Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Idaho is Ron Paul Country! To an Extent!
I'll cop to forgetting, completely, that Idaho held its primaries yesterday, and I missed watching Ron Paul score 24 percent of the vote. (John McCain got 70 percent, with the rest going to some guy named Uncommitted, who's pissed that Hillary Clinton is trying to steal his Michigan delegates.) That was a disappointing result for some Paul backers, who thought the congressman might actually win the primary given the rock-bottom GOP enthusiasm and Paul's strength in northwest Idaho. But Paul's sleepy "stay on ballots but hardly spend any time campaigning, even though there's $4 million in the bank*" strategy limited the oomph.
Paul's continuing to rack up votes in thinly-attended local conventions, nailing down two delegates from Oregon. And he's neither going to endorse Bob Barr nor the Constitution Party candidate—maybe not even after the Republican convention wraps up. At issue is Paul's congressional seniority. He's worried, and rightfully so, about losing his precious banking committee seat if he hands over too much support to third party candidates who are trying to bleed the GOP.
* The Washington Post is making hay out of Paul's payments to his family members, which is neither 1) new to him nor 2) much different from what media darling Mike Huckabee did. The only scandals with Paul's war chest, to me, were the squandering on stupid TV ads and the current hoarding of funds even though, after May 6, only inexpensive states remained on the map.
Colin|5.28.08 @ 10:52AM|#
Speaking of Huck, did anyone notice him going off on libertarianism in an interview yesterday?
Uncommitted|5.28.08 @ 10:53AM|#
My campaign will not rest until we have won both the Democratic and Republican Primaries. Then it is onto victory in November! Yawww! Yaww!
|5.28.08 @ 11:03AM|#
Awesome showing in Idaho!
Colin - yes, I caught that. Sounds like Huck and the GOP are
running scared!
TallDave|5.28.08 @ 11:04AM|#
Nice.
I would eat a potato to celebrate, but I'm doing the low-carb
thing. Sorry, Idaho.
|5.28.08 @ 11:04AM|#
I must admit that he could have campaigned much harder and spent more money. However, I think he has plans for that money to spread the message with his PAC. Part of the reason is because I think the campaign didn't think that had a real chance after IOWA/NH and so they were practical with the money.
Ironic|5.28.08 @ 11:13AM|#
Ron Paul is very libertarian except where he isn't.
Bob Barr is very libertarian except where he isn't.
Short of writing in my own name will I be able to vote for a
libertarian for POTUS in November?
Matt Welch|5.28.08 @ 11:14AM|#
I deleted the "Weigel is a douche" comment; not because he isn't, necessarily, but because hitting "Control V" a thousand times just isn't very considerate of others.
|5.28.08 @ 11:15AM|#
No, the $4 mill isn't going to his PAC. It's going to start a
for-profit publishing biz. Ron's Grandson-in-law-to-be, Jesse
Benton discussed this in the press several weeks ago.
Ron should be able to keep the brood employed there.
fyodor|5.28.08 @ 11:16AM|#
A strength in northwest Idaho, eh? Well a certain somebody's bound to mention it eventually, so I'll go ahead and point out that guess-who wants to be left alone up there?!? Well, it's their right as much as anyone else's, though of course it's still an unsavory association. Oh well....
Episiarch|5.28.08 @ 11:20AM|#
Let's open up the floor to discussion as to whether Weigel is, in fact, a douche.
|5.28.08 @ 11:27AM|#
David Weigel's excellent coverage of the LP convention earned him a giant douche indulgence.
|5.28.08 @ 11:28AM|#
I'm just kind of amazed to have seen the transformation of a movement that was supposed to be "about the message, not the man," a movement that I, indeed, supported at one time, become almost entirely a cult of personality.
|5.28.08 @ 11:48AM|#
I'm kinda sad I missed the doucheness. Is there a place where obnoxious blog comments go to die?
|5.28.08 @ 11:48AM|#
This confirms my theory that the closer to Canada you are, the more likely you are to like Ron Paul. Still, I was surprised that even though Paul's biggest slice of the Idaho Republican pie was in Boundary County (As in the boundary between Idaho and British Columbia), he got double digits in virtually every other county yesterday, even in the supposed Romney stronghold of southeastern Idaho.
BakedPenguin|5.28.08 @ 11:55AM|#
I deleted the "Weigel is a douche" comment; not because he
isn't, necessarily, but because hitting "Control V" a thousand
times just isn't very considerate of others
Ctrl-V for Vendetta...
|5.28.08 @ 12:01PM|#
* The Washington Post is making hay out of Paul's payments
to his family members, which is neither 1) new to him nor 2) much
different from what media darling Mike Huckabee did.
They also called him an isolationist in the first sentence, so WaPo
can go suck a lemon.
Speaking of Huck, did anyone notice him going off on
libertarianism in an interview yesterday?
The Huck is the real douche.
|5.28.08 @ 12:04PM|#
Citizen Nothing,
Get use to it. All your heroes are going to disappoint you in the
end. I was a big Paul booster. But one of the main reason I donated
in dribs and drabs, was scandal insurance. When he tried to brush
the newsletters under the carpet, I withdrew my support. I'm
horribly disappointed in those newsletters, horrible TV ads, and
his lack of commitment to keep campaigning. I suspect the entire
campaign was just an elaborate PR stunt to fund his retirement. But
I don't regret a dime or a minute I gave to PAUL '08. Like I've
said from the beginning, Ron Paul in his years of service in the US
Congress, standing mostly alone as the sentinel of federal excess,
earning the nickname Dr. No, has already earned my gratitude
sufficient that I'd be happy for him to retire to the South Pacific
with my campaign contributions. Now it appears I might have been on
the right track only I had small vision. He wanted to take care of
his whole family. Best of luck to all of them. If nothing else Paul
08 has reveled that the hunger in this country for a new political
paradigm based on freedom, is much greater than the establishment
can acknowledge.
|5.28.08 @ 12:10PM|#
Don't fret, Warren. At this late stage, I don't have many
heroes, and Paul was never one of them.
And I'm more disappointed in his bitter-ender supporters than in
the man himself.
I hope you're correct in your assessment of the hunger for a new
political paradigm.
|5.28.08 @ 12:19PM|#
I deleted the "Weigel is a douche" comment; not because he
isn't, necessarily, but because hitting "Control V" a thousand
times just isn't very considerate of others.
Well, at least he's making all the right enemies - could a Pulitzer
be far away?
|5.28.08 @ 12:24PM|#
The Washington Post is making hay out of Paul's payments to
his family members, which is neither 1) new to him nor 2) much
different from what media darling Mike Huckabee did.
Am I the only one who does not find this to be an acceptable
defense? When you're supposedly at the forefront of a rLOVEution,
"everybody else is doing it" doesn't cut it for me.
I campaigned hard for Paul both by phonebanking and among my
friends and family, but recently I'm getting more and more
embarrassed about it. I laughed at the naivete of Obamamaniac
college kids 'round here, saying that they were fooling themselves
thinking that he was any different from every other
politician...but now it looks like the joke's on me.
adrian|5.28.08 @ 12:44PM|#
didn't his family members actually work for him? were the payments that excessive?
|5.28.08 @ 12:45PM|#
What's wrong with you people? Ron Paul is still the best hope for this country, despise the MSM trying to smear him for bogus shXt. Would you really rather have one of three muskateers as prez? I admit that Bob Barr would be a better choice than those three yahoos, but he can't hold a candle to Ron Paul. I think Chuck Baldwin would be the best second choice thought, not Barr.
|5.28.08 @ 12:50PM|#
"I think (God, Family, and the Republic!) Chuck Baldwin would be
the best second choice thought, not Barr."
Jesus. That says it all, does it not?
charlie|5.28.08 @ 1:03PM|#
Why the hate on Baldwin? I mean, I'm surely not going to vote
for him, but at least he has the guts to denounce the American
empire in no uncertain terms on his issues page. Yeah he's one of
those crazy Christian types, but it was Bob Barr after all who
wanted the U.S. military to ban Wicca.
On cultural issues Baldwin and Barr seem pretty much in lockstep,
though I'd give the edge to Baldwin because: 1) he didn't vote for
the Iraq war or the Patriot act like a certain Libertarian nominee,
and 2) at least he isn't pretending to be anything other than an
anti-war conservative.
fyodor|5.28.08 @ 1:12PM|#
Ali,
White supremicists. Northern Idaho is kinda famed for that. It's
even where the racial slur spewing cop in the OJ Simpson case moved
to. Though whether they're actually anywhere near enough of the
populace to have a noticeable effect on a primary vote, I don't
claim to know.
Lysander|5.28.08 @ 1:15PM|#
Why should someone be disqualified from working for a campaign just because he/she is related to the candidate? I'm sure if you compared what the Paul relatives are paid to what similar positions in the Hillbama campaigns are paid, you'd find Paul is the cheapskate.
|5.28.08 @ 1:22PM|#
I lived in St. Maries, Idaho about 15 years ago when the white supremacy group was open for business in Hayden. The local sentiment was that the neo nazis were a buncha hateful dumbasses. You can't accurately judge the population of North Idaho by the actions of a few.
Ali|5.28.08 @ 1:24PM|#
fyodor- That's what I thought you meant. My second guess would have been BEARS.
|5.28.08 @ 1:25PM|#
$4 million can pay for shipping a lot of copies of the Ron Paul Survival Report. He could have gotten 99% of the vote in Couer d'Alene with that kind of direct mail campaign.
|5.28.08 @ 1:30PM|#
Why should someone be disqualified from working for a
campaign just because he/she is related to the
candidate?
Because it stinks to high heaven of corruption, especially if (a)
they're the ones who are left after he lays everyone else off, and
(b) he's not spending the campaign money on, you know,
campaigning.
It's sort of the same reason that radio stations don't allow their
employees or family members of their employees to be eligible for
prizes.
|5.28.08 @ 1:34PM|#
Holy crap, you made it a whole blog post without mentioning the newsletters. Are you...feeling okay?
Bosworth|5.28.08 @ 1:42PM|#
@Chris Potter
Man, are you a douche.
Family members working for a campaign is nothing new. What hell is
wrong with it? Who's going to work harder? Should they pay their
own travel expenses?
If there's a valid criticism it's that Paul underpaid them,
drastically. Jesse Benton, 54k...are you kidding me?
Keep being a douche chris crocker.
|5.28.08 @ 1:51PM|#
Family members working for a campaign is nothing
new.
That's exactly what Weigel said, and I'm saying "everyone else does
it" is not an acceptable defense for someone who purports to be
breaking the mold.
Jesse Benton, 54k...are you kidding me?
I agree completely. Wait...you said underpaid?
This is the guy who totally fucked up the response to the
newsletter scandal, and made countless gaffes during media
interviews. Please don't get me started on the incompetence of his
campaign HQ staff. The only reason he got any votes was because of
the efforts of grass roots volunteers (douches like myself,
btw).
|5.28.08 @ 1:58PM|#
And furthermore:
Who's going to work harder? Should they pay their own travel
expenses?
I don't have a problem with reimbursements for legitimate campaign
travel expenses; it's the salaries that concern me.
And seriously, why can't his family members work for free, like,
you know, the thousands of people (like me!) who did so despite not
being related to him. What about all the people who drove or flew
to NH on their own money to work for Operation Live Free or Die,
which put the official NH campaign to shame?
Walter Smith|5.28.08 @ 2:19PM|#
REASON magazine is in part responsible for McCain's success
because of their FAILURE to support Ron Paul.
REASON is a sell-out.
|5.28.08 @ 2:54PM|#
The family member got very little cash. If you add it all up,
the total amount was less than $200,000. They were paid very little
money in reality.
Compare that with who the other campaigns are paying. Hmm, a bunch
of lobbyists, and people with connections to special interest
groups. And you are seriously going to say Ron Paul is the one that
is corrupt? Please, that is just ridiculous.
Ron Paul already has millions in gold. He has a successful book,
and he doesn't just go around wasting money. Despite his money, he
is still a normal person. To think the entire campaign is about
getting peoples money is a bunch of hogwash. I gave $2300, and
consider it the best money I've ever spent.
For those commenting on politics, I find it funny not 1 person has
mention McCain-Feingold in all this. Which limit the free speech of
Americans, and will limit it even more in the future as inflation
continues, and the purchasing power of that $2300 dips even
lower.
Which of course, means the media has that much more power over the
elections. As the media is able to promote candidates for free
24/7, and will only promote/report on the candidates they want. It
is impossible for any campaign to overcome this in advertising. To
claim the campaign is at fault only goes to make those people look
clueless as to what is going on here.
Where is the outcry over that corruption? None. Why? Because do you
think the MSM is going to point this out to people? Is it mere
coincidence that McCain writes the laws, then wins the next
nomination while recieving almost 0 support, having to accept
federal matching funds, then trying to take it back breaking his
own rules.
Who do these guys think they are kidding? I'm so sick of watching
the system cater to the stupid. I may have been born in the day,
but it wasn't yesterday.
Let me give you guys a hint - you do not get to choose who is
elected.
|5.28.08 @ 3:07PM|#
I have seen nothing but corruption from the top down this
election. From the media plain out ignoring Ron Paul(documented of
them specifically doing so), to the media flat out attacking him
falsely(fox news, also documented), even go so far as to call it a
virus. To being ignored in the debates, being asked ridiculous
questions, and questions designed(but failed) to give the other
candidates chances to beat up on him. To having out of context
newsletters come up the day before the first primary, which did not
even attempt to show the truth. I watched Romney flat out buy straw
polls, with no media attention. I watched the media push up
Gulliani, even though I could never find a supporter for him. To
fox news putting in specific opinionated people in the polls. Then
to questionable voting procedures in multiple states, not allowing
people to vote for who they actually want to vote for in many
cases. To plain out scripting of the convention process.
So, WTF are you guys exactly arguing about? Is there any question
to who and what is corrupt anymore? Has it not been made absolutely
clear to you? Is it really up for debate at this point? With all
the problems facing the country, THIS is helping?
Please, do us all a favor and grow up. Start taking a look at what
is important, and what is at stake here. If you wanna piss and moan
about anything Ron Paul has done in comparison with the others in
this election, then please get a clue. If there was ever a time
when the childish, he screws animals type stuff isn't needed, it's
now. Unless of course, you happen to want to keep the status quo,
because that is exactly what this kind of debate is - status
freaking quo.
|5.28.08 @ 3:12PM|#
To having out of context newsletters come up the day before
the first primary, which did not even attempt to show the
truth.
There was no media attention on the newsletter scandal either. It
was invisible outside of TNR, Reason, and a few other blogs.
Oh, and the newsletters weren't taken out of context. Dr. Paul
himself said that the content of the newsletters was disgusting and
offensive.
|5.28.08 @ 3:17PM|#
And btw, Ron Paul is doing exactly what he needs to be doing. He
is exposing the corruption in the system at every chance he gets.
He has been in politics for 30 years, and has a great voting
record. I have heard many people, especially libertarians say alot
of the things I like to hear, but Ron Paul is the only man that I
was able to look at and say wow - this man has done it when it
wasn't popular. He stood up for the right things.
I don't doubt him for a minute. He is playing this election very
smart. He has never given up the moral high ground, and everytime
the system has to push him down, it sticks out like a sore
thumb.
Getting Ron Paul elected isn't the goal here. Getting Ron Paul, or
someone like him elected will be the result. The result of
educating the American people to the corruption and problems this
country is facing, and working to give people valid information to
make decisions on. Because if you think they treat Ron Paul this
way because he is Ron Paul, then you are blind. They treat Ron Paul
this way because of the things he says, and the truths he speaks.
Anyone who speaks as such is treated as such. Every candidate,
every person.
He has educated more people in this past year than has been done in
decades. He has done more than any of us have ever thought about
doing.
I don't support Ron Paul. I support the things Ron Paul supports
and tries to educate people about. And I'm pretty proud to have him
representing me in congress, even though he isn't within 1000 miles
of my district.
I think some of you need to get a grip on reality.
|5.28.08 @ 3:21PM|#
"So, what you're saying is that it's OK because everyone else is
doing it."
No, I'm saying it because he should be allowed to have whoever he
thinks is best around him.
Honestly, I fail to see what is bad about it to even need a "they
do it to" argument. You just ASSUME they are being given free money
or something, which is just dumb.
And when you assume, you make an ass outta u and me.
|5.28.08 @ 3:24PM|#
I don't think the "hoarding" is a bad idea. He isn't going to get magical millions fundraised over night like other candidates, he knows exactly how much he will have every day for the next 6 months and he's rationing it out until there's zero.
|5.28.08 @ 3:38PM|#
"There was no media attention on the newsletter scandal either.
It was invisible outside of TNR, Reason, and a few other
blogs.
Oh, and the newsletters weren't taken out of context. Dr. Paul
himself said that the content of the newsletters was disgusting and
offensive."
Thats not true, it was all over the place. It just go reported as
being from there, because everyone else knew it was dog poo, so
that is what the media does. When they want to report something,
but don't want to be directly associated with it, then they report
it as so and so is saying. So when it's proven wrong, they are only
reporting on the report by the source. Didn't think that was a big
mystery.
As well, everyone knows if you support Ron Paul, you read the
internet. It did what it's purpose was, you still have people even
in this blog saying it.
As for what it said. The worse quote I read was actually a quote
from some government study. I also thought the article in general
was pointing out the social injustices in the justice system, and
was based in truth.
For example, I'm not a theif. But I have stolen food from a grocery
store when I was younger. I didn't want to do it, felt bad about
doing it, but I hadn't eaten in 3 days and I was hungry. So I
stole. I didn't get caught either.
Point being, you should look at the persons actions not just on the
action, but also what lead to the action. People don't just act in
certain ways for no reason. And when it comes to poverty, you will
find desperate people doing desperate things. So it is no surprise
when you go into the ghetto if you get robbed. Nor is a surprise if
they are good at it. But that doesn't automatically make them bad
people, it is a result of the environment they live in. Not to
mention the fact that many of the crimes are social drug crimes,
and the war on drugs which criminalize it create the black market
which automatically creates crime.
So, what creates that environment? Well, you can start with the
federal reserve that takes wealth from the poor and gives it to the
rich via the inflation tax. Those dependent on fixed income or
making minimum wage are unable to keep up their income with the
inflation. This is why the poor get poorer, and the rich get
richer. And Ron Paul is the candidate against it, and he is
silenced.
He is also against the social crimes, and wants to repeal them.
Further making the situation better, because it will kill the black
market.
He also points out the importance of the individual, and sees
people as individuals rather than belonging to a race, sexual
preference etc. The only fair and right way to treat people, as
equals and as intended in this country.
So to call him racist and claim racist ties(as if any candidate is
free of them) is just simply ignorant IMO.
I'm sick of the BS, either get real or shut up.
|5.28.08 @ 4:00PM|#
"I think some of you need to get a grip on reality."
Uhemmm-potsandkettles-uhemmm.
Shane Brady|5.28.08 @ 5:22PM|#
Alan Keyes received more votes in 2000 in Idaho than Ron Paul did. This is much ado about nothing.
|5.28.08 @ 6:30PM|#
Wow! David!
You really don't stay very current on the news, do you? Its been
all over the web ... the "left over cash" that is still coming in,
by the way, is being used to finance the "revolution". Duh!
|5.28.08 @ 6:45PM|#
"Alan Keyes received more votes in 2000 in Idaho than Ron Paul
did. This is much ado about nothing."
If this is true, it defeats fyodor's assumption that only the
unsavories vote for Paul in Idaho. Reason Sucks.
|5.28.08 @ 6:51PM|#
Reason continues to undermine the revolution. How was RP supposed to win Idaho when most people (a) have never heard of him, or (b) think that he has dropped out? Give me a break. These were fantastic results.
|5.28.08 @ 7:23PM|#
Another 7 delegates for Ron Paul in Idaho, based on 24% of the
vote, with 26 of their 32 delegates distributed proportionately,
and rounded up.
That should put him in the 30-40 range according to the mainstream
media, and above 50 in real life. Not enough to scare McCain by any
means, but about 50 more than the Establishment predicted a year
ago.
|5.28.08 @ 7:25PM|#
There was no media attention on the newsletter scandal
either. It was invisible outside of TNR, Reason, and a few other
blogs.
Yeah, except for that MSNBC piece on national TV on the eve of the
New Hampshire primary, and another national TV bit on CNN before
Super Tuesday.
Auberon|5.28.08 @ 9:05PM|#
I don't have a problem with reimbursements for legitimate
campaign travel expenses; it's the salaries that concern
me.
Which salaries in particular? Name one Paul family member salary
that you think is unreasonable. Just one. Any one. Be sure to
specify the time period over which the salary was paid, and do not
include expense reimbursements. Hint: this data was not in the
shoddy WaPo article.
|5.28.08 @ 11:16PM|#
badmedia,
Thank you for your intelligent posts. You are representing the
rEVOLution well and with respect. It seems this thread is infected
with some know-nothing, basement dwelling big L's.
It never ceases to amaze me how opponents of Paul never address
issues, only baseless media rhetoric.
|5.28.08 @ 11:54PM|#
Wow, so let me get this straight...in the grand scheme of things
the Libertarian candidate will likely get more votes this year than
any other, the interest in the party will increase, Conservatism- a
dying animal since 1994- is on the rise, thousands of people who
were never involved int he political process now are with the goal
of making government smaller and increasing freedom, and there was
a candidate for President who voted for his principles instead of
pandering to the lowest of the low...and yet, because he hired some
family members to work on his campaign at below market rates you
are disenchanted?
Paul has 4 large in the bank to spread the message of freedom
around with a publishing company- the horror- it would have been
much better if he made an ad about answering the phone at 3 AM that
ran in two markets- yes, spending that 4 million would have made
all the difference in the world.
Some of the people on this board are so removed from reality they
really should be checked out.
|5.29.08 @ 1:50AM|#
Dr. Paul should give his family members a raise. That was a very impressive showing in Idaho and I consider my donation well spent.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245