what difference does it make? you can LITERALLY count the number of heads in every video/picture you've posted on this page last page. The numbers you're posting simply are not that impressive.

you're not doing yourself or paul supporters any favors here (something I'm sure other Paulfans would admit at this point)

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 4:35 PM. Reason : ]

1/31/2012 4:25:43 PM

it makes all the difference in the world. nobody knew who the hell obama was 12 months prior.


Learn to compare apples to apples and then we will talk. I'll show you the same turn out a month before the PRESIDENTIAL election.

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 4:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/31/2012 4:26:34 PM

okay, you should side-step outta the conversation.


Obama made a name for himself at the 2004 Democratic convention. Even rabid right-wingers would admit that.

1/31/2012 4:28:10 PM

Quote :

"Learn to compare apples to apples and then we will talk. I'll show you the same turn out a month before the PRESIDENTIAL election."

1/31/2012 4:28:45 PM

hahaha...no the fuck he won't.

Dude, stop. A part of the appeal of Obama was his marketing and branding (which was also an indicator of how much of a corporatist he is)...

But gathering DOZENS of people in a room during a primary is not an indicator of a revolution.

1/31/2012 4:31:01 PM

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here, stating the fucking obvious.

1/31/2012 4:31:38 PM

You're in denial. It's okay.

1/31/2012 4:33:14 PM

Oh, well then. I guess I'll just go fuck myself.

Glad we cleared that up.

1/31/2012 4:34:27 PM

Me too.

By the way:

A dozen = 12
Dozens = 1-9 dozen = 12 < x < 120
There are apparently thousands in the audience. How do I know? Ron Paul posted the number of seats.


Also,

this is the GOP primaries. Only the 4th primary out of what? 50?

Also,

you claim that "Obama was his [corporate] marketing and branding"... well Ron Paul has none of that and he is bringing in some impressive Obama-like numbers without an ounce of corporate sponsored help.

Also,

He is highest funded by non-corporate entities
He has the backing of the military


Just wait.

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 4:43 PM. Reason : .]

1/31/2012 4:42:36 PM

holding my breath

1/31/2012 4:43:29 PM

If I'm right, don't feel bad if I rub your nose in it. I give you the right to hold my nose in it if you're right.

1/31/2012 4:44:22 PM

jesus...it's cool that you're supporting him and all....but his numbers are his numbers. And this is coming from a progressive leftist who's seriously upset/disappointed with Obama, and who would like to see Paul more than any of the other GOP candidates.

But, Christ, you must be new to this. The only person who has a chance of beating Romney is Newt Gingrich, and that's if he continues on his warpath and gets the endorsement of the radical right (Palin, Bachman, Perry, Santorum and probably Pat Robertson).


[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 4:53 PM. Reason : ]

1/31/2012 4:44:25 PM

Voted Paul today in the FL primary. I am not nearly as dovish on foreign policy, and I think that completely abolishing the Fed and going to the gold standard is at least a bridge too far, and probably a silly idea altogether. I cast my vote as a vote for broader libertarianism within the GOP.

I will probably vote for Gary Johnson in the general election.



^ Yeah, Paul isn't even running for the Presidential nomination, anyway. He's running to influence GOP politics and platform, and I guess more generally to bring the message of libertarianism and limited government to the masses who otherwise don't pay much attention and don't think about there being another way besides what has become mainstream within the GOP and Dem parties.

1/31/2012 4:52:45 PM

I'm just saying... we live in America.

I was taught the constitution.

I have tested and questioned the constitution and that shit is legit.

I regress,

we live in America, I expect to live by the constitution.

As long as this country's name is America, I will forever pledge my allegiance to the constitution this country was founded.

It's fair and justice for all.

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 4:56 PM. Reason : .]

1/31/2012 4:55:44 PM

airtight logic.

a very patriotic haiku, if you will.

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 5:02 PM. Reason : ]

1/31/2012 5:01:28 PM

Like I said, it's more than patriotism.


If this were Nazi Germany, I wouldn't support it because it had oppressive policies that weren't fair and just for all.

If this were China, I wouldn't support it because it has a social class tiered system that isn't fair and just for all.

In Constitutional America, the law of the land at least AIMED for fairness and justice for all. It's beautiful.

Why would you advocate for these other slimeballs based on their chance of winning? You don't agree with them, but you are definitely supporting them with the rhetoric.

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 5:07 PM. Reason : I'm very passionate about this, sorry :/]

1/31/2012 5:06:59 PM

^if you really want to promote that mindset, you should get involved with the paul campaign and explain his virtues

instead of preaching the consequences and doom and gloom of him not getting elected

1/31/2012 5:28:22 PM

Quote :

"this is the GOP primaries. Only the 4th primary out of what? 50?"

This is the GOP primaries. It is not full of the kind of people who would even consider Ron Paul.

Seriously, consider the bloc within the party that has moved from Bachmann to Perry to Cain to Santorum to Gingrich. They make up a good 40-50%. Do you really think somebody who is finding all of those bigoted, theocratic, warhawk candidates acceptable is going to ever find Paul remotely appealing?

These People want more war, not less. They want more military spending and expansion, not less. They want more torture, more PATRIOT acts, racial profiling, harsher sentencing for drug offenses, federal laws against gay marriage, the list goes on. The average liberal has more in common with Ron Paul than the average GOP primary voter.

Then there's another 20-30% that consistently go with Romney, because they're moderates and think he's electable. Do you think they'll jump ship to a candidate that is fringe within their own party? Of course not, they're thinking strategically and getting behind Paul is a huge risk especially if it splits Romney's votes and raise the chances of someone like Newt getting it.

What the fuck is the the strategy here? You guys talk about snagging delegates here or there, but I don't understand how you plan to snag votes from the 60-80% of GOP primary voters who are incompatible with Paul for obvious reasons. He stands a much better chance of soaking up disenchanted liberals for whom the wars and civil liberties are high priority than he does the average Republican. This whole GOP nomination charade is just a huge money sink. I mean fuck, I'd love Jesus to win the nomination but that desire isn't going to compel me to waste time and money campaigning for Jesus. Either Ron Paul is waging a 100% purely symbolic primary campaign or he's just nuts/stupid.

Just go independent already, or team up with Gary Johnson. Or try and tame the cult of personality around him a little bit so people take him and his supporters more seriously.

[Edited on February 1, 2012 at 10:28 AM. Reason : .]

2/1/2012 10:23:40 AM

^ I think most of of that (definitely the first 3/4) is accurate.

I think that, at this point, there is a sufficient cult of personality (or whatever you want to call it) that he could go (L) on a Paul-Johnson ticket and just utterly lay waste to the GOP (and take a considerable bite out of the Democratic ticket).

However, I think that ultimately, he wants to work within the 2-party framework, as he views that as the best chance for long-term success. I doubt he thinks he'll ever turn the GOP into the Libertarian Party, but if he could shove it measurably in that direction and equip a generation with the ideology to continue nudging it along in that direction, that's probably what he's going for.

I think that he might want to avoid the (L) ticket "nuclear option" additionally for the sake of preserving Rand Paul's political future as his torch-bearing successor. I think he doesn't totally discount that move, though, because like any nuclear option, the most desirable way to play it is the ol' MAD-strategy, where nobody actually gets nuked. He's holding it in reserve so that the GOP has to honor the threat and give him so say-so within the party, within the platform, at the convention, etc.

2/1/2012 10:52:59 AM

Quote :

"Just go independent already, or team up with Gary Johnson. Or try and tame the cult of personality around him a little bit so people take him and his supporters more seriously."

We have already established multiple times and multiple occasion that running as an independent in a presidential election is a guaranteed method of not gaining publicity.

By Paul running as GOP, it shows A) he is playing the 'game' and taking the only path available to win and B) he is showing that independents don't get air time, even running as republicans on purpose because there is a body of people who own both the democrat and republican parties AND control the national media in which can control the outcomes of elections to get whatever they want.

If the media were operated by the people, it would look more like the internet, with ron paul everywhere.

Even on TWW, we don't have a single thread supporting the other candidates.

[Edited on February 1, 2012 at 11:02 AM. Reason : .]

2/1/2012 10:59:43 AM

Quote :

"We have already established multiple times and multiple occasion that running as an independent in a presidential election is a guaranteed method of not gaining publicity."

This entire campaign has proven that running as an anti-war, anti-racial profiling, anti-drug war, anti-military expansion libertarian in a GOP primary is also a guaranteed method of not gaining publicity.

Quote :

"By Paul running as GOP, it shows A) he is playing the 'game' and taking the only path available to win"

But he wont win, because he is at odds with the GOP-at-large on very fundamental issues. It's a protest/show campaign at best.

Quote :

"and B) he is showing that independents don't get air time, even running as republicans on purpose because there is a body of people who own both the democrat and republican parties AND control the national media in which can control the outcomes of elections to get whatever they want."

He's showing that candidates who can neither gain nor lose supporters are not newsworthy to the 85% of folks who aren't devoted fans. Every GOP candidate who wasn't Romney was treated exactly the same way until they got a surge that showed a bump in public interest. Romney's coverage can be easily attributed to his front-runner status and to the constant drama inherent in his constant stream of challengers.

Quote :

"If the media were operated by the people, it would look more like the internet, with ron paul everywhere."

First, the media is run by people, rich people who want to make a profit, who make programming decisions based largely on focus groups, public opinion polls, and even just running with what's popular on the other major networks. It's not profitable to report on candidates who don't get surges and maintain roughly the same level of support the entire campaign.

You don't need a conspiratorial narrative about a secret media cabal that also controls the elections and the media. Simple marketing principles explain it, in a very mundane way at that. They don't care who wins the primary as long as they gain viewers through reporting on it.

Second, the internet is not "the people". http://pewinternet.org/Trend-Data/Whos-Online.aspx

The internet, and Ron Paul supporters in particular, is disproportionately made up of white, middle class, college educated males between the ages of 18 and 29 who tend to live in urban or suburban neighborhoods. While the GOP is also disproportionately white and male, it's significantly different in the other demographic classifications.

Just because you see lots of Ron Paul fans on reddit or ronpaulforums.com does not mean they are as present in primary votes or network news viewerships. In fact, it's precisely because Paul fans tend to get their news on the internet rather than network news that the news chiefs couldn't care less about them.

Quote :

"Even on TWW, we don't have a single thread supporting the other candidates."

Lol yeah TWW's a real broad representative sample, alright


[Edited on February 1, 2012 at 11:34 AM. Reason : .]

2/1/2012 11:24:06 AM

I don't read reddit or ronpaulforums.com.

I read comments on local, state, and national news articles.

What can you tell me about people who comment on news articles on the local, state, and national level?

2/1/2012 12:16:22 PM

I would say that Ron Paul fans have more of an agenda to comment on those outlets you mentioned because they understand Paul lacks the media publicity other candidates receive. There is less incentive for supporters of other candidates to make an equal amount of posts.

2/1/2012 12:57:50 PM

No one is passionate about Gingrich or Romney because they don't stand for anything. They'll say what it takes to get elected.

2/1/2012 1:11:19 PM

Ron Paul fans are all over the internet because they're white, middle-class suburbanites with broadband.

That does not make up the majority of the GOP base.

2/1/2012 2:35:02 PM

^^ Yes, and they will get elected.

The Ron Paul movement needs to be position itself for the next thing at this point.

They won't get him in office in 2016, it's out of the question. So they really need to regroup in some way, or else it'll just be forgotten by history. Really Paul people, I'm saying this as a friend.

2/1/2012 3:01:15 PM

Quote :

"preserving Rand Paul's political future as his torch-bearing successor."

interesting thought....Ron admittedly isn't all that excited about the prospect of being president, and has more than implied that a main goal is getting the libertarian views to the mainstream. How likely is it that he's paving the way for Rand to run in 16...

A strong/attention grabbing, but ultimately unsuccessful primary run...A weak repub candidate gets blasted by Obama in the election...4 years pass and the younger generations grab a little more voting influence from the older ones, all while repubs as a whole grow more discontented with Dems...Rand runs in 16 on a slightly more palatable platform for mainstream repubs and gets the nom.

Sort of like haggling on a used car....start the bidding way low, so the eventual price is somewhere close to where you ultimately wanted it to be.

2/1/2012 3:21:19 PM

Quote :

".Ron admittedly isn't all that excited about the prospect of being president,"

It's called modesty. A lost art.

2/1/2012 3:33:37 PM

Quote :

"The Ron Paul movement needs to be position itself for the next thing at this point. They won't get him in office in 2016, it's out of the question. So they really need to regroup in some way, or else it'll just be forgotten by history. Really Paul people, I'm saying this as a friend."

They just need to take over the positions all the old people are in.

Old people are retiring/dying.

The Cindy McCains are the future, and this breed is more amenable to the socially liberal, fiscally conservative brand of GOP.

2/1/2012 3:39:23 PM

http://www.facebook.com/events/192677970828185/

2/1/2012 10:58:55 PM

Troops are the 1%.

2/2/2012 9:09:11 AM

^ how does your dad owning a small business affect your political views. As a person who grew up in a family provided by a small business and lived in a community where small businesses were the norm, how do you feel that critical segment of our economy is honestly affected by a republican or democrat in office.

Adam, I hope you can drop the act for a moment because I would like to hear your sincere opinion.

2/2/2012 1:20:36 PM

destroyer i dont like that picture.

the troops in from of him also in uniform marching that way and with that particular angle is very hitler / mussolini-ish.

just my two cents, i like ron paul.

2/2/2012 3:00:24 PM

Active duty military, 1,430,895 of a country of 307,006,550.
0.4%

All veterans included, 22,658,000.
7.3%

My post was incorrect. <1% Not really a statistically important political group.

^I had the same impression. Looks like a propaganda poster.

[Edited on February 2, 2012 at 3:04 PM. Reason : .]

2/2/2012 3:03:00 PM

Statistically important, no, but it does send a strong message. When the people actually fighting the wars support Ron Paul, that should help people understand that the GOP establishment hawks do not "support the troops" - they support send troops to die for political reasons.

2/2/2012 3:17:13 PM

People will believe whatever FOX tells them to believe.

2/2/2012 3:25:06 PM

1% is correct, unless children younger than 18 can vote.

There are about 137,263,000 registered voters in the US.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p20/2010/Table4a_2010.xls

2/2/2012 4:03:35 PM

Dios mio. I had no idea voter registration was so low.

2/2/2012 4:54:46 PM

ron paul just nailed his interview with cnn

2/4/2012 7:53:48 PM

I really think his age is catching up to him, though. he's just not as fast on his feet with comebacks as other candidates, and I think that hurts him, especially since he is actually the most knowledgeable of the issues among the people running. His best response to some of the posturing so far was him pointing out that he had 2 kids and a wife and still served while Newt was bemoaning having to leave his kid and wife (you know, the one that he later left while she had cancer) behind.

2/4/2012 8:13:39 PM

^^ the Piers Morgan interview? I watched and listened to it and thought it was pretty good.

http://www.dailypaul.com has a lot of good videos of his interviews

2/4/2012 9:23:53 PM

^no, i did not see that. i was talking about a short bit he did for the nevada caucus

2/4/2012 9:45:36 PM

The NV GOP Chair resigned last night, Clark Cty (most populous) conducting recount, and CNN covered 15 straight minutes of the Clark Cty live vote tally last night and RonPaul easily had 55-65% of all votes.

But the media just calls NV and moves on.

Oh yes, and some GOP party officials said they may throw out Clark Cty altogether.

2/5/2012 4:18:13 PM

voting system is rigged. I stand by my statement.

2/5/2012 4:22:55 PM

Nevada is a caucus anyway so there are no delegates to give away. It's purely for show.

2/5/2012 4:30:02 PM

^ the fuck?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-adds-to-delegate-lead-with-big-victory-in-nevada-caucuses/2012/02/04/gIQAWgxiqQ_story.html

Quote :

"Romney adds to delegate lead with big victory in Nevada caucuses"

how would he do that without being awarded delegates?

[Edited on February 5, 2012 at 5:05 PM. Reason : ]

2/5/2012 5:05:48 PM

Sorry, I was mistaken. For some reason I thought caucuses didn't give out delegates. I believe in reality they're just taken to be less important because of the structure of the voting process.

2/6/2012 4:28:42 AM

some caucuses are purely for show however, and award no delegates.

i believe missouri is one of these, for example.

2/6/2012 7:59:18 AM

Show democracy is my favorite kind!

2/6/2012 5:30:53 PM

Quote :

"What can you tell me about people who comment on news articles on the local, state, and national level?"

They are internet users, so disproportionately composed of 18-29 year old white middle class urban/suburban males. I'm not sure how you thought "But I use these sites!" would refute my assertion that Paulites generally get their news from the internet, not network news, and so aren't of interest to network news marketing analysts and/or programming directors.

Or maybe I'm wrong, and the network execs are working around the clock to suppress any news of the half-senile Grandpa Gold who's treated as a fringe loser by his own party, and who's been launching and failing Presidential bids since his supporters were literally babies. I'm sure they're totally terrified of Mr. 15%, who would certainly have the votes of all the GOP warhawks, evangelicals, and PATRIOT act enthusiasts if only they could hear his message...

[Edited on February 7, 2012 at 12:45 PM. Reason : .]

2/7/2012 12:40:48 PM