Ron Paul Rising (and Winning the Black Vote) in New Hampshire?

David Weigel | October 9, 2007

RealClearPolitics gives us the latest Insider Advantage poll of New Hampshire with Rep. Ron Paul at his highest-ever support level: Six percent. That puts him in the running for fourth place, only slightly behind eight-percenters Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee. (That's also higher than the 3 percent most polls give him.) The breakdowns:

- Paul scores around 8 percent with 18-29 year olds and 30-44 year olds, but most GOP primary voters are over 45.

- Paul wins the biggest chunk of the black vote, 22.2 percent, topping Mitt Romney's 18.5 percent. One problem: There aren't very many black New Hampshire Republicans. Only 27 were sampled in this poll, and Paul won six of them. Hey, he gets bragging rights.

- Paul wins 10.4 percent of moderate voters, better than Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee.

That last number's interesting because of the X-Factor in the race: whatever New Hampshire's independents do. They've largely soured on Republicans, especially John McCain (who wouldn't have won the 2000 primary without them), and two-thirds of them say they'll vote in the Democratic race. If Barack Obama or John Edwards wins Iowa, they probably will keep their word. But if Hillary Clinton wins Iowa and the Democratic race stops being interesting, how many anti-war independents will vote for Paul? I'm not predicting a Paul win by any means, but it's getting easier to see a New Hampshire primary where the gap between 1st and 2nd place is smaller than Paul's vote... with the loser having made no effort to steal Paul voters away by talking about his issues.

I talked with New Hampshire Republicans about the race back in June. (That picture was taken outside the June CNN debate.)

In related (old) news, Paul won't be at the Republican Jewish Coalition's candidate forum next week. The first reason given: They only invited the "top" candidates. The second reason given, since they included the never-serious Sam Brownback: Paul votes against aid to Israel.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

Scooby|10.9.07 @ 12:02PM|#

I'm just amazed that they found 27 black people in New Hampshire, let alone 27 black Republicans.

|10.9.07 @ 12:05PM|#

Why aren't all the new Free State Project residents putting RP over the top?

|10.9.07 @ 12:09PM|#

I am having trouble with the numbers. He gains 6.6% of the male vote which is 30 voters. He garners 3.5% of the female vote, which is 22 voters. 52 voters out of the base 1082 is 4.8%.
How is that 6%?

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 12:09PM|#

- Paul wins the biggest chunk of the black vote, 22.2 percent, topping Mitt Romney's 18.5 percent. One problem: There aren't very many black New Hampshire Republicans. Only 27 were sampled in this poll, and Paul won six of them. Hey, he gets bragging rights.

And, apparently, Black voters in NH are hard to find in photographs of RP supporters too.

|10.9.07 @ 12:11PM|#

I'm not predicting a Paul win

Well I am! The more New Hampshire thinks about this race the more attractive Ron Paul will become.

RON PAUL '08
Hope for America

|10.9.07 @ 12:16PM|#

BTW Dave,
Since you have to register as a Republican by THIS FRIDAY to vote in the NH primary, that pretty well sinks your whole 'Dem horse race vs. Ron Paul, votes' theory.

|10.9.07 @ 12:18PM|#

I should add that percentages of small numbers are ridiculous. Woohoo! Hunter captures 11.1% of the Hispanic vote moving him into second place, tied with heavyweights Romney and Thompson; Tancredo humiliated with a big fat Hispanic goose egg. Oh wait. It's only one Hispanic guy for Hunter. A regular "Latinos for Duncan" movement.

|10.9.07 @ 12:19PM|#

I will be registering as a Republican on Friday to vote for Ron Paul in NH. I know that here in the North Country, support is pretty solid for a guy like Ron Paul. Whether or not this translates to votes, I don't know. I haven't seen so much as a bumper sticker for Romney or Guiliani, we get enough tourons from MA nd NY to not want one of them running the country.

Kelly Halldorson|10.9.07 @ 12:33PM|#

The deadline is only for Democrats. I've been telling registered Democrats that are on the fence to register as "Undeclared" by Friday so they will have a choice come January (or December).

Independents (Undeclared voters) are a big chunk here in NH and the ones I know are all considering Ron Paul.

I'm here. It's my home state. I've seen past primaries. I know Ron Paul can win this state. Support is strong. There are far more Ron Paul signs and bumper stickers around this state than any of the other candidates. The only others that come close (from what I've seen) are Obama & Hillary.

JBinMO|10.9.07 @ 12:34PM|#

Dou you think that at the Republican Jewish Coalition's event Brown back will still end with "all for Jesus,all for Jesus,all for Jesus"?

|10.9.07 @ 12:37PM|#

Ron Paul is the ONLY choice for the Republican party. Why? Because otherwise, Hillary's in! Once voters and the media realize this, we will see our man Ron Paul obtain the nomination, and become the next President. He is the ONLY option if the GOP wants a win, remember this.

hope1 asked:

"Why aren't all the new Free State Project residents putting RP over the top?"

Because FSP is a comparatively insignificant slice of the NH electorate...VERY few people.

Individual FSP members can be a help to the Paul campaign, but it would take alot more than FSP member activism to "put Paul over the top" in a Republican primary anywhere.

|10.9.07 @ 12:44PM|#

Off topic, Thanks Cleveland for ruining George Steinbreneners season! Back to the RP NH stuff.

|10.9.07 @ 1:00PM|#

Ron Paul is the ONLY choice for the Republican party. Why? Because otherwise, Hillary's in!

I never get this line of argument. Can someone point me to poll results showing McRomliompson all losing head-to-head against Hillary but Ron Paul winning? And preferably all of this will be shown in a single poll, not cobbled together from different polls.

I think a better line of argument is, "If Paul isn't nominated, we'll likely have to choose between Clinton and Il Duce!" Now that keeps me awake at night.

Tom W|10.9.07 @ 1:01PM|#

Hopefully the four front bumblers will soak up all the usual votes equally (with Huck getting a few too) and the dedicated Paulistas will come out in force and give Ron say 17 or 18%.

They're motivated enough to actually go and vote in a primary; but are there enough of them to make a difference?

To his credit, RP doesn't talk about other candidates very much, but yesterday on the Ed Schulz show I believe I heard him referring to Huckabee as "Hucklebee."

That's fine, because I call him Suck-up-a-bee.

|10.9.07 @ 1:02PM|#

I honestly think that Ron Paul has a shot at being this country's first New Hampshire Republican black president.

|10.9.07 @ 1:04PM|#

Warren,

It looks like you forgot to capitalize RON PAUL the first time you wrote his name. You're slipping, man.

|10.9.07 @ 1:08PM|#

"I never get this line of argument. Can someone point me to poll results showing McRomliompson all losing head-to-head against Hillary but Ron Paul winning?"

It's actually pretty simple... the pro-war candidate will lose in a general election. With Clinton vs McRomliompson, Clinton is the anti-war candidate. With Clinton vs Paul, Paul is the anti-war candidate.

|10.9.07 @ 1:21PM|#

Regis,
I haven't been consistent on the uppercase RON PAUL thing. I like to mix it up, keeps em on their toes (I have no idea what that means)

Go Ron Paul!

Syloson of Samos|10.9.07 @ 1:21PM|#

What's the margin of error, etc.?

iih|10.9.07 @ 1:40PM|#

Off topic, Thanks Cleveland for ruining George Steinbreneners season! Back to the RP NH stuff.

Wasn't that great?!

Back to RP: FWIW, the frequency of Ron Paul bumper stickers are increasing -- but not as dominant as Clinton or Romney. Then in third place I would say Obama. That is here in the NE region (mainly Mass and NH). It is nice to identify with other RP supporters on the road.

|10.9.07 @ 1:40PM|#

TIME TO GET ACTIVE PEOPLE.

FOR PAUL TO WIN THE NOMINATION WE NEED TO START GETTING PEOPLE REGISTERED REPUBLICAN TO VOTE IN THE PRIMARIES (NOT BINDING IN THE ELECTION)

TIME IS RUNNING OUT, WE NEED TO GET RON PAUL THE NOMINATION!!!

HE IS THE ONLY ANTI-WAR PRO-LIBERTY CANDIDATE WE HAVE WHO ACTUALLY STANDS A CHANCE!

www.RonPaul2008.com

www.Freeme.tv

http://ronpaul.meetup.com/

|10.9.07 @ 1:44PM|#

As encouraging as this survey is, it still means nothing this far from the primary.

Perhaps, marginally, it means people have heard the name. We don't even really know who was called, or what names were asked (or in what order, etc.)

Check out the pollster.com disclosure project for some insights as to how the telephone surveys are skewed. (on purpose or by accident makes no difference)

The Plain Old Telephone Surveys (POTS) have had a terrible track record in relation to the straw polls. I am not even talking about Ron Paul's results, and I am not talking about straw polls which are open to every Tom, Dick and state fair attendee.

I am also not talking about cellphone bias, or the fact that Ron Paul's name is routinely left off of POTS (and then those POTS are averaged with other POTS which artificially depress Ron Paul's Real Clear Politics poll averages)

In IA, TX, and MI, the polls were limited to GOP members. In TX, it was very limited - not just GOP members, but past GOP state or national delegates. In theory, these straw polls should have had results within the MoE of the POTS.

Let's see what really happened.

IA - ABC POTS had McCain and Huckabee even at 8% among likely GOP straw poll attendees the week prior to the straw poll. McCain got 1%; Huckabee got 18%. Both results were far outside the margin of error (MoE) for that POTS (4.5%). Romney did well, within the MoE of his POTS numbers, but Giuliani did terribly (well below Tommy Thompson)

TX - Duncan Hunter won the straw poll with 41%. He had been polling in the low single digits (even lower than Ron Paul) in POTS. Again, Giuliani did very poorly in the straw poll with 6%, no where near his commanding 26% in the POTS. Theorhetically, this straw poll should have been closest to the POTS numbers due to the restrictive straw poll criteria. If anything it was the least conforming.

MI - The Mackinac straw poll had the order:Romney 39%, McCain 27%, Paul 11% (106), Giulaini 11% (104), F. Thompson 7%, Huckabee 3%. But the Real Clear Politics POTS average had this order: Romney 26.7%, Giuliani 18.3%, Thompson 14.0%, McCain 13.0%, Huckabee 4.3%, Ron Paul 1%. Of course Romney does well in MI, his father used to be governor. but how did McCain do so well in the straw poll, while doing so poorly in the POTS?

Here then, are 3 straw polls whose attendees were as likely to be GOP primary voters, as any POTS respondants.

Not one of the POTS results is anywhere on the same planet as the straw poll.

Conclusion? The POTS bear little or no relation to actual voting patterns this far from the primary. Plain Old Telephone Surveys are statistically unsound, open your eyes.

I'm not saying Ron Paul is going to win based on this. Ron Paul's numbers are in the 11-16% for these straw polls. I am saying that Ron Paul's support level is WAAaay above the 1-4% (or even 6 to 8%) that most POTS place him at.

Hard work is paying off.

Donate, Donate, Donate.
Door-knock, Door-knock, Door-knock.
Lit-drop, Lit-drop, Lit-drop.

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 1:44PM|#

It's actually pretty simple... the pro-war candidate will lose in a general election.

Just like 1968, 1972, 1980, 2000 and 2004?

|10.9.07 @ 1:46PM|#

The far left is starting to feel threatened by Ron Paul. Alternet has been running semi-hit pieces on Paul the last few weeks. There is a negative piece today on Ron Paul that is so bad it's laughable. And apparently the Alternet crowd isn't buying into the anti-Paul barbs (take a look at the comments, all supportive of Paul).

TLB|10.9.07 @ 1:49PM|#

One way to increase Ron Paul's chances is to reduce the popularity of his opponents. I describe an excellent way to do that here.

|10.9.07 @ 1:52PM|#

Let's start to realize one thing.. the GOP does NOT care if they win or not as long as the choice is ordained by the elite. The two party thing is a sham that only those not paying attention can believe exists.

If we want Ron Paul to win, it's simple. Make sure every eligible voter gets out and votes for him. It's he APATHY to all the other candidates that will hand Ron Paul the nomination. Thank God for this elections apathy. Freedom still has hope and it's name is the Ron Paul Revolution.

|10.9.07 @ 1:54PM|#

Ron has won every straw poll in NH overwhelmingly.

He had 400 people in his June 5th rallying section in addition to those who went inside.

I work tables so I know his support is wide across all parties, ages, genders, and types.

|10.9.07 @ 1:57PM|#

Guy,

I hate to take a little bit of the wind out of an otherwise apt comment, but in 2000, George Bush was the anti-war candidate. Remember the slogan "a more humble foreign policy"?

With that being said the guy who wins the election will probably be the one who scares fewer people than the others.

This of course goes against Ron Paul. Wanting to roll the Federal Government back to pre-1913 activities, while a great idea IMHO, represents a very scary radical policy.

Thus I am not so sanguine about Ron Paul's chances in the general election.

I think that the primary benefit from Ron Paul's candidacy is that it will demonstrate that grass roots movements can perform nearly as effectively as astro-turf movements. It may even begin to eliminate the advantage special interests have in public choice debates.

|10.9.07 @ 1:58PM|#

I was with some of Sen. Domenici's people in New Mexico last weekend. Privately they admitted RP is surpassing all insider expectations and starting to worry people.

|10.9.07 @ 2:20PM|#

The thing that concerns me if all this fails is that those in power will start to clamp down on the internet in one way or another.

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 2:22PM|#

tarran,

Yea, I should have left 2000 out, but because pro/anti-war was not an issue then.

I stand by the others, especially the Nixon ones, for this particular issue.

Edward|10.9.07 @ 2:32PM|#

Ron Paul's march to inevitable defeat must be the most carefully tracked in history.

Just when I thought this place couldn't get any dumber, you fucking morons take it to the next level. I can't deal with this idiocy any longer. Adios, fools.

GILMORE|10.9.07 @ 2:34PM|#

Didnt he also get like 90% of the straw vote at a trailer park party in Alabama?

Come on Paul!~ :P You can win with nothing but the intensely loyal fringe vote!

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 2:39PM|#

GILMORE,

Additionally, I believe he splits the vote on 9/11 truthers with Dennis Kucinich, as well as the UFO believers and Elvis is Alive fans.

Not sure where the moon landing conspiracy vote is concentrated on this one yet, but I am guessing the split is along the lines of the deniers of Ohio being a State.

|10.9.07 @ 2:47PM|#

Edward, you have promised to leave before, many times. You lied each and every time. This time, keep your promise.

|10.9.07 @ 2:49PM|#

OMG, hilarious: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9DrjybyhLA

|10.9.07 @ 2:50PM|#

For the record, yes, that is a slice of pizza rapping for Ron Paul.

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 2:51PM|#

For the record, yes, that is a slice of pizza rapping for Ron Paul.

I forgot about that groundswell of pizza rappers! I doubt that Kusinich has any of them. Big score for RP!

Richard Brodie|10.9.07 @ 3:16PM|#

Relatively few people vote in the primaries as opposed to the general election. Every one of Ron Paul's supporters will be there to cast their ballots - including myself and my seven voting age children. But relatively few of the lukewarm supporters of other candidates will bother to show up. There is virtually no enthusiasm for the so-called "mainstream" "top tier" "leading" "front-runner" candidates - and they don't deserve any. That part of the vote that does not go to Dr. Paul will be split between six or seven other candidates, and he will win the Republican nomination. Then, since 70% of the country wants a quick end to the war on Iraq, he will easily trounce Marxist, Hillary Clinton, who says she doesn't anticipate being able to bring the troops home before 2013!

|10.9.07 @ 3:29PM|#

at least when the jewish democratic council had a 3 day forum they invited ALL of the democratic presidential hopefuls whho then participated. by being so selective and leaving out half of the dozen candidtaes, it does speak volumes about the people running the group

|10.9.07 @ 3:30PM|#

Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like America Deceived (book) from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.

Support the $5-million dollar man, Dr. Ron Paul and save this country.

|10.9.07 @ 3:35PM|#

Richard Brodie,
AAAAHHHHHHH!

Thank you, now can you get me a towel?

|10.9.07 @ 3:41PM|#

I stand by the others, especially the Nixon ones, for this particular issue.

It could certainly be argued that Nixon was the anti-war candidate in 68.

Or at least he was seen as the candidate most likely to end the war.

Zappatista|10.9.07 @ 3:53PM|#

Given the chance, Ron Paul will wax Clinton in the finals. It'd play like Mondale vs Reagan. The debates would be a friggin' massacre. He might make her cry! In ernest! (which is more than can be said for her much ballyhooed laugh)

any other GOP candidate?

big "L" Loser to Big Sister.

Question is, will there come a point where the Republican party will recognize that the only chance at a GOP victory is to suspend their politburo-like devotion to ideological purity, fear, and neo-con talking points, hold their noses and back the party candidate that can actually win come November?

Damn that Scoop Jackson anyhow...

As for the Paul run:

Just consider this:
You can be scared when it gets too real
But you should be diggin' it
While it's happening
'Cause it just might be a one-shot deal
~"Waka/Jawaka"

music is the best

Guy Montag|10.9.07 @ 4:01PM|#

Yea, I am giving up. Ron Paul will sweep the debates just like the 2007 Yankees.

BTW, what time is that Phillys game? Are they on before or after the Cubs tonight?

Tom W|10.9.07 @ 4:06PM|#

Mr. Brodie encapsulates my argument perfectly. If the other candidates are so great, why don't they have the dedicated supporters Ron Paul does? Romney can't even hope to buy the kind of feet on the ground that Ron has.

Another factor illustrating the lack of enthusiasm for them is that donations to GOP contenders are down bigtime. GWB had raised 50 million by this time last time around. Right now, all of them have raised about 35 mill altogether. I think that figure's right.

Edward|10.9.07 @ 4:17PM|#

Just when I thought this place couldn't get any dumber, you fucking morons take it to the next level. I can't deal with this idiocy any longer. Adios, fools.

Just kidding!

|10.9.07 @ 4:25PM|#

I'm not able to vote in the primary because I won't give up my 'independent' status to join the REP party to vote for him but I sure do want him on the slate during the general election. I hope those registered REP turn out to get him nominated!!

Alan|10.9.07 @ 4:25PM|#

Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. Principles don't change. You have to stand for something and not change who you are based on the polls. That is what Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have done and all of the Democrats do it. Give me a leader that will stand by his principles anyday versus someone that stands for everything.

I know many Republicans and conservatives that will stay home if Rudy Giuliani is the candidate. He does not represent our values as conservatives, and never will. Mitt Romney is a Republican-in-name-only (RINO ) that simply has everything else and nothing to do. "I guess I'll just try to buy the presidency". The White House isn't for sale! Conservatives will simply stay home and the Democrats will pick up additional seats in the House and probably get the 60 seats in the Senate they need to completely destroy our Country. Nice picture huh?

However, I think Fred can bring America back together, if that's even possible. America needs a rebirth of patriotism and honor. Republicans also need a rebirth. President Reagan was our last rebirth and he can never be duplicated. Fred Thompson will bring his own down-to-earth common sense to this country.. A little of the good old days of faith, federalism and family would do well for this country. If a conservative runs as a conservative, he will win!

Think of it this way: Eight years of another Clinton White House? Now if that is not a sufficient enough reason to pull together as a nation, and fight this socialist liberal takeover of our government, what is?

Folks, we are in for the fight of our lives, just as our young men and women are fighting for our freedoms in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must fight for our nation right here and now! I truly believe Fred Thompson is the one man who can pull this nation back together! Rudy Giuliani will just tear us apart.

Contribute to Fred Thompson: https://www.fred08.com/contribute.aspx?RefererID=c637caaa-315c-4b4c-9967-08d864cd0791

VM|10.9.07 @ 4:39PM|#

WHO FORGOT TO CHANGE "ALAN" THIS TIME?

WE HAVE A TOMMY VERSION OF THE DUNDEROOOOO.

AAAAAAALLLLLLLLLAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNDDDDDOOOOOO

(YOU SOUND LIKE A REAL FUCKING TOOL)

|10.9.07 @ 4:49PM|#

He won't win simply because zionists have the money to keep him from winning.

|10.9.07 @ 5:02PM|#

Kang is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. Principles don't change. You have to stand for something and not change who you are based on the polls. That is what Kodo has done and all of the Democrats do it. Give me a leader that will stand by his principles anyday versus someone that stands for everything.

|10.9.07 @ 5:06PM|#

Yea, I am giving up. Ron Paul will sweep the debates just like the 2007 Yankees.

BTW, what time is that Phillys game? Are they on before or after the Cubs tonight?

Four 1st round series'.

3-0
3-0
3-0
3-1

Ho Hum.

|10.9.07 @ 5:15PM|#

The important point to keep in mind is that people responding to polls, even this early, include the desire not to "waste their vote" on a minor candidate in their thought process.

As Paul is just now becoming someone who isn't thought of as a fringe, joke candidate (like Tancredo or Keyes), that effect is still dragging his numbers down.

On the other hand, the fact that he is rising so significantly is a good way to overcome that perception.

|10.9.07 @ 5:17PM|#

BTW, I live one town south of the NH border, near four interstates that connect New Hampshire with Greater Boston and its suburbs.

If I was judging just on bumper stickers, I would conclude that Ron Paul is a top-tier candidate.

iih|10.9.07 @ 5:51PM|#

joe:

If I was judging just on bumper stickers, I would conclude that Ron Paul is a top-tier candidate.

Kelly Halldorson and DangerMan, and I agree above. Actually, just saw another car with an RP sticker on my way home today. There many!

Rick Fisk|10.9.07 @ 7:36PM|#

"Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. "

To what principle was he adhering when he lobbied for a big abortion outfit?

Or when he was lobbying for Aristede to make it back in power?

The "pro-life" principle? The "freedom and democracy" principle?

Which principle caused him to support government subsidies to encourage farmers to grow corn for ethanol?

Which principle was he acting under when he was undermining the Watergate investigation and feeding congressional information to Nixon?

Loyalty to party? Or was it something else?

Rick Fisk|10.9.07 @ 7:48PM|#

"I never get this line of argument. Can someone point me to poll results showing McRomliompson all losing head-to-head against Hillary but Ron Paul winning?"

How about the poll result that says 70% of the American people want us out of Iraq?

There is only one GOP candidate that didn't vote for the war originally. Who can believe any of the current DNC candidates since they all voted for the war and at every opportunity have continued to support the war (while pretending they were against it)?

People who dismiss the "Ron Paul beats Hillary in the general election" meme, are, I think, doing so because they believe that the entire nation is full of idiots who can't tell the difference.

What you see on television is not reality. Mitt Ronmey and Giuliani and Thompson are, according to the old media, top tier candidates.

Thompson has to beg for applause from the 25 or so people who show up at his events, Mitt Romney is blowing wads of cash to hire supporters to show up at events, McCain's last media-covered event had ONE supporter.

On the other hand, Ron Paul hasn't drawn less than 800 in 3 months. His donations rose by 114% in the past quarter while his competitors' donations, virtually none of which came from individual contributors, have declined.

Not one of the other candidates can outdraw Ron Paul (including most of the democrats) and yet some people need MORE evidence that he's really the front runner. This is absurd.

Kerry was polling at 5% before he won the New Hampshire primary and then immediately afterwards was polling at 5%. Gee. How'd they screw that up so bad?

Maybe the same way they're screwing it up now?

Rick Fisk|10.9.07 @ 7:50PM|#

Arg! Kerry polled after the New Hampshire win at 53% nationally. (not 5%)

|10.9.07 @ 9:06PM|#

According to Rick Fisk, "Mitt Romney is blowing wads of cash to hire supporters to show up at events"

Why not have a bunch of Paul supporters get paid to go to a Romney event, heckle him, then donate the money to the Paul campaign?

BLIND LEFT HANDED ROMANIAN DEN|10.9.07 @ 9:54PM|#

We of the BLHRDS are thrilled with Ron Pauls performance. Both of us.

GILMORE|10.9.07 @ 10:02PM|#

Alan | October 9, 2007, 4:25pm | #
Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it.

It makes me sad sometimes. So sad.

poor, poor political internet spammers. Even trolls fulfill a warped personal need for recognition. You sad souls post form letters.

i pray for you. get some rest

Gregory Richards|10.9.07 @ 11:15PM|#

My wife and I, both white and registered republicans will also vote for Dr. Paul.

- He appeals to us white voters as well!

|10.10.07 @ 1:21AM|#

So you folks still think your vote counts? Wake up, if you want your Country back your going to have to take it back the old fashioned way!

Ron Paul has woke you up, but it will be up to YOU to take your Country back.......they will NOT allow him to become President.

Simple as that........Hillary Clinton is a member of the CFR and has already been chosen. How fast we forget her saying she wasn't going to even run............when will you people wake up? Ever???

Dave|10.12.07 @ 6:46PM|#

I will be voting for Ron Paul!

and I think that is all his supporters should bother to write from now on in these comments.
The opposition doesn't know what they're in for. They can call it all they want.

It's a revolution!

Ugh|10.17.07 @ 1:11AM|#

I swear it's the conspiracy wackos that keep me from voting Ron Paul ( and i'm as Jeffersonian as it gets ).

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements