Ron Paul: No, I won’t be endorsing Romney any time soon; Update: Convention disruption “against my plan”

posted at 1:36 pm on May 9, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Larry Kudlow asks the most pertinent question about Ron Paul’s continuing efforts on the campaign trail after Mitt Romney has all but wrapped up the GOP nomination, which is what Paul hopes to accomplish by continuing to contest it.  Paul says he’s not ready to follow Rick Santorum’s lead by endorsing Romney in the near future … and why should he?  He’s raising money with a low burn rate, grabbing enough delegates to have the party establishment worried, and putting himself in position to force some policy changes in the party platform.  Ron Paul is having the time of his life:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq6fqEzQLJI

With virtually zero chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination, Rep. Ron Paul said Tuesday that he has no immediate plans to endorse Mitt Romney.

“Not soon,” he said on CNBC’s “The Kudlow Report.”

“I’m not thinking about that as much as what kind of presence we’ll have, how many people we’re going to have there, and what kind of an influence we can have on the platform in Tampa,” he added, noting that there were still plenty of delegates still up for grabs. “It may turn out that we may end up winning Iowa, and we’ve won a couple of these other states.”

Just how close to zero chance is it for Paul, anyway?  Let’s assume that Paul can capture all of the delegates in caucus states, thanks to his organizational strength and ability to play the long game.  Right now, Romney has 722 untouchable bound delegates from primary states, up through last night’s elections.  He’ll get at least half of Indiana’s 46 delegates even if Paul can claw some from the caucus portion of the allocation, so bring that to 745 delegates.  Romney should win all of the rest of the primaries by majorities, so California puts Romney over the top by June 5th no matter what happens.  It’s over, and it’s been over since at least Santorum’s withdrawal.

But the endgame, as Kudlow puts it, hasn’t been the nomination anyway, at least not for Paul. He wants to influence policy in exactly the way he states in the interview, but more importantly, he wants his supporters holding the levers of power in local and state party organizations.  That will make it much easier to move the GOP in his direction — and eventually give his son Rand a clear path to a presidential nomination.  When he’s finished setting up his organization and generating as much in contributions as he can, he’ll give Romney his blessing in this election, because by then Romney’s win this year won’t matter to Paul.

Update: CNN asked Paul about rumors that his campaign planned to use its muscle on the delegate floor in Tampa to stage demonstrations against the Republican nominee, or at least the party establishment.  Paul disavowed that intent:

COSTELLO: Santorum, Gingrich, Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, Cain, they’ve all dropped out. Why haven’t you?

PAUL: Well, it certainly isn’t for the reason of disrupting a convention as you were alluding to. That is not in my plan. That is against my plan. I don’t like that being a suggestion.

I’m in it for very precise reasons to maximize our efforts to get as many delegates as we can. I’m still a candidate and to promote something that is very, very important. That is a change in the direction for the Republican Party to be a fiscal conservative Republican Party.

To not be a party that supports endless wars and a party that would look into the monetary system so that we can understand the business cycle.

So we have very precise goals and we are being quite successful in accumulating more and more votes and delegates. Quite frankly, I think the reports early on that we weren’t winning anything, it turns out we did win some of these states like in Maine and Minnesota and these other places. We’re doing quite well.

COSTELLO: I want to ask you about that, Congressman. Your supporters do seem to be taking a page from Evangelical Christian activists in the ’90s.

They’re taking control of state conventions to win you enough delegates to get your name placed formally in nomination. I mean, is the goal to get you a prime time speaking role at the Republican convention, is that why they’re working so hard?

PAUL: Well, being nominated is one thing and you get to give a speech, but that is different than just the leadership conceding sometime and giving you a speech. One is monitored and one is not.

So just to give a speech for the sake of giving a speech and have it edited doesn’t have much awe peel to me, but I think moving in an agenda is very important. The best way I can do that is to maximize is number of delegates that we have.

Say what you will, but my experience in Minnesota has been that Paul supporters have organized well enough that they don’t need to disrupt the proceedings.  They’re making themselves the new establishment.  They look disciplined and focused, so a pointless disruption on the floor of the convention in Tampa would be not just be out of character, it would mainly be self-defeating.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

Good for Ron Paul! Go third party just so the Mittwits can cry me a rive!

jdun on May 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM

I’d say more money bombs for Ron Paul, as the “end game.”

Oh my bad only “True Conservative!”

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Hang in there, Ron! :)

Decoski on May 9, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Nutter.

Please Retire.

FlaMurph on May 9, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Good for Ron Paul! Go third party just so the Mittwits can cry me a rive!

Because it’s vitally important that Obama get four more years, and that we get to hear about the glories of the Gold Standard….of course. And then Ronulans wonder why they and their guy aren’t more popular?

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Go Ron!! Let’s see if we can’t get Barack Obama re-elected with under 45% of the vote!!!

Swerve22 on May 9, 2012 at 1:41 PM

So much for the Romney / Paul nexus we heard so much about from Rev. Rick.

gaius on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Ron Paul? Does his wife make those fish sticks?

Bitter Clinger on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Crazy Uncle Ron looks older than ever.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Maybe he wanted to endorse Romney but Ron’s sentient eyebrow warned him not to.

Bishop on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Oh please. The longer this goes on Mr. Paul makes himself even less relevant to the public. He loses the influence and goodwill built during the primary campaign.

People don’t want a gadfly. They want a President. This just make Ron Paul look small and more insignificant.

Marcus Traianus on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

free bananas

ant on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Besides, Ron is too busy to make endorsements, the man is working his butt off trying to keep the federal government from fencing us all in.

Bishop on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Well he’s not going to win the nomination, but at least he has those really cool glue-on eyebrows.

GOPRanknFile on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

pretty sure any Republican with an ounce of common sense would consider Ron Paul’s lack of an endorsement a badge of honor.

The dude is a straight up nuttier than a can of Planter’s and the American body politic would benefit greatly if he simply went away.

Sacramento on May 9, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Majority vote to unbind at the convention. Majority rules.

LevStrauss on May 9, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Oh please. The longer this goes on Mr. Paul makes himself even less relevant to the public. He loses the influence and goodwill built during the primary campaign.

People don’t want a gadfly. They want a President. This just make Ron Paul look small and more insignificant.

Marcus Traianus on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

And he sure isn’t helping his son either.

JPeterman on May 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Nope. He’ll just endorse every other candidate under the sun, even Barack Obama.

Logus on May 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Crazy Uncle Ron looks older than ever.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Well… he is older than ever.

Of course, that pretty much applies to all of us who aren’t Ponce de Leon.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I have to question the political astuteness of anyone that thought he wasn’t going all the way to the convention.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM

and eventually give his son Rand a clear path to a presidential nomination.

Rand can do it without with his pop…don’t think this will help him one bit imho

cmsinaz on May 9, 2012 at 1:48 PM

People don’t want a gadfly. They want a President. This just make Ron Paul look small and more insignificant.

Marcus Traianus on May 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Then explain why Mitt Romney didn’t get 100% of the IN vote yesterday. There are plenty of Republicans that want to send a message – even if they know it’s a futile one.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 1:49 PM

And he sure isn’t helping his son either.

JPeterman on May 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Agree

cmsinaz on May 9, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Majority vote to unbind at the convention. Majority rules

Sure and all the Ronulans have to do is get at least 1,152 delegates, secretly, in their camp…sure the campaign that couldn’t get a majority of the VOTES, will be able to game the system and secure a majority of the delegates. You’re delusional, put down the bong and get a real job

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 1:50 PM

…Ron Paul 2016/2020…//

KOOLAID2 on May 9, 2012 at 1:51 PM

The endgame is defeating Barack Obama.

dczombie on May 9, 2012 at 1:53 PM

He is just raising money at this point.

nitzsche on May 9, 2012 at 1:53 PM

He wants to influence policy in exactly the way he states in the interview, but more importantly, he wants his supporters holding the levers of power in local and state party organizations.

Libertarians play the longer game….

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:54 PM

The nutbags supporting RonPaul swarmed the Maine GOP convention this past weekend, and got a whole slew of delegates elected to go to the National convention. It was a disgrace, and simply underscores the need for a primary to replace the old caucus system here in Maine.

The National GOP has already said that the RonPaul delegates won’t be seated, so now Maine will likely NOT be represented, or grossly under-represented thanks to these morons and their lunatic cult leader.

TKindred on May 9, 2012 at 1:54 PM

This guy is just a putz. He is repeatedly give every opportunity to make his case to the Republican party and every time he can’t pursuade anywhere near enough to nominate him. Instead of losing with grace he act like a petulant child. I think it’s time to stop letting this turd participate in the GOP primary process. He obviously has little loyalty to the party.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

and eventually give his son Rand a clear path to a presidential nomination.

Rand can do it without with his pop…don’t think this will help him one bit imho

cmsinaz on May 9, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Rand will be fine. People understand everyone has a “loony uncle” in the family. His is just more public and really what can he do?

RP has the perfect right to continue on and in some ways I hope he does. It doesn’t hurt Romney to continue to work for it and he doesn’t have to spend a lot of money doing it.

If RP can get Romney leaning more right economically is that really a bad thing?

kim roy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

The endgame is defeating Barack Obama.

dczombie on May 9, 2012 at 1:53 PM

I thought the endgame was shrinking the federal government and restoring our constitutional principles.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Because it’s vitally important that Obama get four more years, and that we get to hear about the glories of the Gold Standard….of course. And then Ronulans wonder why they and their guy aren’t more popular?

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 1:41 PM

I rather have Obama for four more years than a Obama Lite with a full gas tank. Obama can’t do much if anything in the next four years with Republican controlling the House and Senate.

However with Obama Lite he can bend Congress to his will. You Mittwits will own Romney socialist, gun grabbing, and baby killing agendas. You Mittwits committed ideological Seppuku. Pathetic.

Go third party Ron so I can row my boat on the tears of the Mittwits.

jdun on May 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM

I thought the endgame was shrinking the federal government and restoring our constitutional principles.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:57 PM

We can’t do that until we remove the Communist from the White House.

JPeterman on May 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM

This guy is just a putz. He is repeatedly give every opportunity to make his case to the Republican party and every time he can’t pursuade anywhere near enough to nominate him. Instead of losing with grace he act like a petulant child. I think it’s time to stop letting this turd participate in the GOP primary process. He obviously has little loyalty to the party.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

He isn’t a Republican. He’s a Libertarian playing a Republican on TV.

Bitter Clinger on May 9, 2012 at 1:59 PM

The nutbags supporting RonPaul swarmed the Maine GOP convention this past weekend, and got a whole slew of delegates elected to go to the National convention. It was a disgrace, and simply underscores the need for a primary to replace the old caucus system here in Maine.

The National GOP has already said that the RonPaul delegates won’t be seated, so now Maine will likely NOT be represented, or grossly under-represented thanks to these morons and their lunatic cult leader.

TKindred on May 9, 2012 at 1:54 PM

As we’ve seen here, RP advocates are petulant children who can’t handle disagreement well. His advocates only make RP look worse.

There’s no way that RP is going to win the primary. He’s also not going to run third party because he know *that* will hurt his son’s chances in the future because the name will be associated with it. He’ll eventually walk away. So why not just not worry about it and wait him out?

It really is all it says here – he just wants to influence a bit of policy and considering his economic stances is that really a bad thing in a year that it looks like Romney is the candidate?

kim roy on May 9, 2012 at 2:00 PM

You dolts should just vote for Obooba and drop the pretense.

Fake eyebrows?!?!!

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:00 PM

He obviously has little loyalty to the party.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

He isn’t a Republican. He’s a Libertarian playing a Republican on TV.

Bitter Clinger on May 9, 2012 at 1:59 PM

You want to know how much loyalty I have to the party? >< this much.

*facedesk

I mean, are we in the People's Republic of China or something? What is this party loyalty you speak of?

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I thought the endgame was shrinking the federal government and restoring our constitutional principles.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Unfortunately the Mittwits are mentally traumatized by Obama that they are willing to betrayed their own ideology in order to defeat him. They willing to take a Obama Lite instead of a true conservative. Pathetic

jdun on May 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

JPeterman on May 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Just trying to keep everybody’s eye on the ball. Patriots’ work doesn’t stop on November 6th.

It begins.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM

I rather have Obama for four more years than a Obama Lite with a full gas tank. Obama can’t do much if anything in the next four years with Republican controlling the House and Senate.

jdun on May 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Have you been paying attention? Champ’s been up to quite a bit without dealing with the pesky senate and congress.

Plus, there’s the extra added bonus that he still gets to travel the world spreading cheer and goodwill and transmitting stuff to Vlad.

It’s not like you can lock him up in a closet (hi Joe!) and let him out for photo ops only.

kim roy on May 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Just trying to keep everybody’s eye on the ball. Patriots’ work doesn’t stop on November 6th.

It begins.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Exactly. People are thinking that’s when it stops.

kim roy on May 9, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I thought the endgame was shrinking the federal government and restoring our constitutional principles.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Yes, well, we won’t get there if we don’t first get Barack Obama into early retirement.

dczombie on May 9, 2012 at 2:03 PM

jdun on May 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

You’re willing to take for more years of Obooba over a moderate conservative. For shame.

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:04 PM

It’s way past time to Lugar Ron Paul’s seat.

meci on May 9, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Maybe he wanted to endorse Romney but Ron’s sentient eyebrow warned him not to.

Bishop on May 9, 2012 at 1:42 PM

If Ron Paul’s eyebrows are sentient, then they are the only part of him that is…

SWalker on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Fake eyebrows?!?!!

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Ron Paul is the best candidate in the race and has proven the most wisdom over time, Ron Paul should be President. The travesty is that the corrupt political establishment in league with their corporate cronies, which own and operate the corporate media that are little more than propaganda outlets for the establishment, have manipulated public opinion against Ron Paul.

I’m not saying that if not for that, that Ron Paul would be the certain winner, he might still have lost fair and square, but the so-called “press” or media in general, especially Fox News, has had a very obvious and clear bias against Ron Paul from the very beginning, ranging from malicious to dismissive.

The professional media isn’t supposed to make themselves part of the news, or make up the news, they’re simply supposed to report it. Not anymore, (if ever), that is a myth that journalism is impartial, as most everybody here should already know. They are collectivist propaganda outlets of one flavor or another, including Fox News. All of them represent the status quo and have ensured that there is no challenge to it.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

It’s way past time to Lugar Ron Paul’s seat.

meci on May 9, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Ahem. Keep your focus on Hatch. Ron Paul is said to be retiring.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:07 PM

That will make it much easier to move the GOP in his direction — and eventually give his son Rand a clear path to a presidential nomination.

The trouble with that, Ed, is the longer Paul acts like a nut the more skeptical I am of his son. That is to say, the influence works both ways. Good and Bad.

I’m receptive to Rand Paul’s message, but the closer it’s linked to Ron Paul, the less receptive I become.

I very much like moderated libertarianism. I very much dislike craziness.

jaime on May 9, 2012 at 2:08 PM

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

You got it all figured out there, don’t ya sport?

So where were these meetings, who was at them, and what was said, when “The Conspiracy” arranged to sabotage RP’s campaign?

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Herr Doktor Paul’s plan is to get Rand elected President one day?

Oy vey – Manchurian Candidate comes to mind.

If Bark installed a basketball court a puppy mill (OED) in the White House, what would Rand install? An Illuminati pyramid?

CorporatePiggy on May 9, 2012 at 2:10 PM

If RP can get Romney leaning more right economically is that really a bad thing?

kim roy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Nope, and while I despise Ron Paul on general principal (the man is batshit crazy) that might actually be his single and solitary genuine contribution to the struggle to revoke this velvet Marxist Coup we are fighting against.

For that reason and that reason alone I hope Ron Paul keeps fighting.

SWalker on May 9, 2012 at 2:11 PM

You want to know how much loyalty I have to the party? >< this much.

*facedesk

I mean, are we in the People's Republic of China or something? What is this party loyalty you speak of?

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

You’re right. Let’s not stick together so we can get steamrolled by the democrats on everything.

Maybe the concept of loyalty to your allies is a foreign concept to you, but I have a feeling that most republicans do understand it.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I would love Ron Paul to go third party. He would peel away a lot of liberal votes from Obama.

The Notorious G.O.P on May 9, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Larry Kudlow asks the most pertinent question about Ron Paul’s continuing efforts on the campaign trail after Mitt Romney has all but wrapped up the GOP nomination, which is what Paul hopes to accomplish by continuing to contest it.

The HotAir establishment spin continues. Paul is running for the nomination; he isn’t contesting anything because Romney hasn’t won anything.

What is so hard about dropping the spin and being honest?

And where are the HA stories of Paul picking up a couple of states and in line to pick up Iowa?

Dante on May 9, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Who is Ron Paul, and what is he trying to accomplish?

Recent Rasmussen polls tell the story. Their current General Election tracking poll of Romney vs. Obama head-to-head has Romney leading 49-44. Rasmussen also polled a 3-way race with Ron Paul as a third-party candidate, and got Romney 44, Obama 39, and Paul 13.

Comparing the two polls, if Ron Paul runs as a third-party candidate, he pulls 5% away from Romney, 5% away from Obama, and 3% from voters undecided between Romney and Obama. Ron Paul gets some support from Republicans with his extremely libertarian fiscal policy, but also from Democrats with his dovish foreign policy and desire to legalize pot, which none of the other Republican candidates supported.

Ron Paul can be a Republican in the House, which doesn’t get involved much in foreign policy, but as a Presidential candidate, he doesn’t fit in with either the “establishment” or “Tea Party” Republicans, both of whom are hawkish on foreign policy. He also is the “one” on lots of 400-something-to-1 votes in the House, so can he really unite the country if the entire Congress is against him?

If Ron Paul won’t endorse Romney, I’ve got a job for him: Run for re-election as Congressman from Sugar Land. And stay out of Kentucky, if he wants his son to have more than one term in the Senate.

Steve Z on May 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM

The thought of having hundreds of delegates booing the nominee at the convention is not what Mitt’s campaign wants. Romney might be forced to put Rand at VP just to avoid this very issue. It would be the only way to avoid the Tampa convention from turning into a complete disaster and would infact turn it into a huge party. The more I think about it…. the enegergy of a Romeny/Paul ticket would surpass any that Obama could muster this time around.

ModerateMan on May 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM

So where were these meetings, who was at them, and what was said, when “The Conspiracy” arranged to sabotage RP’s campaign?

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I didn’t mention a conspiracy, you did. You just made that up. You can build your straw-men all you want and knock them down but don’t pretend like your scoring points against me by defeating your own made-up biased mis-portrayal of me.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Ron Paul is the best candidate in the race and has proven the most wisdom over time, Ron Paul should be President. The travesty is that the corrupt political establishment in league with their corporate cronies, which own and operate the corporate media that are little more than propaganda outlets for the establishment, have manipulated public opinion against Ron Paul.

I’m not saying that if not for that, that Ron Paul would be the certain winner, he might still have lost fair and square, but the so-called “press” or media in general, especially Fox News, has had a very obvious and clear bias against Ron Paul from the very beginning, ranging from malicious to dismissive.

The professional media isn’t supposed to make themselves part of the news, or make up the news, they’re simply supposed to report it. Not anymore, (if ever), that is a myth that journalism is impartial, as most everybody here should already know. They are collectivist propaganda outlets of one flavor or another, including Fox News. All of them represent the status quo and have ensured that there is no challenge to it.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

1 – The establishment complain is hollow: Paulites now dominate the establishment, as one can see by the fact that a candidate who can’t get over 10% when the average Joe votes, wins the vote in reunions of party insiders with little to no public scrutiny as the caucus.

2 – The press complain is flat out bizarre. Are you sure you are a libertarian? You sound more like the polar opposite. Fox is a private company; if you’re unhappy with their service, don’t watch it. If you believe the offer in the market is so bad, then stop complaining and take advantage of the opportunity. That’s the libertarian attitude. Are you suggesting the government should intervene to make sure the press behaves in a way that you deem as “fair?

joana on May 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM

i don’t like paul but he can endorse or not endorse, i don’t care either way.

Sachiko on May 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I very much like moderated libertarianism. I very much dislike craziness.

I as well, but apparently whenever there are two or more libertarians in the presence of one another a strange and frightening craziness strikes them…..

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Well, Kudlow’s question was one of those check-in-the-box nonsense questions anyway. It’s not like Paul’s endorsement would be meaningful for Romney. Paul supporters aren’t the kind who would suddenly be prepared to vote for Romney because Ron Paul endorsed him. They’d be more likely to vote Paul off the island and shout “Good riddance!”

It mattered more — if not a great deal, in this particular political year — whether Santorum and Gingrich endorsed Romney. Paul and his supporters are an outlier set.

J.E. Dyer on May 9, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Spiteful kooky old bigot.

FlatFoot on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Instead of losing with grace he act like a petulant child. I think it’s time to stop letting this turd participate in the GOP primary process. He obviously has little loyalty to the party.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Acts like a child …how? By participating in a process that is still ongoing? I, as a longtime member of the GOP, have yet to have my voice heard on the matter of our candidate’s nomination. On June 5, I will cast my ballot for Ronald Ernest Paul, and feel like a Champion of Liberty, not to mention a Republican my Republican forefathers could feel proud of, for having done so. I have to assume the same goes for those in places like MN, IA, NV, ME, LA and a few other places where the state GOP, in their infinite wisdom, decided to choose delegates to our national convention at their state convention.

Well, guess what. We show up to party’s conventions. We know the rules under which the conventions are organized. We follow those rules, and make sure others follow those rules. We stay until business is concluded. And all the way, we make sure we know who our friends are in the room.

If that makes you unhappy, then I’m sure there is a more totalitarian, top-down governing system you could find which would make you more comfortable.

May I suggest the Democratic Party?

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Neocons blah blah only true conservative blah blah liberty blah blah constitution blah blah revolution blah blah delegates blah blah voter fraud blah blah.

That basically sums up every post you will ever see from a Paulnut. They only know a handful of key words and use them ad nauseum.

The Notorious G.O.P on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Recent Rasmussen polls tell the story. Their current General Election tracking poll of Romney vs. Obama head-to-head has Romney leading 49-44.

Steve Z on May 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Also according to Rasmussen, Ron Paul is tied with Obama in a head to head race, even without a bunch of corrupt crony-capitalists bankrolling his campaign, even without all of the ad’s and propaganda.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Old Coot isn’t a Republican anyway. Too much racism, too much isolationism.

I could care less about what he does, as he (obviously) will not be getting my vote.

unclesmrgol on May 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM

It’s always interesting to see so-called conservatives attack a Constitutionalist. Even more interesting is that they never argue against his policy. It’s just the typical left-wing style personal attacks. Hey, if you can’t debate the guy’s policies, then make fun of his eyebrows, I guess.

Dante on May 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Acts like a child …how? By participating in a process that is still ongoing? I, as a longtime member of the GOP, have yet to have my voice heard on the matter of our candidate’s nomination. On June 5, I will cast my ballot for Ronald Ernest Paul, and feel like a Champion of Liberty, not to mention a Republican my Republican forefathers could feel proud of, for having done so. I have to assume the same goes for those in places like MN, IA, NV, ME, LA and a few other places where the state GOP, in their infinite wisdom, decided to choose delegates to our national convention at their state convention.

Well, guess what. We show up to party’s conventions. We know the rules under which the conventions are organized. We follow those rules, and make sure others follow those rules. We stay until business is concluded. And all the way, we make sure we know who our friends are in the room.

If that makes you unhappy, then I’m sure there is a more totalitarian, top-down governing system you could find which would make you more comfortable.

May I suggest the Democratic Party?

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Yep. He’s still got a shot. Keep f’ing that chicken.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I was not a Romney supporter, my first chice withdrew, however I will do all I can to help Romney win the election.

I look at the republican bench and see many strong leaders coming up the through the ranks. Rand Paul is one of those people with great potential.

Right now Ron Paul and his supporter (Many of whom are Obama supporting democrats)seem to be willing to make Rand Paul toxic in the future.

When Ron Paul starts winning primaries, get back to me.

DVPTexFla on May 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Dante,

There’s no danger of me being forced to eat my underwear for betting on whether Old Coot is a Constitutionalist or not.

I don’t think he understands much about the Constitution. In fact, I’m certain of it after reading a few of his newsletters.

unclesmrgol on May 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM

It’s not like Paul’s endorsement would be meaningful for Romney. Paul supporters aren’t the kind who would suddenly be prepared to vote for Romney because Ron Paul endorsed him.

J.E. Dyer on May 9, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Do you really think we aren’t political animals? The conventions this weekend in ME and NV really should dissuade you of any such misconception.

Mitt Romney makes the deal sweet enough, and Ron Paul signs off on it, the rEVOLut10n will come around.

And in places like NH, IA, NV and ME, that can make a difference.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Old Coot isn’t a Republican anyway. Too much racism, too much isolationism.

I could care less about what he does, as he (obviously) will not be getting my vote.

unclesmrgol on May 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Not to mention a few third party runs. RINO.

unclesmrgol on May 9, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Liberals can’t really accuse GOP voters of being racist anymore because if they were they would be overwhelmingly voting for anti-Semite/racist-extraordinaire Ron Paul.

The Notorious G.O.P on May 9, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Ron’s starting to remind me a little too much of Lyndon LaRouche.

Yiwen on May 9, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Spiteful kooky old bigot.

FlatFoot on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

You are so full of it! Ron Paul has by far the most ethnically and racially diverse grass-roots of any Republican in the country, I’d bet.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Ron Paul is the best candidate in the race and has proven the most wisdom over time, Ron Paul should be President.

The most wisdom, or the most fakest eyebrows?

The travesty is that the corrupt political establishment in league with their corporate cronies, which own and operate the corporate media that are little more than propaganda outlets for the establishment, have manipulated public opinion against Ron Paul.

Please, when and where did they conspire to do this?

I’m not saying that if not for that, that Ron Paul would be the certain winner, he might still have lost fair and square, but the so-called “press” or media in general, especially Fox News, has had a very obvious and clear bias against Ron Paul from the very beginning, ranging from malicious to dismissive.

Dismissive is a pretty good stance to take vis a vis Mr. Paul.

The professional media isn’t supposed to make themselves part of the news, or make up the news, they’re simply supposed to report it. Not anymore, (if ever), that is a myth that journalism is impartial, as most everybody here should already know.

You may have noticed, champ, that there have actually been newspapers called The Democratic Statesman in Austin, and the Democrat Gazette in Arkansas. Where does the First Amendment mandate objectivity, hmmmm?

They are collectivist propaganda outlets of one flavor or another, including Fox News. All of them represent the status quo and have ensured that there is no challenge to it. FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM

I hate it when the media and GOP elites conspire to make everybody like their guy, then after their meeting where they decided this they drag us to a voting booth and make us vote for him.

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

It’s always interesting to see so-called conservatives attack a Constitutionalist. Even more interesting is that they never argue against his policy. It’s just the typical left-wing style personal attacks. Hey, if you can’t debate the guy’s policies, then make fun of his eyebrows, I guess.

Dante on May 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM

“Paul has called Manning, a crossdresser with acknowledged mental problems, a “hero” and “patriot” for stealing government secrets and providing them to WikiLeaks.”

jaime on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

OK Dante, the Gold Standard…it focuses on the ephemera of the era 1714-1914 and misses the real reasons for the hi growth and low inflation…Foreign Policy: No, the US is NOT the major cause of the world’s problems, and if we ‘came home” the world would not be a better –place, nor would it leave us alone. Beyond that Ron Paul has appointed no one to anything…he has NO managerial experience. He hangs out with Troofers and racists and has benefited from their racism via his new letters). That ain’t ad hominem, them’s facts….

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Gentleman, Ladies,

Please do not confuse Ron Paul with the “libertarian” label, or with our libertarian movement.

He is more accurately described as a leftist Republican. His views on foreign policy are no different from those of Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink, et.al.

Civil liberties? Paul would sell this country out to the Islamists who would institute Sharia Law quicker than you could say “Allahu-Ahkbar.”

Yes, he’s good on economics. But his pro-Islamist stances on the other two legs of the stool, cancel out any good positions he has. You can’t be against totalitarianism only 1/3rd of the time.

Eric @ LibertarianRepublican

ericdondero on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Yep. He’s still got a shot. Keep f’ing that chicken.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Perhaps you can point out where I said anyone but Mitt Romney would be the nominee?

Or is that lack of reading comprehension simply the product of our public education system? I’m inclined to believe the latter…

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

What a bunch of republitards. Unless you are on Mitt’s payroll or a part of his extended family, how is it bad that Ron Paul will keep attacking him from the fiscal right for another month, without ad hominem slaps that Santorum and Newt were doing? I don’t care for the insanity Ron Paul calls “foreign policy”, or his open-borders immigration approach, or his alleged anti-Semitism, but if Romney could, or was forced to, incorporate some of his small-government and fiscal ideas I would be so much happier. Won’t you?

Archivarix on May 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM

You want to know how much loyalty I have to the party? >< this much.

*facedesk

I mean, are we in the People's Republic of China or something? What is this party loyalty you speak of?

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Amen! Loyalty to the party that keeps serving me crap sandwiches and then tells me to like it? Not this lifetime. We the GOP stops acting like democrats, I’ll consider supporting them again. My loyalty is to my country and my kids, and I’ll vote for the candidates who represent me, regardless of party affiliation. This whole Red/Blue turf war is the biggest con since social security. Just ask Sen. Lugar.

gaius on May 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Mitt Romney makes the deal sweet enough, and Ron Paul signs off on it, the rEVOLut10n will come around.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:21 PM

One thing we know for certain, as it’s been proven time and time again, is that everything Romney says is temporary.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM

And all the way, we make sure we know who our friends are in the room.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM

And you and Ron Paul seem determined to make that list shorter and shorter at every turn. And this is precisely why he’ll never be president, or even nominated to a major party. He cannot build a coalition anywehere near large enough to do that. He’s been given his platform to speak and has failed to persuade enough to support him. Now he’s just throwing a tantrum.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Question: If Ron Paul is the only true conservative then why does he get so much support from liberals? Liberals aren’t suddenly becoming conservative. So that pretty much destroys the paulnut myth.

The Notorious G.O.P on May 9, 2012 at 2:25 PM

You’re right. Let’s not stick together so we can get steamrolled by the democrats on everything.

Maybe the concept of loyalty to your allies is a foreign concept to you, but I have a feeling that most republicans do understand it.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Let’s stick together with principles. That’s about as far as we can unite under a healthy collectivism.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Perhaps you can point out where I said anyone but Mitt Romney would be the nominee?

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Thank you for conceeding the point. And proving what I’ve been saying all along.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Seriously? Eye brows? When did HA get redirected to Daily Kos?

gaius on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Paulites now dominate the establishment

joana on May 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You say the most rediculous things, there’s little point in trying to refute them. Ron Paul dominates the establishment? Do you think that people who read blogs like this are a bunch of idiots?

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Dante,

There’s no danger of me being forced to eat my underwear for betting on whether Old Coot is a Constitutionalist or not.

I don’t think he understands much about the Constitution. In fact, I’m certain of it after reading a few of his newsletters.

unclesmrgol on May 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM

This coming from someone who doesn’t even understand the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism.

But thanks for making my point.

Dante on May 9, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Seriously? Eye brows? When did HA get redirected to Daily Kos?

gaius on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

During the last open-enrollment here when a hand full of Romney supporters signed up, some of which I suspect are CSDeven sockpuppets.

FloatingRock on May 9, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Here’s what the Paulnuts…very young republicans looking for a Personality Cult Goo-Roo to follow…love about Paul:

1. He’s got a good line on old fashioned conservative economics, and
2. His foreign policy’s about as anti-war and isolationist as it gets.

My explanation: Our young’uns are afraid of having to fight and die in Eye-Ran and really want a Prez who’ll play foreign policy ostrich for them.

How soon our progeny forgets our parents’ lessons from WWII.
Freedom is NOT free. Isolationism no longer protects us, nor do the two oceans on either side of us.

Yiwen on May 9, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Let’s stick together with principles. That’s about as far as we can unite under a healthy collectivism.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I agree. It’s just that for a group that’s going to come closest to our principles (I’m assuming ours are pretty close) who else do you have?

I just don’t agree with the idea that loyalty requires 100% agreement on everything.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM

The thought of having hundreds of delegates booing the nominee at the convention is not what Mitt’s campaign wants. Romney might be forced to put Rand at VP just to avoid this very issue. It would be the only way to avoid the Tampa convention from turning into a complete disaster and would infact turn it into a huge party. The more I think about it…. the enegergy of a Romeny/Paul ticket would surpass any that Obama could muster this time around.

ModerateMan on May 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM

The wisdom of putting a Paul a heartbeat away from the top position of power in this government…

The night that Mitt Romney puts Rand Paul on the ticket, I’m willing to bet a million phone calls go out from volunteers, without even having to be asked. They’d just think it up and do it.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM

What a bunch of republitards… I don’t care for the insanity Ron Paul calls “foreign policy”, or his open-borders immigration approach, or his alleged anti-Semitism, but if Romney could, or was forced to, incorporate some of his small-government and fiscal ideas I would be so much happier. Won’t you? Archivarixtard on May 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I dunno, maybe the crazy parts will rub off on Mitt.

Akzed on May 9, 2012 at 2:32 PM

This coming from someone who doesn’t even understand the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism

Ok what’s the difference it’s 1931 and Japan has attacked China, what does Ron Paul do/ It’s 1937 and Japan continues the war in China, what does Ron Paul do? It’s 1938 what does Ron Paul do about German revanchism in Europe? What’s his stance from 1939 on? What’s the difference between ISOLATIONISM and Non-Intervention? Does the US liberate Kuwayt?

JFKY on May 9, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Thank you for conceeding the point. And proving what I’ve been saying all along.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM

No. What you said was that Ron Paul should drop out, before delegates are decided in many states, and before voting in places like CA and TX have even occurred.

Which pretty much makes you either a shill or a jackass. Although I’m willing to believe in your case that it is not mutually exclusive.

As I say, you are clearly looking for a more totalitarian governing system. Take a left, and keep going until you hit the Democratic Party.

Don’t worry… it’s not far from where you are.

JohnGalt23 on May 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM

I agree. It’s just that for a group that’s going to come closest to our principles (I’m assuming ours are pretty close) who else do you have?

I just don’t agree with the idea that loyalty requires 100% agreement on everything.

Scrappy on May 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Obviously not. Republicans have tolerated the likes of Dick Lugar for decades, right?

To me, loyalty to the GOP suggests voting for their candidates (and incumbent candidates) 100% of the time.

MeatHeadinCA on May 9, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4