Thursday, October 18, 2007

Ron Paul Video Gets 360,000 Looks

There are thousands of Ron Paul videos on the net. This one alone has gotten a huge number of looks. Is Ron Paul smooth? No. Does he project "good 'ole boy"? No. Is he someone that people who can only think in partisan sound bites are comfortable with? No.

But in his own academic with geekish undertones way, Ron Paul is a great communicator. It helps that the ideas he is communicating rise above the limitations of the package they are wrapped in to inspire people. Some people want a good package first, and worry about what is inside the package second, but Ron Paul is so uncool that he is cool. Hip young people that took no interest in politics before he came along are willing to do crazy things to promote this guy. People are tired of slick, tired of good 'loe boy, and tired of plastic candidates. They want real. Ron Paul is real. Click pic to play this widely watched video.


Anonymous Rick said...


Paul does seem to be getting support on the web but can't turn that into support in the polls. Why is that?
Is most of his support pealed off Hillary or Edwards since they voted for the war before they were aginst the war? Or are his supporters the Cindy Sheehan types of the world? Inquiring minds want to know!!

3:39 PM, October 18, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...


You are asking the right questions. His supporters are mostly young people. What Paul is doing is turning them into Republican voters 15 years early. A huge segment of people that age think they are democrats and when they vote they vote accordingly. By the time they are 40 with two kids and a mortgage, they realize they are Republicans. But for the previous eight election cycles, when they voted, they voted Dem.

I have no doubt a tactician like you realizes how huge this could be. Getting those votes 15 years early could provoke another electoral re-alignment. That along with him being the "anti-Bush" is why I say that Paul is the Republican with the very best shot at stopping Hillary Clinton.

What needs to happen is that traditional Republicans who have been sucked into Bush's tendency toward fascism need to make a clean break and turn their backs on him, even as he has already turned his back on them. The same folks like all the rest of Ron Paul's substance, but are uncomfortable with his style. If they want to stop Hildebeast, they better get past finding someone who they as a sixty year old white upper middle person feel most comfortable with.

Ron Paul is like the new music minister at Ole Tradition Baptist Church who starts singing scripture choruses instead of all hymns. He brings in young people, but the old folks get nasty against him because his style is not the one they prefer. Some of 'em would rather close the doors than reach out- and they sometimes get their wish in churches and might in the GOP if they don't open their hearts some.

6:14 PM, October 18, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...


I forgot to add that I would like to see a bit more poll methodology. I did see one on name ID that showed 71% of likely Republican voters did not know who Paul was- the highest of any candidate in the poll. As hard as it is for folks who follow this closely to believe, most folks are just now wondering who is running.

If you read my previous post you will realize that Paul draws a huge amount of support from people who have never voted in a GOP primary before- probably not ANY primary. Because of that, I think they may be under represented on a poll of "likely GOP voters". I mean if I am doing one of those polls I will start calling those who voted in previous GOP primaries in this state. That will not count the new folks Paul is bringing into the GOP fold 15 years early.

It also means he could surprise some people when the actual voting starts.

6:19 PM, October 18, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


A political party is built by bringing in young people.
With that said, I don't see Ron Paul as a party builder.

The Repubs are in trouble for the next couple election cycles because we have the most seats up for grabs. In 2012 this cycle reverses. Politics always swings back and forth. Its going to be nice being out of politics for a few years, I need a break.

6:48 PM, October 18, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Paul would be a party builder, but paradoxically, not by focusing on building the party. Building the party would not be his focus, but it would be his EFFECT. Unfortunately, the party establishment would much rather lose to Hillary Clinton than support a man who is a classic conservative on every issue and has led a sterling personal life.

They will fight his efforts- which are also their last best chance to keep from going the way of the Whigs, with their dying breath. That's why they are known as "The Stupid Party". We can put it on their tombstone.

4:43 AM, October 20, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


The Republican Party is split right now but far from going away. Just last night we saw for the first time since reconstruction a Republican Governor elected in La.
This is a bright spot, even though I think 2008 will be a tough year, but we are far from dead.

Ron Paul as a party builder is laughable. This guy comes off as a fruit cake and I really don't know why. I listen to what he has to say and find myself agreeing most of the time. He will be lucky to pull 2%.

My thoughts are in line with cb. I am not happy with the choices we have this year so I pick the lesser of 2 evils.

Did you see where the Huckster did really well with the value voters in D.C.? He will be the VP candidate.

5:20 AM, October 21, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

This guy comes off as a fruit cake and I really don't know why. I listen to what he has to say and find myself agreeing most of the time.

Well, I can't argue with logic like that.

One of the most frustrating things about doing this is attempting to dialog and getting strictly non-responsive answers to my points. I will say "X is good because of ....", and list several REASONS why I maintain that. It is quite frustrating when the response is "X is bad, but I don't know why and I agree with X". It is like I am in a twilight zone episode where I can't get anyone to THINK.

7:34 AM, October 21, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...

Okay Mark lets try this,

He may be right on some of his issues but his style is lacking. That makes him APPEAR to be a nut. When I see Paul he just reminds me of Ross Perot.

Now to policy. I wouldn't vote for Paul because of his position on the war on terror. I see NO difference between he and Murtha, Kerry or the rest of the nut job left.
Is that better?

10:02 AM, October 21, 2007  
Anonymous mark said...


6:25 AM, October 22, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

One of the most frustrating things about discussing Ron Paul with anyone who supports him is that when I make the case that you just stated (that while I agree with Paul on many, many issues, his quirky presentation & delivery makes him totally unviable), they will not engage in that debate.
I sometimes wonder if they are so hungry for someone who says the things they believe that they remain in denial when it comes to his electability.
To be fair though, I think you swing too far the other way when you compromise many core principles to support Rudy because of his perceived electability.

In short, I (like everyone else I suppose) view my own choice as the sensible, middle of the road option; I'm backing Huck. LOL

9:34 PM, October 22, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


I like Huckabee. The only reason I haven't supported him in the past is I thought he would be gone by now. So much for my predictions.
I have some issues with Huckabee but not to the extent I do with Rudy. My support for Rudy is soft at best. But for the time being I see nowhere else to go. At least with Rudy you know what you are getting, not someone who goes whichever way the political winds are blowing.

4:24 AM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Touche', Rick.

When it comes to sheer campaigning, Huckabee is by far the best of the pack. The only reason he hasn't caught on yet is because the establishment & the media are not behind him like Rudy & Thompson. and he doesn't have personal millions like Mitt(without which we wouldn't even be discussing him).

It remains to be seen whether he can overcome those obstacles.
Iowa is his best shot. Mitt peaked long ago. Having been steadily increasing for months, Huck, in the last poll he was about to pass Thompson for second & that poll was before Brownback pulled out. Huck will pick up 90% of his support.
If he could pull off a win in Iowa he could catapault to the front of the pack with all of the exposure much like Kerry in '04.
We shall see........

5:57 AM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the most frustrating things about discussing Ron Paul with anyone who supports him is that when I make the case that you just stated (that while I agree with Paul on many, many issues, his quirky presentation & delivery makes him totally unviable), they will not engage in that debate.

Did you not read the article for this thread?

6:44 AM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Yes, and kudos to Mark for being the first I've seen address this, however as with all of his supporters there is a lot of wishful thinking interjected.

Anybody who follows politics can remember many candidates that were unorhtodox & they were going to bring all these new voters in & run a different kind of campaign.
It has never worked.

8:47 AM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...

Look you guys, I am trying to talk this through and understand, but it is not computing. Rick, I understand you disagree about the right approach against terrorists. That is a legit issue and we can debate the merits of that issue sometime. My beef is that you are (apart from that) busting him on style ("he comes off as a nut") when that is a matter of your personal taste, not right and wrong. It's not policy, its just packaging. And neither of you have addressed my point that people are sick of slick packaging. If people wanted glib corporate Ken-doll, Romney would have this thing won already.

I cannot understand, please help me understand, how someone who claims to be a conservative can support Guiliani over Paul strictly because of the way they present themselves. I mean I CAN THROW UP TEN PICTURES OF RUDY IN DRAG THAT WILL MAKE YOUR STOMACH TURN. I can do it right now, and you know it. A "conservative" who backs a drag queen! You say Paul comes off as a nut, but based on this, couldn't Paul say the same thing about you? I mean, what has Ron Paul done that is as crazy as Rudy has done? The guys whole adult life is a train-wreck.

And you C.B. How can you read plain bare, linked and undeniable facts like the ones in the Huckabee article at the top of Arkansas Watch and still by-pass Ron Paul to support that man? The most damning part of the article is Huckabee's own words then and now. Its nothing I did, I just showed the man's own words.

Can a man REALLY, REALLY mean what he said in 06 and then REALLY REALLY mean what he said in 07? Are there any other choices than to believe he is either 1) deliberately trying to deceive people as to his feelings on illegal immigration or 2) bipolar?

What are the other options? And if there are not other options then how can you think Paul is too nutty ? At least Paul is sane enough not to support people that are either lying their much-reduced tailbones off or are nuts themselves.

Ron Paul is not a kook. He is not a nut. He is academic, with geekish undertones, but he is also RIGHT. He is the class nerd. Huckabee and Guiliani are among the "cool kids" in the class who are glib and charming and full of social wit. But they also have the wrong answers on the test. Paul has done his homework, understands the system the founders established, and has the right answers. The kids in the class are afraid to vote for the smart geeky kid for class President, even though they secretly know he has the truth.

This is not just a piece of paper test though, this is not an election for class President. The country is in trouble. We must change course. It may already be too late to avoid significant pain.

7:51 PM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

I don't dispute anything you said, save one; that people are "tired of slick packaging".
You, I, & many others who are informed & care about issues may be, but there are millions of ignorant, uninformed voters in this country who vote strictly on emotion and sadly it takes a little packaging.
If by some miracle Paul could win the primary, he would be doomed in the general.

As I have stressed before, I am not happy with my choice & I take issue with Huck on every point you do, yet I think he is the best shot we have to avoid electing a gay-loving, baby-killing, gun confiscating closet Democrat. Or a real one next November for that matter!

I guess if we are still aroud after 3 or 4 years of Hillary, maybe Newt will have American Solutions running smooth & can lead another revolution and bring the GOP back to it's roots & take her out. (sigh)

6:52 AM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Still pushing Newt, I see. I told you he wouldn't run, and now I'm telling you that you should get behind Ron Paul and forget the Huckster.

8:06 AM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Well, let me take a stab at the prophecy thing.... Ron Paul will not win, not the primary, not the general, not ever.

For the record I'm not pushing Newt, I'm engaging in a little wishful hoping, like you. Only my fantasy is a lot more plausible.

11:26 AM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hope, yes. Wishing and fantasy are for books and movies.

1:10 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


You must be writing a book. Thinking Ron Paul has even a slight chance of winning is pure fantasy,not hope.

3:35 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...

I guess it is a moot point, since the GOP and corporate gatekeepers will not let him up for air, but I still contend that Ron Paul would destroy Hillary Clinton. He absolutely matches up the best against her.

I have already ID the swing group that Paul takes from Hillary. In my view, though some would have to hold their nose, he does not lose any significant demographic to Hillary.

Guiliani loses the Christian Right, and the lefties are not going to vote for a Republican liberal when they have a Democratic one available. Huckabee would keep the RR, but does not cut into her base in anyway, and she will beat him on the borders.

5:03 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rick, for someone who advocates for president a man who frequently dresses in drag, you should be careful about using the word "fantasy" for a variety of reasons.

5:39 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


How is the GOP leadership keeping Paul down? Has he not been in all the debates? One reason he isn't doing that well is he can't raise the money to compete in advertising with the top 3, Giuliani, Romney and Thompson.

The question is how much of the Christian Right will Giuliani lose. Obviously he will lose some but no one can energize the Repub base like a Clinton. You have the fiscal conservatives who like Giuliani, those who are for a strong defense like Giuliani and he is reaching out to social conservatives by promising to appoint SC judges like Alito, Roberts, Scalia. He also supports the Hyde Amendment. If its between Giuliani and Clinton Giuliani can win, especially with Huckabee as his VP. Huck would help in the south, northeast states come into play as well as Ohio.

Hillary will start the general with 50% saying they will not vote for her under any circumstance.
This is good for the Republican nominee.

6:14 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


Why do you support Paul? Is there any substance to why your choosing him?

6:19 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...


No. Paul was not in all the debates. The first thing they tried to do was exclude him from the debates in Iowa. It backfired on them when Paul rented the room next door and drew a crowd as large as the "official" debate.

The GOP does not have total control over who appears in a debate, but the state chairman of Michigan circulated a petition to exclude Paul from that debate.

In Texas, they were so desperate to stop Paul that they would only allow people who had been a state or national party delegate before 2002 to vote in their straw poll! They could have had 10 times the small turnout they had, but they were so afraid that Ron Paul would bring new people to the party and win the poll that they scurried up the castle tower and drew up the drawbridge.

I wish I could find the video of one state chairman grabbing a Ron Paul sign and flinging it to the ground so that one of his friends could step on it and keep it out of the RP supporter's hands. They did not want those signs in the background when TV interviews were going on! I saw it myself. has banned new members from discussing Ron Paul for 6 months. Same with all GOP media- water carriers. When a pro-Paul caller got on the Rush Limbaugh show I heard Limbaugh say "Oh oh, another one got through the cracks". Hannity is openly contemptueous of Paul and snickered into an open mike over Paul's answer at a debate, then said "O no, not again" when informed that Paul had won the text message poll about the debate.

States that are open primary and have enough Republicans in the legislature to make it happen are changing their voting rules at the 11th hour to close their primaries so that Paul can't bring in independents and traditional democrats and win the primaries.

It is intensely clear that the GOP has hostility to Paul. He does not care for them much either, to judge by his statements about the Bush's, but they are taking active measures to keep him down.

7:11 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Rick said...


Thanks for the information. I was not aware of that happening. I personally think Paul adds something to the debates, even though I am not supporting him.

4:18 AM, October 25, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home