Three Arguments…

[Erazmus]

Three Arguments…

Three Arguments…

Before I get to the three arguments, I just want to preface by saying that as I read the neo-con bloggers and the mainstream media, that I feel like I’m in the twilight zone. It’s a very surreal feeling to listen / watch the news and see the most recent fantastically absurd reasoning as to why Ron Paul support is exploding. They are willing to say just about anything, other than the truth. Here is the oddity… All the pundits are using the exact same far fetched reasons simultaneously. Take from that whatever you will.

Anyway, here are the three arguments I’ve been seeing…in almost all the anti-Ron Paul rhetoric online and elsewhere.

#1) “The POLLs don’t mean anything.” Then, immediately after this statement, they quote a POLL where Ron Paul registers low, and then they state that said POLL as the only “accurate” POLL.

#2) “I talk to people and ask them about Ron Paul, and they say ‘Who?’” Let’s face it, a vast portion of the population doesn’t vote (unless it’s for American Idol), or they don’t follow politics. We can just observe this Paris Hilton crap on the news to know what sells in media today. So, I put this theory to the test and asked random people what they thought of Mitt Romney, and I got the same response. Who? So, let’s not pretend that every American follows politics. Let’s not pretend that even if Ron Paul was leading in ALL the POLLs across America, that there wouldn’t be a lot of people who don’t know who he is. Hell, I bet there are people who don’t know who our current President is.

#3) “The few Ron Paul supporters that there are, spam the POLLs and google everything written about him and reply to every thread.” I note this as the Ron Paul conspiracy theory. Do people really buy this crap? I’m a Ron Paul supporter. I donate what and when I can. I vote in POLLs when I can. But I don’t go looking for them, and I don’t have the time, as a working American, to spend endless amounts of time doing these things. Who does?

 

[austin356]

#1) There is nothing strange about this absurd argument. Its typical of not just RP or politics but life in general when something happens and you try to "excuse it" or "ignore it". The Neocons have been in really complete control of the party for a while, even though they themselves are only about 15-20% of the actual party. They have forgot that there are millions of libertarians, "Goldwater Conservatives" and even "Reagan Conservatives" that absolutely hate what has been going on in the party, but have been loyal to it because they dont want the "only other Choice" (aka Hillary). Now that those people have someone to group around, their numbers become much more exposed, and it surprises the Neocons who thought they were the end-all-conservative.

#2) People really dont know anything about any of the Candidates except Hillary. And they dont like her, so that leaves just "Ive heard that name b4" type of crap that really does not reflect true feelings of policy or ideas. Giuliani is about as far south (statist, anti-liberty) as they come in America, and people dont know that about him. That will change as times goes by, and once ideas become more widely known such name recognition becomes much less important. OUR CHALLENGE is to make sure people reach this point before the party, elites, and media decide it is time to "narrow the choices".

#3) They do have a point. But it is not in the context they are trying to make it. RP's supporters are soo soo soo very passionate that they come across as nearly overwhelming, which is a great thing.

 

[Erazmus]

#1) There is nothing strange about this absurd argument. Its typical of not just RP or politics but life in general when something happens and you try to "excuse it" or "ignore it". The Neocons have been in really complete control of the party for a while, even though they themselves are only about 15-20% of the actual party. They have forgot that there are millions of libertarians, "Goldwater Conservatives" and even "Reagan Conservatives" that absolutely hate what has been going on in the party, but have been loyal to it because they dont want the "only other Choice" (aka Hillary). Now that those people have someone to group around, their numbers become much more exposed, and it surprises the Neocons who thought they were the end-all-conservative.

#2) People really dont know anything about any of the Candidates except Hillary. And they dont like her, so that leaves just "Ive heard that name b4" type of crap that really does not reflect true feelings of policy or ideas. Giuliani is about as far south (statist, anti-liberty) as they come in America, and people dont know that about him. That will change as times goes by, and once ideas become more widely known such name recognition becomes much less important. OUR CHALLENGE is to make sure people reach this point before the party, elites, and media decide it is time to "narrow the choices".

#3) They do have a point. But it is not in the context they are trying to make it. RP's supporters are soo soo soo very passionate that they come across as nearly overwhelming, which is a great thing.

On argument number one. I understand what you're saying, but when the pundits state an absolute, "The POLLs mean nothing," and then cite the POLL that supports their position, it's absurd.

Thanks for the response. I think we agree on just about everything. Well written.

 

[RJB]

One of my favorite for Dr. Pauls success on the FOX debates polls (I think Hannity said this) "It's those far-left websites."

I'm on a pro 2nd ammendment forum where almost everyone is crazy about Ron Paul, and someone there tried to repeat that on the forum. I asked him if he thought our forum was a far leftsight. He never answered.

As far left sights go, if they did vote, I welcome them. I always hated the word moderate because I thought it implied wishy-washyness-- no firm stance on anything, but I believe that Ron Paul is the only true moderate, in that following the constitution he favors no group over the other.

 

[Shmuel Spade]

I'm on a pro 2nd ammendment forum where almost everyone is crazy about Ron Paul, and someone there tried to repeat that on the forum.

Which forum is it? The High Road? AR-15? TCFtalk? I haven't visited any of those regularly in a while so I'm out of it. TCF I'd expect, but the others… not so much.

 

[ronpaulitician]

1) There's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Replace "statistics" with "polls" (I couldn't figure out how to use the strikethrough feature here)

2) When people ask me "Who is Ron Paul?" I usually answer "The next president of
the United States."

3) Utah straw poll. Pictures of RP supporters outside NH debate. Audience applause at Real Time show where RP was an in-studio guest. There are plenty of reasons to believe that the support for Ron Paul is higher than that which shows up in the offline polls.

 

[RJB]

Which forum is it? The High Road? AR-15? TCFtalk? I haven't visited any of those regularly in a while so I'm out of it. TCF I'd expect, but the others… not so much.

Warrifles.com

 

[Shmuel Spade]

Warrifles.com

One of the forums I never visited, figures.

Seems very well organized.

 

[Broadlighter]

Argument #3 falls apart on polling sites that screen IP addresses or use Bot filters.

 

[CJLauderdale4]

I live in Florida.

According to these arguments, at least I'll know how to vote in 2008. I guess I've had a lot of practice voting...I mean spamming...

And supposedly Florida is getting rid of the electronic machines and going back to.....to...oh no.....hanging chads???!?!?! Could be more Ron Paul voted there too.

 

[angrydragon]

Everyone should care more about politics and government, but a lot of people only care for movie stars and what they do and such. Sorta sad because what the government does (laws, taxes, regulations, foreign covert ops, etc...), affect our lives vastly more than the stars on tv, movies and music.

I don't go searching for online polls either, and I believe the polls on the more visible (like cnn.com, msnbc.com) websites really show substantial support for Ron and his message.

I think the polls (on cnn.com, msnbc.com) show what normal people think who won the debates, not like other sites that lean left-wing or right-wing.