# Is this real and is it normal? \[Ron Paul coverage\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 16, 2011, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889 "2011-08-16T13:05:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/41 "2011-08-17T03:26:55Z")
This is pretty comparable to the Jesse Jackson campaign in 1992. In the early part of the campaign, he had 10% of the vote locked down and was technically the front-runner, as no other candidate had quite that much. But as was made pretty clear in his earlier run, 10% was about as good as he was ever going to get and trumpeting his doomed campaign as a “front-runner” just wasn’t in any serious commentator’s interest. Ron Paul’s function in this election is to get thorny issues discussed; he will flame out (again) long before he’s ever in a position to actually do anything about them. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/42 "2011-08-17T04:27:17Z")
A lot of his views are in accord with the tea baggers. The powers will not allow him to debate the others after awhile. He will get too much applause from the bagger gallery. They want to create the impression of party unity. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/43 "2011-08-17T05:16:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t think he should be ignored, but I do think it’s OK to take his strengths and weaknesses as a candidate into account. If you think he’s likely to springboard from a second-place finish in this straw poll to a serious shot at the Republican nomination - regardless of how the press covers the primaries - you’re not being realistic. They mentioned on TDS that there were stories about how both Rick Santorum and John Huntsman did. As TDS pointed out, 'Santorum didn’t get half of what Paul got. _He lost to a guy that lost so bad, he dropped out of the race_!" “If all of Huntsman’s supporters met at the same time at the same Ames Iowa Quiznos, the Fire Marshall would say 'Yeah, that’s fine.” Neither of these guys have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting the nomination. The fact that they are both knuckleheads isn’t even an issue. I think the reason he’s not a real canidate is that, physically, he’s built like Gollum from LOTR. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/44 "2011-08-17T05:24:51Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > They mentioned on TDS that there were stories about how both Rick Santorum and John Huntsman did. As TDS pointed out, 'Santorum didn’t get half of what Paul got. _He lost to a guy that lost so bad, he dropped out of the race_!" > > “If all of Huntsman’s supporters met at the same time at the same Ames Iowa Quiznos, the Fire Marshall would say 'Yeah, that’s fine.” Yeah, I mentioned that earlier. The press liked Huntsman as a candidate, maybe because he has an interesting resume or because the idea of him running against his ex-boss sounds juicy, but the Republican base was never going to go for him. I don’t think the straw poll counts for much, but whoever said he might have a shot is a nitwit. There’s no reason to believe that and there is especially no reason to think that based on the straw poll results. > [@](#): > > I think the reason he’s not a real canidate is that, physically, he’s built like Gollum from LOTR. And yet James Carville is on TV all the time. Assuming CNN still counts as TV, and come to think of it, maybe Carville is contributing to their problems. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/45 "2011-08-17T05:31:22Z")
Ron Paul’s problem is that he has no constituency in either major party or in the media. His military isolationism causes him to be shunned by Republicans. His free market policies cause him to be shunned by the Democrats. He is not attractive to either big business or big labor. Basically, his beliefs alienate him completely except for a group of followers who, although not necessarily that small, are also not big enough to carry him to a win in any major state. The media won’t cover him because he’s not a useful idiot for either the right or the left. In the liberal media, candidates like Bachmann and Trump are ‘newsworthy’ because they make Republicans look crazy. In the right-wing media, candidates like Sharpton or Kucinich are useful because they make the Democrats look extreme. But Paul has beliefs that span both parties’ platforms, and his craziness spans right and left as well. So he’s really not useful to anyone. And despite how well he’s doing now, he’s simply not a serious candidate for President. You can imagine some crazy set of events that could propel Bachmann into the White House as a long shot, but there’s no path that would get Ron Paul there. Everyone knows he’s at an absolute highwater mark for popularity. He’s too old to make a credible candidate - he would be 85 years old at the end of a second term. The other thing about Paul is that he’s not new. He’s been in this position before, so he’s not particularly exciting to follow. It’s not fair, and he deserves to be heard given the support he has, but he’s positioned himself into a niche that really has no friends. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/46 "2011-08-17T05:39:21Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > Shame. I am democrat but I would glady vote for this guy. I’ve read his manifesto and though he’s got lots of democrat-friendly policies, the fact that he’s doesn’t plan a federal law guaranteeing woman reproductive choice would prevent many from the democrat base from voting for him. He’s an ethical and consistant libertarian, but he seems to put state liberty over abortion liberty. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/47 "2011-08-17T05:41:32Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > In the right-wing media, candidates like Sharpton or Kucinich are useful because they make the Democrats look extreme. But Paul has beliefs that span both parties’ platforms, and his craziness spans right and left as well. So he’s really not useful to anyone. > . I’ve read about Kucinich as well, he’s like a democratic Ron Paul, in both the good ways and the bad ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/48 "2011-08-17T06:01:21Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > I’ve read about Kucinich as well, he’s like a democratic Ron Paul, in both the good ways and the bad And also a lot like Gollum! ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/49 "2011-08-17T06:03:08Z")
I think a couple of the things that work in his favor also double as problems. For instance, his fervent supporters are so fervent they try to drum up support for him… so nobody wants to support him even if they agree with him because they don’t want to be misconstrued as the crazy Ron Paul spammers you see over the net. In addition, that fact that he’s so different means that he “can’t win” so people who would otherwise vote for him don’t because they want to “vote for someone who could actually win.” I think more people would vote for him if most people voted solely on political views and didn’t take into account electoral strategy (or pretty commercials). That’s not to say he’d necessarily WIN if these things were fixed, but he’d at least be upgraded from “Snowball’s chance in Hell” to “Winning the lottery.” ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/50 "2011-08-17T06:10:06Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > And also a lot like Gollum! [Who probably has a more beautiful wife than 95% of American husbands](http://www.clevescene.com/images/blogimages/2011/01/26/1296063547-dennis-kucinich-wife.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/51 "2011-08-17T06:13:56Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > I’ve read his manifesto and though he’s got lots of democrat-friendly policies, the fact that he’s doesn’t plan a federal law guaranteeing woman reproductive choice would prevent many from the democrat base from voting for him. [What exactly](http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/) do you consider to be his “lots of democrat-friendly policies”? And not only does he not plan a federal law guaranteeing female reproductive choice, he has proposed [anti-choice legislation](http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-1096), as well as [other extreme legislation](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.539:) that would attempt to destroy fundamental civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/52 "2011-08-17T06:47:37Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > He’s too old to make a credible candidate - he would be 85 years old at the end of a second term. This is another factor that people ignore all too often. In early 2007, Gallup found that [a 72 year old candidate would fare only slightly better than a homosexual candidate](http://www.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx) - and Ron Paul was 73 at the time of the 2008 election. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/53 "2011-08-17T10:05:30Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > [“Salon” has a reasonable take on this.](http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/08/16/ron_paul_2012/) > > They basically argue that Ron Paul’s positioning in the straw poll doesn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. Ron Paul has a small but fervent group of supporters who can influence relatively low volume/high visibility opinion surveys like the Iowa straw poll. But that doesn’t carry over into more widespread popularity. Given the circumstances, that article’s not really convincing. We’ve got a whole lot of news coverage dishonestly minimising support for Ron Paul, and you just found some more news coverage minimising the support for Ron Paul. Not to mention that the author of this article was one of the ones pulling the [“Only talk about Ron Paul to explain why we’re not talking about Ron Paul”](http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/08/13/iowa_straw_poll/index.html) bullcrap: > [@](#): > > So if you’re keeping score at home, Saturday was a very good day for Bachmann, and a decent one for Romney. And it wasn’t bad for Perry, either, although he would have preferred to see Bachmann lose the straw poll. It was, however, a dreadful day for Pawlenty, who’s now pretty much run out of time to demonstrate that a candidacy that makes sense on paper is remotely interesting to Republican activists. He is no impartial observer, he’s covering his own ass. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/54 "2011-08-17T11:52:56Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > Ron Paul supporters will do everything they can to make it look like he’s got more support than he does. Anyone who’s run a website poll knows the second the online RP community catches wind, they’ll be stuffing the virtual ballot box - and telling all their RP-supporter buddies to do it too. But that is not the reason the media is shunning Ron Paul. If it were, they would shun Bachmann as well, because what you are saying is, straw polls are notoriously unreliable, But they are not shunning Bachmann, her win in Ames is being touted as a significant step in the nominating process. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/55 "2011-08-17T12:41:21Z")
> [@Krokodil](#): > > Ron Paul’s function in this election is to get thorny issues discussed… It _should_ be. This is exactly why perspectives with small but strong constituencies should be included in the debate. The process and ultimate result can be improved by candidates with no chance of winning in themselves. But this isn’t happening nearly as much as it should be. Saying that the media is right to ignore Paul (or whoever) simply because they have no shot at winning is missing the point. The party conventions are a year away! We have plenty of time for the top candidates and the general election. _This_ is the time for a broader view, for challenging assumptions anew. This is what should be keeping democracy vital. From Fox News to _Mother Jones_, it seems the media is letting us down. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/56 "2011-08-17T15:40:57Z")
> [@Krokodil](#): > > Ron Paul’s function in this election is to get thorny issues discussed Like this? > [@](#): > > “I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city [Washington, D.C.] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/57 "2011-08-17T17:06:35Z")
Another issue is that the 24 hour news cycle spends hundreds of hours covering election minutia. They have a lot of airtime to fill and this is probably their #1 topic. The idea that there’s just not enough time to justify some Ron Paul coverage is kind of ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/58 "2011-08-17T17:21:54Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > This is another factor that people ignore all too often. In early 2007, Gallup found that [a 72 year old candidate would fare only slightly better than a homosexual candidate](http://www.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx) - and Ron Paul was 73 at the time of the 2008 election. I wish they’d throw in some more extreme questions into polls like that. I’m curious to know how much more or less atheists are despised than child molesters or murderers. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2011, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/59 "2011-08-18T01:26:31Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > “I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city [Washington, D.C.] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” [That wasn’t actually him who wrote it](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Newsletter_controversy)and he ended up saying; “ Everybody knows in my district that I didn’t write them and I don’t speak like that… and I’ve been reelected time and time again and everyone knows I don’t participate in that kind of language. The point is, when you bring this question up, you’re really saying ‘you’re a racist, or are you a racist?’ The answer is no, I’m not a racist. As a matter of fact, Rosa Parks is one of my heroes, Martin Luther King is a hero, because they practiced the libertarian principle of civil disobedience and nonviolence. Libertarians are incapable of being a racist because racism is a collectivist idea: you see people in groups. A civil libertarian as myself sees everyone as an important individual. ” — Ron Paul, CNN, January 10, 2008 > [@SenorBeef](#): > > I wish they’d throw in some more extreme questions into polls like that. I’m curious to know how much more or less atheists are despised than child molesters or murderers. You mean, there’s a difference? Jesus Christ! Why won’t you think of the children? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2011, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889/60 "2011-08-18T01:40:50Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > As a matter of fact, Rosa Parks is one of my heroes That’s why he voted against giving her a Congressional medal of honor. I don’t think the guy is a racist, but he does have sort of a tin ear for these kinds of things consider voters would already have reason to be concerned about what would happen to civil rights laws under a Paul administration. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-real-and-is-it-normal-ron-paul-coverage/592889.md?page=4)