Comments on: Ron Paul’s supporters aren’t Republicans

by: abb3w

Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:28:59 +0000

To the extent that it gets people who have previously considered themselves Independents and Libertarians to join, that would seem to be a good thing for the proverbial Republican “big tent” strategy. If its liberal Democrats changing to a registration of convenience because they think Ron Paul can’t win the national election, that’s less good (if classic political chicanery, which I’ve seen done by both sides).

Conservative Democrats re-registering would seem to fall somewhere in the middle.

Politically, I call myself a “Pragmatist” these days. I lean Libertarian, but have enough socially and environmentally leftward leanings that I don’t call myself one, and my stance on the war generally pisses off everyone I explain it to. I considered joining the Ron Paul swarm, but my concerns about faint hints of racist and theocratic streaks leave me leary enough that I’m going with my first instinct: after the antics of the Nixon and present Bush administrations, I will not vote for anyone running under the banner of the Republican party in my lifetime.

Perhaps with the issue of Slavery settled, it might be time to bring back the Whigs?

by: William Dalton

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 19:38:48 +0000

I was a Jesse Helms College Republican in 1976 when we organized to win the North Carolina Republican Primary for Ronald Reagan. This was the first primary victory for Reagan that year and turned the tide for the California Governor, because he won nearly every primary thereafter and nearly wrested the nomination from President Ford. One of our primary objectives in the campaign was to convince conservative Democrats (Jessecrats) to re-register as Republicans so they could vote for Reagan in the primary. We succeeded, and four years later built a new Republican Party that would actually put conservatives into Congress and the White House. I am supporting Ron Paul because I am sick and tired of the Bush-Giuliani big government war machine corrupting the good name of the Republican Party. Thirty years ago a lot of Democrats became Republicans, saying, “I didn’t leave the Democrat Party. The Party left me.” If the GOP travels down the same road in 2008 it has for the last ten years, they will find a lot of these same Southern conservatives and their children saying the same thing about the Republican Party.

by: eye

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:37:43 +0000

I am fascinated that you all are fetishizing one word. “Neocons.”

There is a lot to Ron Paul. His anti-war position is only one part of it.

If you want a single-issue anti-war libertarian, he is your man. If you want someone who can describe some of what is happening to our economy right now, as he can do, then he is your man.

But otherwise the dude is a crank.

by: Founder

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:20:50 +0000

As a member of the Republican party since 1992, who voted for Bush, Sr.’s relection bid and Bush W. both times I think I am one who is voting for Ron Paul who is a Republican.

I can remember when the Republican party was more like what Ron Paul is talking about.

So if anybody should go its the NeoCons - neo means new - in otherwords, NeoCons are the infil-traitors.

by: scabby

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:19:49 +0000

One of the reasons for having such a broad spectrum of candidates in the primaries is to help raise funds for the party and find niche issues that can build a coalition. This is how you grow the party. Since 2004 the base of the Republican party has shrunk, so the fact that any candidate is out there bringing back Independents and Reagan Democrats to stop the contraction of party numbers is a good thing. McCain did this in 2000 and I don’t remember really anyone complaining then.

What amazes me is that any Republican would be enraged that Independents and Democrats might want to change party affiliation to support a candidate who is pro-life, for smaller government, and wants to protect our borders…oh but right…he’s against the war so all bets are off. He’s not even against the war for hippy peacenik reasons either but because of a principled position on the constitution…but that doesn’t matter either I guess.

I don’t agree with every position of every candidate in the Republican field but I have been a Republican all of my life. What I’m witnessing now is a party that is destined to lose in ‘08 because it won’t reach out or look at itself. Stop the in-fighting! If Congressman Paul has no chance of winning then court his followers by applauding his service to the country and his admirable principled stances on the issues…if you don’t then the scores and scores of Independents and Democrats he’s winning over will leave the “R” ranks and will probably never return.

by: jbozzi

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:11:58 +0000

ok, so the big issue is the foreign policy. I’ll admit I used to feel that way too but not am 100% with Dr. Paul now. What I realize now is that one cannot be for endless war, going to war with following the constitution, policing the world, and nation building…. but still say you are for SMALL government. It is simply impossible and a complete contradiction. It is dragging our country down and will destroy us just as much as the welfare/entitlement state will. There are much better solutions to these problems, but frankly there are a lot of people making a lot of money off the current policies now.

by: Publius Endures

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:56:57 +0000

Soren:
I think you are reading way too much into this. For starters, I know a number of long-time Republicans or now-disillusioned Republicans who are Ron Paul supporters, myself included (oddly enough, you yourself can confirm my Republican credentials- I met you at a couple of Republican functions in your pre-blogging days).
In any event, any candidate who is running a primary campaign is going to want to make sure that his or her supporters are properly registered.
This isn’t to say that there aren’t a lot of small “l” libertarians (who, by the way, used to be overwhelmingly members of the Republican party) and even some fairly liberal Democrats amongst the Ron Paul supporters. But it is to say that you can’t use e-mails like this to prove that there are few Republicans amongst Ron Paul’s supporters.
Indeed, Ron Paul supporters are very likely to be first-time voters or to have not voted in quite some time due to disillusionment; in some states this can result in not being included amongst registered Republicans for primary voting purposes. In fact, this is precisely what happened to me in 2000- my absentee ballot for the previous federal election had not been received and, as a result, I had been removed from the eligible primary voter’s roster.

by: eye

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:17:12 +0000

As, I’ve said, I think that he has a lot of economics dead on.

But he believes that foreign aid is unconstitutional. Not wrong. Not inefficient. Not anything else. Unconstitutional.

Unserious. A crank.

by: jbozzi

Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:55:55 +0000

actually I think you have it backwards. I grew up a Reagan Republican believing a conservative Republican was someone for small govt. I left the Republican party a few years ago after I realized these new Republicans (especially the neocons) like small govt about as much as Michael Moore likes salads. I’ll support Dr Paul and Republicans that run on the Paul platform (we are already starting to see this happen locally). Research a little, the neocon philosophy is really just the latest form of big govt socialism.

by: eye

Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:15:33 +0000

I don’t have a problem with people trying to get people to switch their registration. I just think it is telling when that is a major message of the campaign.

Giuliani voters are definitely GOP inclined. They are probably Schwarzenegger-style taxes and security independents who are social liberals. I welcome them.