Who Gets Paul’s Vote?

Posted on January 11, 2012 by

Primary supporters of republican outlier Ron Paul could be decisive in the 2012 general election.

Will they stay with the party of “free enterprise” and low taxes, despite its adherence to christian values and aggressive foreign policy?

Or will they shift their allegiance to candidate Obama and his corrupt “welfare-state” policies?

For now, democrats enjoy Paul’s role in helping prevent an early Romney wrap-up.  And there are some progressives who respect the Texas congressmember’s principled positions against foreign intervention and the patriot act.

But Paul is mentoring a significant slice of young Americans to hate government and to disparage any notion of a common purpose.

While he appeals to a healthy youthful impulse for individual freedom, he blurs that with a rigid defense of property rights and unrestrained corporate practices.

Once the republican nomination is settled, both camps will begin to court the Paul voters.  That is unless – to the delight of the white house – the 76-year-old decides to go third party.

Comments (51)


  1. John says:

    Paul lives in a black and white world. The world is not black and white however. My guess is an extremely small number of Paul supports shift to Obama. I’ve talked to countless numbers of them, and by far, their main message is limited to no government. They are drunk of the notion of self determination, without considering the reality of what that really means. It’s a fractured reality of individualism mixed with the irony of a UNITED states.

    • crkranz says:

      I think that is exactly opposite, listen to Pauls speech after the NH primary. He says that freedom unites. Since everything isn’t black and white, freedom affords everyone the opportunity to live together with less conflict. It allows people to pursue their individual goals without having to fight over who is going to impose their agenda on the other group. When government gets involved and starts dictating this and that, 50% of the people on the losing end are going to be unhappy.

    • Dan says:

      John, you are way off base here. I used to be a very liberal democrat and now look with shame at my former self. It was through deep consideration of the notion of self determination that I came to the conclusion that the libertarians were right. Here is a short list of amount of reading I’ve done to come up with these views.

      The Revolution by Ron Paul
      Liberty Defined by Ron Paul
      Man, Economy, and State with Power and Markets by Murray Rothbard
      The Mystery of Banking by Murray Rothbard
      The Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard
      Rollback by Thomas Woods
      Meltdown by Thomas Woods
      The Real Lincoln by Thomas Dilorenzo
      Hamilton’s Curse by Thomas Dilorenzo
      The Law by Bastiat
      Crisis and Leviathan by Robert Higgs
      Against Leviathan by Robert Higgs
      Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises
      The Left, The Right, and The State by Lew Rockwell
      Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block

      I could go on and on because Ron Paul has inspired me to devote my free time to studying these issues deeply and thoroughly. We support his message only because we understand it and what the reality of his message is. You statement is very much lacking in the realm of reality.

    • asdf@asdf.tld says:

      You don’t know Paul then. Everyone else in the running is an absolutist. Paul is the least absolutist.

    • Whatever says:

      Well, John I must disagree. I am 31 married 7 years with a child and another on the way. I understand about reality. The reasons I am a Ron Paul supporter are many. I came to first learn about I’m watching a video on his economic prediction of the housing bubble back in 03 (I think). I found it amazing that he did so with such accuracy. listening to NPR every day while going to and from work between 07 and 10, the theme was that no one saw this coming. No one. Well here was someone trying to warn of this collapse.

      How did he know? Why didn’t anyone listen? Well, these questions ignited my curiosity and after checking out his book “end the fed” I came to realize that this guy was no joke.

      As I said there are many reasons I support Ron Paul. Another is the integrity he has. I had pretty much given up on politicians as a lost cause fighting against each other for retention of power. Most often that I should feel thankful if they followed through with trying to accomplish 70% of what they said they would. Once I learned about Ron’s record and integrity I was blown away. He didn’t play games or work with lobbyists. He didn’t speak in vile terms as many do. His record was impressive for what I had expected.

      The third big point I’ll leave you with is his view on the totality in how far we have come from where our founders determined for us to go. And this took a while to fully embrace for me. Sure, it is nothing major to add the income tax in1913 and tell the people it will be on the rich and only 1%. Look where it is now and how big govt has gotten.

      There are a litany of examples you could think of where the rule or law that was passed slowly gets abused, corrupted or invites inefficiency. The problem is that each new generation suffers from not knowing a nation without these programs or laws, so it’s all we know. We have slowly eroded more and more to a point where the govt is now costing us exponentially more than our growth in population. And, we are getting a bit further than we should, philosophically from our essence too.

      Most people hat are “young” seem to rally behind the anti war message but there are many that are intrigued and interested in his philosophy in economics. And with his predictions it makes sense to explore this.

      He is an honest person speaking the truth with vast knowledge and wisdom as his guide. Frankly, I think he is amazing since he was a doctor, politician and honorary economist that the mighty Paul krugman stoops to battle (Nobel prize winning economist) paul because his predictions were so accurate. I was more left leaning on social issues but have realized that you can support many of and more the challenges of today (gay rights etc.) under the Paul platform. This was enlightening to me. Fiscally he is a realist and only expects the got to cut spending like a family living beyond their means. No one else talks like this because they have their lobbyist and special interst and re-election on their mind.
      We literally are going broke and no one wants to cut anything. Taxes on the rich will not solve our problems either it does provide for good rhetoric though.

      Oh and I voted for Obama in 08. I hope you will give ron a long look. Obama has proven he is no stranger to lying and special interest corruption even with being an “outsider”.

    • vman2003 says:

      Who lives in a black and white world is the one who believes that there is a “left” party and “right” party and that somehow there are differences between them and if you’re part of the “left” party , you can’t possibly look at the “right” party, and the other way around. The reality is that a large number of democrats are relatively fiscally conservative, but choose not to vote for reps because of the reps “social liberties issue”. Ron Paul is the mix of two.
      I’ve been RP fan for 5 years now. And I’ve introduced him to my gf last year – she was a traditional democrat. Like most she was leery of “republican” designation but once she started listening to message she got fully on board.
      Ron Paul is the only one that has
      Do we agree with RP 100% ? No – but 90% is good enough for me, especially when I agree on 70% with everyone else and they deliver 30% of that 70% on top of it.
      I would suggest that every liberal and democrat listen to the interview with Robin Kroener – he’s a classical liberal who supports Ron Paul – and in it he explains his views, among others accomplishing liberal goals of social justice through liberty, and not coercion.

    • David says:

      John. RP gains much support BECAUSE the world is not black and white. It’s the adherence to preserving our civil liberties is what unites RP supporters. Paul supporters are probably the most educated because they go beyond the sound bytes and slogans and political rhetoric. That’s why his support is so strong. It takes research and thorough understanding of economics to understand what Paul is talking about. His stuff sounds crazy until you actually understand why he believes the stances he believes in.
      RP is drawing many Independet’s votes that propelled Obama to victory in 2008. The reason? Obama’s failure to keep the promises that got him elected.
      He failed to end the Iraq War “the first thing he would do.” As we pull troops out of Iraq, he’s sending more troops to Afganistan. We got militarily involved in Libya and now it’s about to be overtaken by Al-Qaeda.
      Obama extended the Patriot Act. Obama first closed the Gunatanamo Bay, but opened up 6 new interrogation bases in eastern europe and south america within that year. Later, he reopened the Guantanamo Bay prison.
      Don’t even get me starting with the NDAA.

      Ron Paul is the only one standing up for our civil liberties and a sensible fiscal government.

    • Dsmith says:

      Yes, Ron Paul is awesome on the economy and property rights and personal liberties. However, here is the simplest reason there is for voting for Ron Paul and none of the others. My wife, our three kids and myself just started our farm out in the country. We made this move to get away from the deteriorating conditions of our former neighborhood.

      What makes this particularly poignant is that the home we had been living in was my childhood home that I had purchased from my mother after my father passed away. I wanted our kids to be able to enjoy the neighborhood that my wife I grew up in. Within a few short years of moving back, the single family houses around us turned into absentee-landlord apartment houses. the majority of the occupants were on various forms of state and federal welfare and other aid.

      After getting tired of the police telling us that there was little they could do about a particularly nasty neighbor, we left and started a new life from the ground up.

      Now, I could wave the big government/granny state flag and complain about the caliber of the entitlement recipients but I won’t. Really, our lives are far superior than where we were a short year ago.

      My simple reason for supporting Ron Paul came from a phone call I received in the Fall of last year.

      i spent the better part of a week on my land working on our cabin. I hadn’t been online, watching the news, etc . . .

      A friend of mine called to say hi. During the conversation, he told me that we had begun bombing Libya. Libya? What the hell had they done to us lately?

      Turns out, nothing. This was a NATO action that we partook of. So, here I was. In the northeastern part of our country, doing my thing. Not a single problem had crossed my driveway. Not a single threat to my family’s freedom or safety and our country was attacking yet ANOTHER country.

      I’m voting for Ron Paul because, I am confident that he will defend our country if we are threatened. More importantly, I will not find out a week after the fact that he ordered a bombing mission on another country that wasn’t messing with us, again. An action that harms innocent children and casts a negative light on all Americans.

  2. John Connolly says:

    Behind every “Libertarian” there’s a Right-Wing Statist yearning to get out … and RULE!

    I’ve seen NO numbers detailing Ron Paul’s attraction of a “significant slice” of young Americans. All I’ve seen and heard are reports of an interesting, maybe significant proportion of younger people around the Paul campaign for Republican primaries.

    OK, given that many Republican Primary activists and voters and Ron Paul (and other Neanderthal-ist) boosters tend to be somewhere between 75 and dead, anybody not already yelling “Keep Your Government Hands Off My Medicare!” might look young …-ish.

    The media assertions of a St. Paul Youth Crusade may indeed be correct … but none of these news sources are providing numbers to back up the assertion. ‘Til I see some proof, I think it’s just more Pious Baloney.

    • Dan says:

      Well the only reason you don’t see the youth movement behind Ron Paul is you’re not looking. Just take a look at the election results of Iowa and New Hampshire. About 50% of the people 30 and younger are going to Ron Paul. This has been in fields of 6 or 7 candidates.

    • Les says:

      You must be getting your news from sources even more biased than the ones I do. Every poll shows Ron Paul destroying every candidate not just in the under-30 range, but also in the under-40 and under-55 ranges. If not for voters aged 65+, it would be a Ronslide.

  3. Darren says:

    Hello, I was directed here from dailypaul.com – I’m obviously a Paul supporter. I’m 28, and work in the IT field, and if Paul isn’t the nominee, I’ll be writing him in or abstaining from voting. Many Paul supporters that I know take this stance.

    I wouldn’t say that Dr. Paul has got me to hate government, but rethink what its purpose ought to be and re-evaluate the status quo and how the whole system works. I think government should protect our freedom, but essentially get out of the way otherwise. I would disagree that this disparages any notion of common purpose in me, though, but would instead suggest that common purposes are best met by the free association of a free people and not by imposition of government.

    As far as property rights, I don’t see that as a separate issue from personal freedoms. If I don’t have a right to my stuff or the fruits of my labor, how could I be considered as having personal freedom?

    When it comes to deregulation, I am a bit hesitant there, but I do think that for the most part government intervention only hurts business, while being ineffective at protecting consumers. But aside from the good that it may or may not do, the fact that government does do regulation means that lobbyists are heavily invested in affecting the outcomes. So faced with the choice of a government which doesn’t regulate at all vs. one that does and is corrupted by corporate interests – I choose the doesn’t regulate at all option. I don’t think there is an in-between because as soon as the government exercises that power, the lobbyists will be there.

  4. Crickett says:

    I do not know where people get the idea that Ron is against government and it is quite obvious that the writer of this article does not pay a whole lot of attention to what he does say. We happen to have unique laws that started our country and need to remain, if we want to be any sort of “exceptional” because that Constitution is what originally made it that way. AND guess what? Its main purpose was to LIMIT the size of the federal government!
    Yes. They were given THREE main duties and that is all. This was to keep us from becoming LIKE other countries. This post angered me. If the writer misses this precept of Dr. Paul and our Founders then nothing else he even says will make sense to him, so why even bother to write about Ron.
    I am over 60 years old and can not speak for young people, but there are about a zillion polls in which Ron does much better than Romney in this regard. Look them up instead of whining that it “can’t be so”. There are so many they are easy to find.
    Sorry to sound so ornery but this post really got my ire up.

  5. In your heart you know Ron Paul is right. Listen to your heart, it wants to be free!

  6. fiodax says:

    Actually, Paul is the only candidate favoring a truly regulated business environment by abolishing the monopoly powers of the Fed as the regulators of currency and instead affixing that regulation to the politically more immune standards of gold and silver and by encouraging competing currencies.

    Corruption is prevalent in our corporations and government because at it’s core is the power of the government to create money, the symbol of value that all business is set out to accumulate. As it stands today, the government is the source of this wealth, so corporations go there in order get the new money first.

    Because of this, corporations don’t worry so much about the quality of the goods and services they are producing, instead they worry more about how what they are producing can secure them a subsidy or government contract, or how they can persuade officials to create regulations that guarantee their profitable activities.

    Paul would remove this power from government and put into the hands of the people. Corporations would be forced to appeal to the market in order to get any of the wealth, that would now be in the hands of the people, to flow their way. This would mean they would have to create new, better, more efficient products, as well as behaving in such a way that the market would tolerate (not polluting the private property of others, honoring labor contracts, etc).

    The regulators are being bought and paid for by the people that they regulate, often it is hard to tell a difference between the two, and this is especially true when it comes to the Fed. The only real solution is to regulate money by affixing it to an outside standard such as gold and silver that is not prone to political manipulation (as the Constitution suggests), this is not deregulation, this is the real regulation, based in reality, not in the political whims of an elite few.

  7. Josh says:

    To Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives:

    I’m sure you all agree with Libertarians that these wars have gone on way too long, and you are tired of the death, destruction and heartbreak they cause.

    Even if you wouldn’t support Ron Paul in the general election, How could it hurt to vote for him to become the Republican Nominee?

    It’s a win-win!

    You end up changing the discourse in the Republican party to more closely reflect your views!

    With a coalition of Libertarians, Paleoconservatives, Liberals, and Progressives, Ron Paul can without a doubt be the Republican Nominee!

    • michael says:

      Ron Paul has voted for anti abortion legislation and spoken out against abortion every chance he has had.
      Govt. involvement in any decision made by a doctor and patient is private and personal and must not be the govt’s business.
      Truly libertarian?

      • darge says:

        The foundation of liberty is life. Without the protection of life there cannot be any liberty, and this is clearly stated and understood in the Declaration of Independence where it states and I quote “…. that they [men] are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights Governments are instituted among Men….” The Declaration of Independence is one of the organic laws of these united States – it recognizes the sanctity of life in whatever form it comes as it does not qualify what life is.

        But furthermore to accept abortion is to recognize the violation of ones property rights – the rights of the unborn child. To accept that an unborn child can be killed or done away with as a woman wishes is to recognize that the child is the property of the woman bearing it – in other words it is to accept that the child has the status of a slave, with no rights and to be done away with as the master wishes. You cannot claim to accept freedom and liberty and thus property rights while at the same time accept abortion. It is intellectually indefensible.

        What those in liberal camp fail to understand is that Liberty requires one to take responsibility for the choices one makes in life. If you are involved in activities which in the end you cannot take responsibility for then do not engage in them. One may argue the issue of rape, but then the question which arises is what fault of the child is it that it has to lose its life? Would it not be better to give birth and give the child away then to kill it just to save the woman the inconvenience of giving birth?

        If you accept abortion then you have to accept slavery … truly liberal?

        • John Williams says:

          The one problem I have with this argument is where does life begin. Saying it is at conception is as bad a saying termination at 81/2 months is acceptable. If this issue were to become a law then an objective scientific position on when human consciousness arises needs to be formulated.

      • Stephen Pasquale says:

        Anyone that believes a fetus is a person would of course believe it’s a violation of the child’s liberty to end its life.

        The question is not whether Ron Paul is a true libertarian, the question is whether the unborn is part of the mother or is it its own person.

        With years of experience in the field, Ron Paul, Ob/Gyn looks at the medical evidence and believes the unborn child is a person separate from the mother.

        Abortions are performed on children who have their own heart, their own brain, their own arms and legs, their own thumbprint, their own DNA, the capacity to feel and respond to pain, and in later stages, the ability to live outside the womb).

        It’s not unreasonable to believe that life should be protected.

        Life. Liberty. Pursuit of happiness.

        • michael says:

          Is there a grain of difference between a republican who wants to force their beliefs upon women and a liberterian who believes abortion is murder?
          The liberterian probably wants less services and spending to care for the baby once it’s forced upon the mother by the govt. that both claim to want to reduce.
          The words abortion and belief are always used in tandem.
          Hold onto your beliefs. Live by them. The’re your beliefs.
          What a woman chooses to do with her beliefs are her own. Live by your beliefs. What a woman chooses to do with hers, are NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS. Govt. does not belong in peoples bedrooms.
          Libertertian? Ha.

  8. Crabacado says:

    You might be in for quite the surprise with Ron Paul. Think about it. He wants to end war and bring most of the troops home. He wants to stop our empire building because history has taught us, time and again, that economic collapse is unavoidable when an empire is spread too thin.

    We have 500,000 troops overseas. They should be spending their money here, not in Japan, Germany, S Korea etc.

    The war on drugs cannot be denied as an epic failure. He has the sense to stop trying something that simply doesn’t work. Remember the definition of insane, is trying the same thing over and over, expecting different results.

    He wants to make peace with the world and trade with them instead of bombing them or forcing unwanted nation building.

    Even the CIA supports Dr Paul’s foreign policy, just as the military does. How else could one explain that Paul receives more donations from active military than ALL other candidates combined, including Obama.

    and one final point. Romney’s biggest donors? Goldman Sachs, B of A and JP Morgan. These are also Obama’s biggest donors. Dr Paul has never taken a penny from Lobbyists or big Corporations, yet somehow his campaign raises more money than the others. Don’t you want the government out of your life and your bedroom?

    Been through an airport lately? Homeland Security and The Patriot Act have stolen our liberties. Now it’s NDAA and SOPA. Don’t you see what is happening?

  9. Dan says:

    You can’t have respect for individual freedom without a respect for property rights. I understand where you are coming from, as I used to be a diehard Clinton democrat, but after studying libertarianism and Austrian economics I have learned that my views were not correct. I have also been able to bring all my former liberal family over to the message of liberty through getting them to study these issues. In fact, any person who I have gotten to study libertarianism and Austrian economics, whether democrat or republican, has come to the same conclusion and has given up the left-right paradigm. The truth really does set you free.

    As for where our votes will go, we will either stay home, write-in Ron Paul, or go third party. These votes will go away from both Romney and Obama because both democrats and republicans are becoming libertarians. We see no difference in either Romney or Obama. They both support undeclared wars. They both support assassination of Americans with no charge or trial. They both support NDAA and the Patriot Act. They both support the bailouts. They both support the Federal Reserve system. They both support foreign aid. They are both hawkish on Iran. They both support the drug war. They both support individual mandates. They both ignore the constitution. They both sound like George W Bush. The only difference is one is more for social welfare while the other is more for corporate welfare.

    I’m not voting the lesser of two evils. I will only support candidates who espouse principles that adhere to the non-aggression principle and have a respect for property rights. Ron Paul is the only candidate that does so. I will stay home if Ron Paul doesn’t win the republican nomination but as a former democrat that is one less vote for Obama. Give me liberty, period.

    Thankfully it will not matter one way or another. The people who support Ron Paul will always and forever defend the message of liberty and never accept anything less. We will continue to spread the message and grow in numbers until we are the majority. The youth movement is completely behind Ron Paul and thus the future is behind liberty. Democrats and republicans will continue to lose supporters to our cause as ours is the message that unites all people. Freedom is popular.

  10. shero says:

    The essence of Ron Paul’s message is that the Government has been looting the American people, that would be you and me, to the point where the majority of us are finding it nearly impossible to provide for ourselves and our families. I would call stopping these shenanigans a “common purpose.” I don’t think you like being rendered impoverished because of some fools in suits who think they are smarter with your hard earned money than you are, do you?

    I fail to see the problem with property rights. They really just mean that what is yours is not mine. Why should I have a right to your belongings, money, etc, or you mine? Perhaps if I were a fool in a suit and took offense to your blog, I could just take it from you, and then change it to something more in line with my philosophy. But under the protection of property rights, I cannot do this, not to mention it is kind of a jerky move in principle.

    As far as the youth are concerned, we are really just sick of paying for generations worth of mistakes, and I for one do not want to see my elder relatives live their last days eating cat food. If we as a nation to do not address and fix the fundamental problems with our economy, this scenario will become a reality, sooner rather than later. Weimar Republic, anyone?

    I really do not enjoy sounding so dire, but unfortunately, the situation calls for it. Please give Ron Paul a second look. Do some digging. If the money is no good, everything else goes to you- know-what and Paul is the only one addressing this.

  11. DPH says:

    “But Paul is mentoring a significant slice of young Americans to hate government…”

    If only that were true. However, if you listen to the message, it is that the time has clearly come to reign in an over reaching and unaccountable central government simply by requiring elected representatives to follow the document that was intended to define its role, the constitution.

    We are taught in school to revere our founders and the constitutional republic they established. We are shown in life that when the restrictions imposed by that document interfere with political expediency, it is ignored.

    I believe it is the hypocrisy and increasingly naked lust for power of most politicians that is causing the message of liberty to resonate with so many young people.

    If you can honestly say that living in a country with a government that has claimed the power to detain, torture and kill anyone, anywhere, without charges or trial on the say so of one man does not disturb you, then I guess we’re done for.

    Government, at its most fundamental level, is brute force. Nothing more. If it cannot be controlled and limited, it is far more dangerous than none at all.

    You know, the Germans didn’t just wake up one morning in 1939 and say “Scheiße! I guess we’re all nazis now.” It happened one “Patriot Act” and NDAA at a time. Everything Hitler did was perfectly legal. And yes, it can happen here.

  12. quiltingsando says:

    Hi! I am a Ron Paul supporter and I did not just jump on the Ron Paul wagon. I did a lot of research first.
    After reading his books and checking his voting record, and watching his videos on Youtube, (going back many years) I was very impressed. He has been trying to inform the public of what would happen if we ignored his warning and then his predictions came true how could I not support this man?

    When the media kept calling him kook, nuts, crazy etc. I couldn’t figure it out. At first his stances seems excessive like his position on the FED, Income tax etc. but after careful study his message and positions were correct in my view. He has been voted the Tax Payers best friend many times.

    He also said he would not just end all the programs abruptly but transition from them so those on them will not suffer and that the younger generation have the option of not being forced onto them.

    If you have not sincerely read his work or talked to Ron Paul supporters then you are doing yourself and your family a disservice.

    Good luck because this country is so off track now that the NDAA is law, we are in serious danger.

    I am not a Libertarian but an Independent.

    I view all the political parties corrupt because they have totally ignored the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    It is not just the young who support Ron Paul well actually I am 61 years young. ha! ha!

    We don’t need to fight and insult one another like rival football teams but discuss and work together this is our freedoms we are losing.

  13. Praxis says:

    Greetings and salutations Mr. Siegel.

    At the request of a polite young individual many a member of the Daily Paul will be filling up your comments board with our libertarian jargon which might possibly be unwelcome. We understand that and respect others’ private property such as your blog here and contact you with no ill intentions, of this fact I can assure you.

    Nonetheless, the conversation between disparate views over the direction of our fine country is a healthy one as we all care very deeply about our futures. I’m sure that can be appreciated by everyone.

    I’m sure a large part of the argument gamut has already been covered so I’ll only add a few things relating to my personal experience.

    My name is Tom, I’m a 31 year old disaffected Democrat who has always leaned somewhat libertarian, yet went along to go along on the party boat.

    Ron Paul (and many other libertarians) have helped me to realize a few things about Washington and governance in general.

    1. Top down pyramid structures are abusive.
    No matter what the intentions are of such a system, good ideas almost universally are retarded over time into control mechanisms they were never intended to be. They suffer from corruption creep often needing major overhaul after the system starts breaking down. This is what is occurring with Washington today. The gridlock and failure is so thick, palpable and entirely obvious to anyone with a pair of eyes and a brain.

    2. Nothing is absolute, not rights, not decrees, not scribble on paper mandating this or that.
    To ascribe to an absolute is an exercise in futility. The only absolutes in the universe are change.

    3. The big Club is ruining life for everyone.
    George Carlin in his famous “why education is terrible” act popularized this label of the hierarchical trading favors structure and insider clique mentality of the political (or rather “ruling” if you will) class who fill most of the large power positions in all government, but more pronounced, the Federal Government. I’m sure you know all about the Big Club, its agenda and how it relates to the Great Game of world power.

    With those generalities aside, here’s the kicker.
    The essence of the Ron Paul movement is the people’s way of saying to power what Max Schumacher in the movie Network famously said.

    We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore.

    It’s basically saying to the power establishment, “You had your chance over the last 100 years. We don’t believe you are a force for human progress anymore, rather, you are a hinderance. We, the people of America, will rout you out and by god we will rout you out.”

    If the machination of government is so onerous, so sick at heart that you won’t participate, that you can’t even casually participate, we must throw our bodies upon the wheels, upon the gears, upon the levers and make it stop.

    When America is run of, by and for the people to a sufficiency defined by the people, the machine will be let to run again. Until then, we will put you (the federal government) into a small box called the Constitution until we are satisfied your moral and ethical values are in line with our own.

    I believe this is a common cycle of humanity and nothing out of the ordinary. Empires come and go regularly.

    The young people, being not hopelessly dependent on the system writ large are picking up on this large social transformation which the information age has ushered in. They are looking passed the near future and are shouting their observations. Many have read history and can see where a lethargic and materially focused society usually ends up. Self destruction. They don’t want that. Neither do I.

    Thank you for your time.
    Peace and liberty for us all.

    • Lou says:

      I want to thank Tom and other Ron Paul supporters for your thoughtful and persuasive comments. Your candidate has integrity, principled political values and a coherent message. I’m happy to hear and consider your points of view and I don’t at all feel that my space has been invaded.

  14. Restore the Constitution says:

    If you want to end the wars, stop the overseas adventurism that is killing people for corporate profits, stop the government – Wall street corruption, stop the NDAA, stop SOPA, stop the Patriot Act, and restore our civil liberties you had better start thinking about supporting Ron Paul. He may be our last hope to get back on track and restore the consistution and if you go with Obama you will get another 4 years of the same old thing. But don’t take my word for it, research Ron Paul – read his many writings, watch his youtubes interviews, and read his books and see for yourself.

  15. joel in ga says:

    Ron Paul’s ideas inspire common purpose: a respect for my neighbor’s life, liberty, and property. Ever growing government means ever growing coercion, which is a slight to human dignity.

  16. asdf@asdf.tld says:

    The left-right paradigm is broken beyond all measure. The real divisions, if you are staring at a typical left-right political graph, are up and down. towards the top are the statists, centrists, wilsonians, the u.s.a. is all powerful, big government, loves centralizes solution type people. They are exist on the top left, top center ,and top right. Unknowingly, they view people as ants, to be given marching orders, where we all line up, and do as we’re told. Whether that’s support war, support welfare, support corporate welfare, support the nanny state.

    Then at the bottom of the graph, you have jeffersonians, decentralists, grass roots, bottom up, individual liberties, self managed, emphasis on local governance, representation that is meaningful, ….basically people who understand that just like giant corporations that are sluglike and depend on government blessed monopoly status, the government itself has become large an unwieldy, it’s not a difficult thing to spot. Any top down, centrally managed collective, at some point in its growth cycle, becomes too large, and gross inefficiencies naturally occur, with more and more effort spent on attempting to “control the organism”.

    It’s human folly.

    I’m open to many ideas that the left hold near and dear to their hearts, but not in the present form, where an all powerful central government pays lip service year after year, as two faces of the same coin, pretend to wrest power away from each other every 4 years.

    We need to talk about these things. We need the old people to wake up and realize that THEY are where the buck stops. They are the elders. And if this country has gone to heck in a handbasket, it’s the elders who need to realize that they have the greatest contribution to the problem. But they also have the greatest potential to lead us back to sanity. If they weren’t afraid of everything and anything….

  17. Kenny C says:

    For what it’s worth, here is my story and my journey to a philosophical understanding that has changed my life. I can only hope it helps others on theirs.

    I was a liberal democrat for my whole life. Always told how the democrats were the party of the people and I believed the rhetoric. Always thinking that if we just taxed the producers more and more everything would be alright. I never questioned what would happen if we taxed them to much and they just stopped producing because it was no longer profitable. I never took time to notice that policies never changed from one party to the next. There was always more bombs being dropped on innocent people, there was always more monetary expansion, and there was always more debt onto my back and future generation’s backs. That was until I discovered a few life changing names….

    First was Frederic Bastiat, a French philosopher and economist. His broken window fallacy blew my mind open to a new strain of thought. It allowed me to see not just what I can see as the positive effects of a situation but the man that was not seen in every situation. His book “That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen” changed my whole perspective of the country. I realized that every action that a government takes removes capital from the hands of the people. Some is used for a legitimate purpose like national defense, but others merely distort the market and benefit a few at the expense of the many.

    Second was Murray Rothbard who’s book lead me to understand the concepts of libertarianism and how spontaneous order can occur in society based up the decisions we make on a daily basis to make our lives better. How the consumer choices determine how a business succeeds and fails, and how human actions is not some mathematical calculation but a constant flowing change of wants and desires that make up what we call the pursuit of happiness. Of course after that I began to appreciate the Constitution for once in my life and how it created a sense of order with restraints on the power available to the politicians, who throughout history have tried to obtain power to control people’s live, in order to allow people to decide their own fate instead of being guided by the moral majority.

    Naturally of course those two led me to Ron Paul. Once I listened to some of his speeches I realized there’s at least one politician that hasn’t sold out his beliefs. It’s pretty obvious that politicians sell their votes to the highest bidder but there was just this one guy, who so many times voted against the party lines all by himself because he believed in something and stood up and asked where in the Constitution congress had the authority to do all these things. The way the man speaks you can tell he is not out for fame, glory, money, or his own personal gain. He is out to educate and try to better our society. He believes in the Constitution with all his heart and believes in all of us to live our lives the best we can and make the choices that suit us. That is how America became great. It did not become the wealthiest nation because of it’s government. It became the wealthiest nation because of the choices of the people and the determination to better their own lives.

    I now have a completely new aspect on life and a renewed hope in humanity. The Ron Paul supporters I’ve met since becoming one of them have helped me become more knowledgeable, friendlier, and a much more profound thinker. While so much is going on to stifle the free flow of thought and suppress free thinking there is a large sector of America yearning to think for themselves and I call those people friends and revolutionaries.

  18. freetheconstitution says:

    “But Paul is mentoring a significant slice of young Americans to hate government and to disparage any notion of a common purpose.”

    Mr. Lou,

    I have to respectfully disagree with you on this line from your article.

    Ron Paul is considered a mentor by many of us Americans, not just the young people. I am 35 years old and was re-awakened in 2007 during Ron Paul’s run for the Republican nomination. I am upper middle class, and am well educated. I will not bore you with details on how I came to where I am in my support of Dr. Paul, but it is important to remember that Ron Paul’s reach goes far beyond a small group of college kids.

    It is, in fact, the common purpose of liberty that unites us all. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not Ron Paul himself that creates such support, but rather, the ideas that he has steadfastly and honorably represented in his time in Washington. He garners such a following because he is incorruptible, often being the lone voice of reason screaming on the road less traveled. I heard it said recently that “Most politicians spend their career chasing the electorate.” “Ron Paul is unique in that he’s spent his career for decades standing in one place, and now people are coming to him.”

    His ideas of limited government, personal liberty, and a common sense approach to foreign policy should be ideas that everyone should embrace. They are the ideas of our heritage, the views of our founders, and the very principles that inspired the writing of our Constitution.

    To insinuate that he is in any way teaching others to hate government is an argument born of fallacy and a lack of understanding. Government is always dangerous because of man’s quest for power. Thomas Jefferson said, “In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

    It is not a question of hating government, but one of distrust in the men who seek power to control the people. This is and always has been the danger of any central government. It is an ideological battle that the founders understood and once upon a time (not too long ago) Americans embraced. Ron Paul is the messenger that reminds us of our duty to our country and to one another. This movement and our support of Dr. Paul is not a fight to overthrow government, but rather, a fight to return the power back to its rightful place, the people. We do this for Paul, we do this for ourselves, and more importantly, we do it for all Americans, even those like you who do not realize yet the importance of the battle we are in.

  19. Hello! I’m a left-leaning person from Daily Paul.

    I just thought I would quickly weigh in on why a liberal would want to support Paul over Obama. Consider each candidate’s downsides:

    Ron Paul: Will veto every bill that doesn’t pass his extremely strict interpretation of the Constitution, derailing growth of various programs. Might succeed in dismantling or downsizing certain federal programs, resulting in loss of govt jobs. Might succeed in reducing foreign aid to various countries. However, all of these financial policies will be heavily moderated by Congress.

    Obama: Will continue wars or start more wars without Congressional approval—wars which destroy civilian communities while pointlessly slaughtering our own troops (twice the number of troops have died under Obama as those under Bush). Will continue expanding his drone program which results in incredible numbers of civilian deaths. Will continue civil rights violations via the Patriot Act and indefinite detainment, and will even continue to detain Guantanamo prisoners who’ve been cleared for release. Will continue the drug war. Will continue to bail out banks and megacorps while protecting his corporate friends, like BP. Will continue TSA insanity. (I have links to articles backing up these claims, if you’re interested.)

    Basically, a vote for Obama guarantees death and detainment of a lot of innocent people—and no private organization or regular person can save those people. A vote for Ron Paul may disrupt a number of programs that give free resources to the needy—but private charities *can* help those people, to some degree.

    Thus, I feel Paul is the only humanitarian option.

  20. FlyingComic says:

    How can you say that “Paul is mentoring a significant slice of young Americans to hate government and to disparage any notion of a common purpose” and imply that they unite for a common purpose in support of Ron Paul in one blog entry? I’d say you have a flawed definition of “common purpose,” which is not uncommon among those on the left or right who favor “progress through force.”

    For you, “common purpose” is kneeling before the alter of government politicians and bureaucrats who somehow magically know more than we do. That commandment to “know our places” comes in the face of evidence all around us that these government overlords DO NOT know more than we do and their commandments do not work.

    Ron Paul is leading a whole generation to finally think for themselves and unite for the common purpose of granting each other the liberty to act in non-agressive fashion. They are abandoning the religions of government that tell us how to “morally” spend our money or “morally” obey made-up rules of personal behavior. He is teaching people that as long as they don’t interfere with the rights of others, they can behave in any way they want to, but they must accept the responsibility of the outcome of that behavior and not try to “socialize” their failures.

    Ron Paul is teaching the young and the young of heart that freedom is popular. It is about time!

  21. Heidi says:

    Mr Lou: I don’t know if you have ever heard this wonderful Ted Talk by Kathryn Schulz “On Being Wrong”, but I think it could be a potential paradigm shifter for anyone willing to sit for 14 minutes. And, I think it approaches well this duality of thought that is prevalent in politics (and elsewhere) today.
    I highly encourage you (and everyone) to listen to it here:
    Now, I might be wrong, but this is where I’ve landed ideologically… at least today: In the hierarchy of human interaction, the lowest level is force. In our current state of affairs, Government equals force. The next level is voluntary contractual agreements. One could argue that this is where Dr Paul has raised the bar. He is encouraging us to voluntarily contract with one another in mutually beneficial ways – without obstruction or force (ie “Government”). This type of thinking often leads to fear-based responses from folks on both sides of the ‘aisle’. This is understandable, because we have been conditioned to believe that we require a 3rd party intercessor to advocate for us in many areas of our lives. But to my thinking, this intercessor (in this case “Government’) usually acts as an impediment to straightforward and honest interaction. In other words, we have outsourced to a government of force our greatest gifts and assets: life, liberty and voluntary experiences. This often makes people uncomfortable, because it requires us to take risks, and even a leap of faith, if you will. Even more unsettling for some it requires that we to learn to be cooperative. Voluntarily and without force or coercion. This is where it gets tricky for people (democrats?), because they see it as being an inherently competitive state of being, and favoring one group or individual over another. It doesn’t feel fair. This is true. It isn’t. However, it is through this ‘higher’ level of interaction that we learn to hone our cooperative skills and our sense of unity that will eventually lead us to ‘level 3′. This last level is the voluntary cooperative interactions for the greater good. Maybe I’m wrong (or just naive) but I’d like to see a world where we all individually advocate for the greater good. Does that make sense? It takes the (democratic ideology of) the greater good, and combines it with the (republican ideology of) individual agency for a world I think we’d all like to live in.
    So, why Ron Paul? Because he’s the only one advocating for the next step in our human evolution.

  22. Savannah says:

    Hi, I just wanted to share some thoughts about my support for Ron Paul – not just the person, but his message.

    When I started paying attention to politics in my 20s, I found that while conservative viewpoints made sense in some ways, I was drawn to the liberal notion of helping those less fortunate. Some of my older friends were self-defined “bleeding-heart-liberals”, and I admired their compassion, and I ended up leaing more Democrat.

    I discovered Ron Paul many years later, right around when I turned 40, last election cycle. After doing some research on him, I was amazed to find that not only did he have a consistent voting record, but that he was a politician with integrity – I had grown to believe that was an oxymoron up until that time. :)

    One of the MAJOR things that really impressed me about Dr. Paul which caused me to listen to him in the first place was that he does NOT bend to lobbyists; they don’t even bother seeking him out anymore because he cannot be influenced. Wow.

    The more I learned about Dr. Paul’s views, the more I had to question the 2-party system and the labels of liberal v. conservative. I began to see that these “classifications” are divisive, a tool used by the political elite to divide the people and keep them distracted as the groups fight each other. I also began to realize that there really isn’t much difference between the Democrat and Republican parties: both were promoting wars, big govt, expanding budgets, and more control over the people by taking away civil rights.

    Once I realized that having a BIG govt was harmful to the average person (& the high taxes that allow funding to expand govt also gives govt tons of money for wars), all that was left were two concerns:
    1) If we don’t have big govt to care for the disadvantaged, who will take care of the poor/those in need of charity?
    2)With small govt and less regulations, who would protect us from corporate greed?

    I wanted to see how the paradigm of “libertarianism” would deal with those questions.

    Reading the book “Healing Our World” by Mary Ruwart was a great help in answering those questions.
    (The first edition is available free online at http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/ruwart_all.html )

    In that book, I found the answers to the question of compassion & how to help the poor with much LESS government — esp since most (if not all) govt regulations designed to help the poor actually harm the poor the most (eg minimum wage laws are well documented to harm the poorest segment of the population).

    Dr. Ruwart also does a good job throughout the book of explaining how a true “free-market” system works, and how in reality the free market “regulates” business much more effectively than govt regulation.

    The reason our current system is such a mess is because whenever you have a big & powerful govt, human nature leaves far too much room for corruption. Even the best of politicians have continual pressure to bow to lobbyist demands, or risk losing their position to a candidate who will give the special interests what they want.

    Our current system is touted as a “free market” & then criticized, with folks saying “free market capitalism has failed” using examples of corporate corruption everywhere.

    But we don’t have a free market system due to govt created monopolies (eg subsidies), govt not allowing bad businesses to fail (bailouts), govt blocking consumers from suing for bad products so corps not held liable (eg vaccine mfgrs). So as long as we have corporations in bed with govt, we as consumers /citizens are NOT protected, and the “free market” is not given the chance at self-regulation.

    The only answer is to reduce the size & power of the federal govt (and hopefully citizens of each state can keep their state govt down to a level that works best for citizens of that state) and let govt move out of the way of private businesses — and that means not protecting companies, either!

    If we let the free market reign w/o govt interference or protection, businesses will be forced to provide a good product at a reasonable price, provide a healthy work environment with wages/benefits acceptable to employees, be a “good neighbor (eg refrain from polluting the environment). If the business does not do all of those things, consumers will choose not to buy from them & they will fail.

    Anyway, I hope my rambling makes sense (with 4 kids, I was distracted at times!) and offers some insight into the libertarian perspective that gets so much support from those who admire Dr. Paul.

    Have a blessed night. :)

  23. Well, I can’t speak for all Ron Paul supporters, but this is what this Ardent supporter is going to do:
    There is no other candidate I will vote for than the good and honest doctor. If he’s not nominated then I will vote 3rd party like I did the last two times.
    How grateful I am to know a man who understands the constitution in its inspired form.


  24. Craig Johnson says:

    1). No individual or government has the right to initiate force, threat of force or fraud against a persons life, liberty, property/contract.

    2). The only legitimate use of force is in defense from those who violate #1.

    3). No exceptions exit.

    Ron Paul is consistant with this axiomatic premis.

  25. Words cannot describe how much I admire Dr. Paul. I will not vote for anyone in the Republican field but Ron Paul. I will vote third party before voting for banksters Mitt or Obama. I am not a child, but a mother of five who sees through the farce of the two party system.

  26. David says:

    Ron Paul crosses the party lines b/c Obama is not any better than Bush. The independents that gave Obama victory in 2008 are aware of that and that’s why they’re switching to Ron Paul.

  27. Liberty4ever says:

    How could anyone support the lying murdering Obama. Do you know he has murdered more civilians in Afghanistan then Bush did in 8 years? He is warmongering psychopath. Listen to your son and vote Ron Paul!!!!

  28. sovereign says:

    I read the books Blowback by Chalmers Johnson and The Creature From Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin to get an in depth understanding of Ron Paul’s economic and foreign policy views. Ever since I’ve been a believer that his views are spot on.

  29. Robert Fallin says:

    Well, we can either support Obama, who supports greatly increased domestic spending, more overseas adventurism, more military spending, Obamacare with waivers for his friends and the authority of the POTUS to murder, torture or intern US citizens indefinitely without due process; or Mitt Romney, who supports increased domestic spending more overseas adventurism, MUCH more military spending, Obamacare with waivers for HIS friends and the the and the authority of the POTUS to murder, torture or intern US citizens indefinitely without due process? SC Governor Nikki Haley said Romney, told her that South Carolina would be able to get a waiver from the requirement.

    So, given a choice between two tyrants who cannot be trusted, I would say most supporters of Ron Paul will urge Congressman Paul to run third party. The BIGGER question is, should, by some miracle, Ron Paul defeat the MSM, win South Carolina and all of the Southern “Red States,” then build on that momentum to win the nomination, will the GOP establishment recruit Romney or some other GOP RINO to run third party against Ron Paul, as they did in 1980 with John Anderson?

  30. Berlin Veteran says:

    We all know how much influence lobbyists have on those in politics. I would like to know how many lobbyists have had a impact on Ron Paul. I would then like to know how many lobbyists have had an impact on the other candidates. It would seem to me that the candidate that lobbyists had the least amount of success with should be the natural frontrunner. Sadly that is not the case. Ron Paul is known among the lobbyists as a person that can not be bought. The media has been bought. Obama, Romney, Gingrich, Huntsman, Perry and Santorum have all worked with the lobbyists in formulating laws and regulation that would have a positive affect on the corporations that paid for thier influence. It’s east enough to find out the answer to this question. I will believe that corporations are people when they exacute the first corporation that violated the economic prosperity of the citizens. Maybe Naomi Klein had it right in her film “The Shock Doctrine”. We need to look real hard at the facts that many of those that were responsible for the collapse of the economy were rewarded with big bonuses and positions of authority that affect the future of our economy. When the wage disparity of the average CEO goes from 43 times the wage of the average worker to over 400 times the wage of the average worker those in power have a lot of explaining to do. If you have made your selection for president I ask you to check to see if they are a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). If that is true then you should take an even more closer look at that candidate because if they are a member of the CFR then you have been told what you wanted to hear and they have no intention to do what they said they will do. Most Republicans and Democrats are only separate wings of the same bird. Look back and see for yourself. We have waged a war on poverty for over 50 years here in the US and the only people that have really prospered are those that were not considered to be in poverty.

  31. Ace45 says:

    I no longer fall for the leaders on “the right” or on “the left”. I want to live under non-aggression principles that those two sides oppose in one form or another.
    Lou, what unrestrained corporate practices occur without the use of some kind of government force??
    If government was truly protecting citizen’s life, liberty, and property (which includes fraud) then what would a corporations FORCE you to do?
    If you study at mises.org your view of the world will open up.
    Best of luck.

  32. Savannah says:

    This was interesting to note:

    The top contributor to BOTH Obama and Romney is Goldman Sachs – a mega-corporation that rec’d $10 BILLION in bailouts, which of course, is a burden placed squarely on the shoulders of We the People (taxpayers).

    The top 3 contributors to Ron Paul:
    1. US Army
    2. US Air Force
    3. US Navy

    Active military donations to Ron Paul are double that of the other GOP candidates and Obama COMBINED.

    They understand that spreading our troops in 130+ countries around the world weakens our national security and don’t want these wars for oil & dollar hegemony (and it costs taxpayers $1 Trillion per year!). Ron Paul wants to end the unconstitutional wars & bring our troops home ASAP.

    See also:
    10 reasons why even democrats, liberals, and progressives are choosing Ron Paul over Obama

  33. pravin says:

    50% of the under 30 vote went to Ron Paul in NH and Iowa and it will repeated across the country. The Tea partiers were hijacked by establishment republicans,but the RP wing of the republican party will not vote for anyone but him.

    The future of the country is voting for ron paul -because they KNOW that there is no easy way out of this financial mess.The steady erosion of civil liberties(patriot act,ndaa,sopa) is not not unsurprising,but also expected in The Road to Serfdom -a book by FA Hayek,one of ron paul’s intellectual heroes.

    think.and vote for paul.

  34. Jason says:

    As a Georgist I do not agree with Paul on everything. However, limited government is exactly what this country needs at this time of runaway spending and tighter government control over our lives. Obama’s Presidency is really Bush’s third term:

    1. Took much longer to withdraw troops from Iraq than promised. Only withdrew after the Iraqi Parliament said they would no longer give the US immunity to warcrimes charges.

    2. Continues pouring billions of dollars into fighting a war in Afghanistan we cannot win.

    3. Expands our global war by bombing Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and Libya.

    4. He renewed that Patriot Act

    5. He did a complete 180 and signed the unconstitutional NDAA despite promising to veto it

    6. He has done little to change the course of our failed ‘War on Drugs’

    7. He promised to keep lobbyists out of his administration but broke that promise 17 times in just the first 2 weeks of his presidency.

    8. Bailouts, bailouts, and more bailouts. Who’s really representing the corporate interests?

  35. Les says:

    I will be voting for Dr. Paul in the primary, and if he does not run third party, I will proudly write him in. All other candidates offer no change to the horrible status quo.

    You say the white house would be delighted by a Paul 3rd party run. If that’s true, then they’re in for a huge surprise.

    Your post seems to hint at the support Paul gets from the left and wonder for a second whether he could actually take away more Obama votes than Romney before dismissing the notion as nonsense. Careful.

    Obama voters are a young base demanding change in the direction of our country. I think Obama’s people should be much more worried about Paul’s surge in popularity than Romney’s.

Leave a Reply