Video: Paul’s first New Hampshire TV ad
posted at 7:09 pm on October 27, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
One of five, count ‘em five, new ads in New Hampshire he’s planning on rolling out. A commenter in the Alex Jones thread wondered why I’d waste a post on a kook polling in the single digits. Answer: Because that kook’s flush with cash, thanks to a third quarter that saw him rake in five times what social-con darling and new “first-tier” candidate Mike Huckabee pulled. Paul’s not winning jack but he’s ahead of Huckabee and even Fred in one NH poll; a good showing there in a state famous for its fondness for political eccentrics could push him further towards a third-party run. He’s denied a thousand times that he’ll go independent — but do please note the nuance that’s crept into those denials of late. The guy is fringe because his supporters believe in fringey things, not because he wants for supporters.
Interesting how the very first words offered in support of him here are, “Well, I don’t always agree with Ron Paul.” The man knows a protest vote when he sees it. Exit question: Granted, his budget isn’t as big as Mitt’s, but can’t he get better actors than this?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Where did they get all those freakin’ misfits?
Oh silly me, volunteers of course.
TheSitRep on October 27, 2007 at 7:12 PM
Wonderful. My Paulian neighbor, whose windows are covered in Paulian paraphanlia, will no doubt now be plastering my apartment’s bulletin board with “suggestions” to watch these online. Can’t wait!
Sir Loin on October 27, 2007 at 7:12 PM
Ugh.
But it makes sense, when you think about it. A lunatic-fringe candidate just wouldn’t gain any street cred with the lunatic fringe if his commercials featured normal-looking actors with, y’know, acting ability.
And geez, can’t Ron Paul even smile for his own commercial? Come to think of it, has he ever smiled?
Splashman on October 27, 2007 at 7:27 PM
Out of Iraq “pronto”?
nailinmyeye on October 27, 2007 at 7:35 PM
OK. I’m convinced. Actually, he looks a bit like my doctor. I like my doctor because he has small fingers.
RedWinged Blackbird on October 27, 2007 at 7:40 PM
someone needs to ask Paul in a debate if he beleives in the Bilderbergers and their desire to wipe out most of the human race through the NWO….or whatever the hell “EndGame” was about.
jp on October 27, 2007 at 7:41 PM
AP,
Who do you think is hurt worse by a Paul 3rd party run? The Democrat nominee or the Republican?
bj1126 on October 27, 2007 at 7:43 PM
I’ve seen better acted, written, produced, etc. ads for my local school board election.
lowandslow on October 27, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Pathetic. I blame you for making me feel sorry for the b@sta@rd.
Not really, but I had to say it.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 27, 2007 at 7:49 PM
He seems to have way too much pancake on.
jihadwatcher on October 27, 2007 at 7:53 PM
A candidate is fringe because a few of his supporters are fringe?
So whoever Al Sharpton supports is a racist. Whoever Bush supports is a moron. Whoever Bill Clinton supports is an adulterer. Whoever Corey Rowe (Loose Change a$$hole) supports is a complete retard.
Am I understanding that right?
muyoso on October 27, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Couldn’t they get real ron paul supporters to appear in his ad? The testimonials sounded as convincing as the actors in a low-budget, local hardware store commercial.
jihadwatcher on October 27, 2007 at 7:59 PM
I think it is a very good ad if you are running for congress.
So if he goes 3rd party who does he pull votes from? Or are RP voters so disaffected they will not vote for a D or R candidate?
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 8:00 PM
It wasn’t bad until people started talking.
Harpazo on October 27, 2007 at 8:01 PM
No, most of RP’s supporters are fringy
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 8:01 PM
I like the long-haired fat college kid stating that, even though he’s not a conservative (undeclared), he’s going to vote for a republican this time.
jihadwatcher on October 27, 2007 at 8:05 PM
There.
Jaibones on October 27, 2007 at 8:08 PM
I admit to asking the question “why does anyone care about 3 grand exchanging hands between a conspiracy nut, that I have never heard of, and a Congressman who is polling single digits?” I think this third grade ad is vindication. If R Paul is going for he facially haired Dunkin Donuts vote, he’s got it! But NH has always been repeptive to regional candidates, and Mitt’s a neighbor and apparently Rudy’s a Red Sox Nation Native. There is little room for a Southern Senator/actor to gain traction. Excuse the spelling please. I’ve been in the Scotch.
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 8:08 PM
No joke. This ad (especially Paul in the beginning) is just terrible. Across the board. Nothing quite like an ad that starts with “I don’t agree with (insert candidate here)”
lorien1973 on October 27, 2007 at 8:09 PM
None of my friends, or I are fringy, at least not when compared to the whole of America. Of my closest friends, 2/3rds support Ron Paul. Do we support him because some retarded conspiracy theorists like him? No, we support him because of his ideas and his voting record. I know that is a crazy idea to some. I support him because of his stance on the second amendment, which NO Republican candidate comes close to, which is a travesty. I support him because of his stance on foreign affairs and the Iraq war. I mainly support him because he is CONSISTENT, and refers to the constitution when making a stance on an issue, something that I feel no other candidate does. Other than Paul, I support Thompson the second most, and possibly Romney, but idk that much about him.
muyoso on October 27, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Sound like Moonies without jobs.
Or is this the outakes?
Go Master Ron!
(How soon till they change it to RONNIE PAUL, to subliminally mooch some of the Reagan buzz?)
profitsbeard on October 27, 2007 at 8:18 PM
muyoso,
Are you in college?
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 8:24 PM
Is this letter for real? Anyone know?
http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2007/10/ron-paul-still-.html
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 8:27 PM
BTW Ron Paul said today that if he doesnt get the republican nomination he will not run 3rd party
All I can say is RUN RON RUN ! we want you as a third party candidate !
William Amos on October 27, 2007 at 8:35 PM
Just in time for Halloween! Creepy
abinitioadinfinitum on October 27, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Does it bother you that Ron Paul and Bin Laden have the same foreign policy ideas, if for different reasons? And do you find it curious that Paulbots have a strange obsession with foreign aid to Israel, while ignoring aid to other countries that actively root against us? Why is that?
lorien1973 on October 27, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Dude, is that really fair? Dig deeper, I’m sure you can find a better foreign policy argument against Ron Paul.
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 8:57 PM
@ bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 8:24 PM
No i am not. Graduated a few years ago.
@ lorien1973 on October 27, 2007 at 8:39 PM
No, why would that bother me at all? Bin Laden does not want us in the middle east, so he uses lunatic methods to try and get us to leave. Ron Paul doesnt want us in the middle east because he sees us having a stranglehold over the worlds oil as stifling both innovation and progress here at home (we should have been developing new fuels YEARS ago) and because if you think about it, what right do we have to be over there? How would the US react if China decided one day that it got fed up with the constant recalls of toys and decided to invade New York where the Fisher Price headquarters were?
On to your second point, its probably because its utterly ridiculous that we give so much foreign aid to Israel. Why should we be giving our money to ANY foreign nation, but especially one that is NOT in need of it. We wonder why so many Middle Easterners hate us so much, its fairly simple. Be it right or not, this is the logic. The Middle East HATES Israel, for some reason, why is not what I am trying to answer. We are supplying the country they HATE with not just aid, but almost purely military aid. Then when Israel justifiably retaliates after a suicide bombing, and dozens of Arabs lie dead in the streets, its thrown out to the rest of the Middle East as “American supplied bombs kill dozens of Arabs”.
muyoso on October 27, 2007 at 8:59 PM
Awesome! A real ad, now we don’t have to argue against Paul by arguing against his shady personal associations.
Just for the record, I’m not willing to call Huck 1st Tier.
Spirit of 1776 on October 27, 2007 at 9:14 PM
Do you a source for that?
I ask because the people who I know who support R Paul tend to project their own viewpoints quite liberally. I agreed with you that our foreign policy shouldn’t consult scumbag terrorist but I am not sure that we agree on much more.
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 9:20 PM
That’s “have a source for that?”
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 9:21 PM
No, that’s the candidate. That’s just how he is.
Oh, you mean those others? Yeah, there’s a sort of Stepford Wives quality about the way they speak, isn’t there? Something more than bad acting, I think. I get a whiff of the robotic disconnect from the emotions one gets in Hubbardites.
Splunge on October 27, 2007 at 9:27 PM
Sure i could. but that’s a good stumper, usually. Why try harder? I usually invoke a beaten wife foreign policy which works well. But face it. RP’s foreign policy goals do mirror OBL’s in many ways
lorien1973 on October 27, 2007 at 9:36 PM
Splashman on October 27, 2007 at 7:27 PM
My guess would be Asperger’s or some other form of high functioning autism and he’s just never been diagnosed? *shrugs*
liquidflorian on October 27, 2007 at 9:38 PM
Here, upper right corner
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 9:39 PM
If we had a conservative candidate to choose from this would not be an issue. I’m supporting Thompson at this point just because he’s as close to a conservative that the R party has.
ThackerAgency on October 27, 2007 at 9:47 PM
Anti-Israel sentiment is what unites ALL Ron Paul supporters. Some just want no foreign aid, but especially to Israel, while others believe Israel is the source of all evil including 9/11 and any other nutty conspiracy theory. I have yet to see a single RP supporter who isn’t crazed to some degree about the Jooooos.
It’s no wonder Stormfront, David Duke, Alex Jones, and virtually every other hateful extreme right or anarchist entity (and plenty of left-wingers as well) support Ron Paul.
bamapachyderm on October 27, 2007 at 9:48 PM
Maybe at the link bnelson44 spammed, but it was obviously not a spontaneous smile. At the debates, he is himself: an angry, bile-filled crank.
bamapachyderm on October 27, 2007 at 9:50 PM
Holy crap, that’s about the understatement of the century.
That tends to happen a lot with the mentally unstable, you know, especially among extremists.
bamapachyderm on October 27, 2007 at 9:52 PM
That is a huge understand, I agree. And true of all candidates and their supporters I might add.
Spirit of 1776 on October 27, 2007 at 9:58 PM
Ron Paul at 1% in latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/102507_politics_release_web.pdf
Rudy Giuliani 31% (+2)
Fred Thompson 17% (+1)
John McCain 12% (even)
Mitt Romney 7% (-4)
Mike Huckabee 5% (even)
Duncan Hunter 3% (+2)
Tom Tancredo 2% (even)
Ron Paul 1% (-1)
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 10:00 PM
Now this was an interesting question and answer in the poll I linked to above
If the United States were suddenly in an extremely serious crisis, which presidential candidate would you want to be president at that moment? Among Independents (Only included Republican candidates)
John McCain 17%
Rudy Giuliani 12%
Fred Thompson 3%
Mike Huckabee 2%
Ron Paul 1%
Mitt Romney 0%
Paul doesn’t even score very high amongst independents with this question. With all the hype form Paulites, I would have thought he would have scored higher.
bnelson44 on October 27, 2007 at 10:03 PM
How to say this delicately….
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 10:04 PM
Anti Ron Paul nuts are just as insane as pro Ron Paul nuts! Same coin, different sides….
sweeper on October 27, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Is it just me, or did the Crank’s ad have a disturbingly “infomercial” feel to it?
“He wants to get out of Iraq, pronto!”
“It removes stains, pronto!”
It also has that pale-hued 1980’s after-school special vibe. Especially with the moron college kids and the last line, “He’s catchin’ on, I’m telling ya!”
Is this guy a Presidential candidate or a toothpaste?!
Damian G. on October 27, 2007 at 10:09 PM
I’m curious to know what makes someone an anti Ron Paul nut. A large chunk of the pro Paul pack thinks 9/11 was an inside job, so do anti Paul nuts think it was 19 Muslims? A large chunk of the Paulbots wouldn’t mind it if Israel ceased to exist, so do anti Paul nuts want to keep Israel from being destroyed?
Please expand.
BadgerHawk on October 28, 2007 at 12:40 AM
I have to tell you. My husband and I took a trip a couple of weeks ago to an orchard I’ve gone to since I was a little girl. It’s near the VT border. I was amazed at the Ron Paul signs on the way out. I didn’t see one sign supporting anyone else.
Connie on October 28, 2007 at 1:19 AM
Ron Paul supporters are a reactionary group with no ability to look at the larger picture. They exist within a bubble of impratical idealism not unlike the leftists.
Connie on October 28, 2007 at 1:24 AM
Seems a little odd that this is the one candidate where people are focusing on his supporters rather than the candidate. Some of Hillary’s supporters are socialist nuts, but we’ll have to campaign against her, not her supporters in the general.
dedalus on October 28, 2007 at 1:29 AM
I predict a serious spike in psychiatric visits in the same vein as Kerry’s loss in 2004 when Paul crashes in burns. These supporters on the internet are panting about Paul. This isn’t going to be pretty.
Black Adam on October 28, 2007 at 2:50 AM
That’s a good observation.
Spirit of 1776 on October 28, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Needs more
cow bellhead bobbing.- The Cat
MirCat on October 28, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Well, he has already done a third party run, and without being able to state the precise case, I believe that he has already decided on a third party run. Even now, he’s trying to attract Democrats in addition to Republicans. His front page of his website tells Democrats when they need to register Republican if they want to vote for him in the primary.
I see his third party run as all to the good. People who would vote for Ron Paul, probably should be disenfranchised for their lack of mental competence or stability. A Ron Paul candidacy achieves virtual disenfranchisement without government action. It’s truly the libertarian solution to fringy voters.
Even better, a Ron Paul candidate will suck up the attention that would go to a Christian theocrat candidate if they decide to run one against Giuliani (if he wins the Republican nomination).
thuja on October 28, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Now that’s disturbingly funny.
taterblade on October 28, 2007 at 12:22 PM
I can explain this.
Unfortunately, Hillary has a realistic shot at being POTUS; fortunately, Ron Paul does not.
Similarly, once his campaign crashes and burns, Ron Paul will fade back into obscurity. On the other hand, normal people will still have to deal with his supporters on a regular basis, mainly by denying them spare change on the street.
Kensington on October 28, 2007 at 2:07 PM
As to a Ron Paul independent run, I say BRING. IT. ON. I’m convinced that the vast majority of his supporters are Moonbats or people who wouldn’t normally vote GOP if their life depended on it. Let them occupy themselves with foolishness and frivolity; we grown-ups will select the next President.
Kensington on October 28, 2007 at 2:09 PM
haha. I think a Ron Paul 3rd party run would take more people away from the Democrats than the Republicans. Most truthers are Democrats, and for some reason I can’t see Skinheads going out to the polls on a regular basis for D or R.
BadgerHawk on October 28, 2007 at 7:36 PM
The 400 lb. gorilla in the room for all candidates is, would you stand with Israel or the Arabs? The answer would be chilling. It will come to that and I’m very concerned where our government’s loyalties lies.
24K lady on October 28, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Here’s one.
First: Israel does not equal Jews. Jews do not equal Israel. Israel is a country — a sovereign nation. Trying to equate opposition to our funding of the Israelis with anti-semitism is dishonest. So stop.
Ron Paul’s position on Israel (and mine) is that we should be neutral. Not neutral by arming the Israelis and arming their enemies, but neutral by minding our own business and washing our hands of that everlasting bloodbath. Israel can defend themselves. Even if they couldn’t, it’s not our job to defend them, especially since we’re the ones who are constantly funding and arming their enemies (Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Ladin, the Palestinians). Our current idea of “neutrality” is to fund and arm both sides. That’s insanity. How many wars do we have to fight where the enemy is using our money and our weapons to attack us (al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein and Iraqi insurgents) before we realize that our foreign policy is our own worst enemy?
Depends on how many lefties are willing so sacrifice all of their domestic agenda (health care, social programs, etc) to get out of Iraq. Probably not a lot. I don’t know a single Democrat/leftist who is supporting Ron Paul. Everyone I know who supports him is a Conservative Christian (and a handful of libertarians).
C. None of the above.
Here’s an idea: our government’s loyalties should lie with America, not a foreign nation or group.
Mark Jaquith on October 29, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Comment pages: