Ron Paul's Delegates

The good news for Ron Paul voters is that their candidate only narrowly missed expectations. He polled poorly in the South but scored extremely well in states with caucuses, especially in the libertarian West. Let's run them down:

- Alaska. Paul hoped to win a symbolic victory here, but he came in 3rd with 17 percent of the vote. Good enough for 5 delegates out of 26.

- Arizona. A poor 4 percent and no delegates. (McCain got all 50.)

- Colorado. Fourth place and 8 percent of the vote, but no delegates.

- Minnesota. Paul rounded out the top four with a not-bad 16 percent of the vote. But it was a winner-take-all race and Mitt Romney got all 38 delegates.

- Montana. Second with 25 percent of the caucus votes, but in a winner-take-all state he walked away with no delegates.

- North Dakota. Third place with 21 percent of the vote, good for 5 delegates out of 23.

Nowhere else (except Illinois, NY, NJ) did Paul score above 4 percent, and nowhere else did he win delegates. CNN projects 16 delegates for the candidate overall after Tuesday, not counting the West Virginia deal.

Paul told me in New Hampshire that he'd reassess the race after Feb. 5. I've asked the campaign what the next steps will be but don't have an answer right now. Texas's primary is on March 4, and Paul is in far better shape than Dennis Kucinich is in his primary (also March 4), but Kucinich is fighting for his political life.

UPDATE: I was calling around San Francisco a month ago to see if Paul had a chance winning the small GOP vote in Nancy Pelosi's congressional district. (In the California GOP race delegates are awarded by congressional district and they're winner-take-all.) I decided there was no "there" there, and I guess I was right: Paul won only 8 percent in San Francisco. He barely won more votes than Rudy Giuliani, a function of how much absentee balloting there was and a function of a weak Paul effort.

Paul supporters, if you learn anything from this election, it should be this: Stop wasting your damn time waving signs on street corners. Canvassing and phone-banking aren't fun, but they win elections.

Comments

[Legate Damar]

I was unaware that Colorado and Minnesota caucuses were WTA. If they truly are, why are they frickin caucuses?

[P Brooks]

dispatch from Montana:

I saw, several weeks ago, a story which said Paul's people were busily getting themselves into position for the caucuses- registering R, signing up for vacant positions, things of that nature.

Recently, however, I saw a letter in the Bozeman paper complaining about how the Republican "establishment" was shutting out newcomers, and people who weren't falling into line; I do not recall a specific reference to Paul, or any other candidate.

It sounds like the caucuses here worked pretty much the same as Wyoming. Too bad for RP and the rEVOLution.

I have no first hand knowledge of any of this.

[Ammonium]

Ron Paul got 5% in Illinois. Since he probably didn't win any congressional districts, he won't get any delegates.

[Legate Damar]

I think he had to win either Montana or Alaska in order to even pretend he was still in it. Even if there is a brokered convention (big if), AND he stays in the race, he's only on pace to pull in about 30 delegates. That would be a rounding error on the totals of the other three.

I would recommend he spends the next 4 weeks shoring up his district before making any additional decisions.

If you look at the states that didn't crap on Paul thus far, you have:
The extreme northeast
The mountain west, bleeding into the northern plains

That's not enough votes to win. Romney is also doing well almost exclusively in those areas (plus Mass.) His total combined with Paul's still isn't really competitive.

Apparently freedom isn't terribly popular on the populated portions of the coasts or in the south (although that isn't exactly a surprising revelation.)

Helps narrow down the list of places I'd want to retire, though.

[Christopher Monnier]

Minnesota's caucus results are non-binding, though I have no idea whether how often delegates don't follow the general results.

[some dude]

What can Paul do? I think the chances are real that he would do better than McCain in a three way race vs. Hillary. Hillary would still win, but if Paul did do better than McCain, they couldn't credibly call him a "spoiler." [could they?]

It might be hard to run third party because of sore-loser laws. He has always said the r3VOLution wasn't about him, so maybe he could throw his weight behind Gary Johnson of New Mexico or someone. I don't know what would happen to any leftover money he had in that case.

[The Democratic Republican]

Whatever happened in the big mess down in Louisiana?

[Taktix?]

If they truly are, why are they frickin caucuses?

Because states have the right to determine how to choose their delegates.

Now, I hate to sound like tin-foiler here, but has anyone ever seen such a field of government green thumbs? We've seen marginal candidates shut out in the past, often as a result of some over-zealous opponents, but I've never seen a race so homogenized in ideas.

I thought the GOP was thrown out in 2006 for NOT being small-government? Has that much changed in the last two years?

[Alan Vanneman]

Ever wonder why libertarians seem to thrive in cold weather? Because the Democratic is largely the "black" party and the Republicans are largely rednecks. Way up North there aren't many of either, so neither party seems very relevant.

[montaigne]

Might want to check your facts on MN. The straw poll taken at the caucuses last night was non-binding. Not to mention that the delegates elected last night have a few more hops to go before they become delegates to the national convention.

I'm a delegate, and I'm for Ron Paul.

[Mike Knapp]

I'm not 100% sure how this works, but if Huckabee or Romney bows out in the coming weeks, those delegates will then be up for grabs again. Dr. Paul could pick up a signifigant number of these delegates. Possibly enough to force that brokered convention.

You also have to remember that in a LOT of the places he polled low, he was facing closed primaries. Ron Paul has a LOT more support with Independents and even has the support of a lot of democrats. If he can keep some steam going through the convention, he may be a viable candidate as an independent.

Either way, he has to keep going to reach as many people with his message as possible. Even if he doesn't win, this can be the foundation for the movement, legitimizing the platform for like-minded congressional candidates on both the state and federal level, as well as future presidential bids.

[Pat]

Looking at the popular vote numbers, like it or not the politicians in both of the dominance parties must now look at the issues that can draw double digit percentages of voters to Ron Paul.

Paul's campaign is a success in my terms.

[Sean]

Pat:

I agree. 600k votes yesterday is pretty damn impressive.

I'm looking forward to him running as a third party - I'm sure at this point he's got a cinch on the LP ticket if he wants it.

[Colin]

It's amazing how many people are still drinking the kool-aid.

[P Brooks]

I would like to see Dr Paul drop some of his moneybomb on the "big three" (MacHilBammy) with ads reminding people of the September Tenth "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave" world.

It's the freedom, stupid.
You may use that, free of charge, Doctor.

[Tom]

You know that guy in New Jersey that voted for Ron Paul - that was me!

[NoStar]

Good Advise! There is a time to wave signs, but going door to door is more effective at finding sympathetic voters and encouraging them to go to a caucus or to vote in a primary.

[Pax]

Hey I voted for Paul in New Jersey too, so there's TWO of us!

How many delegates does he get for that?

[From the Keystrokes of John Q.]

A lot of romney voters in my precinct but after a speech Paul took 2nd! I also got the most important delegate seat. State Delegate and we only had one opening and I was running against Romney Supporters. I know the people in precinct 43 had the same luck for Paul! Hoping we took a high level of delegate slots at county and state!

[sixstring]

New York went 7% for Paul. It would have been 7.001% but circumstances prevented my wife from voting.

[Sam Grove]

I did not allow myself any expectation, so I am not bummed.

OTH, more people than ever before have seen how subtly, and odiously, the oligarchy maintains its power.

[prolefeed]

Paul supporters, if you learn anything from this election, it should be this: Stop wasting your damn time waving signs on street corners. There aren't enough libertarian-leaning folks for Paul to win, no matter what you do. Canvassing and phone-banking aren't fun, but they win elections for candidates with numerous voters who support them.

Fixed.

[Danny]

I still think Ron Paul can't win because he won't win. ...Or is it that he won't win because he can't win? Either way he's not going to win, so stop drinking the freedom/kool-aid, you tin-foil hat wearing, liberty-loving weirdos! We've got a country to ruin!

[Kent Brockman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, democracy just doesn't work.

[Steve]

I am a Paul supporter. I also think it's plain to see that giving Paul anymore time, attention, or money is a waste. He isn't going to win AND isn't going to influence the outcome in anyway.

The lesson from this year's nomination process is the one we learn over and over again, which is that you can't beat the status quo (e.g., McCain, Clinton). They're too entrenched and have the political machines behind them to ensure their futures.

Ultimately, George Carlin was right: there's no reason to vote because it means nothing.

[Danny]

Oh, so it's not that votes don't count anymore. It's that they don't matter.

[Paul Mc]

"Apparently freedom isn't terribly popular on the populated portions of the coasts or in the south (although that isn't exactly a surprising revelation.)"

Hard to know if that's really true given how poorly the Ron Paul message was conveyed (at least in my state of New Jersey). Apart from the zealous devotees talking to themselves, there is almost zero coverage of RP in the MSM and what there is is a caricature ("Dr. Paul, what is your position on Global Warming?"). Given all the money raised, it is really a pity that a simple message the general population could relate to (and, no, that wouldn't be about abolishing the Fed) was never formulated and driven home. David is right about the ineffectiveness of waving signs on street corners.

[zig zag man]

"I'm a delegate, and I'm for Ron Paul."

montaigne wins the thread!

[Jon]

Given the way the GOP has treated Paul, a scorched earth policy is good enough for me.

If he runs 3rd party, he can prevent McCain from securing his lifelong ambition.

That will be enough to have me cheering in November.

Even if it secures Clinton her lifelong ambition.

[NY Voter]

I agree with Paul MC. There were 0 commercials in New York. Many people actually like his message when they hear it, and there are a lot of voters who do not watch the debates.

Couldn't he run some ads on the History channel, fer crissakes? What's he doing with all the money?

[M16]

Forbes was complaining about the value of the dollar on CNBC this morning, and vented his frustration over how no presidential candidate is talking about it.

Ron Paul: The Man Who Wasn't There.

"He told them to look not at the facts, but at the meaning of the facts. Then he said the facts had no meaning."

[John Thacker]

You also have to remember that in a LOT of the places he polled low, he was facing closed primaries. Ron Paul has a LOT more support with Independents and even has the support of a lot of democrats.

Perhaps, but it's just not reflected in the numbers at all. Dr. Paul polled better in closed caucuses than in open primaries.

Open primary in Tennessee- 6%
Open primary in Illinois- 5%
Semi-open primary in New Jersey- 5% (basically, must pledge as R but no checking)
Semi-open primary in Massachusetts- 3%

Paul did better in a closed New York primary (7%) than in open primary states.

I have no doubt that the committed Paul supporters include a lot of Independents and Democrats excluded from closed caucuses. However, that doesn't mean that Independents and Democrats in general contain a lot of potential Paul voters.

Paul's very strong fund-raising indicates a large mass of committed supporters, which works well for caucuses. His inability to score well in open primaries-- doing worse than in closed caucuses and even some closed primaries-- indicates that there, so far, has not been any success reaching out to the broader voting populace, including Independents and Democrats. I just don't see support for the claims that Paul will break out. Perhaps that would change if he started spending more of that money.

I thought the GOP was thrown out in 2006 for NOT being small-government? Has that much changed in the last two years?

Well, at least McCain is anti-spending, anti-ag subsidies, anti-waterboarding and Gitmo, pro-free trade, and pro-immigration, and very solid on all of those. It's interesting, because he has a decent amount of libertarian positions, but he's just not libertarian philosophically, temperamentally, and often instinctively and rhetorically.

[highnumber]

When RP did get mainstream exposure, he blew it. Did you see him on Jay Leno? He talked about the gottdam Fed on Jay Leno! WTF?! Amateur. His campaign was f*cking amateur.

The real lesson that will be learned from RP's run is not going to be learned by his supporters. Fundraisers just learned how much money independent voters will pony up for a candidate who captures their imagination. Somebody do the math: how many votes has RP received and how many individuals donated to his campaign? The numbers must be awfully close.

[Click \'n\' Learn]

Paul supporters, if you learn anything from this election, it should be this: Stop wasting your damn time waving signs on street corners. Canvassing and phone-banking aren't fun, but they win elections.

Candidates like RP can't win elections on that alone. The only way RP could do much better would be to reduce the popularity of his opponents, otherwise he'll always have a ceiling.

Non-cosmotarians who want to reduce McCain's popularity should videotape his response to this.

Reason knows that phone-banking alone won't do it, so why are they suggesting that as the only alternative?

[n0rd1x]

This whole presidential campaign is the "American Idol" of presidential contendors. The Beatlemania that surrounds Obama is just hilarious and a perfect example.

[John Thacker]

I thought the GOP was thrown out in 2006 for NOT being small-government? Has that much changed in the last two years?

There is a difference between the GOP being unable to win when it upsets libertarian and libertarian-leaning voters too much, and libertarian and libertarian-leaning voters being able to win alone.

It would be nice if the Democrats were interested in wooing libertarians in response. Unfortunately, I suspect that they're more interesting in wooing evangelical Huckabee-type voters; there are more of them, you know. See for example Kristof here.

[Pro Libertate]

I think the Paul campaign shows that a more polished quasi-libertarian could conceivably win the nomination for the GOP (e.g., Flake, Sanford, et al.). Heck, without McCain's resurgence, Paul might've done a lot better in this election. And he's not a particularly good campaigner, I think we'd all agree.

[Pat]

TO: Sean | February 6, 2008, 11:59am

Compound the Paul Vote with that of Gravel and then add to that the millions of voters driven out of the Democrats and Republicans by the drug war and toss in the millions of Americans who might otherwise vote but who have been mass criminally disenfranchised, mostly by the war on drugs, and you are looking at margins that, I firmly believe, cost the Democrats wins in both 2000 and 2004.

[Larry Edelstein]

FYI I live in San Francisco (not far from the center, but still in Tom Lantos's bizarrely shaped 12th Congressional District) and received, in the last few days, one Ron Paul recorded voice message phone call, as well as a text message.

[Legate Damar]

Unfortunately, I suspect that they're more interesting in wooing evangelical Huckabee-type voters; there are more of them, you know.

That's the thing. If you look at the states where Paul cleared 10%, then remove the solidly red states (where there's no chance for Democrats in the general), you're left with only 3 purple states (NV, MN, LA). Admittedly, every single state currently matters, but that's hardly a treasure trove worth reworking your entire platform over.

[creech]

I find it hard to believe that only 5-10% of Republicans are anti-war, but maybe that's so.
In any case, why didn't the RP campaign take a look at how Perot ran in 1992 and basically ape him? Cranky guy, charts, straight talk, etc. and ends up with 19% of the vote.

[Legate Damar]

Is ME purple as well? I guess you could add that.

[Pro Libertate]

Strangely enough, I don't think that voters care much about the war.

[Sam Grove]

Most people are comfortable. Why should they risk real change?

They prefer to wait until they become very uncomfortable.

Ron Paul's campaign was always about a hope of winning a lottery of a culmination of factors.
A slim hope, perhaps, but people do buy lottery tickets despite great odds.

IAC, while the tide hasn't changed direction, perhaps it has begun to wane just a bit.

[stephen the goldberger]

"He told them to look not at the facts, but at the meaning of the facts. Then he said the facts had no meaning."

I love that movie

[Pat]

Win? Lose? Relative terms.

Meaningless terms when to win means voting for some party hack thug who will then shit in your face.

I vote for candidates who reflect and respect MY pluralistic social justice, civil liberties and human rights CONSTITUTIONAL values.

[Robert Maltz]

1) Quit telling people to "quit drinking the kool-aid" just because you want them to.

2) Someone mentioned earlier perception, and this was conveyed very effectively in New Hampshire at least to casual liberalist observers who only knew of Ron Paul for his "terrorist nations" joke campaign commercials on TV and may not even know that he's staunchly anti-war. Personally I tend to think that the average liberalist that is "anti-war" is only anti-Iraq War if the candidate goes along with something vaguely resembling their own social platform/programme.

[Sean]

Pat:

Right on.

The funny thing is, this election is going to be just as close as the last two. So take into account a few third party 'spoilers' and we can hand the presidency to the GOP, again.

Paul and Gravel were the two respective anti-war candidates, and I look forward to them siphoning votes away in the general election from the Democrats.

[Fluffy]

As I expected, Rockwell's people are already using his blog to talk about Paul leading a "conservative exodus" from the GOP to vote third party if the ticket is McCain / Huckabee.

They're also talking about how Paul "would have" won various LPA primaries, if write-in votes for him weren't automatically invalid.

Paul is going to run third party. It's only a matter of when he declares.

[Chris Potter]

Ron Paul has a LOT more support with Independents and even has the support of a lot of democrats.

McCain clobbered him among independents in pretty much every open primary. Regrettably, it may well be time to stick a fork in this campaign...and there's no way, barring a resurrected Hitler and Stalin facing each other in the general, that he's going to run 3rd Party.

[Fluffy]

That's the thing. If you look at the states where Paul cleared 10%, then remove the solidly red states (where there's no chance for Democrats in the general), you're left with only 3 purple states (NV, MN, LA). Admittedly, every single state currently matters, but that's hardly a treasure trove worth reworking your entire platform over.

The bigger problem for the GOP are the states where Paul's vote total comfortably exceeds the GOP margin of victory in either 2000 or 2004. States like NH and FL and IA.

But you can't cater to those voters without pissing off different GOP voters.

Which means the GOP is fucked.

[D.Gallion]

Most people still had no idea who Ron Paul was, and most still don't. Name recognition is tough. To go from the biggest unknown to receiveing hundreds of thousands of votes in a Republican primary process is amazing. I will leave the campaign in the hands of the candidate and his staff to play out their strategy and let the chips fall where they may. I may have played the campaign differently, especially early on in Iowa and NH. But who is to stay my strategy would have been more effective.

But here are my thoughts anyway. Before you get any broadbased support you must have name recognition. Without it you have nothing. Then you can start to get people to look at your policy positions. At that point you have a chance to compete. Without a number one or even a close second in the first two contests (Iowa and NH) you were never going to have a chance to get name recognition. After those two states the audience is to broad to reach without a 100 million dollars or more to spend. And even with money you still need the news media to get your name recognition up. It is the truth, like it or not. First name recognition, then coverage, then consideration by the voter. If the pieces fall into place you get a strong finish in the beginning and can play that for all it is worth in later states.

No maybe RP figured that another strategy is the most realistic and is playing a game of chess and working for a limited number of delegates to at least be in the room if not at the table. Who knows? I do not and it is their campaign to manage, not mine. That is their issue to work on. 20/20 hindsight is easy.

I still support RP and believe he is the best candidate. I am not discouraged in any way. Tommorrow is another day. There are more primaries. And eventually there will be more elections. As an old politico, I can tell you, there is always another contest and another opportunity. You just put another brick in and build on that. Change is the one thing you can count on.

[Robert]

I think the Paul campaign shows that a more polished quasi-libertarian could conceivably win the nomination for the GOP (e.g., Flake, Sanford, et al.).

Yes, provided that candidate previously got into statewide office. Why is nobody mentioning that factor? Look at the front runners. They're current or former US senators or governors. You have a lot more credibility when you've served statewide than when you've only represented a CD. I think lack of statewide office was a big factor that knocked out Giuliani so early and marginalizes Kucinich.

Of course you need a lot of luck to do so. Ron Paul just never had a reasonable opp'ty to become governor of or US sen. from Texas. It's not in the candidate's control to be in a state where the circumstances allow a "new guy" to get such a seat. You could get elected to the US senate from another,/b> state, but only if you're part of a political family like the Kennedys, Clintons, Romneys, or Bushes. For most aspiring US senators, state-shopping just isn't feasible.

[pdog]

'Independents' to me suggest that they are more along the lines of fence-sitting moderates. They hold some liberal views and some conservative views. Not the type of people who would find Paul's positions appealing. For a moderate like McCain though, they would and thus why he sucked them up.

[David T]

"Looking at the popular vote numbers, like it or not the politicians in both of the dominance parties must now look at the issues that can draw double digit percentages of voters to Ron Paul."

Just where the heck has he done this with voters *in primaries?* The only places he gets into double digits are in caucuses where relatively small numbers of activists can have disproprotionate influence.

Sorry, but if you want to be considered a major candidate you are going to have to start doing well in primaries some day!

[Pat]

TO: Sean | February 6, 2008, 1:10pm |

I totally disagree with the theory that voting for alternative candidates s a "spoiler" move. That is the demonizing defeatist reasoning of the people who's comfortable political status quo is threatened by our assertion of our values in politics.

It is the fault only Democrats themselves when they cost themselves the elections by supporting policies and values that DO NOT ATTRACT their own traditional core voting blocks.

I've posted at my blog an interview with Nader that responds to these contentions about spoiler status. He also analyzes the campaigns of Obama and Clinton. Good stuff.

Nader Interview on Obama, The Clinton's and Democrats today

If the Democrats want my vote they have to WIN it. they cab do that by reflecting and respecting my social justice, civil liberties and human rights anti drug war values. Simple.

[Corey Sax]

In MN winner takes all means that you have to vote for the winning candidate at the state convention, but you can vote for who you like at the national level. It's not really winner take all.

[DF Robichaux]

Paul won 10% in Iowa surpassing both polls and MSM expectations. There after Paul was all but blackballed in any coverage by the MSM. Most folks who vote (elderly,) get their information on candidates from either TV and major newspapers and Paul was nowhere to be found in them after Iowa. All you heard was McCain, Rommey, Guiliani and Huckabee.

[Sara]

Considering the hit piece this magazine published about Ron Paul's so-called racist newsletters (you know, the ones he didn't actually write), it's no surprise you're enthusiastically predicting his defeat so early in the game.

How's it feel to be a corporate lackey, Dave?

[rah62]

The ranting about MSM conspiracies makes supporters of Rep. Paul look like black-helicopter crazies. It's time for them (and Rep. Paul) to fold up their tents and admit the campaign is over.

[Brandybuck]

Paul supporters, if you learn anything from this election, it should be this: Stop wasting your damn time waving signs on street corners. Canvassing and phone-banking aren't fun, but they win elections.

Oh God yes! I've been saying the same thing to Ron Paul supporters for a couple of months now, but every time I've been told to "shut and and wave". If waving signs wins election, you can be sure that Romney and McCain would be doing it too, but they're not. RP has more active supporters than all the other campaigns combined, but I doubt we managed to hit even 5% of the houses in our districts.

But I have to blame the official campaign for this. We volunteers out in the boonies are just that, volunteers. We are stumbling around in the dark with no leadership. What little direction we have had from the campaign has been scant, tardy or erroneous. It has been very frustrating all around.

[Roger Maltz]

Anybody that runs a political weblog and hasn't figured out that it's "bloc" needs to consider using a dictionary once in a while.

[robc]

Robert,

Ron Paul just never had a reasonable opp'ty to become governor of or US sen. from Texas.

He came close in the early 80s, when Gramm ended up getting the nomination. IIRC, the national/texas party supporting Gramm (who had just switched parties) over him is what caused Paul to leave the GOP the first time.

But, you are right. A house member cannot win the presidency. There is a reason it doesnt happen. Im not sure if it was true but someone pointed out before super tuesday that Paul already had the best performing House member run for president in the last century.

[Dave Weigel]

it's no surprise you're enthusiastically predicting his defeat so early in the game.

About of the pledged delegates have been awarded as of yesterday, and the two states where everyone inside and outside the Paul campaign said they had a chance to win - Alaska, Montana - have voted. It's not early anymore.

[bookworm]

"It's time for them (and Rep. Paul) to fold up their tents and admit the campaign is over."

Zogby thinks that Ron Paul will be running all the way, that he's using this as a stepping off for a 3rd party run.

[Legate Damar]

I'd be very happy to see him run third party.

I sure won't vote McCain. I sure won't vote Hillary. I sure won't vote Hucklebee. But if Obama (or unlikely as it is, Romney) is in the general, the LP stands a chance of repelling my vote back into "lesser evil" category by picking another Badnarik-like nutter. A Paul candidacy not only prevents that chance from occurring, it gets me working on the phone banks.

[TrickyVic]

I think the bottom line is America isn't buying what Ron Paul is selling. He's selling adherence to a document many think is outdated and irrelevant.

[Pro Libertate]

You mean his sad devotion to that ancient institution? Better watch what you say--Darth Paul has choked people using the Force for saying such things.

[TrickyVic]

"""The ranting about MSM conspiracies makes supporters of Rep. Paul look like black-helicopter crazies. """

For some people that may be true. But I'll support a candidate that touts following the Constitution any day.

[highnumber]

Dave Weigel must be rich. He's shilled for EVERYBODY. Dems, Repubs, Corporations, the Mafia, the Trilateral Commission, Naked Mole Rats, Yer Mom, Gay Zombies, Morris Day & the Time, Tuesdays with Morrie, Left Handed Curlers, Good Night Moon, Ron Paul...

[svf]

"FYI I live in San Francisco (not far from the center, but still in Tom Lantos's bizarrely shaped 12th Congressional District) and received, in the last few days, one Ron Paul recorded voice message phone call, as well as a text message."

I live in Chicago and got that phone call too. I was also encouraged by the campaign to text my friends (though I am so paleo I do not own a cell phone). They have repeatedly auto-called Ron Paul donors. Cold-calling is another ballgame altogether...

As far as 3rd party goes, would Ron Paul be sacrificing his House seat if he did so? He can't run for both President as 3rd party and Congress as Republican at the same time all the way through to Novemeber, right?

[bookworm]

"Well, at least McCain is anti-spending, anti-ag subsidies, anti-waterboarding and Gitmo, pro-free trade, and pro-immigration, and very solid on all of those. It's interesting, because he has a decent amount of libertarian positions, but he's just not libertarian philosophically, temperamentally, and often instinctively and rhetorically."

Too bad he's such a warmonger.

[svf]

Paul's peeps now claiming he has 42+ delegates... so damn confusing...

http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/02/ron-paul-nation.html

Ron Paul National Delegate Count Now 42 or More
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 6, 2008

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA - With the results of many of the "Super Tuesday" primaries and caucuses now finalized, the Ron Paul campaign is now projecting that it has at least 42 delegates to the national convention secured.

While much of the focus in yesterday's Super Tuesday contests focused on preference poll numbers, Ron Paul caucus-goers were focused on securing delegates to the national convention. With dedicated supporters and an organization focused purely on securing delegates, the campaign has secured more delegates to the national convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul than caucus straw polls might otherwise suggest.

According to campaign projections, a minimum of 24 delegates were won in yesterday's contests. When added to projected delegates coming from strong showings in Iowa (4), Nevada (8), Louisiana (3) and Maine (3), that brings the total delegate count to 42 delegates or more.

"Our goal has always been to walk into the national GOP convention with as many delegates as possible," said Ron Paul 2008 campaign manager Lew Moore. "The number of delegates we won yesterday could very well be the difference in a Convention where no one has a first-ballot majority. With Dr. Paul's home state of Texas coming up, we feel we can enter the convention with a substantial number of delegates."

In an agreement first reported by West Virginia television station WSAZ, three Ron Paul delegates were secured through an agreement with the Mike Huckabee campaign at the West Virginia state convention early Tuesday. Ron Paul delegates to the state convention swung their sizable support to Huckabee - putting Huckabee over the top - in exchange for the delegates.

According to campaign projections from last night's results at least 3 delegates were won in Alaska, 5 delegates were won in North Dakota, 9 delegates were won in Minnesota, and 4 delegates were won in Colorado.

Additionally the results of the Louisiana Caucus may still change in favor of Ron Paul, where an ongoing legal challenge may result in most of that state's delegates going towards Ron Paul after state GOP officials violated their own rules to improperly put delegates from other campaigns on the ballots.

[Craig]

The article doesn't mention Tennessee (6%).

The Paul campaign is claiming they are up to 42 delegates, although media sources have them at 14 to 16. The claim to have won 3 in WV, 3 in AK, 5 in ND, 9 in MN, and 4 in CO, in addition to 4 in IA, 8 in NV, 3 in LA, and 3 in ME.

In any event, Ron Paul's chances of being the Republican nominee have gone from slim to none. At this rate, he probably won't control enough delegates to even affect the outcome. It's time to drop out and consider a 3rd party run, or just drop out. After last night's weak showing, dropping out seems like the better option.

Hopefully people will stop complaining about New Hampshire now -- his 8% there was his best primary showing, so maybe the Free State Project didn't choose poorly after all. (Although you have to like Nevada, Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota a little more these days.)

[Craig]

...the LP stands a chance of repelling my vote back into "lesser evil" category by picking another Badnarik-like nutter.

If the LP can't find a presidentially qualified candidate (current or former governor, member of Congress, big city mayor, general, admiral, or high powered business exec), someone like Badnarik -- a compelling, persuasive, unapologetic advocate of liberty -- is about the best they can do. I voted for him last time, and I would again, absent a more viable pro-liberty candidate.

[svf]

I voted for Badnarik too, but felt better about voting for Harry Browne (twice)...

Regardless, we're back to talking about less than 1% of the vote.

Even if he has "no chance", it has to be encouraging that the Ron Paul campaign, with all of its considerable shortcomings, is raising millions of dollars and achieving respectable vote totals in Republican Primaries in 2008.

I have to believe this is only the beginning... there's something very real to be tapped into here and once we get a more charismatic (and "qualified"?) standard-bearer for "the movement" and figure out how to turn online buzz into actual votes, who knows what might happen...

[KoWT]

All of the numbers out of Minnesota are from the Presidential Preference Straw Poll conducted at the caucuses. It's window dressing that counts for nada. The delegates won't be assigned to a candidate until the state convention held sometime next month.

We won 3 out of 4 of our precinct's delegate slots for the Paul campaign. We also recruited apolitical friends to show up and volunteer in other caucuses if there were any slots open. That won control of 3 additional seats in one county, and 2 in another.

Paul'll show well for the state convention, and you can be sure that the network of newbie politicos gathered for this run can make or break future candidate's at a variety of levels.

It's not a failure by any stretch of the imagination.

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

I'm certainly going to vote 3rd Party this November, but I don't think Paul should run. He did a pretty good job with the primary and has secured a position as an elder statesman of the Freedom Movement. A thrid party run that is less successful than the primary run would taint that, and I see no reason to suggest a thrid party run would do any better. You need to have personality, looks, and chraisma to win over the hooples. Ventura would be my best bet for a successful third party run. I think Andrew Napolitano might be able to make some noise too, but I want to keep him on ice for 2012.

[robc]

I have to believe this is only the beginning... there's something very real to be tapped into here and once we get a more charismatic (and "qualified"?) standard-bearer for "the movement" and figure out how to turn online buzz into actual votes, who knows what might happen...

If McCain wins the presidency, that opens up a senate seat for Flake to run for. There is your moderately silver-like lining to this storm cloud.

[Chet Thomas]

Not sure what you are talking about in terms of Colorado?

The preference poll is non-binding, the delegates are non-binding.

I was elected a state, congressional, and county delegate. My Precinct got 5/6 delegates for Ron Paul. (even though we lost the preference poll by quite a bit).

This occured in almost every precinct??

[Brenn]

Keeping an eye on people reporting their precinct results from one of our Paul distribution lists, the theme seems to be consistent in him polling 5-20% across-state but obtaining 30-60% of the precinct's delegates, as happened in mine.

The BPOU Conventions this and next month are going to be interesting.

[Brenn]

Er, in Minnesota, that is.

[Danny]

Thanks Chet and Brenn. Now I feel like I know absolutely nothing about the process. All I wanna know is how we can get Ron Paul in the oval office, and if it's still possible.

[Brenn]

"Thanks Chet and Brenn. Now I feel like I know absolutely nothing about the process. All I wanna know is how we can get Ron Paul in the oval office, and if it's still possible."

With a wand. A very special wand.

Really though, if you're not a delegate (at any level), then I'd suggest contacting your state's campaign to ask them how you can help existing delegate supporters and affect delegates who aren't.

[Jim Waddell]

You don't understand the MN caucus process at all. Romney did not get any delegates to the National convention. No one did yet. I saw at least 50 precinct results emailed to me. The general result was "Not so great in the (meaningless) straw poll, but we got 4 out of 6 delegates (to the next caucus, the county level)". RP most likely placed 2nd in terms of delegates to the county level.

[Nash]

I'm convinced RP did as poorly as he did simply because he was perceived as far too radical. Period.

The average person liked the general ideas until they found out his rhetoric basically involved burning the federal government to the ground.

RP obviously would have governed as a pragmatist, but nobody believed that, especially the MSM and why should they? His rhetoric was over the top.

Radical rhetoric gets you a lot of cash but apparently few voters will take you all that seriously when they go to the polls.

When I canvassed my neighborhood the reaction to RP was mostly negative from all the registered Republicans I talked too. They want tax cuts but not entirely. Maybe they think Iraq was "mis-managed" but complete pullout from not only Iraq, but the Middle East and everywhere else they consider over the top. Maybe NCLB sucks but they still aren't convinced blowing up the ED is a good talking point. They liked him on guns and mostly on domestic spending and that was about it.

People might want small changes but they don't want a radical in office. This isn't news. I hope future Republicans that are sympathetic to Paul take what worked (freedom message, donations, and getting young people mobilized) and leave the rest (radical policy rhetoric that is fodder for the press).

[D.Gallion]

I want to say to all the Ron Paul supporters, of which I am one, that I have never been so proud of the amazing accomplishments of this campaign so far. I have experience working on a few state representative and congressional campaigns, and I know the massive obstacles that were overcome to get this candidacy to this point. Of course, you would like to be leading in delegates and be locked in for the nomination, but if you believe that this campaign has failed then you underestimate what you have done.

This campaign started with a candidate that was for all practical purposes unknown to 99.9 percent of the population. The message of the candidate was one that most people have never heard. The message is one that challenges the conventional wisdom accepted by rank-and-file Republicans. The media either did not cover the campaign or would only mention it in passing, and sometimes using pejorative terminology. Yet, so far, this campaign has raised millions of dollars and garnered hundreds of thousands of votes. In addition, many hundreds of thousands have been exposed to the message of the campaign. Best yet, this effort is not over by a long shot.

There is so much to be proud of. I am very proud of what we have done, will yet do in this campaign, and will accomplish for years to come. Simply amazing is what this is.

[Ernie John Hopkins]

In Mississippi, which has not voted yet, Paul has a core that have been out canvassing, working gun shows, etc. I do not think that it will sweep Mississippi for him. First, I personally have heard much disbelief that he even exists as a Republican candidate due to the virtual media blackout. Not everyone has heard of YOUTUBE, in fact most voters haven't. They rely on CNN/Fox for their guidence. Huckabee has received a huge endorsement from the Southern Baptist Churches which is huge here. The blacks are virtually 100% Obama and will not jeopordize their very profitable federal cash cow with a racist constitutional view (their view, not mine). The handful of non Baptist whites tend to be pro John McCain because he symbolizes strong government, again an opposite of Ron Paul.

[Eric Dondero]

Big news:

Republican Liberty Caucus National Chairman Bill Westmiller, a diehard Ron Paul supporter, is now saying the campaign is "nearing the end."

Story and link at http://www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

[Franklin]

Either this blog post is incorrect or this press release from the Paul campaign is incorrect.

[Marianne]

Minnesota is a caucus/convention state. We will probably take at least 3 - 4 of the 8 congressional districts, at 3 delegates apiece, plus a portion of the state convention elected delegates.

The straw poll did not represent the delegates elected. Ron Paul supporters were educated in how to get elected as delegates and did so. In precincts where Romney won the straw poll, we won half to three-fourths of the delegates.

[Steve CA]

Paul had always frustrated me in the debates by not finishing his arguments and assuming that people would implicitly understand his premises.
He was not factoring in that most people are either idiots or don't pay attention or both. They need to have things spelled out down to the basic "A--->B" level. Not only would that get the message accross better to the regular Joes, it would also force the other candidates to try to dismantle the logic rather than just respond with their own set of presumptions.

On Super Tuesday I had a Republican ask me what ever happened to Giuliani and seem really amazed by how well McCain was doing. The fact that ALL (nearly all) of California voted for McCain just shows you how irrlevant and uncritical the voters are out here.

"Golly me, I'll vote for McCain cause he's gonna win and he has character!"

[Don]

Marianne is right about Mn. delegate selection. In our county Ron Paul finished second to Mitt in in the straw poll while winning a clear majority (not plurality) of the delegates to the county convention. We have a couple of conventions to go to determine delegate selection to the national convention. We are in a very good position at this point. In my precinct Ron swept all five delegate positions to the March 15 county convention.

[Lars]

Thanks for reporting about Ron Paul

We are collecting links to articles like yours at http://www.WhatTheySayAboutRonPaul.com for all the latest news about Ron Paul.

If you want to ensure your future articles about Ron Paul are noticed by even more Ron Paul supporters and others following the Ron Paul message you can go to http://www.WhatTheySayAboutRonPaul.com and post links to your own articles as soon as you make them available online.

[Mike]

Mr Weigel,
it seems you are, once again, on the Ron Paul side of Freedom. I hope your plan was to help Dr Paul shake off the whole "newsletter controversy" early on so that it would be a non-issue in the long term. Or you just realized what a jackass you were being and came to your senses.

Either way, welcome back. Dr Paul has a core of supporters who will never abandon him, I'm one of them and I hope you are too.

Sincerely,
Mike from Toledo, OH

A precinct leader canvassing like mad to Get Out the Vote in Ohio on March 4th!

[Scott]

This is to the goddamn idiots mentioning "drinking koolaid", you're voting for a candidate that the media and pollsters are telling you to vote for so that you can vote for a winner and feel like you didn't waste your vote so you can run around on message boards paroting what every other brainless twit is saying to the people voting their conscience. You are the ones parting of the beverage, you are their sheep.

[Martin B]

Eric decided to make a career of attacking Ron Paul. Now Ron gets way more votes than he ever got with Eric's help.

Rudy Giuliani rose to the top of the polls. Then Lucky Eric joined up with him and blogged like crazy. A few weeks and sixty million dollars later, Giuliani is not only winless, but Ron beat him in several states and has at least 16 times more delegates.

With Giuliani out of the race our little good luck charm began touting Romney. And last night we saw the result.

So if Romney bows out, where will Rittberg turn next? When reporters posed that question to McCain his face turned red and a throbbing blood vessel popped up on his forehead. "If that little son-of-a-bitch so much as puts up one of my yard signs I swear to God I'll kill him with my bare hands."

Learning of McCain's outburst Huckabee turned to a senior aid and said, "Well, I am a Baptist minister, so I can't just go around threatening to kill people, but if that motherfucker dials my number I'll kick him right square in his goddamn balls. Oh shit. Are we live?"

[Jen]

Off topic question. What's the story behind Rittberg changing his name to Donderoooooo.

[kool-aid man]

Martin B... holy fuck that is some funny-ass shit....!

[svf]

Stating the obvious here... but the most likely Ron Paul voter is, was, and will always be found in an enormous and notoriously difficult to mobilize demographic...

Namely young/first-time voters and the never voted/don't-vote-anymore because they're all assholes and it doesn't make any damn difference potential voters.

That so many of these people have not only voted for Ron Paul but even bothered to register to vote -- on time -- and often (gag) as Republicans not only in primary elections but also in convoluted closed caucuses -- and that many of them have even become DELEGATES for fuck's sake...

... well, it's pretty amazing.

The next "Freedom Movement" candidate needs to be even better at this in order to succeed. I think/hope we're learning a lot of lessons at the grassroots level.

Toning down the absolutist/"extremist" rhetoric from both the candidate and his more, uh, "vocal" supporters would certainly help.

Mentioning the gold standard a little less often might also be a good idea...

[pissedofnjguy]

Let's try to predict the next 4 years from a REALISTIC stand point. McCain, Obama or Hillary willl be the next president. The Fed will continue dilluting the value of our currency. Unemployment will continue to go up. The deficit will grow, taxes will go up, personal bankruptcies up, inflation up, illegal aliens up, welfare.entitlement spending up, defense spending up, war in Iraq (continuing), war with Iran (most likely), troops still in areas for now over 60 years (Italy, Germany, Japan,SKorea etc. etc.) And (most likely) a military draft while millions of illegal aliens get social programs and live the American dream. THAT IS WHY I WILL WRITE IN RON PAUL"S NAME FOR PRESIDENT EVEN IF HE DOESN"T RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--TIME FOR AMERICANS TO WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!

[pissecdoffnjguy]

Oh, and I forgot one more thing. In Manhattan stores, (upper east side-I saw them yesterday) are now taking Euros. (my prediction)Within 4 years the dollar will be replaced by some other currency as the world's leader. Again it doesn't matter if Obama, McCain, or Clinton will be President. The results.....................will be the same.

[svf]

sadly, a military draft is probably what it will probably take to get a truly anti-war president elected...

[Craig]

Eric! That rat bastard is running out of candidates to ruin. I hope he keeps supporting all of Ron Paul's opponents! Is Hillary next?

[Pablo Escobar]

Australian libertarian here. Just wondering why you Americans bother with a 3rd party like the Libertarian Party? As America has a first-past-the-post and not a proportional system of election, it's basically impossible for you to win anything of significance. You'd be better off joining the Republicans and trying to change it from within -- or perhaps cause a party split.

Here in Australia we have a proportional system of election for the Senate, which means minor parties actually have a fairly good chance of getting someone elected. In one of our States (Tasmania) the government of the day is actually elected via proportional representation. There's also very little difficulty getting on the ballots.

[Zephram Stark]

"Paul supporters, if you learn anything from this election, it should be this: Stop wasting your damn time waving signs on street corners. Canvassing and phone-banking aren't fun, but they win elections."

Truer words have not been spoken in the last day or so.

[Rob]

You ever think that winning isn't the only reason Ron Paul is still in the primary? If you think he has no chance, if you think that it is a lost cause, then get your head out of your ass and look outside the box. If you are gonna vote for McCain or Obama even though you originally supported Ron Paul, don't vote for McCain or Obama. Your are gonna get to vote for them no matter what in the presidential election. Either Obama being president or vice president. Just give it a chance, vote for Ron Paul, it isn't about winning it is about getting the MESSAGE across. Atleast you can say you tried.

[Rob]

One more thing, REAL ID, look that up and tell me why it hasn't been on the news? Nothing better then watching your freedoms getting taken away without being told.

[Joe]

Ron Paul is just one man who has decided to stand up for a fundamental philosophical belief centered around the Golden Rule. Even if he doesn't win a presidential election, that philosophy will continue to exist. It will spread and grow stronger each day that goes by.

The philosophy is being treaded upon; and like a cornered dog, or steam in a closed boiler, it will eventually find its way out.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

- John F. Kennedy

Sorry to put it so bluntly.

[TGA]

Jen asked: What's the story behind Rittberg changing his name to Donderoooooo.

Brazoria County Texas shows no record of him changing his name. His divorce records and property records are in the name Rittberg.

He is too cheap to legally change his name. He just calls himself Dondero. Claims it was his biological father's name.

Maybe he just thinks Dondero is sexier than Rittberg. You know, he saw Billy Crystal in "When Harry Met Sally" and took the "You didn't have great sex with Sheldon" too seriously. (http://www.nobby.de/sounds/movies/whms/esheldon.wav)

Or maybe he's a nut.

[karla]

Mr. Ron Paul would be doing better if the media
stop cowering and start giving him identical
reporting and airtime that they give to the
other two unworthy candidates. then he probably
clean up!! his message and stance is more important and so direct - how can anybody miss it??

[Tim G]

Ron Paul supporters, just like the forefathers of our country, will not give up in the face of adversity. Dr. Paul's message will continue to be spread.

42 delegates so far for Ron Paul and with Romney's withdrawal more delegates will come.

It has been hard for many to hear his message because of media blackouts, but now the media has been paying closer attention. Take for instance CNN's recent story of how Dr. Paul has received more military donations than any of the other candidates combined! If anyone chooses to ignore the troops voice and still feel the wars of the American empire are just, then those believers are in a world of their own and should reexamine our Constitution about entanglements with matters not affecting our national security and about undeclared and unconstitutional wars. I am ashamed of the America people's ability to be lead like sheeple in a time where our country needs to see the truth.

The dollar crash that is coming should wake people up and perhaps someone will finally see that the crashing money trail will lead to our overspending for wars that are not of our consideration or at least should not be. We are going broke and America will see over the coming months. There is little that can be done to save our dollar until we stop spending with borrowed money.

Ron Paul is making strides that cannot be ignored and his message of life, liberty, and freedom should not be ignored. This is what our nation was founded upon and today's government chooses to ignore. The time will come and the game will be over for the warmongers.