Don't be fooled, Ron is doing great!

[RonPaulNLiveFree]

Just think about it...

- his 60 minutes interview was not aired
- his larry king interview wasn't aired
- he was exluded from a debate
- he's barely mentioned in the news
- he's lconveniently left off the scientific polls

- he's raised more money than any other rep. in the 4th quarter
- he has the single day fundraising record
- he got 10% in IA and 8% in NH

call me crazy, but i think that's pretty frickin good for a guy that is barely mentioned on the news. i think the #1 reason they dont' support him is they don't hear who he is.

[hillertexas]

+1

[abruzz0]

Let's take a look here.

Brownback, Gilmore, Tancredo, Dodd, Biden, Richardson, Hunter, Kucinich, and Gravel.

DID ANY OF THEM GET 10% IN IOWA AND 8% IN NEW HAMPSHIRE?

Ron Paul has overcome incredible odds to be where he is at now. We must keep working hard. We have more states coming up, so let's get to it.

[Opulen]

bump!

[travismofo]

I have to admit my hopes were shattered momentarily on both Jan 3 and Jan 8. But I still have hope. Hell even Faux News is going to include him in the next debate because they realize that he has lots of support and is not going away soon. I'm sure is support is going to still grow.

[Minuteman2008]

Yeah, good post. He's done much better than initially expected.

Now is the time to come up with new strategies to take him to the next level.

I hope people can remain open minded to new ideas and not accept 10% as the best we can hope for though.

The grassroots has done wonders. Now is the time for the official campaign to be inspired and come up with strategies to increase Paul's percentages to get to the next level.

Just think, the first three primaries could have three different winners. The race is still wide open. At least at the state level we've seen candidates come up with one issue and ride it to the top after being way down in the polls. Paul needs something like that.

[wildflower]

bump - to get that horrible other thread off the main page. :mad:

[zerogod1989]

ya i was thinking about it like that the more the media hides him the better he must be doing.

[tfelice]

call me crazy, but i think that's pretty frickin good for a guy that is barely mentioned on the news. i think the #1 reason they dont' support him is they don't hear who he is.

The reason the "don't hear who he is" is because he never managed to climb out of the basement in the polls. The only reason he has been covered at all is because of the money bombs, internet presence and the occasional angry mob. If it were not for those things Paul would likely be covered as much as Hunter, Tancredo, Keyes, Gravel, Dodd, etc.

I'm not an apologist for the MSM, but let's be realistic here. There have been 21 candidates (9 Dem, 12 GOP) that have been official candiates for the nomination. Not all of them can get the same amount of coverage. The media reports on those candidates that rise to the top of the heap.

Look at Huck, for example, a couple of months ago he was hardly a household name and was in single digits nationally, and didn't get all that much coverage even though he had come in second in Ames and 2nd in the Value Voters Poll. But then he broke through in mid Novemeber and now is leading nationally. He made news and got coverage and used that to grow.

Conversely, even though he has been on the Tonight Show twice and many other major media appearances, Paul has not been able to break through. Do you honestly expect the media to spend any time on a candiate that has been in the basement the first three contests?

Paul needed to break through in December. To do something to create media interest and cause people to take a strong look at him. This didn't happen and the campaign suffered for it.

The grassroots should actually be thankful for the coverage he has gotten. There are a lot of candidates who have received less.

[Peace&Freedom]

Look at Huck, for example, a couple of months ago he was hardly a household name and was in single digits nationally, and didn't get all that much coverage even though he had come in second in Ames and 2nd in the Value Voters Poll. But then he broke through in mid Novemeber and now is leading nationally. He made news and got coverage and used that to grow.

Conversely, even though he has been on the Tonight Show twice and many other major media appearances, Paul has not been able to break through. Do you honestly expect the media to spend any time on a candiate that has been in the basement the first three contests?



Huckabee was ELEVATED by the media, and did NOT break through on his own. Paul won most of the state straw polls through the fall and the MSM SUPPRESSED coverage of it. I honestly expect Paul to be given time after three contests if Giuliani has been given the time after bottoming in the first three contests. Rudy got free national TV time the night of the Iowa caucuses when he finished at 3%, while Paul got less at 10%. Thompson has also bottomed out other than Iowa, and also gets more time.

[Jeremiah]

Look at Huck, for example, a couple of months ago he was hardly a household name and was in single digits nationally, and didn't get all that much coverage even though he had come in second in Ames and 2nd in the Value Voters Poll. But then he broke through in mid Novemeber and now is leading nationally. He made news and got coverage and used that to grow.


The extra coverage for Huckabee may also have something to do with the fact that he appointed Richard Haas, the president of the CFR as an advisor. You think?

[tfelice]

The extra coverage for Huckabee may also have something to do with the fact that he appointed Richard Haas, the president of the CFR as an advisor. You think?

Possibly, but I don't think everything that occurs is because of a grand conspiracy. There have been other CFR members that have run for the nomination in the past that did not automatically get media coverage.

Biden, Dodd and Richardson were all CFR but I didn't see them getting massive coverage

[Chester Copperpot]

Just think about it...

- his 60 minutes interview was not aired
- his larry king interview wasn't aired
- he was exluded from a debate
- he's barely mentioned in the news
- he's lconveniently left off the scientific polls

- he's raised more money than any other rep. in the 4th quarter
- he has the single day fundraising record
- he got 10% in IA and 8% in NH

call me crazy, but i think that's pretty frickin good for a guy that is barely mentioned on the news. i think the #1 reason they dont' support him is they don't hear who he is.

He had an interview on 60 minutes?

Huh?

[Chester Copperpot]

The extra coverage for Huckabee may also have something to do with the fact that he appointed Richard Haas, the president of the CFR as an advisor. You think?

No doubt. Just like the speech he gave in front of the CFR in Sept. That was when he went up in the polls from 1%

[athlon64bit]

Possibly, but I don't think everything that occurs is because of a grand conspiracy. There have been other CFR members that have run for the nomination in the past that did not automatically get media coverage.

Biden, Dodd and Richardson were all CFR but I didn't see them getting massive coverage

Just because they are members of the CFR doesn't mean that they are trusted by the elites. I reckon most of the members of the CFR don't understand the full agenda of CFR and the trilateral commission. Most members of CFR probably are brainwashed and or corrupted by business deals (many members of CFR are well connected in the business world) to think in a certain way with propaganda.
Hillary clinton and romney I think are the chosen ones and the trusted elite to take the presidency so MSM is touting them to the exclusion of others and even diebold favours them to.
The main problem is the fiat based monetary system of the federal reserve. It is what enslaves america and just about every major country in the world and leads to centralised government, loss of liberty, corporatism, death of the middle class and transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich.

[Jeremiah]

Possibly, but I don't think everything that occurs is because of a grand conspiracy. There have been other CFR members that have run for the nomination in the past that did not automatically get media coverage.

Richard Haas is the PRESIDENT of the CFR not simply a member. Sometimes coincidences actually do mean something. Certainly the winning of the Values Voters' Debates and Chuck Norris' endorsement helped energise the evangelical base but the additional MSM coverage has more to do with Haas' appointment, in my opinion. After all you can be sure that Haas has a Rolodex full of MSM contacts.

Do you think that the fact that Dick Cheney was the CEO at Halliburton had nothing to do with that company getting most of the contracts in Iraq? I'll say it again, sometimes coincidences actually do mean something. We had a saying in the 1960's - "Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is plotting against you".

One last thought. The MSM and other enemies of freedom love to use the "conspiracy nut" epithet to shut down their opposition. Do not fall into their trap.

[Cleaner44]

I have to admit my hopes were shattered momentarily on both Jan 3 and Jan 8. But I still have hope. Hell even Faux News is going to include him in the next debate because they realize that he has lots of support and is not going away soon. I'm sure is support is going to still grow.

Those who want us to fail are hoping we will get downand quit. We will not quit, this is what they don't understand. We will not start backing Huck or McCain becuase we want to be with a "winner". We know the truth.

[DrCap]

One should assume the MSM are trying to work in THEIR own best interest, not ours, and not America's best interests. Thus they get their jabs in about each other (for instance CNN talking about Fox forum) but then when covering NH CNN staff show Richardson in the pie chart with 2%, but leave Paul out even when he was at 9% and pretty much tied with Guili.
They want to 'be friends' with the next administration, so they cover people when it is in their best interest. They are just hedging their bets when they give time to Huckster or Thompson. They feel RP can't win, so why bother? And even if he did win, they probably know he would not be 'friends' with them, so why bother.

All the more reason to double up again on donations and your precinct.

[rfbz]

Nothing gives me more hope than seeing the other candidates we have to choose from. Romney spent a fortune in Iowa and NH. He can't win on his background because it's full of flip flops, and apparently spending himself crazy isn't really overcoming that much. McCain is a niche candidate that only does well in a few areas, and the republican base actually despises him (immigration, not supporting Bush tax cuts, him "selling out" and supporting Bush in 2000). Thompson is pretty much done (1% in NH?), Giuliani is essentially a Neocon liberal (he turns off the base with pro-choice views) and Huckabee turns people off with his overuse of the Christian card. Not to mention his record of raising taxes and being sympathetic to illegal aliens.

[Brian in Maryland]

I think Dr. Paul is doing great. Other candidates are going to start dropping out. Dr. Paul will start getting more exposure.

My wife and I have just made a new financial commitment to increase our donations every week.

I keep seeing negative posts from "tfelice". What does this mean? It looks like he is from another campaign to me. If not, start being positive. :)

[Joe3113]

Don't forget the pie graph incident, asking him about NAU, Asking him about third party every 2 seconds, calling him racist, saying he has no chance so people wont vote for him........

[JohnM]

I think Dr. Paul is doing great.

He is doing OK - neither great nor awful.


Other candidates are going to start dropping out. Dr. Paul will start getting more exposure.

Yes. The fewer candidates there are, the more exposure Dr Paul gets. People can remember 2 or 3 or maybe 4 names. There are 6 Republicans still standing. Hope that 2 or 3 drop out soon.


I keep seeing negative posts from "tfelice".

I thought his post was intelligent, well argued, and thoughtful. In fact, I found it pretty convincing.

[tfelice]

I think Dr. Paul is doing great. Other candidates are going to start dropping out. Dr. Paul will start getting more exposure.

My wife and I have just made a new financial commitment to increase our donations every week.

I keep seeing negative posts from "tfelice". What does this mean? It looks like he is from another campaign to me. If not, start being positive. :)

No I am not from another campaign. Been here a while, and been a supporter of paleoconservative candidates for years. I am just a realist. When some said Paul was going to win NH, I was realistic enough to know that he didn't have a chance.

You learn in life from your failures. Refusing to accept the fact that the campaign failed miserably to garner support is delusional. But some would rather blame the media, the voting machines, the voters themselves before they will admit that maybe RP isn't the best spokesman for the paleoconservative message.

Point two: regarding the posts on the CFR. I agree the CFR has influence, but if Paul was able to capture the attention of a significant portion of the GOP base and poll higher, he would have received the MSM coverage. He didn't, so he didn't get the coverage that other candidates have gotten. History backs this up, as Buchanan (who was not a CFR candidates) got plenty of coverage in 96. You have to earn coverage - it's not guaranteed and Paul's low poll numbers throughout this contest haven't earned him the right to be covered as much as the other candiates.

I really wish they would have done a better job, but I think the combination of a poorly run campaign, a grassroots run amuck and a candidate that wasn't ready for the big show destined this year's true conservative candidate to failure.

[Maltheus]

But some would rather blame the media, the voting machines, the voters themselves before they will admit that maybe RP isn't the best spokesman for the paleoconservative message.

Why not blame them all? Obviously the campaign is being run poorly. But the media blackout is a bigger problem IMO. We don't know how bad the fraud was, but it's pretty clear there was at least some. Most people are retards, so hell yes, blame the voters too. The raving mad supporters have certainly done us no service, they get some blame as well.

Right now though, the only thing that can make any kind of difference is all that money we gave. The campaign needs to come up with a novel way to spend it, to drum up more support. The campaign needs a shakeup if we're to do well on Super Tuesday.

[familydog]

Just think about it...

- his 60 minutes interview was not aired
- his larry king interview wasn't aired
- he was exluded from a debate
- he's barely mentioned in the news
- he's lconveniently left off the scientific polls

- he's raised more money than any other rep. in the 4th quarter
- he has the single day fundraising record
- he got 10% in IA and 8% in NH

call me crazy, but i think that's pretty frickin good for a guy that is barely mentioned on the news. i think the #1 reason they dont' support him is they don't hear who he is.

Good post :)

It's nice to have some positive outlooks on here. Don't see it too much anymore.

[tfelice]

Why not blame them all? Obviously the campaign is being run poorly. But the media blackout is a bigger problem IMO. We don't know how bad the fraud was, but it's pretty clear there was at least some. Most people are retards, so hell yes, blame the voters too. The raving mad supporters have certainly done us no service, they get some blame as well.

Right now though, the only thing that can make any kind of difference is all that money we gave. The campaign needs to come up with a novel way to spend it, to drum up more support. The campaign needs a shakeup if we're to do well on Super Tuesday.

Sure they all share some blame, but the media cannot be changed, the next election will come around and we will be up against the same corporate media as we are now. Though I would disagree with calling the voters "retards" - that's hardly a way to win over the people you need.

But if we have a candidate that is far more polished, can present the message in a way that is palatable to the average GOP voter, we can truly win. It's been done before. We need to learn from our mistakes and move on. If the RP campaign shifts gears drastically maybe there still is a chance, but historically candidates that have not broken through at some level by this time are usually long forgotten.

[RevolutionSD]

Possibly, but I don't think everything that occurs is because of a grand conspiracy. There have been other CFR members that have run for the nomination in the past that did not automatically get media coverage.

Biden, Dodd and Richardson were all CFR but I didn't see them getting massive coverage

Being in the CFR does not guarantee you coverage, but NOT being a member guarantees you will NOT get media coverage. Not conspiracy, just the way it works. The last non-CFR connected president that broke through was Reagan, who went on to surround himself with CFR members and stepped back to let the grand daddy neocon Bush run his presidency.

[tfelice]

Being in the CFR does not guarantee you coverage, but NOT being a member guarantees you will NOT get media coverage. Not conspiracy, just the way it works. The last non-CFR connected president that broke through was Reagan, who went on to surround himself with CFR members and stepped back to let the grand daddy neocon Bush run his presidency.

What about Buchanan he got coverage? Forbes got coverage. Pat Robertson got coverage.

[Eponym_mi]

Paul needed to break through in December.

He can break through before Feb 5th and that will bring down the house. Hopefully, the RP advertising campaign gets people stoked before then. Other candidates will limp away after any kind of upset.

[RonPaulFTFW]

more importantly he's only spent 2 mil.

[Lars]

Great Post. Ron is doing great - against the odds.

We are working on increasing the support from local media all over the country. Please join us at the site below.

[celticsman7]

All we need to do is double what we got in Iowa and New Hampshire. Consistenly getting between 16% and 25% in the Super Tuesday states would give us a great shot at winning this because we'd have so many delegates at the Convention.

[Maltheus]

Though I would disagree with calling the voters "retards" - that's hardly a way to win over the people you need.

You're right, not a way to win them over, just stating a fact. I don't think anything that gets said on this forum will have an impact on the election though so I'm not really worried about stating an opinion that most people here likely share.

[thechitowncubs]

It's true, he's doing very well.

Donate more, lets get this man what he needs. 23 Million.

[bolidew]

Keep in the race no matter what, more and more people will get to know Dr. Paul!

[tfelice]

He can break through before Feb 5th and that will bring down the house. Hopefully, the RP advertising campaign gets people stoked before then. Other candidates will limp away after any kind of upset.

Sure he can, but what are the realistic possibilities. Paul right now sits at 4% nationally. In order to break through he would need to gain 20 to 25 points. That is so monumental it's not even funny.

I know there are a bunch of you that refuse to let this thing go, but there comes a point where you have to realize that it's lost. Aside from a miraculous set of circumstances we have to chalk this one up as a lost cause and learn what we can from it.

[robofx]

Now is the time to come up with new strategies to take him to the next level.

Why don't we just do whatever Huckabee and McCain are doing?

Seems like their strategies work pretty good.

[RonPaulNLiveFree]

....

[robofx]

We will not start backing Huck or McCain becuase we want to be with a "winner". We know the truth.

If Paul doesn't get the nomination, I'm voting for whichever Communist ends-up being the Dem nominee - just to help drive the final nails in the USA's coffin.

Ignorant Americunts deserve everything they get if they don't wake up & put Paul & other Constitutionalists in office.

[amistybleu]

Let's take a look here.

Brownback, Gilmore, Tancredo, Dodd, Biden, Richardson, Hunter, Kucinich, and Gravel.

DID ANY OF THEM GET 10% IN IOWA AND 8% IN NEW HAMPSHIRE?

Ron Paul has overcome incredible odds to be where he is at now. We must keep working hard. We have more states coming up, so let's get to it.

+1

[Malakai0]

I completely agree. We are in a good position right now to have a bunch of delegates if we can keep the upward momentum going.

RP will do well in california the way the republicans choose their delagates there.

[amistybleu]

Why don't we just do whatever Huckabee and McCain are doing?

Seems like their strategies work pretty good.

telling lies, negativity, and deception are not the foundations on which we stand. PERIOD.

[AlbemarleNC0003]

Why don't we just do whatever Huckabee and McCain are doing?

Seems like their strategies work pretty good.

If you like their strategies, join them. This is a bottom up campaign. Go back, think about the kind of government Paul is espousing. Start local. Become a precinct leader.

[Goldwater Conservative]

Yeah, our guy is less well known than even Alan Keyes was in his last presidential bid and is significantly more maligned. As recently as November, I would never have thought Paul could get 8-10% of the vote and be on par with three other "top-tier" candidates. The GOP establishment is not laughing about such a noticeable chunk of its base going to a candidate whose support is widely considered non-transferable to another Republican, especially in light of the Dems seeing such monumental turnout.

[free.alive]

This is the strategy to win -

http://voters.ronpaul2008.com/grassrootscentral.test/menu.php

"Canvassing gets you votes - everything else is just noise."

[tpreitzel]

Richard Haas is the PRESIDENT of the CFR not simply a member. Sometimes coincidences actually do mean something. Certainly the winning of the Values Voters' Debates and Chuck Norris' endorsement helped energise the evangelical base but the additional MSM coverage has more to do with Haas' appointment, in my opinion. After all you can be sure that Haas has a Rolodex full of MSM contacts.
One last thought. The MSM and other enemies of freedom love to use the "conspiracy nut" epithet to shut down their opposition. Do not fall into their trap.

People are so brainwashed. Here's the definition of conspire:

transitive verb: plot
contrive intransitive verb
1 a: to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement <accused of conspiring to overthrow the government> b: scheme
2: to act in harmony toward a common end <circumstances conspired to defeat his efforts>

By definition, at least TWO people are needed to form a conspiracy. Also, from one of the definitions, a conspiracy must be unlawful or lead to an unlawful, e.g. unconstitutional, result. Probably, 90%+ of the legislation passed by the US Congress involves conspiracies. The other definition of conspire simply means that at least TWO people act together toward a common goal. In politics, I'm willing to bet nearly EVERY agreement is a conspiracy and most of those conspiracies are malevolent to the cause of liberty and the US Constitution.