Primaries | The Ron Paul Beacon

Less

« Older

Home

Newer »

Archive for the 'Primaries' Category

Adventures on the Sunday before a Primary Election

Published by

SueM

at January 7, 2008 in Supporters and Primaries. 0 Comments

Sunday, January 6, 2008

Here we go …. after months of being consumed by the candidacy of a certain Congressman we want to be president, after months of emails and ad designs and sign waves and lit drops and phone calls and rallies and yes, even moneybombs, here we are on the Sunday before a Primary Election in New Hampshire.

I started off my day with a little project that had been pulled together earlier in the week and which I had decided just the night before to join. A few phone calls, a pick up of tri-folds from a car parked next to a Catholic church in Nashua, and I found myself at a second church in Nashua, tri-folds at the ready, listening to the Mass in French. Resurrecting my long-ago but still surprisingly intact knowledge of that language, I began rehearsing what I would say to people as they left the parking lot after Mass. As it turns out, they all speak English, but it was still nice to practice, and to listen to the spoken word of the beautiful language that is French.

Mass ended and handouts were handed to those who wanted them. Unfortunately some assumed that mine was “just another candidate,” or even mistook my offering for the literature they had just retrieved from their car windshield, placed there on behalf of another candidate. No, this was something quite different, “Catholics for Ron Paul,” with an absolute must-read on the back “Theology, not Politics – Ron Paul, April 2005.”

Then it was on to the 10:30 Mass at another church in Nashua. I arrived in plenty of time to actually attend, which is something I’m not often able to do, so this was a quite wonderful addition to my day. Hand-outs were again handed out after that Mass and then it was back to the New Hampshire Liberty Forum to hear Ron Paul speak at noon. Or was it one pm? In my barely minimal checking of emails that morning, I had noticed a schedule change. No time to confirm it, so just go. This is a common theme in the Campaign, this waiting on where to be and what to do. It takes a certain degree of faith and patience which are always good qualities to have, so that’s another benefit that comes from campaigning for Ron Paul.

This turned out to be the best speech I’ve ever heard the good doctor give, and he did say that we, the audience, were the reason. We were all just so happy to hear the things he was saying being said. Two men later told me, separately, that his speech had brought tears to their eyes. I can see the headline now “Ron Paul Makes Grown Men Cry.” Of course we all know that it isn’t Ron Paul, it’s the message, the one we have held so near and dear and quietly in our hearts for so long, and we just love to hear it being shouted.

Speech ended, hustle and bustle and crowd control ensues. Ron Paul disappears. Roger and I ask each other what to do next. Oh yes, you’ll want to know who Roger is. I had met him the previous night at the Liberty Forum because he was in need of a ride to Providence. Altogether at least three people had stepped forward to get him there – me being one of them – and the decision that it be me had been reached just before Ron Paul’s speech. Again, the nature of our campaign. Wait and see, and the best possible alternative will naturally present itself.

Now we were back in wait-and-see mode. There were rumors flying everywhere at this point. Canvassing packets to be had at Murphy’s Taproom (should we pick some up and canvass for a few hours?) Phone banking in Concord (but a few people had just been sent up there so the phone bank might now be full.) A rally at 5 pm on Commercial Street in Manchester (was this where the infamous Fox Forum was being filmed? or was it where the Ron Paul Town Meeting was being held – his response to being shut out by Fox? Or had the campaign purchased an hour of TV time to have our man’s message run concurrent with the Forum?) And what about the rally of 10,000 at St. Anselm’s in Goffstown? I had been seeing bits pieces about that online for a good week. Was it real, or phantom? Impossible to know. Questions, questions, questions and no answers at this point.

However, since you constantly run into people you know, you almost always have someone to ask. One calls Concord to see if the official campaign has anything planned. No answer. They must be busy up there (duh!) Another says St. Anselm’s it is, but don’t bring signs, they won’t let you bring them on campus. What we need to do is to bring our voices, so that even though we will probably be restricted to a “First Amendment Zone,” perhaps we’ll be able to shout loud enough for the world to hear what we think of the “fair and balanced” Fox News Channel.

But is the Forum still even being held at St. A’s? Someone claims they’ve changed the venue to a bus that is now on the road. I wonder why they would do that. And the time. I had heard 6 pm, now someone was saying 4:30.

Then something brought us back down to earth. We realized that we were hungry. Hmmmm, Murphy’s Taproom definitely has food, and may have canvassing packets … that seems like a good idea. So we left the Crowne Plaza and headed north to Manchester, and as we drove we watched a plane trolling a Ron Paul banner overhead. This was great!

We reached Murphy’s to find a strange scene. There was parking everywhere. It seems there never is parking at Murphy’s when Ron Paul is in town, and sometimes even when he’s not, but there it was, empty spaces to be had. I was pretty thrilled actually, to be able to use real Murphy’s parking for once in my life. This we did, only to find the front door locked, with a closed-for-the-day sign upon it. And inside, Murphy’s didn’t even look like Murphy’s, they were re-fitting it for some private party being held that evening. Okay, well, let’s see if there are canvassing packets. We can always find food somewhere else. We knocked and someone answered. By now three others had shown up. We all stepped inside. Roger went looking for canvassing packets as we four remaining RP supporters chatted. Then Rand Paul showed up. They were looking for lunch too. We overheard the recommendation, a place called PJ’s further up the road.

There were no canvassing packets to be had, so we left for PJ’s. We figured if it’s good enough for Ron Paul, it’s good enough for us. And it was good. Soon after Roger and I had sat down, a waitress came by asking if we had any campaign literature. She said there was a cook out back – a young man of 18 - who was a huge Ron Paul fan and wanted to ask for his autograph, but had nothing for him sign. Campaign literature? You’ve come to the right place. Have him come over and we’ll go to my car and he can take his pick.

The nice advantage to this was that it reminded me that I had finally remembered to bring the something I had been hoping to have autographed, and frankly if the waitress hadn’t come over I probably would have forgotten to even ask for it. This 54-year-old brain of mine is just way too full of stuff and I’m constantly forgetting little details like that.

Next arrived the three we had met at Murphy’s, a young lady and two young fellows. They took the table next to ours and we all had lunch. At some point in the middle the young cook came out and we went to my car, talking a blue streak of course. His mom’s a supporter and so is his roommate. I told him how my generation is thrilled that his generation loves Ron Paul too.

We did a little strategic planning as to how to ask for the autographs – you can’t interrupt someone’s lunch after all – and finally we managed to do so. I told Dr. Paul what I thought of the speech he had just given. He thanked me.

Then the three from Murphy’s approached us. It turned out that two of them had to leave that very minute to catch their flight back to Michigan and the third, a young fellow named Chris, needed a ride – could we take him along?

Hmmm … I pictured my daughter’s Chevy Aveo, which she had traded just that morning for my Kia Amanti in order to move her stuff back to school. I pictured it with Roger’s luggage and my 2 x 4 Ron Paul signs, among others, in the back seat, and my four small bags of stuff. Then I said “sure.” He’s thin, he can fit. So, off the two went to Michigan and we three, Roger, Chris and me, rearranged a few items and squeezed into the Aveo, in search of what’s next.

We now had two choices. Too late to do any good up in Concord, so shall we head for Commercial Street, or St. Anselm’s? Roger had been to the latter just the day before. Not that he knew how to get there, but he did have a pretty good idea of what to expect should we be able to find it. The GPS I don’t own would have come in handy just then, but I had the next best thing – my brother lives a stone’s throw away, and he was home and answered when I called, lost, somewhere on the east side of Manchester.

He got us there where we discovered that you needed a pass to get onto the campus. Now what? Park somewhere and walk? Are the 10,000 even there? It was pretty quiet, so we figured not. I called my contact who had earlier advised me of the Commercial Street thing. She said “come on down, there are people over here.” So, it was back to the west side of Manchester where, after getting lost again, we managed to find a piece of the crowd. Word was that there were more people up at Bridge Street, or at some 1 Plaza place. We wandered around on Commercial Street for twenty minutes or so. The first word had been that something (Town Hall Meeting?) was happening at 540 Commercial and they wanted people outside with signs when Ron Paul left the building. Then someone said it’s at 545 Commercial. Then someone said no, we should go up to Bridge Street, there are tons of people there. And that’s what we did.

It was somewhat of hike up what seemed to be ten stories, to the bridge overhead, then a trudge in the snow up a small hill, to Elm Street where there was, indeed, somewhat of a crowd. It seemed rather small but at least it knew what it was doing, standing there on four corners with signs and chants and many, many people driving by and beeping for Ron Paul, better than the crowd that had been milling around down below debating what to do, but still not quite in the range of 10,000.

Then someone came up and said that it was actually seven blocks south where the ton of people were. This made sense because that’s where the media were hanging out. Should we go, and if so, should we walk or go back for the car? Chris and I decided on the car plan and Roger headed off to the new rallying point. We got there some twenty minutes later, with lots of beeping and shouting Ron Paul out the window as we drove through the packed intersection. Some policemen were just starting to arrive – I guess it had gotten big enough for that. We parked and joined the crowd. There was a little restaurant on the side street we were on, with a separate crowd outside of it. Word was that they were waiting for Sean Hannity to come out, which he did soon after. He and a companion headed for the nearby Radisson Hotel and the crowd followed, shouting epithets at Fox News (relatively nice ones as far as I could hear, it was a very well-behaved crowd). I managed to see Mr. Hannity in profile, confirming that it was indeed him. Not long after this I noticed a crowd plastered against that same restaurant, again yelling Fox News epithets. The unconfirmed report was that the infamous Frank Luntz, “pollster” was inside and the speculation was that a hallowed Fox News Focus Group was being conducted at that very place. And so virtual reality meets the real world as those who spin are confronted by those who just want to know the truth.

There came a time when we decided it was time to leave, to drop Chris off not far away, in Manchester, and set off Providence-way. Just then we met Steve from New York, and struck up a conversation that could have continued all night, frankly, because it was that interesting. Steve’s truck was parked back down on Commercial Street, so of course the question “would you like a ride” came up and he said yes. I drove him down, we talked for another 15 minutes, and then I pulled myself away, thinking of Chris and Roger waiting back up on Elm. I got a little bit lost trying to get back to them. I really don’t know how I ended up on the outskirts of Bedford when they were something like five blocks away, but anyway, no harm done. I turned around and found my way back, arriving some twenty minutes later. They didn’t seem to mind the wait at all. There was still plenty going on. We dropped Chris off at a house full of Ron Paul supporters crashing for the night and then finally Roger and I headed south.

Roger thanked me at least five times for taking him to Providence that night. And I said, at least five times, no problem at all. In fact, the value of the conversations we had during our nearly two-hour trip far outweighed the extra time I had taken to get him there. This was in part due to the fact that Roger practices law and I have a very keen interest in that, mainly in what the law actually says versus what people assume it says. The question that keeps coming to my mind is how and why did our law, so simple and true at the founding, get to be so cumbersome and confusing?

Now, about this revolution we are having, I have a friend who will forever say that it takes just ten people to turn a town around. Just ten to send state government packing, out of the town schools (if the townspeople choose to have schools), out of its finances, out of everything that makes up the life of the town, and its Liberty. Ten people to put that state government back under the guidelines by which it was created in the first place. Ten people to remind everyone that their town is not a vassal of the state it created, but rather a Sovereign, an extended family not unlike the one forming today via the Ron Paul Revolution, incorporated for the protection of all who live there.

And so, as this family we call the Ron Paul R3VOLution grows, I wonder, where will this lead? Will it be ten Ron Paul supporters town-by-town, until we get them all back? Or will it be some other mechanism, still unclear, something new and of these times in which we live? Time will tell and I wonder what my children and my children’s children will inherit.

I know that those who came before us wondered this too as I turn to the Preamble of my state constitution to read this:

We, therefore, the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the goodness of the great Legislator of the universe, in affording us, in the course of His providence, an opportunity, deliberately and peaceably, without fraud, violence or surprise, of entering into an original, explicit, and solemn compact with each other; and of forming a new constitution of civil government, for ourselves and posterity; and devoutly imploring His direction in so interesting a design, do agree upon, ordain and establish the following Declaration of Rights, and Frame of Government, as the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Sphere: Related Content

Who Are The Ron Paulers?

Published by

nonrate

at November 9, 2007 in Supporters, Primaries and Political Issues. 4 Comments

You may have recently begun to read about this Ron Paul character in the news. In addition to wondering who Ron Paul is, you may also be curious who these Ron Paul people are? Who are these guys running around frantically flooding website comments, waving signs and contributing to record breaking “money bombs?” And why do they care so much about this Ron Paul guy who barely registers in the polls? Well, I felt it was time you found out from the mouth of one of them.

Ron Paul, currently running for the slot of President of the United States, is a 10 time Texas Congressman running on the Republican ticket. Many call him out as a Libertarian. It’s true that he ran for President in 1988 on the Libertarian ticket –after leaving the Republican party for the time that he did it. And many gawk when they see the Republican label. He must be in support of the current Iraqi expedition, and an expansion into Iran. He must also be for all kinds of controls and laws to protect the American people, like listening into your phone conversations and suspending laws that were created to protect freedoms that could be used to hurt you. He must be married to the bible and committed to ruling the land by it’s word as he interprets it, regardless of what religion you hold true to yourself is.

No, no and no. Ron Paul’s support does not come from todays twisted and perverted platform once known as the Republican party. It comes from the twenty year old college student, who saw their parents get their education at a fraction of the cost of theirs, and now feel uncertain for the chance to labor toward the American Dream they’ve been working so hard for, and so many fought for. They’re the people that are irked at the fact that they’re either earning the same or less than they were five years ago, while every living purchase has skyrocketed, with no end in foresight. They’re those close to retirement who can easily envision little or no social security coming back to them, after they’ve had it taken from them all their lives. It’s the people in their golden years that struggle to survive on their own living and medical expenses who can’t figure out why those whom we fund for governance feel it’s more important to spend it on waging battles halfway across the world, based on false pretense, rather than battling for the welfare of the greatest generation that ever existed. The generation that delivered the most impressive fruits of the industrial revolution and created the comforts of life we enjoy so much today. And they see the product of their labor transformed into the instrument of conquest.

They’re people that believe America is what it was founded to be. A place where the people of each state can independently govern itself, bound by a set of common principals guided by liberty. Those that believe in equal rights for all of humanity and the rule of law, as outlined in the United States Constitution. We are the ones that not only want to see, but are determined to being a part of what makes America the best it can be.

And we’re against those who attempt to cloud the American way. Against the abuse of power that often delivers a rewritten message of what the American ideology is about. We are against any regression into an uncivilized structure of civilization that preys on the poor and promotes unnecessary militarist conflict.

any are now crafting articles in an attempt to not only label Ron Paul “crazy” or as a a “lunatic,” but also pass these sentiments onto his supporters. Fine. In my limited experience following politics, I don’t believe I’ve ever witnessed such a strategy where not only the candidate, but the American public in support are also attacked. However, it certainly demonstrates this campaign isn’t just about Ron Paul. It’s about we the people. It’s about the message of liberty, responsible government and those in support of it. It’s an attack on the very ideas and principals that created the worlds first highly successful free society. But we, the Ron Paulers, are not swayed by such romper room tactics.

Those articulating their opinions in such a manner hope it will sway the Ron Paul supporter, or one considering to garner its message. It’s a natural defensive position to take when one threatens another –attempt to discredit them in the hopes you won’t listen to them and accept their judgment. And it’s your choice if you do or not. I know it can be difficult to hear something very sensible from someone like Ron Paul and become confused when someone that’s supposed to be an authority on the matter in question says it can’t work, when it did in a day we consider more primitive. And I agree it’s easier to adopt someone else’s judgment on a particular position or issue rather than examine it independently. But Ron Paulers are those that have decided to take the more challenging route and judge for themselves.

All in all, I can promise you this. We Ron Paulers are not about to fade into the night. We’re growing in numbers day by day. We’re committed to the modern ideas of freedom and liberty as scribed in our 200 plus year old constitution, and we plan on preserving it. We believe in a sound economic system where the money you earn holds its value while you alone hold onto it. We have no problem receiving the petty childish antics that attempt to shroud the message of liberty as crazy, or zany. Because we foster one of the most important traits required to maintain a free and prosperous country –tolerance. You may want to consider being a part of it… because we’re not going away.

Sphere: Related Content

Why I Quit The Democratic Party For Ron Paul

Published by

peter

at October 23, 2007 in Republicans, Democrats, War, Primaries and Political Issues. 4 Comments

Today I received an Acknowledgment Notice from the Boston Election Department via the US Postal Service. It was a standard, unassuming, laser-printed form letter informing me that they received my affidavit of voter registration. Nothing out of the ordinary.

Nothing, that is, except for one phrase which gave me a sudden mental shock and made me gasp every time I looked at it: “Your party affiliation has been changed from DEMOCRAT to REPUBLICAN.”

This was not a mistake. This was a decision I made after a long, excruciating deliberation with myself. Which is exactly why it was so shocking to me.

I grew up in an upper-middle class area of New Jersey and attended a highly regarded private school there for nine years. Though I hardly appreciated it at the time, the education I received was excellent and I am thankful for it. In fact I didn’t appreciate the breadth and depth of my learning until I went away to college (unlike nearly half of my private school classmates, I did not attend an Ivy). Yet I have also come to understand that the education I so highly value came with its own biases, not unlike the regional biases that came with growing up in the Garden State.

Most people in my little part of New Jersey didn’t like country music, for example. So I too, by default, grew up believing that I didn’t like it without ever questioning why. I’d complain when the bus driver played it without ever giving it a chance. Later in life, while attending a small liberal arts college located in the poorest county in New York state, country suddenly became cool. Nearly all of my friends and acquaintances (most of them being preppy kids from prosperous New England towns) instantly and without warning embraced this seemingly alien genre of music. I too grew to love it, and it soon dawned on me that perhaps I was more a product of my environment than I liked to believe.

I experienced a similar epiphany with politics recently. Many of my private school classmates (despite their wealthy and often Republican parents), and nearly all of my teachers, held very liberal views. Even our graduation speaker was an outspoken critic of the death penalty. And so it was that I grew up proud to hail from an environment that seemed to care so deeply about social justice.

My outspoken Republican classmates, which I could count on one one hand, were acknowledged by the rest of us to be either sociopaths or unassuming victims of brainwashing by their parents. Their attitude toward the underprivileged was hardly empathetic, and we felt justified in demonizing them for this reason alone. And if Republicans were the enemy of the underprivileged, it seemed to follow that their Democratic counterparts were their saviors. Of course this conclusion was based on fallacious logic, but this did not occur to me until much later in life. I did not realize at the time that good intentions do not automatically lead to good results (in fact, they rarely do).

When I discovered Ron Paul last year, I was forced to rethink my world view. It was a painful experience, but I slowly learned that the traditional Republican values of small government (which have since been abandoned by the Grand Old Party) and low taxation do in fact have merit. They are not, as I used to believe, merely a rationalization that the privileged use to justify their grip on money and power at the expense of the lower and middle classes. In fact, I would learn that some of the Federal institutions we don’t often think about, such as the Federal Reserve, play a far more important role in increasing the gap between the rich and the poor than the rich do themselves.

I was also forced to consider the possibility that most federal programs and departments, no matter how well-intended, do not benefit The People. More often than not, in fact, they are money pits which exacerbate the very problems they were intended to address. I was shocked to learn that prior to 1913 there was no national income tax (nor was there inflation), and that we did just fine without it. And when I learned that the Founding Fathers warned us against the very dangers we face today as a result of an increasingly centralized and powerful Federal government, I came face-to-face with my liberal biases and realized that I could no longer justify my old views. But I wasn’t ready to embrace Republicans of the Giuliani and Romney variety either. They were not true conservatives. So where did the small-government Republicans go?

The problem with our two party system is that is forces each party to take a side on one issue. This results in parties which have arbitrary values that are often inconsistent. How, for example, can you justify a pro-life view when your party also promotes the death penalty? It comes down to the same thing–state sanctioned death is either right or wrong. To endorse one form of death but not the other means that you either hold a double standard or that you are a hypocrite. In fact, most people do not side completely with one party or the other but feel compelled to choose the closest fit or simply go with the party that supports the issue that is most important to them. This allows politicians with ulterior motives to exploit the resulting gap between personal and party values, or worse, allow themselves to be bribed by lobbyists that seek to exploit this gap.

This has resulted in a worrisome shift in party values. The small-government Republicans disappeared because they were of no use to the lobbyists, who depend on a strong Federal government with a healthy source of revenue. Thus in the modern Republican Party, greed has usurped values.

I see only two solutions: we either need to get beyond this two-sizes fit all model and provide some competition to the existing parties (which would unfortunately require some dangerous tinkering with our Constitution), or we can simply change the parties from the inside out with our votes. The good news is that the GOP in its current manifestation has been so damaged by the Bush Administration that it must change or it will cease to exist. This isn’t the first time a party’s values would change drastically. The Republican party of today would be hardly recognizable to a Republican from 1854 (the year the GOP was founded) or even 1954 (prior to the Civil Rights movement).

We have a chance to help change the Republican Party change for the better and I intend to do so; the Democrats are stuck in the status quo to such an extent that they are not seizing a golden opportunity to regain power by taking the bold anti-war stance which voters are demanding. Since neither party is giving the American people what they want, we will see some radical changes in party politics very soon. This is indeed a rare moment in history: we have an opportunity to restore values to politics.

It will take some time for me to get used to calling myself a Republican. The ick factor isn’t likely to go away soon. But I know it is the right thing to do, because here is what I have learned about our two-party system:

Democrats have the right motives (social justice) but the wrong approach (central government). Republicans have the right approach (free market) but the wrong motives (maintaining a plutocracy).

Ron Paul is unique because he has the right motive and the right approach. He really does care about the middle class, and it would benefit greatly from his Presidency. I also happen to believe that Ron Paul represents the future of the Republican Party, whether he wins the primaries or not. He is in the right place at the right time, delivering a message that Americans are hungry for. I feel lucky to be a part of it.

I sincerely believe that Ron Paul represents our best hope for a better future, but to me its more personal that that; Ron Paul represents my own hope to proudly call myself a Republican.

Sphere: Related Content

Unspinning Fox News

Published by

SueM

at October 22, 2007 in Polls, Media and Primaries. 4 Comments

Here we go again. I’m sure there are tons of discussions going on across the Internet about last night’s Fox News broadcast of the Republican Debate in Orlando. Here’s my own little observation of the shenanigans of the post-debate special edition of “Hannity and Colmes.” My comments are in italics.

First, the lead-in, as best I could transcribe it:

Alan Colmes: Welcome back to this special edition of Hannity and Colmes and we are coming to you live tonight from the spin room at the GOP Presidential Debate in Orlando Florida and now it is time to reveal the results from our text messaging poll…as of now in first place Ron Paul 39%…

Sean Hannity: (talking over Colmes): and by the ah…they’re stacking the deck

Alan Colmes: (continuing in spite of Hannity’s interruption): …Mike Huckabee getting 19%…

Sean Hannity: can I say something

Alan Colmes: and ah you want…

Sean Hannity: yea, they’re stacking the deck…that’s the way they have at every campaign…he did not win this debate, period, end of sentence.

Alan Colmes: all right, well let’s, I’m just telling you what the results say…

Sean Hannity: (talking over Colmes): well, that’s my opinion

Alan Colmes: …we don’t have any further information other than what the results say. Third spot, Rudy Guiliani getting 12% of the vote…

This is all quite predictable, but soon it gets interesting as they move to the “room next door.”

Alan Colmes: …and we check back in with Frank Luntz who is in the…ah… right next to the spin room here he’s been following a focus group throughout the evening and some rather interesting results from the people who he has been trailing throughout the proceedings here tonight. Frank…

Frank Luntz “pollster”: Yes we’re here at the University of Central Florida and I have to show you something…How many of you thought Ron Paul won the debate?

Camera pans across the room of approximately twenty people, none of whose hands go up.

(why I am not surprised?)

Frank Luntz: No hands going up.

I do, however, count four smiles as he says this - silly me to think that the text messaging poll meant something - these are real people they are polling here and why would there be even one Ron Paul supporter in a room of twenty? Or maybe there is one, just one, and he or she doesn’t think Ron Paul won the debate. Despite such rational thinking on my part I remain perplexed by the 39 to zero percent spread.

Frank Luntz continues: I think that says an awful lot about that text polling. But I didn’t really ask the right question earlier. Since the focus of the debate was Hillary Clinton, how many of you, based on what you saw, think that Rudy Guiliani is the best Republican specifically to defeat Hillary Clinton? How many of you believe that?

A majority of hands go up.

Frank Luntz: look at these hands going up (he seems pleased) and a lot of these people don’t necessarily support Hillar ah Rudy Guiliani (Freudian slip alert: does this mean Hil and Rudy are interchangeable?) but Bob why’s he the one to defeat Hillary Clinton?

Bob: He stood up, he can withstand the Clinton Machine, and in kind.

Frank Luntz: Greg, why Rudy?

Greg: I think he’s demonstrated very good leadership over the years he probably managed a budget that’s larger than many small country’s so I think he’s got the experience.

Frank Luntz, turning to another participant: Do you also think it’s Rudy, or not?

Man in blue tie: No, I do not.

Frank Luntz: Who’d you pick?

Man with blue tie: I thought Huckabee came on strong tonight. I’m a Thompson fan but I thought Huckabee’s momentum’s going forward and I think he’s…ah…he’s gonna come up…

Frank Luntz (interrupting): and you’re nodding your head also…

Man in black shirt: if you woulda told me that I was gonna come in here tonight and think that Huckabee would win this debate I would have said that you are a liar (Freudian slip alert: he would call Frank Luntz “pollster” a liar? Why not just “I would have said you were wrong?”) but I too, along with him, I as a Thompson fan Huckabee won me over tonight.

Frank Luntz: you’re nodding your head also

Man with glasses: Clinton was an unknown governor when he won the presidency. Huckabee is that type man. He came in today strong. He came in as a man with ideas…if they give him time he’s one of those candidates who’s out there who they ask him one question and ask Rudy three…they need to give that man some time.

Man in black shirt: Bill Clinton came in as a sleeper like Huckabee and we have the Arkansas factor as well playing into effect.

Wait…I thought the subject here was who won the debate..this is getting way too analytical for me. In fact it’s sounding more like a campaign strategy meeting for a Rudy-Huckabee ticket than an objective opinion poll.

Frank Luntz: you know it’s interesting that there’s always some sleeper…there’s a surprise in this…this is the second time in these debates that we’ve done that Mike Huckabee has been the surprise. Looks like he had a good night also.

So, Huckabee (2nd in the txt msg poll) and Rudy (3rd) both had great nights…but Ron Paul who just happened to be way ahead in first place in that poll did not, not in a room full of “real” people anyway.

P.S. For an analysis of who is actually in a position to beat Hillary click here. Hint: it’s the fellow who came in first in the text messaging poll.

P.P.S. and for some comic relief check out this short video: “Faux News Debate: Hitler vs Mother Theresa” … hilarious!

Sphere: Related Content

RE: “An Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful”

Published by

peter

at October 12, 2007 in Polls, Media and Primaries. 2 Comments

from: Pete Nowicki <peter.christopher@gmail.com>
to: politicalcapital@cnbc.com
date: Oct 12, 2007 12:39 PM
subject: Response to “An Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful”
mailed-by: gmail.com

Dear Mr. Wastler,

I appreciate your response to the concerns that Ron Paul supporters had after the CNBC poll was taken down on Wednesday. Your words struck me as quite sincere and I understand why you did what you did.

However, I do feel that there could be an underlying bias at CNBC and other media outlets that I’d like you to consider (and I’ve never met a human being without a bias, myself included, so please don’t take this personally). You say that “a well-organized and committed ‘few’ can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of ‘the many.’” It’s a valid point, but I feel that this statement rests on an incorrect assumption, that the sentiments of “the many” are a better predictor of which candidate has a better chance of winning the primaries.

Generally speaking, it is preferable to have a broad sample than a narrow one. However, “the many” are not necessarily a good predictor in this case because they represent the sentiment of the population as a whole, only 20% of which vote in the primaries. Most people don’t pay any attention to politics this early in the game and primarily rely on name recognition, which in turn is determined by the amount of exposure the candidates get on TV. Thus you have as much as 80% of your data reflecting what essentially amounts to media bias (which is inevitable, since everyone has a bias). And since Ron Paul did not start receiving a proportionate share of media attention until earlier this month when he announced his Q3 fund raising numbers, it was unfair to rely on “the many” to determine whether it was appropriate to take down that poll.

You also say that your “poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign” and then rule out the first possibility in the following paragraph. But the poll was not the target of a campaign, at least not in the traditional sense. There was no order coming down from the top saying “let’s have a good showing in this poll.” In fact, the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign has never sent such a request to its supporters. These kinds of turnouts are truly self-organized. These are people from all walks of life and all parts of the country spontaneously acting in unison, something that would not be possible today without the internet.

I wish I could say otherwise, but Ron Paul is not a master of internet campaigning (in fact, neither he nor his supporters are very SEO-savvy, as this post from SEOmoz.org suggests). To the contrary, it is his words that are creating this bone fide grassroots movement (one that is presently very close to “tipping” in the Gladwellian sense), and he will tell you this himself. He knows better than anyone that he owes his success not to Ron Paul the man but but to “the message” he has been speaking about for 30 years. Americans today are hungry for the truth, and he is the only one (at least on the Republican side) willing to speak it.

So I ask you to re-examine what you really want from your “show of hand” poll. Is it better for it to reflect the unsolicited opinion of the general public, 80% of whom are not really interested in politics and haven’t taken the time to examine the candidates and issues in any significant detail, or for it to reflect the opinion of those who actually care enough about the issues we face as a country to actually do something about it?

When pondering this question, it might be wise to remember that as late as July 1776, a mere 21% of Philadelphians were in favor of declaring independence from England. It doesn’t take a majority to start a revolution.

Sincerely,

Peter Nowicki
Founder & Contributor
www.RonPaulNewEngland.com

Sphere: Related Content

Meeting the Man Himself!

Published by

CorieW

at October 8, 2007 in Primaries, Political Issues and Ron Paul Awareness. 4 Comments

Being a member of the Ron Paul for President Boston Meetup group has been a pleasure from the start, but never did I expect that it would yield an opportunity so marvelous as the one I was presented with officially on the morning of September 28th. I heard my cell phone ring around 7:30 AM on Friday as I was scrambling around getting ready for class, nervous because I knew that in less than 12 hours from that exact moment, I could be meeting face to face with my only living political hero - and that’s not me exaggerating by any means! I answered to hear Bob Dwyer, another dedicated member of our group on the other line. As I heard the words, “Congratulations!” my heart skipped a beat. He meant what I only could have dreamed he did - I was going to a private event in Beverly, Massachusetts to meet the one and only Dr. Ron Paul!

As a person tends to when they’re excited, it seems that I’ve gotten ahead of myself. First, I must begin by explaining that due to an innovative thought originally presented to us by one of our members, Scott DiNitto (also a writer here at the Beacon), a few of our members were able to set up a lottery that would allow for one of us to attend the private event that called for a $1000 donation to the campaign. We got the ball rolling on this idea by Tuesday, knowing that we would have to raise $1000 by Thursday in order to speak with the campaign and obtain a ticket. As optimistic as I tend to be, I was not sure that we would be able to muster our forces and raise that amount of money in such a short time. Andrew Johnson and I championed the idea on our mailing list, noting that even if we could not raise $1000, the money we do obtain will go to the campaign - and before the September 30th fundraising deadline! Essentially, it was a win-win situation.

I woke up late on Thursday morning to find that we had more than reached our fundraising goal! To be honest, I was entirely astonished but nonetheless grateful - especially because some individuals who could not even make it up to the North Shore on Friday had donated. It was truly breathtaking to see people coming together so quickly to reach a common goal! As Dr. Paul always says, perhaps it’s because freedom is popular! Regardless, I was stunned. The lottery drawing was to be held Thursday night at 7!

I have to say, as mystical as it may sound, I truly felt as though fate was in my hands Friday morning, because I had come in third in the aforementioned drawing yet it turned out that the two chosen before me could not attend. The 11 hours that remained of Friday before I was to head north for an event I still could not believe I would be attending were totally surreal. Even more unbelievable was the moment I saw Ron Paul walking up the steps, heading right in my direction. My heart was pounding and I was speechless to the extent I feared I would become, unable to competently introduce myself. As eloquent as I had planned to be, in the presence of greatness the first words that came out of my mouth (and in retrospect, I do wish they had been different) were, “You are my idol”. There I was, standing in front of the Good Doctor himself and the words I utter sound more like I’m 12 and Dr. Paul is Justin Timberlake. Nonetheless I will never forget the way he looked at me, inherently stunned that people do, on a daily basis, say such things to him. For those who may have doubted it, I assure you, Ron Paul is a man of such humility that it’s almost wrong. He is so utterly convinced that it’s not him, but the message - that he is simply a spokesperson for this Revolution and that he cannot claim it as his own.

After saying what I did, Dr. Paul thanked me, but in a way where he seemed somewhat outside of himself. When you meet the man face to face, you really do get the impression that he feels he is a representative of something greater, something one man cannot himself possess. His selflessness is part of the reason that he is so inspiring, and his sense of humor makes him that much more compelling. Amidst our initial exchange, I took my Constitution out and showed him that he’d signed it after the Republican Debate at the University of New Hampshire. I went on to explain that because he was being swarmed by his usual mass of fans I recognized that it was either a handshake or getting him to sign the back page of my Constitution between quotes from John Marshall and Benjamin Franklin, right where his name belongs. He observed his signature, laughed, and said, ”Yeah, it looks like I was pretty hurried! And to make up for that, here are two handshakes!” and proceeded to go through the motions of shaking my hand twice. I’ll never forget that little gesture. To me, it totally exemplifies who I believe Dr. Paul is as a person - so utterly genuine, so innately real, humble and loving. It’s as if he wants to reassure all of the people who believe in the message that he speaks on behalf of them, on behalf us collectively as the American People, and certainly not on behalf of himself exclusively by any means - a serious rarity in a Presidential candidate but something our country so desperately needs.

It is quite obvious that Dr. Paul is sacrificing a great deal of his personal life, time with his family, meals, and sleep (the last two explained to me by the wonderful Mrs. Paul) to warn Americans that our freedoms of choice and conscience are under attack and that we must fight back to retain what we may now take for granted. Every move he makes is executed with such grace and each word he says is so unmistakably genuine, humble and most of all, Patriotic. I almost bring a tear to my own eye recalling it, because in meeting him, I can verify that Ron Paul is truly a Statesman of Founding Father stature. I have no doubt that had he been alive during the Revolutionary Era, he would have been present at our Constitutional Convention. Instead, we have been graced with a man of his greatness in our own time, and I truly believe that a continuation of our spectacular American Revolution manifests itself in Dr. Paul and the Patriots that continue to support him with steadfast vigor.

The event overall, was quite successful and I will be forever indebted to the many individuals who provided me with such a rare and incredible opportunity. While the highlight was obviously meeting the great Dr. Paul himself, discovering how fantastic, friendly, intelligent and just plain adorable Mrs. Paul is, and meeting other wonderful Patriots such as Michael Nystrom of The Daily Paul helped to make the fundraiser a night I will always look back on quite fondly - especially knowing now of the 5 million we all personally helped the campaign to raise! Also, I would also like to thank Mr. and Mrs. Stacey for pointing out that I was the guest present who had won the Boston Meetup Group lottery. When Ron Paul reffered to me as “the special guest”, I was just utterly stunned, flattered and beyond anything, infinitely appreciative.

I hope that as a people we continue the great American Experiment our Founder’s have bequeathed us. Freedom, as Ron Paul reminds us, is not an antiquated notion, but tyranny and Authoritarian governance on the other hand are age-old methods far more rooted in human history than that of our great Constitutional Republic, which as Americans we must defend. I am aware now, more than ever after having met them, that Dr. and Mrs. Paul are model citizens. Again, I would like to personally thank them, their family, and every member of the Boston Meetup Group who made it possible for me to meet these wonderful, Patriotic individuals.

As citizens of this unique, and still very young Republic, we must always seek to participate in the incessant fight for freedom that characterizes our much heralded American Dream. Our great country was founded upon the ideal of liberty, and through the years many a great American has worked to secure that freedom for each of us. We mustn’t sit back now and surrender our sovereignty to an unconstitutional form of government masquerading as one that is American. The legacy of America’s Founding and the autonomy it offers lives on in both the eloquent and passionate Dr. Paul as well as within ourselves - but it can only continue to flourish if we the people open our eyes and recognize it’s infinite and unwavering importance.

Sphere: Related Content

Why “Ron Paul Can’t Win” Won’t Last

Published by

peter

at September 11, 2007 in Gen Y, Iraq War, Primaries, Foreign Policy and Political Issues. 13 Comments

A few months ago I reconnected with an old friend with whom I haven’t spoken in close to 12 years. He happens to be my former boss and a Reagan Republican. In the spring of 1995 he offered me my first sales job while I was abroad, during a year off I took between high school and college. At the time, he was the publisher of several English language business papers in central and eastern Europe.

I was pleased to find out that while we had been out of touch he had become a publisher of a prominent conservative publication in Washington. Since then he has left the publishing business and is once again abroad. He sounded disgusted with the current state of the Republican party.

A few days ago I asked him what his conservative friends in the US think of Ron Paul. His response was “they think he is simply unelectable due to lack of mass name recognition.”

This, of course, did not surprise me.

As a Ron Paul supporter I am used to hearing the “Ron Paul can’t win” objection. Despite the fact that he is finally getting decent coverage in the mainstream press, even positive pieces about him throw in a caveat; they usually say something along the lines of “he is an interesting, nice guy with some great ideas BUT….” Usually this “but” is followed by a phrase along the lines of “he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell.”

This widespread dismissal has been driving many Ron Paul supporters nuts because it creates a self-fulling prophecy. If everyone thinks that everyone else thinks that he can’t win, well then he won’t. And no one wants to throw their vote away, right?

Some of us suspect a conspiracy by the media and the corporatocracy that controls it. I don’t fall into that camp–in my view everyone in the media who dismisses him simply doesn’t believe he can win because nobody else seems to–just like everyone else. This feeds on itself because no one is willing to go out on a limb and possibly risk their career to say “wait a minute, I think that Ron Paul doesn’t just have some good ideas, I think he has a chance.” It always takes a leap of faith to change the status quo.

But there is good news. Lately I’ve come to realize that this objection won’t be valid much longer as more and more people realize that he does in fact have a chance. “Ron Paul is unelectable” was a valid concern several months ago when he was completely on the margins, but since then his campaign has raised a healthy sum of money and is winning more straw polls than any candidate except Romney. Things are changing–perhaps slowly for now, but Ron Paul’s campaign will reach a Tipping Point soon. This “tip” will occur in the next few months and when it does it will catch nearly everyone by surprise.

There are three factors which will enable this to happen:

1. The Gen Y vote

A full half of Generation Y (born 1980-2000) will be of voting age by next year and no one really knows what impact they will have on the 2008 elections. A few months ago, Fortune ran a cover story about how different twentysomethings behave in the workplace, but the political aspect of this story has not been covered to any significant degree. One thing is certain–in 2004 the Gen Yers who were of voting age showed up to the polls in droves. And now that their numbers have doubled and they are a little older and wiser, they are poised to shake things up.

Contrast this with the the fact that my own generation (Gen X) has a well-deserved reputation for being politically apathetic, and this will only make this next generation’s impact even greater and more surprising. They are very different from the rest of us and will wield close 40 million potential votes in 2008. Given how connected they are to each other online (specifically Facebook), they are more than capable of politically mobilizing themselves in unprecedented ways. Combine that with the fact that they don’t like the way we’ve run things and we might be looking at nothing less than a revolution.

2. Campaign Fundraising

Dollars speak louder than words, and the Ron Paul Campaign raised 5 million of them in Q3! He has the cash to be in this for the long haul and is likely to “tip” very soon.

3. Iraq

There is not a single other Republican Presidential candidate, and only two other Democratic ones (Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich), who are talking about an immediate exit strategy from Iraq. Ron Paul is correct about his party; Republicans have lost heir way. These former non-interventionists are ready to return to their roots. If Dr. Paul can leverage this argument to win over enough of them who are tired of where the current administration has led them, he will take the primaries.

As far as the general elections go, nearly half of Americans think we should get out altogether. If Ron Paul is lucky enough to run against Hillary Clinton, it’ll be a landslide.

So why aren’t the other candidates listening to the people? The Iraq “war” was an unconstitutional and illegal invasion and we accomplished our stated objective years ago. Why are we still there? Why have we allowed thousands of our troops to pay for our honor (thanks Mike Huckabee) with their blood? Is that what they mean by supporting the troops? I’d rather support them by getting them home.

It’s hard for me to understand why it isn’t obvious to everyone that Iraq really is the key issue for 2008. Why don’t the other candidates get this yet? Before I get too worked up about this I must remind myself that this is actually good for Ron Paul. Tom Eddlem, a fellow Boston MeetUp member, summed it up to me this way:

The war in Iraq is already unpopular, as evidenced by the mid-term elections last year. It’s going to sink the Republican Party by November of next year, unless the Republicans nominate Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the only Republican who was right on Iraq from the beginning. Recent polling numbers indicate that even a majority of Republicans recognize that the United States needs to leave Iraq within six months, and no other Republican candidate is for a pull-out.

So let’s not worry too much about this “Ron Paul Can’t Win” thing. The question that people will soon be asking is not “why should I vote for Ron Paul if he doesn’t stand a chance of winning?” but rather “why would I want to waste my vote on those other Republicans who are guaranteed to lose in November?”

Sphere: Related Content

A Soldier’s Neo-Con Free Perspective on Iraq

Published by

CorieW

at September 9, 2007 in Iraq War, Primaries, Foreign Policy, Political Issues and Ron Paul Awareness. 6 Comments

An old friend of mine who is currently stationed in Iraq sent me an instant message tonight to catch up and chat. I was quite surprised, pleasantly so, of course, because I haven’t spoken to him in ages. We talked about this that and the other thing, and not knowing at all where he would stand on the issue, I asked him how he thought things were going over there. I was honestly entirely unsure of what his response would be, because I primarily remember his “let’s get ‘em!” attitude prior to basic training back in high school. What he did end up saying though, was both justifying to me but rather upsetting at the same time - the prototypical catch-22.

To start, he laughed, then cursed the place out. His next statement reminded me of something that Rudy Giuliani, who has never been to Iraq, would call “extraordinary” or “unbelievable”: “The only reason why things seem to be going well is because we pay the bad guys not to fight us anymore”. I responded with a sarcastic comment about how bribery is always fantastic and he added to his initial comment by saying, “The same guys that were attacking us and blowing us up everyday work for us now as ‘Iraqi Police’ - which is fine to me, as long as it lasts until after October when I come home, haha.” I in response of course commented on the whole scenario as being a bad idea in the long-term. He then explained the situation further in saying, “These people are horrible. We shouldn’t be here, cause we’re fighting Al Qaeda and this other terrorist group. Then the two groups started fighting, and then once the other started winning we ‘allied’ with them …. ”

….. Then came the statement that was extremely upsetting to me: “It’s real nice working with people who you know have killed your friends and blown you up and shot at you. I hate them all. I just want to go home.” As I manifested feelings of sympathy, sadness, then anger, remembering how passionate this friend of mine was about fighting for his country, honor and all those ideals entailed before being sent to Iraq, I realized then and there how infinitely and personally offended I was by comments made by the neo-conservatives in the September 5th debate. I became especially aware of my disgust in relation to Mike Huckabee’s statements about honor in his exchange with Ron Paul.

Huckabee, as well as the other neo-conservatives, are presidential candidates running on OTHER people’s sacrificed honor, not on the symbolic honor of the Republican party, and certainly not on an honor they personally possess. The neo-conservative candidates are basing their platforms on their individual egos and an inability to admit that they were, first off, acting illegally, and secondly were wrong. These men say that it’s about “finishing what we started” and about “honor”, but I invite someone to please explain to me where the honor lies in forcing American troops to fight side by side with terrorists disguised as mercenaries further disguised as allies who have killed the dearest friends of our brave soldiers?

Another interesting point my friend made was about the differences between Iraq and Afghanistan. We were discussing another friend of ours who was recently sent to Afghanistan. I said that I assumed based on what I know that it must not be as bad there as it is in Iraq. He responded by saying that Afghanistan is supposed to be a lot better. “The people hate us here (in Iraq) but are semi-indifferent over there.” Interesting point - perhaps because the presence of troops in Afghanistan actually relate to September 11th whereas in Iraq, nothing positive is being achieved.

In a country where the police are simply a terrorist group themselves, and we have been reduced to aiding them as our only legitimate course of action so that things “look good”, we have no business there. It seems to me that everything occuring in Iraq is merely a temporary “fix” to an endless problem. It’s just the U.S. government supporting another terrorist group disguised as an ally. What will be next? There is no long-term solution that the U.S. can possibly provide. Whenever our government provides a political group or country with weapons (Iran-Contra Affair), or aids them in the overthrow of elected leaders (1953 Coup D’Etat in Iran), nothing good comes of it. The only result is what the CIA calls BLOWBACK - a concept apparently foreign to the neo-conservatives although the term simply means that there are consequences to our actions; consequences ranging from deep-seated hatred of the United States of America by countries we intervened in to actual aggression from groups using such actions as components of the reason they attacked.

I know that I can keep dreaming, but I’d like to see even the smallest bit of accountability on the part of the neo-conservatives who pretend so fervently that they are Republicans. As Ron Paul points out quite often, Reagan, a man the party idolizes, was smart enough to recognize the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics, and pulled out of Lebanon. No incoherent, backward ramblings where a perverse version of honor is used to justify an obvious mistake - he just did what needed to be done. The neo-conservatives could learn from their supposed idol. They’d also probably better themselves if they took a couple of history classes; especially on foreign policy.

Sphere: Related Content

It’s History, Not Legend

Published by

CorieW

at September 7, 2007 in Primaries, Political Issues and Ron Paul Awareness. 3 Comments

As I was walking home down Hanover Street last night, I cut through the park area near the Old North Church and took a look at the statue of a man we Americans memorialize, perpetually put on a pedestal, but apparently disregard. Are we truly that removed from the message of freedom our Founding Fathers gave their sweat, blood and tears to intergrate into the fabric of our society? Paul Revere’s statue portrays him as heroic - almost mythical - and maybe that in and of itself is the problem.

At what point does history become legend? What length of time must pass for a human mind to simply disregard the mistakes of our forebearers and inevitably repeat them? I fail to understand those who are so quick to ignore the truths that history teaches us - especially the politicians who do it. James Madison, the man posterity has named the Father of our Constitution warned us that “if tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”

Profound, and quite relevant to the contemporary American, no? It’s almost as though Mr. Madison was an oracle. Though a genius, he was not omniscient. The mystery of what he in fact was lies in an all too obvious explanation: James Madison, and all of the great individuals who aided in the founding of America were educated. These men knew their history and understood the complexities of human interaction, two things that apparently, the neo-conservative candidates running for the highest office of what we currently call America either disregard or simply do not understand.

Being present at the Republican debate Wednesday night was truly disheartening to say the absolute least. As a traditional conservative and advocate of limited government, I was sick to my stomach as a reaction to almost every response the candidates (besides Ron Paul, obviously) provided. I was especially displeased with Mitt Romney, who of course, FOX gave the most time to. I had to manifest a great deal of composure to react quietly when Mr. Romney told an enthusiastic, but seemingly ignorant audience that our government has no call to protect civil liberties when it cannot protect life (therefore justifying the Patriot Act among an array of other unconstitutional activities).

The telling James Madison quotation resounded repeatedly in my head as I fully recognized that I was witness to an exact manifestation of his prediciton, as so many before me have seen the roots of tyranny take hold in their lives. Oppression does not bequeath itself upon a society overnight, but rather the gradual erosion of civil liberties strip us of our freedoms of choice and conscience, because we have never met directly with intolerable tyranny in our lifetimes. We must depart from this narrow view of our existences and gather years of history and precedent together to formulate a viable theory of what our futures will in fact come to if “checks and balances” continue to operate within our government as more of a symbol than a legitimate method.

As it stands, both the Republicans and the Democrats as entire parties want the government to have control over more and more aspects of our lives. Whether it’s Romney giving the government the go ahead to do anything in order to “protect life” or Hillary convincing her constituents that it is the duty of our American government to intervene in everything from healthcare to genocide in third world countries despite the inherent inefficiencies of bureaucracy and the fact that government intervention will inevitably worsen the situations.

If principle cannot beat out Establishment in this election, I will be sorely disappointed in the ability of the American people to understand and utilize what voice we are given, but I won’t give up. I’m out on the streets spreading the word about the Ron Paul Revolution because the optimist in me believes that true civic-minded Americans will grasp the importance of the good doctor’s principled message. We mustn’t limit ourselves to our own constricted views of life as we see it in front of us. It’s an age-old cliche, but history repeats itself.

Sphere: Related Content

Fox News Exposes Itself … Again

Published by

SueM

at September 6, 2007 in Primaries, Political Issues and Ron Paul Awareness. 1 Comment

Exhibit A:

Alan Colmes is announcing results of the Text Message “U-Vote” for the first time and Ron Paul is first with 35%.

Sean Hannity says:

Oh, here we go again … ah, here we go again, it’s driving me crazy

Later in the broadcast:

Alan Colmes:

And before we get to our next guest, let’s take a look at the results so far for tonight’s ‘U-Vote.’ In first place with 33% … Ron Paul … the Paulites I guess busy dialing and re-dialing on the phone.

Sean Hannity (interrupting):

Wait wait wait wait … you know what, they’re re-dialing by the second …

Exhibit B:

Political pollster Frank Luntz is analyzing the graph of viewer response during the “Paul - Huckabee” exchange on Iraq. As it turns out, the exchange was cut short.

Viewer response increases with these last words of Mike Huckabee’s:

Even if we lose elections we should not lose our honor and this is more important than the Republican Party.

to which Pollster Luntz gives his final comment:

Not losing our honor … clearly principle won out in this exchange.

(end of segment)

All well and good had the complete exchange actually been reported, with these, Ron Paul’s final words:

We’ve lost over 5,000 Americans over there in Afghanistan, in Iraq plus thecivilians killed. How many more do you want to lose? How long are we going to be there? What do we have to pay to save face? That’s all we’re doing is saving face. It’s time we came home.

We’ll never know what viewer response to the true ending of this exchange showed on the graph. I can say that the applause to the two statements seemed to be quite even. Given this I think it is safe to imagine Pollster Luntz’ actual final words, the ones not broadcast by Fox News: