Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Who's the Loser?

The LA Times doesn't like Ron Paul. In this blog post they claim he 'lost again' last night in New Hampshire. Fact is he virtually tied with Giuliani.

How come they didn't post Giuliani loses again? His is after all the campaign that claimed to be inevitable, he claimed to be a contender. Ron Paul never did. And last night that one percent difference between his fifth place and Giuliani's fourth was a mere 2223 votes.Giuliani spent millions on ads in New Hampshire compared to Paul.

Rudolph’s camp knew he couldn’t win,
so they used the effective strategy of downplaying his loss by claiming that the candidate didn’t make any real effort in New Hampshire. The media, however, today exposed some interesting facts about Guiliani’s efforts in New Hampshire. Guiliani not only made more campaign appearances in New Hampshire than any other candidate but he spent more money in the state than all over candidates except for Mitt Romney. That Ron Paul virtually tied Guiliani is an incredible political feat and the Paulites of New Hampshire should be wildly applauded. Had it not been for Paul activists, the candidate would have finished around Hunter’s 1%.

And Paul beat Giuliani in Iowa. And Paul has delegates while Giuliani has none.

Mr. McCain received 37% of the vote, in comparison to 32% for Mr. Romney. Mr. Huckabee garnered 11%, and Mr. Giuliani beat Ron Paul by one percentage point, 9% to 8%. Senator Thompson captured just 1% of the vote.






Jan 8 Del
*Pledged delegates to date. Republican Scorecard lists all Republican delegates, including unpledged RNC members.
And Paul beat the last best conservative hope the media has been pushing; Fred Thompson. Whom he also beat in Iowa. And he is tied with Thompson in SC where Fred promises to make his final stand; ala the Alamo.

This is probably the real reason the liberal LA Times is pissed off about 'loser' Ron Paul, he is still in the race and they will have to continue writing about him.

Ron Paul: N.H. no reason to let up

January 8, 2008

CONCORD, N.H.—His didn't upstage the Republican frontrunners in New Hampshire, but Ron Paul said Tuesday he will continue on, raising issues that have riled many other Republicans and raising record amounts of cash on the Internet.

"There's really no reason for us to be letting up. It's really only the beginning," the Texas congressman told a raucous crowd of campaign workers and supports in Concord.

Paul, an outspoken critic of the Iraq war, was on track for fifth place with about 8 percent of the vote. He had hoped to better his 10 percent showing in the Iowa caucuses last week.

The libertarian-leaning doctor who says the Republican Party has lost its way said his campaign will gain strength as more voters hear his message of individual liberty and a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

"There is no doubt in my mind that we're on the right track. We're moving," Paul said.

He credited much of his support to young people, and an intense Internet campaign that saw him raise record amounts on the Web in the last three months.

Just like the right wing bloggers are gleefully cheering his loss in New Hampshire. They too suffer from Paulitis. But he just isn't going away or giving up, and good for him because unlike Kucinich this gadfly is getting press and will get more. He is far from irrelevant. Ron Paul is good for shaking up the conservative and Republican establishment in America and pissing off liberals who can't figure out his popularity.

These same folks also don't get Huckabee and his success either. They dismiss the populist as simply a born again phenomena, missing his appeal to the blue collar Republican base.

Working class America with all its peccadillo's and quirks is voting for change, both in the Republican and Democratic party's. And not just a change of leaders but a sea change in the politics of the two ruling party's of the ruling classes.


New Hampshire Polling Puts Paul Fourth

, , ,, , , , , , ,
, ,


Daisy said...

Excellent comments about Ron Paul, whom I have decided to "strategically vote for" here in the SC primary.

The neo-cons tipped their hands a bit by excluding RP (on some flimsy-ass technicality) from the Fox News debate in NH. There was no reason to exclude him on percentages, as you make clear. They just didn't want him putting the neocons on the spot about the war, as he tirelessly does.

eugene plawiuk said...

Hey daisy I have read some of your posts in researching RP. Thanks for the comment. I have commented earlier on Fox censorship. just click the link in the post for Ron Paul and my articles will come up