Ron Paul Signals He May Drop Presidential Bid - What Now For His Supporters?
By Logan Murphy Friday Feb 08, 2008 6:29pm
Via The Politico:
Ron Paul appears to have had a Dennis Kucinich moment.
Just as the liberal Ohio congressman realized last month that his long-shot presidential campaign was imperiling his prospects for keeping his House seat, Paul appears to be choosing the comfort of incumbency over a continued effort to win a nomination that he has virtually no shot at capturing.
Last night, the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman sent a message to his supporters signaling that he was scaling back his presidential bid.
The most telling passage: "I also have another priority. I have constituents in my home district that I must serve. I cannot and will not let them down. And I have another battle I must face here as well. If I were to lose the primary for my congressional seat, all our opponents would react with glee, and pretend it was a rejection of our ideas. I cannot and will not let that happen." Read on...
Ron Paul's campaign has been remarkable in many ways. Considered a second tier candidate from the start, one couldn't help but marvel at his fund raising abilities and the voracity of his supporters. Paul held his own during countless Republican debates, many times looking like the only sane person on the stage. While I don't disagree with all his positions and wouldn't have voted for him, I admire his tenacity. It will be interesting to see how his supporters react and where they go from here -- if he drops out, who will they vote for? Paul is a Republican, will they stay with their party or will they turn their support toward the Democratic candidate? How about a third party? Will they vote at all?
Too Bad
Mostly Barak Obama, he is the least establishment
Like he had a chance in hell!
The "veracity" of his supporters?
Paul had bigger cojanes than any Repub or Dem on the debate floor. He was and still is the only one who wasn't afraid to call the war as it is. Illegal and immoral.
Liked him at the beginning but like many say, the more you learn about him, the worse he seems. Yeah, ending the Iraq war is great and actually talking about monetary policy is great, but I think Public Schools and the Minimum wage are good things too. Plus he thinks evolution is "just a theory" and I'm pretty sure he was against net neutrality (ironic conisdering how a neutral net helped his fundraising so much). I switched parties in January and voted for Obama here in Kansas.
I see many similarities between Edwards supporters and Paul supporters regarding the "What now?" frame of mind. While it's highly unlikely that Edwards supporters will jump to the Republican party, Paul grabbed a lot of undecideds. Both candidates' supporters were looking for something different from each of their parties. I'm curious what will happen.
For the record, RP also said this for any of those on the Left who had considered supporting him solely based on his opposition to the occupation of Iraq:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/paul-concedes-race-sort-of/
His rabid opposition to corporate regulation, the UN and social programs mean more war, more economic division and poverty, not less.
the only candidates left on either aisle of the spectrum are pro-war, pro police state, pro secret surveillance.
the military industrial complex rules unopposed.
The "comfort of incumbency"?
That's a biased misinterpretation of what Ron Paul actually said.
If I was Ron Paul I would be fearful of my supporters.
We are democrats who contributed to Ron Paul's campaign. We wouldn't have voted for him, but we definitely wanted his message heard and debated. The same is true of Edwards message to a lesser extent - more reformist than the frontrunners. It's a shame when the honest guys drop out. Their message gets lost.
Truth B Told @ 9:
Quite right. I hope Ron Paul stays in the race for a bit longer, but it's clear that the mainstream media has chosen McCain as the GOP candidate. Someone nice and soft for the Democrat candidate to push over.
I can imagine a few of Ron Paul's supporters rolling over to Obama, although I can't imagine why, especially with his foreign policy and support of the drug war. I suppose that reflects the turd-vs-douche situation they're faced with. It's likely that most of the 'true believers' will plug away with Paul and his ideas until the next election rolls round... they're Paulbots, after all. You can question their sanity but never question their devotion.
Time for his supporters to get a life.
I love how willfully obtuse RP supporters are steadfastly refusing to acknowledge how the majority of Democrats did not support the Resolution for the Use of Force (it was not a "vote to go to war" anyway but that's another debate). Obama was against the invasion from the start and no Democrat (except Lieberman) supported it. In fact, they demanded Bush return to Congress for an actual declaration of war which he refused to do.
Cap'n Phealy @ 4:
yeah, i tripped over that too. veracity = truthfulness. i think he was going for "viciousness" or "voracity."
The "veracity" of his supporters? Are you talking about their truthfulness?
OH my gosh. Look for mass suicides on the Internet......but there's a goodly number of them I think the Dem candidate could get. But what I want to know is what the heck has Ron Paul done with all that money he's raised? I've never seen him advertise here, or even come around California.
So all the anti war candidates are out of the presidential race.
Quo Vadis, America?
Snowball @ 15:
Huh? Only Barbara Lee (one lone person) voted against that.
I think you mean the "tenacity" of his supporters.
"no Democrat (except Lieberman) supported it."
If you're refering to the Iraq War Resolution, Snowball, you're wrong. I think about 26 Dem Senators supported it...heck, we know Edwards did, for starters. But you're right that if you combine the House and Senate, about 2/3 of Democrats did not vote for the War Resolution Act. Something to reply to the wingnuts who claim Democrats supported the vote...
Ron Paul was the only way people could be 'anti-war Republicans'; I suspect with nothing else left to offer on the Republican side they might end up being 'Democrats because of the war'. Check goes for Obama.
jxn @ 16:
You are correct, it was a typo and my mistake. It was meant in a positive way, I apologize for perhaps giving the wrong impression.
joe! @ 5:
Hold on now! Don't forget Kucinich.
I'm a strong Democratic supporter, especially since Howard Dean became Chairman, but I wanted Ron Paul to represent the Republican side of politics this election cycle. I thought it would be best for the future of this country. His ideas and viewpoints are much more advantageous to the debate than say Huckleberries religion, McCain's warmongering, or Guiliani's police state.
I'm hoping they turn to Barack Obama.
Sorry to monopolize, but I smell a big rat in Ron Paul's excuse. Is he really facing a challenger in his district? And so what? It would have to be a hand picked RNC challenger. But Paul always says he's so popular in his district.....Or, in my mind more likely, is he being leaned on big time by the RNC, for whom the last thing they want now is Paul running around...or shall I see appearing at debates, if there are any more, and tearing McCain to pieces.
I tell you something right now, that guy has balls, to get up in a arena full of frothing at the mouth republicans and talk about "blowback" takes guts, democrats don't even talk about the things he does (maybe Kucinich and gravel but neither of them talk about blowback) and there supposedly the anti war party (snigger).
When Obama talks about change he means he'd tinker with things to give the perception of change, when Ron Paul talked about it he meant it.
He's more anti war than any democrat, shame some people couldn't see past the wedge issues and vote for the guy because he's the ONLY one who'd put an end to this crazy foreign policy.
Personally, I'm amazed at how far Dr. Paul's campaign has gone when you consider the obstacles it faced. Constant ridicule from the other candidates, practically blotted out completely by the press and pollsters, being labeled as a "kook", and so on...
If anything, his campaign has opened the eyes of many who were otherwise apathetic about politics, and urge them to question things. I sincerely hope that people continue to question and learn even after the new president takes office.
Ron Paul Signals He May Drop Presidential Bid - What Now For His Supporters?
Lyndon LaRouche?
Rons campaign isnt over yet, but yeah, he doesnt stand a chance now.
I left the republican party in 2000, and registered independent. 7 years later, I registered republican just so I could vote for Dr Paul. I did so proudly, and now at least I can sleep at night knowing I tried.
I won't be voting in the general, picking between McCain and Hillary is like picking between a rope or knife.
Let it be known that after 8 years of war, recession, and a shift towards Facism that the American people took their votes, stood up, and decided they wanted more of the same.
I may, MAY vote Obama but I highly doubt it. He's seriously got to start being more aggressive towards the warmongers, he needs to denounce domestic spying further, and promise to repeal the patriot act. Obama won't win the dems nomination though.
maybe its time to start sending huckabee some money.....just to keep things interesting, maybe generate a couple fundraising headlines, embarrass mccain a little
I respect Mr. Paul, which brings the grand total of Republicans I respect to 1.
Shiva @ 29:
Americans are glorifying the record breaking thoughts of a woman or black man as Prez. They don't want anyone speaking truth, like RPaul was or Kucinich, or even look at the Edwards message. They want American Idol...Oh looks at all the celebrities turning out for this primary...oh, who's the latest celebrity endorsement...oh, you can feel the electricity in the air as they stroll down the red carpet.....
What Now For His Supporters?
They will continue to be ignored by the fair and balanced corporate media.
I'm verocious for veracity.
ysbaddaden @ 36:
No, you're voracious for veracity. And this is getting out of hand.
:)
MagnificentAppendage @ 37:
Alright, do you have to rub it in? LOL We're imperfect beings, we make mistakes now and then.
I am a Ron Paul supporter. I'm gonna go with Obama.
All I can say is anyone that votes for McCain will regret it. The United States is just barely surviving George Bush. McCain is just another George Bush and the country may not recover from another republican President.
there are some absolutly brilliant ron paul videos up on youtube, ihope people don't stop making them.
check them out, this is a really good one-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2GQcBtroTg
He's a bit of a nutcase but when he's right about something he's completely right. His views on iraq and the war on drugs were excellent.
There was no "war resolution" only the Resolution for the Use of Force, which was not intended as a blank check to go to war. It was instead, a legitimate diplomatic tool which in most any other President's hand would not have been used to invade Iraq.
I'm gonna write in Ron Paul.
'Obama the least establishment"?!?!?!?
I do feel betrayed by RP. He should consider running independent.
Jesse Ventura did and won.
Logan Murphy @ 38:
Indeed, and it's all good, man. Our childrens are learning.
Josh @ 44:
And he turned out to be a great choice, didn't he? LOL! Remember how he appointed a Bushbot Republican to the late Sen. Paul Wellstone's seat locking in Republican rule of the Senate? Not that you Libertarians care much about that as long as you get your tax cuts and corporate deregulation.
collectively, we will either not vote or vote democratic. i lean more towards the first option as your talking about seriously frustrated people here who are just about done with our government. establishment candidates, and yes obama is included in that description for many, need not apply. ron paul people HATE mccain, so you can forget about us voting republican now.
Like everyone else Paul supporters can now contemplate the Bush Job Creation Revolution.
http://www.bls.gov/bdm/nj_chart1.gif
Your Correspondent was perhaps one of the first bloggers to speculate where Ron Paul's campaign might be starting steam--and only days before Super Tuesday, in matter of fact.
Credit that to the revelations of Ron Paul's potentially bigoted past in The New Republic, his subsequent denials notwithstanding.
Maybe now he can resume his weekly appearance on the Alex Jones 9/11 Was An Inside Job Nutball Radio Show.
It makes me shake my head in disgust how many supposed liberals bought into his nonsense simply because he wasn't so stupid as to be in favor of the Iraq war.
but yeah, if anything, obama gets a small shot in the arm from this.
I really admired Ron Paul for refusing to toe the party line on the issues of the Iraq war and monetary policy.
None of the remaining candidates will speak to those issues with the effectiveness and directness that Ron did... too bad.
IludiumPhosdex @ 49:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4535489085249094976&q=naacp+sc...
Personally I'm looking forward to the impending gnashing of teeth and rending of garments by the fanatical rp cultists. It should be a hell of a lot more amusing than the non stop proselytizing.
One positive is that most of the rp followers I've come across claim they won't vote at all if they can't vote for ron.
It would be nice if they'd vote for the dems but one less vote for a reslug is good as well.
joe! @ 5:
Yep.
...
You guys don't understand who Ron Paul is and what he represents. He is above all one of the most important Americans of this decade and before. He is not someone to be ridiculed. Whether one likes it or not, he has contributed a lot to Democrats in respects that he has kept alive the anti-war slogan in (what was once) conservative circles. He played on the turf a Democratic candidate couldn't reach. His message was clear on the war and everyone knew he would stop it if elected. He earned lots of supporters in that respect because many Americans want and demand to the war.
The others left standing in the race won't stop the war. We haven't learned from our mistakes. The pain of this nation will continue. This war has to end. You guys are not serious. You want to play Republicans vs. Democrats. Obama, Hillary, and McCain - they all voted for the war. You guys are caught up in the drama, not the issues. You're counting on voting for lawyers to end the war, and you call the candidate that delivers babies crazy.
LibertyLust @ 55:
Obama didn't vote for the war, although he did vote to fund it, which was a little odd.
LibertyLust @ 55:
yes fuckin' sir! agreed.
but obama did not vote for the war, libertylust, he just voted to fund it. he was not a senator at the time.
MargeAggedon @ 53:
Libertarian trust fund babies won't vote for Democrats ever. To them, Liberalism = Socialism = Communism. Despite the rampant autocratic authoritarianism of the Republican party, they have always thrown their votes to them.
Ron Paul brilliantly did his part in the part to restore the republic, and I expect he will continue to lead on the Banking Committee and in the well of the House.
Democrats can attract these people with Obama/Volcker economics, civil liberties, and maybe just simple respect and decent treatment.
MagnificentAppendage @ 37:
Perhaps Logan mean "the viscosity of his supporters."
But then again, Ron Paul's supporters weren't known for "going with the flow" ;-)
"Obama, Hillary, and McCain - they all voted for the war."
What the hell are you talking about? Obama wasn't even in the US Congress at the time, and he spoke out quite strongly against the war.
Im not sure ron Paul supporters would vote for someone who has made speeches at AIPAC HQ and has zbigniew brzezinski as his top foreign policy advisor, someone who supported the patriot act/military commissions act (bar some specifications within them), talks about invading pakistan and using troops in one of the trouble spots in Africa as humanitarian interventionists.
Gar, 6 posts in 4 minutes makes me effectively slower than molasses.
Vindication will be Ron's and his supporters when the inevitable fiscal fallout is done. He will then get to say I told you so to all did not listen, and maybe, just maybe then they will finally listen. Then 75 years will pass until humanity has forgotten histories lessons and will screw it up all over again.
I was hoping Ron Paul would take all that money he's raised and mount a Libertarian Party candidacy to take some votes away from McCain in November.
TM @ 66:
One wonders why he doesn't. I presume it's because he, like his followers, believe that tax cuts for the rich, corporate deregulation and appointing the next Supreme who will rule in favor of corporate interests every time and slap down any attempts by the people to use the democratic instrument of government to mitigate corporate and elite power, are more important than everything, including ending the occupation of Iraq.
americangoy @ 19:
right into the shiter !hang on from now on its a rough ride to oblivion!
Snowball @ 67:
how come none of the big corporations come out in support of ron paul then ? they like Hillary though.
Finally my Paulhead friends will finally stop linking me to libertarian nut jobs, conspiracy theorists, and fear mongers.
It's really swell to see a little news about Ron Paul I don't have to go hunting for. It was the same situation with John Edwards. It took Edwards' leaving the race to get the media to suit up and show up for the "news".
I got the message from Ron Paul and it said:
"Let me tell you my thoughts. With Romney gone, the chances of a brokered convention are nearly zero. But that does not affect my determination to fight on, in every caucus and primary remaining, and at the convention for our ideas, with just as many delegates as I can get."
Doesn't sound to me like an, "I've decided to suspend my campaign" message! I think he's right that he needs to fight for his district seat, but I am hoping he will stay in the race (although I doubt he'll be invited to any future debates with Huckabee and McCain).
In case you missed it and give a sh*t, here's the speech Ron Paul gave at CPAC on Thursday. (I guess since McCain was practically booed off the stage you can't find a video of McCain's speech ANYWHERE). Ron Paul wasn't booed ONCE:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/news/#RonPaulspeechatCPAC278
BTW, this is the latest information on McCain not legally being allowed to be POTUS (from The State Department's own website):
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/citizenship.php
LibertyLust @ 55:
People call him crazy because he wants to tell women they should all have babies and not have a choice about it. His foreign policy is sound, but domestically he's just another "I've got mine, fuck everybody else" Libertarian asshole.
Dana @ 25:
how quickly they forget they could have had an honest man!!!!!!!!!
Because RP is a critic of the Military Industrial Complex and also he had no chance of winning. The problem I have with RP's solution to the corruption of government by corporate special interests is that he thinks stripping government of the ability to regulate corporations will get them to stop corrupting the system. It's like decriminalizing murder to bring down the crime rate.
As for Hillary, she has mostly caved into the health care industry so they no longer feel threatened by her. Who knows if we'll see a return of Harry and Louise anyway? As for the Corporate Media, there's plenty of evidence that corporations won't settle for Clinton's Third Way politics. They need Republicans in charge at the FCC and won't settle for any half way measures that the Conservative wing of the Democratic party offer them.
Did I miss something? At what point did he signal he may drop his Presidential bid? The fact that he has more then one agenda on his plate is some kind of signal? Some of you would be better off reading tea leaves especially when he makes such an obvious statement as;
What about that is so hard to follow? I know there are haters that would like to see him gone but when they start distorting and adding their own context as to what he has said it's sad beyond belief. There is no signal so everyone just chill the smug out.
DickCheneyShotMeInTheFace @ 71:
George Bush is pro life, are there still abortions performed in america today ?.... these are silly wedge issues people get heated up about. He's pro life, so what ? you think if he got in he'd have the power suddenly tell all women to have abortions ? no he wouldn't so it's a non issue. Im pro choice myself but i'd still vote for him over the rest any day of the week.
Say goodbye to whatever is left of the US Constitution...
This Country is now going to be completely f@#ked by either Radical Muslim for President Obama, or by WACO/Ruby Ridge Billary Clinton, or by War Evermore Bubble Boy McCain in 2009....
Maybe it'll seem a better idea to vote for people who are really trying to change America like Ron Paul come 2012 after we experience a tanked economy and civil chaos in the cities...
I think by 2012 most of the idiots that vote for the same establishment puppets will be incapacitated by then..
Have a nice 4 years and enjoy the Fascism and multiple taser shots..
;)
This Candidate Doesn’t Quit
By ArcBlatt | February 9, 2008
This Candidate Doesn’t Quit
A few news sources are misreporting Ron Paul’s e-mail from last night. The presidential campaign is not ending, not being suspended, and not even drawing down. It’s slimming down and ramping up — with over twenty states having already voted, we’ve shed staff, and we’re concentrating financial and organization resources on the remaining states. We’re going to the convention, and we’re fighting for every vote and every National Delegate along the way.
Republicans do not want John McCain to be their nominee. He has only been able to become the front-runner because the field was so divided and because he’s a media darling. We can see just how unpopular McCain is in the heartland by his performance in the Kansas caucuses today. Kansans resoundingly rejected the Arizona senator, and McCain’s big wins so far have mostly been in blue states — states he won’t win in November if, heaven forbid, he’s the Republican nominee.
Republicans want and need an alternative. Some people think Mike Huckabee provides an alternative to McCain. But Huckabee, who now tries to sound like Ron Paul when he talks about abolishing the IRS, raised taxes in Arkansas and vastly expanded spending in that state when he was its governor. Huckabee is no alternative at all. Ron Paul, on the other hand, has never voted for a tax increase, never voted for an unbalanced budget or for an unconstitutional war or government program.
At stake here is not just the Republican nomination — which McCain still has not locked up — but the future of the Republican Party and, much more importantly, the future of our liberties. We have to organize in every single state, including the ones that have already voted in the primaries and caucuses, to continue the fight to take back the Republican Party and to ensure that Ron Paul’s principles, the principles of Washington and Jefferson, prevail. For the sake of that cause, Ron Paul’s campaign continues, all the way to the convention.
Source: http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/02/09/this-candidate...
Don't worry, those supporters will still keep his name in the light.
Josh @ 44:
a couple of days ago you were all for HRC...
Where do you stand............? nevermind.
You just showed your true colors.
Global Evildoer Fighter @ 76:
trolling, trolling,
keep that bullshit flowing,
Asshole!
I'm not a troll I speak the truth...Just because you don't like it, park it.
Keep up to date at Suzie-Q
http://www.suzieqq.wordpress.com/
Ron Paul is doing what he's told.The GOP can't risk him dividing their party.
They need more time to prep their candidate for the Dem nominee.
Paul is just doing as he's told,just like Romney.Don't you find it a little odd that they both withdrew the very same week.
They need to buy time...because either Obama or Clinton will crush them in the general election.
Super Tuesday,8 million republicans voted,While 15 million Dems voted.
Their running out of time.
Paul is still in! Read harder.
Straight from his website, he isn't quitting.
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/02/09/this-candidate...
Josh @ 44:
Why do you feel betrayed? There is no signal he may quit this is just more Ron Paul hater-aid. Read what I had to say at 74 and like Ron Paul it just makes so much sense that it too has to be ignored.
The whole Ron Paul phenomena this time around has been distinguished by the young people who ventured out into the world of politics, had a look, took their lessons and will move on. Did anyone tell the guys in the blimp ?
http://dcist.com/attachments/dcist_sommer/2007_1207_ronpaulblimp.jpg
Global Evildoer Fighter @ 76:
Paging, Mr Evildoer Fighter.
Paging, Mr Evildoer Fighter.
Your Prescription is ready.
Please follow aisle 5 to the back of the store,We have pharmacists waiting to assist you.
There were three issues that led me to become a "Ronbot", "Paultard" or my preference "paulunteer" 1. Loss of civil liberties (Patriot act, military commissions act, loss of habeus corpus etc.) 2. Occupation of Iraq/Afganistan (STOP CALLING IT A WAR - the war was over when commander codpiece landed on the carrier) and 3. The coming economic catastrophe caused by a $9.2 trillion debt. On these three issues Ron is absolutely correct (and he voted that way in congress). While I disagreed with some of his other positions, his views on these three issues made him my candidate (p.s. I voted for Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore and Kerry) Don't know who (or if) I will be voting for now, but I know it won't be McCain.