PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul Collecting Fans, Big Money


Danny White
11-15-2007, 08:40 AM
Ron Paul collecting fans, big money

By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer Thu Nov 15, 6:04 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Those who dismissed Rep. Ron Paul as a joke in the Republican presidential primary campaign aren't laughing so hard these days.

The Texas libertarian's rise in the polls and in fundraising proves that a small but passionate number of Americans can be drawn to an advocate of unorthodox proposals such as returning to the gold standard and abolishing the income tax, CIA and Federal Reserve.

Paul, 72, recently set a one-day, online GOP presidential fundraising record, and pulled slightly ahead of Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee in a New Hampshire poll, where he had 8 percent of the Republicans' support. In Iowa, he tied John McCain for fifth place, with 4 percent each.

Paul remains a very long shot for the nomination. But as the only Republican candidate backing a prompt troop withdrawal from Iraq — and an airing of possible impeachment charges against Vice President Dick Cheney — he appeals to a mix of liberals and conservatives who feel alienated and deeply distrustful of the government.

"Where the extreme left and the extreme right meet, you'll find Ron Paul," said Merle Black, an Emory University political scientist and co-author of the book "Divided America."

"He strikes a chord with some segments of the population," especially with his quixotic, uncompromising style, Black said. "But there's a pretty low ceiling in terms of his actual vote."

Paul, who earned a medical degree from Duke University and embraces the nickname "Dr. No," often casts the only House vote against proposals he sees as too meddlesome or unworthy of taxpayers' money.

In recent months he was the only House member to oppose an expression of support for Northern Ireland's new power-sharing government, a condemnation of "the persecution of labor rights advocates in Iran" and a statement citing the importance of "providing a voice" for relatives of Americans who have vanished.

He was one of two Republicans to vote against funding the Defense Department in 2008, and against urging the release of Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

Paul is Congress' most prominent advocate of returning to the gold standard, which the country abandoned in the 1930s. In its purest form it would mean that all paper currency in circulation could be redeemed for gold.

Supporters say the gold standard would curb inflation and boost confidence in the economy. But others say it would trigger severe recessions because the Federal Reserve could no longer manage the money supply in times of economic weakness.

For that matter, Paul would eliminate the Fed altogether as an impediment to free markets.

Paul breezily talks of eliminating the personal income tax, saying it provides about 40 percent of federal revenues, which spending cuts could absorb. The government's funding level would approximate that of 2000, he says, although government statistics put the figure closer to 1995.

In a phone interview Wednesday, Paul said he is inching up in the polls "because more people have heard the message."

He said he was stunned when supporters raised $4.2 million for him on Nov. 5, mostly through the Internet. It broke Mitt Romney's one-day fundraising record, $3.1 million, for Republican presidential candidates.

"Something is going on," Paul said. "It's all spontaneous," he said, and reflects a hunger for smaller government, greater adherence to the Constitution and "a pro-American foreign policy."

Paul said the United States should leave the United Nations. "I don't like giving up our national sovereignty," he said.

The government should gather intelligence, he said, but dismantle the CIA, which he accused of blunders and abuses of power.

Democratic-drafted charges that could lead to a House impeachment vote against Cheney, Paul said, deserve careful deliberations by congressional committees.

Presidential debate moderators typically pay scant attention to Paul and two other House members seen as fringe candidates. But he has triggered some crackling exchanges on the Iraq war, unusual for primary campaign debates in which most candidates hold similar views.

At a mid-May debate in South Carolina, Paul infuriated Rudy Giuliani and others by saying U.S. troops' presence in Saudi Arabia contributed to al-Qaida's decision to attack the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.

"If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem," Paul said. "They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there."

Many Republicans condemned the remarks. But Paul's supporters rhapsodize about his candor and integrity on Web sites and at "meet ups."

"We didn't really believe we could find an honest politician," said Cecelia Poole of Elkton, Md., describing how she and her husband intensely researched Paul's record. First drawn to Paul's hardline stance against illegal immigration, Poole said she found herself agreeing with him on monetary policy, the war and other issues.

"He would turn this country around in the way that it needs to go," said Poole, a semiretired mortgage broker. She and her husband now travel to several states, she said, "promoting him everywhere we go."

BrAinPaiNt
11-15-2007, 08:43 AM
Go Ron Go:cool:

iceberg
11-15-2007, 08:49 AM
Go Ron Go:cool:

he seems quite extreme in some instances and his own website has too much "marketing" terminology for my tastes, but i want to find out more about him and what he really wants to do.

72? would he be the oldest president? reagan was 69 i think...1st term?

anyway - so far so good on ron paul.

BrAinPaiNt
11-15-2007, 10:06 AM
he seems quite extreme in some instances and his own website has too much "marketing" terminology for my tastes, but i want to find out more about him and what he really wants to do.

72? would he be the oldest president? reagan was 69 i think...1st term?

anyway - so far so good on ron paul.

Search this zone...we had a few ron paul threads about a month or so back.

Yes he is extreme on some issues, but all and all I like his integrity.

trickblue
11-15-2007, 10:14 AM
72? would he be the oldest president? reagan was 69 i think...1st term?

anyway - so far so good on ron paul.

I didn't realize he was 72 already... time flies...

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 11:09 AM
72? would he be the oldest president? reagan was 69 i think...1st term?

I don't that's too big of a deal. Reagan knew Thomas Jefferson.

Danny White
11-15-2007, 11:19 AM
His age might be a factor... if he had a snowball's chance of getting elected.

I like seeing Ron Paul do well, and I like the fact that some of the issues he's passionate about are getting added attention due to the success he's had in this race.

But I'm not under any illusion that he's going to win the nomination and eventually the Presidency. It just won't happen.

Best case scenario is that he shocks the world and wins New Hamphshire, which IS an outside possibility. But even then, he can't keep it going.

Sorry to be rain on a parade.

iceberg
11-15-2007, 11:26 AM
His age might be a factor... if he had a snowball's chance of getting elected.

I like seeing Ron Paul do well, and I like the fact that some of the issues he's passionate about are getting added attention due to the success he's had in this race.

But I'm not under any illusion that he's going to win the nomination and eventually the Presidency. It just won't happen.

Best case scenario is that he shocks the world and wins New Hamphshire, which IS an outside possibility. But even then, he can't keep it going.

Sorry to be rain on a parade.

we got a long way to go. i've seen many articles that said "this person was a lock in xxxx year....then suddenly this person was nominated."

i'll agree *at this point* he's a longshot. but things can change quickly. if he can get the mainstream of both parties to listen, that could be his best outcome.

BrAinPaiNt
11-15-2007, 11:41 AM
His age might be a factor... if he had a snowball's chance of getting elected.

I like seeing Ron Paul do well, and I like the fact that some of the issues he's passionate about are getting added attention due to the success he's had in this race.

But I'm not under any illusion that he's going to win the nomination and eventually the Presidency. It just won't happen.

Best case scenario is that he shocks the world and wins New Hamphshire, which IS an outside possibility. But even then, he can't keep it going.

Sorry to be rain on a parade.

So you're telling me there is a chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mff6uPddUbw

:laugh2:

zrinkill
11-15-2007, 11:49 AM
Ron is only 2 years older than Reagan when he first took office.

Danny White
11-15-2007, 12:38 PM
So you're telling me there is a chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mff6uPddUbw

:laugh2:

You know, just when I think you couldn't possibly be any dumber, you go and do something like this...















... and totally redeem yourself!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnkefjCES-4

jterrell
11-15-2007, 01:10 PM
Ron is only 2 years older than Reagan when he first took office.

And Reagen suffered severe dementia before he left office.

I like Paul and I hope more politicians follow his lead but having nothing to lose is a freeing mechanism to be true.

zrinkill
11-15-2007, 01:16 PM
And Reagen suffered severe dementia before he left office.

:rolleyes:

BrAinPaiNt
11-15-2007, 01:37 PM
:rolleyes:

I don't know if your reaction was that he brought that up and it has nothing to do with Paul.

Or if you don't think he really did have problems before he left office.

I have no proof that Ronny was already falling into Alzheimer's when he was in office but I honestly would not doubt it and think he probably was in the early stages.

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 01:51 PM
I don't know if your reaction was that he brought that up and it has nothing to do with Paul.

Or if you don't think he really did have problems before he left office.

I have no proof that Ronny was already falling into Alzheimer's when he was in office but I honestly would not doubt it and think he probably was in the early stages.

I don't doubt Reagan was possibly in the early stages of the disease, but "severe dementia" is probably stretching it a bit.

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 01:53 PM
You know, just when I think you couldn't possibly be any dumber, you go and do something like this...

... and totally redeem yourself!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnkefjCES-4

Oh, brother. Now we're going to have pages of threads full of Dumb and Dumber quotes...



Pull over!

No, it's a cardigan, but thanks anyway.



:D

zrinkill
11-15-2007, 01:54 PM
I don't doubt Reagan was possibly in the early stages of the disease, but "severe dementia" is probably stretching it a bit.

:hammer:

iceberg
11-15-2007, 01:59 PM
And Reagen suffered severe dementia before he left office.

I like Paul and I hope more politicians follow his lead but having nothing to lose is a freeing mechanism to be true.

I don't know if your reaction was that he brought that up and it has nothing to do with Paul.

Or if you don't think he really did have problems before he left office.

I have no proof that Ronny was already falling into Alzheimer's when he was in office but I honestly would not doubt it and think he probably was in the early stages.

1. that's quite possible, bp.
2. severe dementia would be an attempt to drama-fy the situation however, don't you think?

either way he's stil better than either bush would ever be. or anyone else running today for that matter.

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 02:00 PM
If you want to bring up presidents who probably should have resigned the office due to declining health, Woodrow Wilson is a good one to start with. He suffered a very serious stroke in October of 1919 and served the remaining year of his term in confinement. The full extent of his disability wasn't disclosed until after his death in 1924. His wife filtered what she deemed to be the important issues to him, and delegated other issues to his cabinet heads, which leads many to believe she was the first female American president, if not in name, at least in action.

iceberg
11-15-2007, 02:03 PM
If you want to bring up presidents who probably should have resigned the office due to declining health, Woodrow Wilson is a good one to start with. He suffered a very serious stroke in October of 1919 and served the remaining year of his term in confinement. The full extent of his disability wasn't disclosed until after his death in 1924. His wife filtered what she deemed to be the important issues to him, and delegated other issues to his cabinet heads, which leads many to believe she was the first female American president, if not in name, at least in action.

interesting.

when i look for qualities in a president, male/female doesn't make the list.

integrity tops it though.

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 02:17 PM
interesting.

when i look for qualities in a president, male/female doesn't make the list.

integrity tops it though.

Supposedly they purposely avoided any direct contact between Wilson and the acting VP/cabinet members/ambassadors etc. lest they question why he hadn't stepped down.

It was a factor in the 1965 ratification of the 25th amendment, which basically laid out the procedure for the transfer of powers from President to VP in times of death or disability. The VP and the cabinet heads OR Congress can decide to remove the president from office involuntarily. Once they pass this on to Congress, Congress votes and by 2/3rds majority can remove the president from office and promote the VP.

Though, considering the date of ratification I would think the JFK assassination played a larger role. Lincoln lived only hours after he was shot, but James Garfield died 80 days after he was shot. It gives the government the ability to move on with executive leadership in times of crisis like that.

Or when the president needs a colonoscopy done.

jterrell
11-15-2007, 02:50 PM
1. that's quite possible, bp.
2. severe dementia would be an attempt to drama-fy the situation however, don't you think?

either way he's stil better than either bush would ever be. or anyone else running today for that matter.

Reagen was saying different things at different times of the day.
As president there wasn't medical precedent to remove him from office as the test for Alzheimer's wasn't even developed yet.

People thought Reagen was only temporarily in distress after the bullet wound to he various surgeries for benign tumors/polyps.

But his mother had presented the same symptoms years prior and eventually they did identify the disease. Ronnie was a very beloved President but he was certainly no where near the man who was California's Governor in mental acuity by the time he left office.

He routinely forget the names of his cabinet members and once while in Brazil toasted the people of Bolivia.

This is a man who had a great memory early on and once auditioned for a sports broadcaster's job by reciting play by play of the fourth quarter of a college football game.

Ultimately this is merely suggesting that yes a man entering office at 72 years of age is a real concern from a health standpoint.

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 03:58 PM
He routinely forget the names of his cabinet members and once while in Brazil toasted the people of Bolivia.

That's still not as bad as the next administration's VP celebrating the great state of Chicago! :laugh2:

jterrell
11-15-2007, 04:13 PM
That's still not as bad as the next administration's VP celebrating the great state of Chicago! :laugh2:

Ronnie was forgetful not dumb:)

Sr. Bush could have had 4 more years if he had selected a decent VP.
Since we got Bill instead I am OK with Quayle.

I think George selected Quayle because he reminded him of little Georgie

:laugh2: :laugh2:

Mavs Man
11-15-2007, 04:59 PM
Ronnie was forgetful not dumb:)

Sr. Bush could have had 4 more years if he had selected a decent VP.
Since we got Bill instead I am OK with Quayle.

I think George selected Quayle because he reminded him of little Georgie

:laugh2: :laugh2:

Those statements reflect badly on a person, but I don't think a lack of intelligence is necessarily the cause. Some people (self included) are just not very good public speakers. And that is 99% of the job for a president/vp.