The Troops Love Ron Paul (but Not That Much)

David Weigel | July 16, 2007

The story making the rounds is true: Ron Paul raised $22,140 from active duty or retired members of the military as declared on their donation forms. That was more than John McCain ($16,675), Mitt Romney ($4551) combined and only a little less than those two plus Rudy Giuliani ($2320). But those are the total dollar donations—not the number of donors, as Wonkette reported.

"The story on Wonkette is wrong," explained the Paul campaign's Jesse Benton. "We'd love to have 22,140 active military donors, but that's a lot of guys with five-figure salaries dipping into their wallets."

As to why Paul did so well: "We think that Ron is the strongest advocate of the military in the race: He supports bringing them home from foreign adventurism. We're very proud of our military support but we don't want to overstate it."

Comments

seer|7.16.07 @ 6:08PM|#

The military used to overwhelmingly support Republicans, and it was because of guys like Ron Paul.

Heh|7.16.07 @ 6:28PM|#

The neocons must be pulling their hair out right about now. I'm just waiting to hear their lame reason for this.

|7.16.07 @ 6:38PM|#

why are the folks at Wonkette so hateful? They're sooo holier-than-thou.. from the articles to the comments.. am I missing an inside joke or does every hateful "progressive" zealot on earth hang out on Wonkette and the Daily Kos? They toss this "racist" tag around like it's some kind of currency with which they can buy some more self importance.. it's quite disgusting, but maybe it's just me.

|7.16.07 @ 6:43PM|#

With all the favorable Ron Paul news today, I can't help but be awash with hope.

However, we Paul-sters need to remember that the War on Drugs hasn't really been prevalent in Paul's TV time.

When that happens, he's going to take a pretty big dip with the Know-What's-Better-For-You crowd, a.k.a. like 90% of people who vote...

|7.16.07 @ 6:45PM|#

P.S. I have officially coined the term "Paulster"


Go forth and multiply...

|7.16.07 @ 6:46PM|#

We think that Ron is the strongest advocate of the military in the race: He supports bringing them home from foreign adventurism.

So the theory is that when the "adventurism" ends, all these guys expect to collect their measly "five-figure" (sniff sniff) salaries manning the homefront? Most people don't donate to candidates who promise to take away the donors' jobs, but then 1) donations are basically irrational acts anyway, and 2) donating to Ron Paul ridiculously so. Such an expenditure may as well be a movie ticket -- and most folks don't like their action heroes to be nuanced or sensible either.

David Armor|7.16.07 @ 6:54PM|#

And just think, it's not even 2008 yet. You don't see this kind of hype around any of the Democrats... not even Billary Clinton.

heh2|7.16.07 @ 7:02PM|#

I totally agree with you Taktix®. The one issue that really hasn't been brought up (The War on Drugs) could easily destroy any chances Dr. Paul has of gaining the Republican nomination. But, his federalist stance could save him also (as in, leave it to the states to combat drugs). There's no doubt, however, that the WOD is a fundamental issue for most conservatives, unfortunately.

|7.16.07 @ 7:22PM|#

Dear T.

Instead of Paulsters, how about something holy, such as Paulists (like the Paulist Fathers?) or maybe Paulistas for the Hispanic vote? How about Paulbearers? He's going down in flames anyway due to the drug issue.

Reminds me of the Goldwater era. A fine, conservative statesman running against a guy who told his mistress the night before the JFK assasination, "after tomorrow, we won't have to deal with the ________ing Kennedy's anymore."

When it comes to who gets to the top, sometimes democracies aren't so different from Totalitarian regimes as we'd like to think.

Ron Paul won't get elected, but at least he won't be murdered in Mexico like Trotsky.

|7.16.07 @ 8:03PM|#

I'm a vet myself. If you knew what people in the military got paid, you'd understand why $22,000 is alot of money for military donations. Most of them qualify for food stamps and such.

Back in the 90's, I made only $1000 a month before taxes. After taxes, I took him about $700 a month.

Also, consider their ages as well. How many of us were donating at the ages of 18-22?

So as a vet who knows the military and understand the financial situations they face, 22k is HUGE.

And oh yeah, they only count retired vets, not all vets in the charts. I'm a vet, but not considered 1 in those figures since my employment is something else now.

|7.16.07 @ 8:08PM|#

Just so long as we don't paularize the electorate.

|7.16.07 @ 8:09PM|#

but maybe it's just me.

not hardly.

|7.16.07 @ 8:20PM|#

J Goard,

Unlike government service empire builders who specialize in employment justification, there are many of us in the Military who would be happy to be out of a job. Peace is only slightly less profitable than war, and a hell of a lot less effort.

BTW Ron Paul has my 50 bucks, and there's more where that came from.

|7.16.07 @ 8:22PM|#

Head to head, we'll Paulverize the competition.

|7.16.07 @ 9:52PM|#

Damn skippy! While it's true that there are plenty of gung-ho types in the military, and no one in uniform is allowed to question the chain of command. Don't buy the bullshit that they support guys who want to send them to their deaths. Military folk support politicians that increase defense spending, wave the flag, do a lot of saber rattling, and only send them into combat that can be mopped up in a weekend. Just like Ron Paul!

Also, I don't think there's as much rah rah support for the drug war either. The WOD has gotten totally ridiculous and more and more people are realizing that. Even though there are still plenty people still on the"drugs are bad mmmkay" bus, there's other things they are caring more about, and they're getting tired of riding in (descending) circles.

Jim Treacher|7.16.07 @ 9:58PM|#

Paulookas?

|7.16.07 @ 10:32PM|#

No, Silly. We're Pauliticians.

James Quentin Clark|7.16.07 @ 10:40PM|#

Paulbearers is pretty sweet. How about "Ronsters"? Or maybe "Ron's Renegades" or, dare I say, "Ron-egades"?

Ron is a cool first name. My friends and I call him "Ronnie MC", which is also what I call Ronald McDonald, the clown that sells the hamburgers.

I'm going to stop talking now.

|7.16.07 @ 10:47PM|#

When he wins, the Department of Homeland Security will be called the \"Paulitburo.\"

CLS|7.16.07 @ 10:50PM|#

Well, the news is interesting but the real important information is missing. Remember that normally a donation is not reported unless it is a minimum of $200. So that means the maximum total number of identified donaors from the military would be 110 people. And it could be as lows as 10 or 11. In other words a lot of people are spreading the hype about what amounts to a couple of dozen donations.

|7.16.07 @ 10:58PM|#

"When he wins, the Department of Homeland Security will be called the "Paulitburo."

When he wins, the Department of Homeland Security will be called a memory.

Brian Defferding|7.16.07 @ 11:21PM|#

Man, Wonkette's become a haven for jerks with a hard-on for Ron Paul. Wonder why they spend so much time backhanding him and his supporters if they really feel he's such a long shot candidate.

In other news, I'm going to be passing out Ron Paul fliers this weekend.

Edward|7.17.07 @ 2:31AM|#

Top ten reasons why Ron Paul is a joke candidate:

1. He comes off as whiny, fanatical kook
2. He is a whiny, fanatical kook.
3. Fewer voters know who he is than have seen Texas Chainsaw Masacre.
4. He's no Ross Perot.
5. He was once the libertarian candidate for President.
6. His prospects have always been the figment of fervid libertarian imaginations
7. He looks goofier than Fred Thompson on a good day.
8. His policy prescriptions, which few will ever hear, are so far out of the mainstream that he may as well be from Mars.
9. He's dumb as a box of hair.
10. His hair.

|7.17.07 @ 2:53AM|#

Dr. Paul's anti-drug-war stance will be a big PLUS for him, not a negative. Recall how Bob Barr was DEFEATED because he was pro-drug-war. Not only that, but Bob Barr has switched sides and is now ANTI-drug-war.

Also, recall that Dr. Paul is a TEN-term congressman. Not only does he win, but he has beaten an incumbent THREE times (likely unprecedented in American politics). The pro-drug smear simply does not stick to him. He is anti-drug AND anti-drug-war.

|7.17.07 @ 4:30AM|#

Ok, "Edward" has to be some regular trolling for laffs. Anyone care to 'fess up?

|7.17.07 @ 5:35AM|#

I know nothing about politics this early in the game - what are his chances of really gaining some footholds here and there and making a run? I know he doesn't have Perot's money, but Perot did not seem to have as much of a consistent agenda, nor the legitimacy of a multi-term congressman.

So what, aside from the "MSM"s neglect of Dr Paul, not to mention the considerable name-recog problem Dr Paul has, is keeping him from making a viable run? Also, he does not seem so stupid as to think that he has no chance of at least doing some damage, so why would he run if he didn't think it would have some impact?

Maybe Jesse's piece has some insight into that?

|7.17.07 @ 8:12AM|#

Wonder why they spend so much time backhanding him and his supporters if they really feel he's such a long shot candidate.

Dude, it's Wonkette. They don't need a reason to be smartasses; it's just who they are.

|7.17.07 @ 9:11AM|#

Wonkette selling Ron Paul short? Just another example of the beltway bias of the gaystream media

Severin|7.17.07 @ 9:15AM|#

It makes sense that if you are in the military and are a republican against the war you would contribute to Pauls campaign. If you are okay with the status quo you might not have a preference yet of the 9 other candidates who are all promising to keep you in Iraq and away from your family.

Edward|7.17.07 @ 9:28AM|#

Gaystream media? Hey, how about getting Ron Paul a makeover by Queer Eye for the Straight Guy? It's a lomg shot, but it might just work.

highnumber|7.17.07 @ 11:20AM|#

Not that I've ever read Wonkette with any regularity, but I now have a favorite commenter there:

BY DAVIDWATTS AT 07/16/07 02:13 PM
It's almost as if they'd rather not be blown up for no reason.

A smartass and a Kinks fan. He wins.

|7.17.07 @ 11:38AM|#

Wonkette is part of the Gawker Media group, the publications of which are extra-heavy on the snark and sarcasm. It makes for fun reading during the workday (search for stories with the Endless Cummer tag for all of the sex scandals involving politicians going on right now). There's a Dem slant to things, to be sure.

VM|7.17.07 @ 11:45AM|#

High - it's only cuz you wish you were like David Watts...

[ducks]

highnumber|7.17.07 @ 12:25PM|#

VM - Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa

VM|7.17.07 @ 12:30PM|#

just don't sing that down in a tube station at midnight...

|7.17.07 @ 12:53PM|#

Don't flatter yourself guys; wonkette has a pessimistic attitude to all candidates and all things in general. You have to look past the the hate language and see the satire. I think they report on him because they secretly like him and many of their readers do as well.

Read the first paragraph of this story...
http://wonkette.com/politics/dept'-of-second-life-same-as-the-first/national-journal-would-like-you-ron-paul-fanatics-to-knock-it-off-266610.php

Pendulum|7.17.07 @ 12:57PM|#

And I wish all his money belonged to me!

|7.17.07 @ 1:29PM|#

...how about getting Ron Paul a makeover by Queer Eye for the Straight Guy?

There's a joke in there about Guiliani's transvestite tendencies, but I'm not funny enough to wring it out.

VM - you mean don't sing it when you're going underground?

VM|7.17.07 @ 1:34PM|#

Not unless I'm armed with an Eaton Rifle.

(when I wasn't, I had to Beat Surrender, all covered by Bricks and Mortar, which was the Bitterest Pill I ever had to swallow).

Merkinflesh! Awesome name. check out the bestest place in teh INTERTUBZ (lolz), MERKINWORLD

Our old buddy "Twistedmerkin" also has been spotted 'round these hier parts!