suppose we assume he doesn't drop out after N.H.?

let's suppose all the support and contributions he's been getting is NOT 'just the internet', as the MSM is so eager to tell us, every time the Ron Paul movement makes another wave they can't manage to ignore?

Et tu, jet?

Why would he drop out after winning in New Hampshire? That would be most egregious misstep in political history.

Jet - the main stream media will ignore (or come as close as they can without losing ALL credibility.. as if that hasn't already happened) this latest, incredible fundraising day. They'll still write him off, for they have their (notoriously inaccurate) poll numbers to which they will cling with all their might, hoping that they are true.

But seriously, polling 10% of "likely-to-vote" repubs, with strong support from the independents?? You can't write-off Ron Paul in NH.

Why bother having an election at all? Just give the job to the candidate who can raise the most money. It seems that we only care about that anyway. No issues, policies, platforms, or any of that petty stuff. Just show me the money....

Well said, Bill. It's as though because Paul can raise the money, the natural conclusion must be that he's the best man for the job. We all know that money = integrity.

The tighter you make your grip the more Ron Paul will slip thru your fingers :)
Go Ron.......show em' how its done!

Yee-haaaa, Ron! Get'r'done

The only question is:

How large a pecentage will Ron Paul win the monination?

%51 or over 60%?

I predict he never breaks 20%.

"All the leaders of groups tend to be frauds. If they were not, it would be impossible for them to retain the allegiance of their dupes..."

Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956)
U. S. Editor and Critic.

Ron Paul is destined to be a player in the GOP nomination battle thru February, perhaps beyond. Once some pretenders (Tancredo, Hunter, and Thompson) drop out soon after Florida, there will be more focus on all the survivors, including Paul. Will he get the nomination? You have to consider who really participants in GOP Primaries and conclude he has a snowflake's chance in hell -- maybe. The big question is this: when the GOP finally rejects him, will Paul decide that his Libertarian sensibilities warrant seeking the Libertarian Party's formal nomination?

The real point MSM (and this blog as well) is missing is it's not about Ron Paul.

It's the message. It's the infusion of people to wrest control of the Republican party away from the neo-cons and paid off politicans.

Already some followers are talking and planning (thanks to Meetup) about running for House and Senate on the same platform as Ron Paul.

In the NOW special put out by the PBS, the man behind the Nov 5th and Dec 16th money bom states after being asked what if Ron Paul does not win.

"It's not about Ron Paul"

The Dems got their chance in 2006 and they blew it instead they opted for more bribes from the corporacracy and keeping the status quo.

The people are fed up, and like a few rocks falling down the precipice, the landslide of political change is beginning.

When you put it like that, Cawdor, I agree with the sentament. I still don't believe in Paul as an individual because I'm a socialist and not a libertarian. All the same, I like that people are fed up with the status quo and agree that Dems have really blown it since gaining majority lst year. A sorry lot they've represented themselves to be. All the same, if Paul were already an independant isntead of a fringe republican, the money bombs and the followship would be more meaningful. As it is, it looks like people ae still afraid to think too far outside of the GOP box. That's where I object to people lionizing Paul - he may represent good, old-fashioned conservativism to include it's best componants [isolationism, fiscal accountability, a hard line on constitutional ideas of individual freedom] but he still carries some of the questionable elements, too. Like social conservativism and the naive messege that we should be loose with big business and let them do what they want when we know they'll under pay people and poison our rivers.
Question them all.

"Like social conservativism and the naive messege that we should be loose with big business and let them do what they want when we know they'll under pay people and poison our rivers."

With the implementation of a real freemarket (which none of us have experienced). Wealth would always be created and items would be sold for the cheapest price. Wages may fall but if everything is cheap with the removal of government prtectionism and mismangement. You don;t need a lot of money to buy stuff. If one looks at the Chilian miracle, one sees how the free market would work (though it had flaws (no free market on the currency, and creeping gov. fasicsm). But that is the best example of what the American economy would look like in a RP presidncy with no gov. involvement.

As for pollution, the re-instatemnt of private property allows me, us, the coumminty to go after businesses that pollute since it is destroying our private property.

For the sake of briefness these explanations are not enough, but I do encourage you to look at RP's view on these things since you are not seeing the full picture

Nop system is perfect but we have seen the failure of big government and its time to wake up that it doesn't work unless we just go socilaist ans socialism is the antithesis of the principles that this country was founded upon.

I didn;t work for the Russia, Cuba, NK, and China which is now forced to adopt capitalism to assuage some of its citizens as it takes land, lives and wealth from its people.

The biggest problem with Ron Paul is trying to sell the idea that to fix the problem that the GOP has created we need another GOP in office?

Sorry, that will make for a few rocks - no landslide.

If the landslide concept were true - Ron Paul would have no problems already hitting double digits (as in more than 9.99%).

His low numbers reflect a giant "NO SALE" with his own party.

So what is your prediction? over 50%? And do you really feel like that it possible?

The biggest problem with Ron Paul is trying to sell the idea that to fix the problem that the GOP has created we need another GOP in office?

No, we would replace the failed democrat party now ladeling themselves neo-conservative (which is where all neo-cons come from) with a real Republican (think Taft)

Sorry, that will make for a few rocks - no landslide.

I didn't say its going to happen now, but that it is starting. The success of Ron Paul will determine how fast the momentum will be

If the landslide concept were true - Ron Paul would have no problems already hitting double digits (as in more than 9.99%).

When you push poll on people who are being polled becuase they voted last election and do not poll newly "minted" Republicans who are voting Paul, or worse don't even put Paul on the list of choices on the poll then duh his numbers will be low.

That's why MSM has no credibility. Hell even most polling companies have lost credibiity when it comes to election polling becuase their methods are flawed.

Example: Most people who will vote for Paul don't have landlines. All the pollsters are calling people with landlines .. How do you get a accurate picture when you filtering the people you are trying to find???

His low numbers reflect a giant "NO SALE" with his own party.

You mean the No Sale for the neo-cons and the RNC establishment .. this is already known. I am walking my precint to be a delagte fopr Ron Paul, I started with just myself and in one week, I have 6 others who are going to the caucus with me to vote for Ron Paul. I have more of my precinct to cnavs, but last caucus, my precint only had 7 people show up .. I have 6 now ... the majoirty of Rep.s I have talked to have stated that I was the 1st to approach them about the caucus ...

So what is your prediction? over 50%? And do you really feel like that it possible?

I predict 1st in NH and Nevada, 3rd in Iowa and South Carolina

I've heard of Fantasy Football, but Fantasy Candidates....

Cawdor, people always look at other countries to say what will or won't work for America. I say we are a rather unique group of people. I'm not pro-socialism as a radical and complete form of government, I'm pro-socialist as a bent and a strong aspect to our capitalist democracy. That's a bit differant and hard to do a dead on comparison to China, et al

So to fix the problems created by the GOP neocons we need GOP non-neocons?

That makes sense to you?

Capt, I think you're missing something. Most Paul supporters do not identify him as GOP. We are tired of the single-party system and ready to move beyond that. We want to elect the best person for the job. Party is irrelevant.

Cawdor, if we had a govt. free of privately owned central banks..as we did before Roosevelt, maybe we would have a true captitalistic country. You cannot have true capitalism with a central bank. Before Roosevelt, we had people, not govt. controlling the banks. The Great Depression proved that "people" couldnt be trusted in banking, so we infused the Govt. and it's centralization of banking. Now we cannot trust the govt. Look what the govt. has allowed. We are run and ruled by the banks today. We are in deep and in debt. It goes to show that the govt. cannot be trusted as well. Anyhow, you cannot have true Adams theory of capitalism with the central banking system.

tmb, you might want to tell Paul you don't think of him as GOP - I think he'd be surprised. He IS A REPUBLICAN, as in, one half of the two-party system. Open your eyes. He even dodged a question a few debates ago about whether he would be willing to run independetly if he did not get the GOP nod, by saying that he very much planned to get the GOP nod - nuff said. He is contentedly a Republican. I feel like I'm having to talk my cousin out of going to Africa with Jim Jones. What part of 'mindless cult' are you guys not getting? To restate: If Paul were truly, authentically his own independant movement, I would applaud his followers for standing up for something. As it stands, its like all the Republicans wear their wrist watches on the right and he moves his to the left and suddenly he's a messiah to you guys. Look closer.

"He IS A REPUBLICAN"

GOP no matter how delusional his supporters are.

The very idea "Most Paul supporters do not identify him as GOP." is the reason they sound so delusional.

Ron Paul is GOP that is the "R" behind his name and that is who he caucuses with so . . .

The that is my point about a hard sell, the solution is not more GOP. Bush and the neocons have made it impossible for most people to support a GOP candidate.

Why would your political "savior" associate himself with those slugs? (hint he is a slug even if only by association)

Just curious.

"So to fix the problems created by the GOP neocons we need GOP non-neocons?"

Not listening, and not following up on facts. Ron Paul has said publicly and repeatedly that the neo-cons are the worst aspect of the Republican Party and need to be removed.

He is also the ONLY REPURBLICAN candidate to state he will end the WAR ON IRAQ IMMEDIATELY.

He also publicy has decired corporatism to be evil.

Sound like a neo-con to you? I didn't think so.

"Anyhow, you cannot have true Adams theory of capitalism with the central banking system."

Which is why Ron Paul haas called for the abolishment of the Fed. Like Jefferson and Jackson before him .. Ron Paul understands the very points you are making. IF he were to become president, I think his battle with the Fed will be more what Jackson went through then Jefferson.

"He even dodged a question a few debates ago about whether he would be willing to run independetly if he did not get the GOP nod,"

3 times today (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) he has stated he will not run 3rd party, you are spreading misinformation and FUD.

"If Paul were truly, authentically his own independant movement, I would applaud his followers for standing up for something. "

If the Demagogues and the Repugnants did not gerymander election laws to silence and stifle 3rd party runs then there would be a chance.

Ron Paul knows this from EXPERIENCE. He learned hard lessons on the obstacles the 2 parties have put up to prevent a viable 3rd party run.

"The very idea "Most Paul supporters do not identify him as GOP." is the reason they sound so delusional."

The fact you can't think outside the box and look at a bigger picture exemplifies the problem with both parties and their blind followers.

I do not identify him with current Repbulicans, I indentify him along the lines of Taft, Hoover, Clark, etc..
those who defined the Republican party after the transitions from WWI in which they learned the folly of participating in folly of the warmongering democarts under Wilson

"Why would your political "savior" associate himself with those slugs"

Why would the warmongering Deomcrats associate themselves with Bush by funding his war (hint they are warmongerers if only by association)

So Ron is not GOP?

You are making no sense at all?

The neocons are almost all GOP, the warmongers are almost all GOP.

Ron Paul is not a democrat, he is not an Independent he is a member of the Republican party by HIS choice?

That is what I mean by a hard (if not impossible) sell.

You want people to believe voting FOR the GOP is somehow AGAINST the GOP?

"No Sale" - that is why Ron Paul will never be the nominee for the GOP nor will Ron Paul be president.

That is exactly what I am saying and everything you have posted only confirms.

"So Ron is not GOP?"

I will repeat myself since you did not bother reading my response to that question

I do not identify him with current Repbulicans, I indentify him along the lines of Taft, Hoover, Clark, etc..
those who defined the Republican party after the transitions from WWI in which they learned the folly of participating in the the warmongering democrats under Wilson

"The neocons are almost all GOP, the warmongers are almost all GOP"

except when they are democrats which are what the neo-cons are ..disenchanted democrats from the early 70's unhappy with the choices of McGovern and Carter.

So what we are seeing is today is two sides of the same party.

The McGovern/Carter/Dukakis democrats and the neo-Con republican/democrats (Scoop Jackson, Kirkpatrick, Wolfowirtz, etc..)

Ron Paul is a Republican before the party hijacking of the 80s by the neo-con democrats

I see a lot of the posters here are completely unfamiliar with their American politcal history

"You want people to believe voting FOR the GOP is somehow AGAINST the GOP?"

If people know their history then they would know that a vote for Ron Paul is a voter for the true conserviative, small-government, rule-of-law Republican Party not the neo-con dems who currenmtly control the party.

""No Sale" - that is why Ron Paul will never be the nominee for the GOP nor will Ron Paul be president."

My observation as a delagte and hitting the streets as a Ron Paul foot soldier is telling me a very different story then your unsupported "opinion"

But time will tell.

"My observation as a delegate(sp)and hitting the streets as a Ron Paul foot soldier is telling me a very different story then your unsupported "opinion"

What?

My opinion is fully supported by reality.

IF Ron Paul wins the nomination it will be for the REPUBLICAN party (GOP) - if he then wins the election his administration will be a REPUBLICAN administration.

No amount of "foot soldiering" BS will ever change the facts. Or am I missing something?

GOP is the problem not the solution. Trying to change the subject is a veiled and tacit admission of that fact.

Ron Paul doesn't even think he will win anything, he has said he intends to stay on after NH but by his own statement he KNOWS he is not in it for the long haul. Why can't his Paulites be as realistic? It really detracts from the positive message that could be reality based instead of fantasy generated.

Just a thought.

"My opinion is fully supported by reality."

And what reality would that be? You fisrt stae that RP will never get the nomination or the presidency and I state otherwise by my observation and interation with fellow Republicans and then state that he does have a chance but it will be a Republican Administration ..

which is it?

"GOP is the problem not the solution"

Incorrect, rampant spending to prop up big government and the endless wars to keep our "empire' is the problem.

Getting rid of both (the foundation of Ron Paul's platform) is the solution.

Blaming a party for a problem is silly and lacks factual basis.

"Ron Paul doesn't even think he will win anything, he has said he intends to stay on after NH but by his own statement he KNOWS he is not in it for the long haul"

becuase as I have said earlier,and you are just ignoring or not bother to read it

IT IS NOT ABOUT RON PAUL.

ITS ABOUT RETURNING TO THE FUNDEMENTAL PRINCIPLES THIS COUNTRY WAS BUILT ON

no big government, no empire, no wars, no federal social/moral mandates, etc..

Peolple live their own lives, their own ways and are beholden to only themselves.

"Why can't his Paulites be as realistic? "

Why can't the Demagogues and the Repugnants see the truth by the facts in front of them (low approval in the world becuase of ourt foriegn policy, failing economy, the collapse of the dollar, the failures on the War on Drugs, Katrina, War on Terror, etc..)

"It really detracts from the positive message that could be reality based instead of fantasy generated."

Reality is the final product of a dream implemented and worked on.

Just ask the founding fathers who's dream of a constitutional republic was made reality despite the overwhelming world of monarchies and despotism

"My opinion is fully supported by reality."

Ron Paul is a GOP candidate, that'd make you a GOP delegate.

You think Ron Paul can win?

Please predict by how much?

50% or better? What percentage of the national vote do you think Ron Paul will garner?

I predict he never hits 20% in a national poll or election.

The GOP has been killed by Bush and his neocons and Dr. Ron cannot raise the dead.

No matter how much you wish it were so.

"Ron Paul is a GOP candidate, that'd make you a GOP delegate."

Well we agree on one thing

"You think Ron Paul can win?"

Yes

"Please predict by how much?"

1st in NH and Nevada, 3rd in Iowa and SC.

As I have posted, "I predict he never hits 20% in a national poll or election."

Can't predict the national until I know who he would be running against. If it's Hillary .. she will lose.If it's Obama or Richardson .. could be dicey. If it's Kucinich then they will just run together. Any other Dem hopeful will lose to Ron Paul.

"The GOP has been killed by Bush and his neocons and Dr. Ron cannot raise the dead."

The neo-con movement is dead and good riddance. It's time to wash away the big-gov democratic filth from the party and restore the Republican party pre-1980

["The GOP has been killed by Bush and his neocons and Dr. Ron cannot raise the dead."]

Heard it all before, and it was wrong the last time I heard it, too.

Substitute "Nixon" (& Agnew) for "Bush" (& Cheney) and this is just another verse in the song us older Democrats were singing back in 1974/75.
As it turned out, the Republicans were only "dead" for the 4 years of the Carter administration, after which time, the nation's voting population was done with Democrats in the Whitehouse for the next 12 years, while putting an end to Democratic majority in Congress that had lasted 26 years up until 1980.

Like Cawdor says, the voters are finished with the neocons, and good riddance.
The nation IS smart enough to examine Ron Paul's statement "Neo-CONNED", from way back in 2003, his record of voting against them at every turn, and know that by electing him, they are saying a resounding NO to what the neocons have said, done and stood for.

Here's his speech.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm
His position is worth knowing, if you're planning to try and tie him to neocon policy and rule.

If Hillary, Barack, Mitt or Rudy had set an all time fundraising record, MSM would be talking about how the fact points to broadbased, committed support among the electorate.

Ron Paul does it, and they eagerly write it off as some sort of anomaly achieved by a candidate who has no broadbased, committed support at all, and who will be out of the race two weeks into the primaries.

Rule of Thumb:
"Conventional Wisdom"...
isn't "Wisdom", it's merely "Conventional".