt that very many Republicans even know who Kucinich is, and, of those who do, I doubt they could point to a policy difference between him and Leiberman, with the possible exception of Kucinich's opposition to the PATRIOT Act and the war in Iraq.

obviously you don't k now any republicans. every republican with any interest in politics knows who kucinich is. and though they might not be able to spell out his specific policies, they don't have to. they don't have to justify to you or ron paul or anybody else why they think kucinich is ridiculous or why they will never vote for a repulican that ties himself to kucinich.

[VoluntaryMan]

obviously you don't know any republicans.
Actually, I know more Republicans than anything else. I've been a GOP organizer since the 80's. Most of my friends, family, and associates are Republicans. Unfortunately, though, many of them are also noecons, which means that, although they're Republicans, they aren't really conservatives...but I'm still working on them.

If you don't know the difference between a neocon and a conservative then you need to spend less time posting and more time reading.


every republican with any interest in politics knows who kucinich is, and though they might not be able to spell out his specific policies, they don't have to.

Again, any of the Republicans who REALLY know anything about Kucinich's positions are already voting for Paul. How can they claim to know anything about him, if they don't know anything about his positions? More importantly, how can they honestly claim to dislike his positions, if they can't identify any of them? Most of his positions don't appeal to me, but at least I know what they are, and am not just reflexively responding to news geek programming from FOX.



they don't have to justify to you or ron paul or anybody else why they think kucinich is ridiculous or why they will never vote for a repulican that ties himself to kucinich.

You still didn't answer my question about which candidate you support, so I'm going to guess: Rmoney?

[jointhefightforfreedom]

economy is going to be a big issue in Mi
they have one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country

[LibertiORDeth]

A "threat" wtf. He should be a "possibility" not characterize him as a threat.

I know, but this is positive, coming from CNN.

[partypooper]

If you don't know the difference between a neocon and a conservative then you need to spend less time posting and more time reading.

please stop patronizing me.

neocons are republicans and you have to convince them - or a big chunk of them - to vote for dr paul if you want him to win the nomination. who is the "true" conservative or republican in some abstract sense is irrelevant in this context. you need to work with the republicans you have - not with 1% of real republicans.


Again, any of the Republicans who REALLY know anything about Kucinich's positions are already voting for Paul. How can they claim to know anything about him, if they don't know anything about his positions?

plase think before responding to me. i never claimed they said they know or not know anything about kucinich actual positions - i merely observed that most republicans resent kucinich (rightly or wrongly) and that, since it is we who are trying to convince them to vote for dr paul, they are not obliged to justify to us why, exactly, they hate kucinich. whether they are misguided or not is irrelevant because we don't have time to educate every republican on all possible issues. it is much more prudent to skip kucinich altogether.

[VoluntaryMan]

neocons are republicans and you have to convince them - or a big chunk of them - to vote for dr paul if you want him to win the nomination.

Yes, neocons, unfortunately, are Republicans. Neocons are also socialists, which makes it difficult to win them over to Ron Paul's positions. Sad fact is that neocons don't even know they're socialists. It's easier to convince a self-aware socialist to vote for Paul, than to convince a neocon socialist in denial. That is the saddest fact of all.


i merely observed that most republicans resent kucinich (rightly or wrongly) and that, since it is we who are trying to convince them to vote for dr paul, they are not obliged to justify to us why, exactly, they hate kucinich. whether they are misguided or not is irrelevant because we don't have time to educate every republican on all possible issues. it is much more prudent to skip kucinich altogether.

Okay, how do you suggest persuading someone who is convinced that America has the right, obligation, and resources to impose "stability" and "democracy" on the rest of the world that his worlview is misguided, without first educating him?

[pacelli]

I'll believe it when I see it. No more inflated expectations.

We have a lot of work to do.

+1

[partypooper]

Yes, neocons, unfortunately, are Republicans. Neocons are also socialists, which makes it difficult to win them over to Ron Paul's positions. Sad fact is that neocons don't even know they're socialists. It's easier to convince a self-aware socialist to vote for Paul, than to convince a neocon socialist in denial. That is the saddest fact of all.

few people have consistent ideologies the way you portray them, and the fact that they don't think of themselves as socialists might work to our advantage. in any case, if what you are saying is that neocons simply can not be converted to dr paul under any circumstance then you are really saying that we can not win and could never have won the nomination.


Okay, how do you suggest persuading someone who is convinced that America has the right, obligation, and resources to impose "stability" and "democracy" on the rest of the world that his worlview is misguided, without first educating him?

please explain how exactly is educating them about kucinich going to help?

sure, we need to change other people's minds - but since changing minds is extremely difficult we need to pick our issues wisely. this is precisely the reason why no time should be wasted on kucinich. dr paul should never ever have brought him up.

[Ethek]

This just became much harder. Its been reported on MSNBC that Romney has pulled all funding from his SC effort. You can guarantee he will be focusing all expectations on MI.

[Eponym_mi]

This just became much harder. Its been reported on MSNBC that Romney has pulled all funding from his SC effort. You can guarantee he will be focusing all expectations on MI.

As if it wasn't hard enough! He has been advertising like crazy here.

[Trigonx]

As if it wasn't hard enough! He has been advertising like crazy here.

i wanna know just how much money Romney has left and how much he has spent and how much of his money has he put into his campaign to date.

[Ron Paul Fan]

Currently polling 6th in Michigan. Maybe he can jump over Thompson for 5th. No better than that though.

[VoluntaryMan]

few people have consistent ideologies the way you portray them, and the fact that they don't think of themselves as socialists might work to our advantage. in any case, if what you are saying is that neocons simply can not be converted to dr paul under any circumstance then you are really saying that we can not win and could never have won the nomination.


I'm really getting tired of this:

1) You said that only Republicans were worth converting, even though Reagan won the nomination by attracting crossover voters in open primaries, when he was running against an establishment candidate, one with a larger Republican base of support (initially). Reagan proved his viability to Republicans (ironically), by winning primaries with the help of Democrats and Independents.

2) I never suggested that neocons were impossible to convert, only that they were socialists in denial, and therefore required more time to convert than others. It was you who said that we didn't have time to educate them, but that we shouldn't be going after anyone else.


please explain how exactly is educating them about kucinich going to help?

What? You're the one with the Kucinich fixation. Where did I suggest educating people about Kucinich? I was asking you how you intended to educate neocons as to their errors regarding US foreign policy. Please, explain.

[partypooper]

What? You're the one with the Kucinich fixation. Where did I suggest educating people about Kucinich? I was asking you how you intended to educate neocons as to their errors regarding US foreign policy. Please, explain.

you are right - all this is extremely boring. good luck with your strategy of praising kucinich the night before the primary.

[mconder]

How is he supposedly doing so well? They haven't committed very many resources AT ALL to michigan? There are some good meetups doing some good work, but overall all I have seen are a couple measly mailouts and radio ads. If RP does well in Michigan, it will have little to do with the campaign at this point.

Maybe we do better in places where the campaign doesn't spend money.

[VoluntaryMan]

you are right - all this is extremely boring. good luck with your strategy of praising kucinich the night before the primary.

Good luck with Rmoney.

[VoluntaryMan]

Currently polling 6th in Michigan. Maybe he can jump over Thompson for 5th. No better than that though.

Polling among whom? Are they polling all registered voters? ALL?