Spearing Ron Paul
This fellow can’t spell "candidate," but by being willing to come out and say that Ron Paul Lost, he’s closer to wisdom than the entire staff of Takimag. The full measure of Paul’s failure isn’t even that he’s not going to be the Republican nominee. It’s that, even since everyone else dropped out of the race but Paul and McCain, he’s still been losing to Mike Huckabee in every state where the Huckster was on the ballot except Pennsyvlania. (Paul was born in Pennsylvania.) Idaho is the only other primary state where he broke 10%. (He hit low double-digits in a few caucus states.) He has 35 delegates by CNN’s reckoning. Huckabee has 275 and Romney 255. With his $30 million in donations, he’s barely breaking the million-bucks-a-delegate mark. That’s ten times the much-ridiculed rate of Mitt Romney.
Paul failed to win any states, to move the GOP debate in his direction, to accrue significant delegates or to leverage his fund-raising into a third-party run. And word is he’s staying quiet about endorsing an independent because he doesn’t want the Congressional GOP leadership to strip him of committee assignments come the fall. Paul accomplished the one thing he’s always been good at: using political appeals to get people to send money. I don’t feel freer.
Comment by Kevin B. O'Reilly —
May 31, 2008 @ 12:46 am
I’m not sure what the point of this post is. We all know Ron Paul’s campaign failed. Dave Weigel’s dissected that all much better than this guy did. To whatever extent the Ron Paul Revolution congealed, it did so despite the candidate not because of him. That said, I predict Bob Barr will raise less money and get fewer votes than Paul did.
Comment by Thoreau —
May 31, 2008 @ 1:13 am
How much does Ron Paul actually accomplish on committees?
Yes, I’m aware that committees are where a lot of crucial things happen in Congress, but that just underscores the point: How much does he accomplish in committees? Does he find ways to craft compromises, kill the worst provisions, attach riders that would accomplish some good on the margin, and generally accomplish stuff consistent with his agenda? Or does he use committee hearings to deliver speeches about the Federal Reserve and gold standard? (I bring up those topics because he’s often talked about being on the Banking Committee, and those are known to be big priorities of his.)
We’ll leave aside for now the merits or demerits of his positions, and precisely what it means to “accomplish some good on the margin” (since that depends in part on how you view Ron Paul’s positions). Let’s just ask how well he advances that agenda.
Does anybody know how good he is at this stuff?
Comment by JMG —
May 31, 2008 @ 10:36 am
It has always been my opinion that Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign was the political equivalent of Max Bialystock’s production of “Springtime for Hitler,” with libertarians playing the role of the little old ladies.
Comment by Derek Copold —
May 31, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
It’s impossible to disagree with the numbers the article makes, but I think there is more to it than that. Two things stand out. First, you had a candidate on national television seriously advocating a sane mind-our-own-business foreign policy, and striking something of a chord. Second, you did have a tremendous grassroots response. Yes, Paul didn’t have the organizational skill to take advantage of it, and he was a quite flawed vessel, but I believe someone else will come along and take note. Given the wreckage that will be the GOP after November, I don’t see how they can’t.
Comment by actual Ron Paul delegate candidate (seriously) —
May 31, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
One has to bear in mind that when viewed from a distance the whole campaign appeared to be a Ron Paul mailing list acquisition adventure. Those semi-Spotlight people were his audience, and his audience paid for the list-gathering. Running for President was the means not the goal.
Comment by Bill Woolsey —
June 2, 2008 @ 7:52 am
Paul spent $26 million. What was it all spent on? I don’t know, but here in South Carolina, regular Republican primary voter received multiple mailings of glossy postcards. Some included Paul’s position on multiple issues, others on a single issue.
There are some TV ads here, but lots of radio ads.
Paul was able to educate many voters on what he thinks are the most important issues of today. Bad Federal Reserve policy was one issue that is very, very important to him. Stopping abortion. Protecting the borders. Protecting the U.S. from conspiracies by the internationalists…
And, of course, getting out of Iraq and not attacking Iran, cutting government spending, and rolling back the unconstitutional expansion of the national security state.
Paul’s plan is for others to seek to win the Republican primaries and promote his sort of agenda. Paul did manage it himself (winning a seat in Congress years
ago,) so it is possible. If more people try, then, presumably, more will luck out and win seats (like Paul did) than if fewer people try.
While Paul may be worried about losing committee assignments if he endorses a third party candidate, it is also possible that the strategy of Paul supporters working within the Republican
party would be more difficult with such an endorsement. (Personally, I think his refusal to endorse McCain will be nearly as bad, not that I suggest such a course.)
Finally, Paul activists (who would listen to his endorsement) are a coalition of many types. The
Conspiracy theorists are supporting
Baldwin, as are the paleo-conservatives.
The libertarians are going to go with
Barr, I suspect.
(Barr is running on the parts of the Paul program that I liked, and is saying little about the things that I found
barely acceptable. I don’t think that is an accident.)
Comment by Bob Murphy —
June 2, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
Paul accomplished the one thing he’s always been good at: using political appeals to get people to send money. I don’t feel freer.
Aww come on Mr. Henley! I wasn’t bothered by your post up until that point.
Remember the buzz when Giuliani (according to Fox News) put the smack down on Paul over foreign policy? I was ecstatic that somebody on national TV was saying what Paul was, during the Republican debates no less. That right there would have been an immense accomplishment.
Or how about when Wall Street traders were cheering during Ron Paul’s grilling of Bernanke, and CNBC reported on it? Before this election, I would have been afraid to even bring up the Federal Reserve for fear of putting readers to sleep. Ron Paul has actually made it cool to say you hate the Fed. That is unbelievable.
You’re right, I don’t feel freer either. Just like Reason, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Cato, LewRockwell.com, etc. have all done a really bad job stopping the erosion of civil liberties over the last few years.
With the criterion you’re using to judge Paul’s success, we should all quit and do something useful with our lives.
Comment by Dave W. —
June 2, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
Bob Murphy wins the thd.
Comment by Lexy —
June 5, 2008 @ 11:56 am
What an idiot! Ron Paul has been in the race much longer than Romney, so of course the amount he’s spent on delegates will rival what Romney did (which was a lot and early in the race).
Dr. Paul is never going to support McVAIN. Why would he? Ron Paul is a man of principle and he’s not just going to change his principles and sell his soul to a party that has done him disgrace by supporting McCain.
I’ll be in St. Paul at the convention revolting against the treatment of Dr. Paul in the primary process by both the GOP, as well as, the media.
The GOP is smart in their efforts to keep him from speaking at the National Convention, because they are very much aware of his ability to ruffle feathers and gain support.
I think it’s personally amazing how even with the lack of media coverage and often demeaning coverage of Ron Paul, he’s has been able to gain the amount of support he has. Not only is his support amazing, because of his mistreatment, but what is amazing is that it is continuing to grow.
Comment by Gene Callahan —
June 6, 2008 @ 12:06 am
“What an idiot! Ron Paul has been in the race much longer than Romney, so of course the amount he’s spent on delegates will rival what Romney did…”
Lexy, can you say non sequitur?