He did it in the Washington GOP caucus.
The resurgence is on!
The REVOLution lives!
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (4)|
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.
February 10th, 2024 at 11:24 am
The delegates that ae elected to go to the convention are what is important. The failure of the “neo-cons” is that they forgot this.
After the first ballot does not give a clear majority, the convention will go brokered, meaning the minimum of 16 delegates that Ron Paul has now, will allow him to speak at the convention.
February 10th, 2024 at 11:28 am
I wouldn’t bank on a brokered convention…
Beyond that, I expect that Paul will get to speak at the convention–now whether it is a prime time slot or not is another question (I would bet on not, but you never know).
February 10th, 2024 at 12:53 pm
Ha! Dr. Talor, Paulites must really have bothered you…you like to throw the digs in there. Fair enough, I guess, as certain members of Paul’s support seem blind to the consequences of some of their tactics (you would think after hearing Paul debate, very effectively, the dynamics of blowback, they would have know better?). Consider it the result of bringing new, often younger, and almost always inexperienced voices to the political discussion.
That being said, I think the “revolution” very much lives on–as I’ve mentioned before, Paul winning the nomination was probably never the best chance the movement had of influencing the political world…but it WAS the best chance we had of influencing the American public, and awakening many to the ideas, that has come around in quite awhile. In that, I continue to maintain it was very successful. Just look at how high on the bestseller list Paul’s yet unreleased new book is (they are organizing a “book-bomb”!).
And I think Paul HAS influenced the political discussion this campaign cycle. The constitution has received more air time among several candidates then it has in quite awhile, as has the relationship between the Federal Reserve and inflation.
Ah, I digress. I just humbly suggest that you online pundits occasionally give Paul some credit in where he HAS had some success and influence, instead of poo-poo’ing it constantly. I DO believe solid repetition and projecting conventional wisdom upon the public can create self-fulfilling cycles, of which I wish to avoid. I would much rather lose to a true discussion of ideas and direction.
February 10th, 2024 at 8:32 pm
Li,
Mostly I have been amused, and hence the digs. I have no problem with a reasoned debate on this issue. It has more to do with my sense of humor than anything else, which, granted, may not be obvious.
Indeed, it will likely surprise you that at one point I seriously considered voting for Paul in the Alabama primary. However, it was some of what Paul actually has said, and what many of his supporters support, that made that rather difficult. Paul really is less libertarian than he is oriented towards the views of the Constitution Party (for example on issues like immigration and especially trade).
I hate to tell you, though, I honestly don’t think that Paul has been a significant factor, and I say that not out of the above-noted amusement or anything of the sort. It is simply a fact and no, I don’t think it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The mass media clearly does influence the debate, but they do not control it nearly as much as many Paulites believe. If Paul’s message really did resonant beyond a small sliver of the population, we would know it.
Now, there are structural features of our electoral system that do make it difficult for such segments to succeed, but they are not sufficiently large to stop folks like Paul if he actually had support in the 30 to 40% (or more) range that many Paulites argued he would have.