Back in early November, when Ron Paul held a one-day fundraiserpalooza and pulled in a record-breaking $4.2 million, I said that it was hard not to take the accomplishment seriously.
Esteemed differently-winged BMGer Peter Porcupine responded:
David – I’ll take it seriously if he does it again. Ever. For now, his adherents have emptied their UNICEF cardboard collection boxes…
Well, guess what.
Ron Paul supporters marched today through the snow from the State House to Faneuil Hall, then smashed the one-day fund-raising record for a Republican presidential candidate.
As of 7 p.m., the supporters said they had raked in $4.3 million, surpassing the record $4.2 million total they raised on Nov. 5.
And there are still a few hours to go! {UPDATE: Apparently the final take was over $6 million. Really, that’s pretty impressive.}
At this point, though, it’s not clear how much this does for Ron Paul. Any chance he had of a late surge seems to have been wiped out by the GOP’s sudden case of Huckabee fever, which has starved all the other also-rans of desperately needed media attention. So even if Paul raises a pile of money, what does it get him? He’s still stuck in single digits in NH, which is where he has to make his stand.
Too bad for PP — forced to take Paul seriously just when it’s too late! đŸ˜‰
They may only be in single digits, but they’re the only campaign with its own air force.
I’ve seen Romney’s blimp on this blog a number of times…play it again, David?
Somethings are just meant to be savored.
I received a hand written post-card from a neighbor expressing his support of the above presidential candidate. The neighbor used a plain postcard with a stamp that you can purchase from the post office and wrote his feelings about the candidate with a pen.
It was quite touching.
after Ayn Rand? Now that’s devotion.
<
p>I think it will be funny when Paul beats Thompson in NH.
I cannot think of anything more likely to ensure good GOP primary turout than a spate of Ron Paul media messages.
<
p>Seriously, the votes won’t be for him, though.
in NH. His support amongst 18-39 year olds is off the charts in all internals. Think about that. Those people are basically unreachable via telephone because they have unlisted cell phone numbers as far as polling goes.
<
p>If is wasn’t for his 17th century foreign policy I’d be right there with the Paul supporters.
“Likely republican primary voters” of the persuasion that can be measured by polling technique, would not include any margin for independants or crossover democrats … The RP revolution is a once in a lifetime, never before seen phenomena which current polling technique has no way to account for. How many unaccountables will it take to tilt the scale? What percentage of actual voters actualy select primary winners? Minutely small, enough so that even a few thousand “additions” would spike the drink?
We will see ina few more weeks just how strong actual support is and if as I suspect, it is significantly higher than is being reported the sudden media attention will become a slef fulfilling prophecy that will swamp the remaining mediocre-at-best GOP-Dem field.
He’ll probably pull a few Dem-leaning independents, but not the groundswell you describe. If there were no serious Dem primary fight, then he’d probably get more votes from left-leaning indies, but since there’s pretty good action right now on the left, my bet is that those folks will stay on the blue side of the primary.
2. Because he made corpo-media’s hitlist.
<
p>Don’t worry though the Illuminati will take care of Ron Paul.
And he did take some attention away from Boston’s other Tea Party, the one for 911 truth, which was also a media blacklisted event.
Maybe that’s enough for you… not for me thanks.
OK, so he’s got his heart in the right place when it comes to our disastrous, immoral and illegal debacle in Iraq…opposing it. Good for him. However, there are other things about him which cause me to not support his candidacy. First of all, he’s against abortion rights. Secondly, he’s advocated illegal spying, and whatever on American citizens. Thirdly, he seems like another wolf in sheep’s clothing, which is just what all of today’s Republicans are.
Namely, that he’s a lunatic.
I’ll give you that he is personally opposed to abortion. That’s his view; I have no problem with it, and yes, he would seek to find a case that would end up overturning Roe v. Wade. However, he would not pursue a national abortion ban; rather, he would leave those decisions up to the states, which is where they should be according to the Constitution.
<
p>”Illegal spying, and whatever”? Where have you heard this? That’s the last thing that Ron Paul would support, since he believes in the Bill of Rights.
<
p>Finally, what impressions do you get that he would be, as you say a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”?
<
p>I would love to know all of these.
Also, as I frequently do, I’m going by gut instinct here, which tells me that Ron Paul’s not to be trusted.
<
p>Also, the reason I mentioned “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, is because that’s the way the Republicans, especially nowadays, have been acting.
There is NO greater defender of personal liberty in this race than Ron Paul. There is NOONE in this race more opposed to the patriot act and the illegal infringements of privacy that it advacates than Ron Paul …
Shit … your democrats all voted for extending the frigging patriot act while Ron Paul has fought it from the beginning …
so PLEASE if you want to bash Ron Paul go right ahead but please stop outright lying about him. You read that crap nowhere but where you yourself wrote it.
<
p>nomad943: First of all, are the accusations that you’re presently making in your above-mentioned post necessary? I think not. I think that most Democrats voted against extending the Patriot Act and not for it. Secondly, if it’s true that Ron Paul really believes in the Bill of Rights, the fact that he’s very anti-choice is at least one reason why I don’t support him.
As for Ron Paul’s advocating leaving abortion rights up to individual states, this is a step towards completely overturning the Roe v. Wade law, which, for all kinds of reasons, could be and would be quite dangerous.
<
p>ORLY? Check out H.R. 1094, 2007. A bill “to provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” If that’s not moving toward Federal Moratorium on Abortion, I don’t know what is.
<
p>
<
p>For me, the above bill, for one.