Sorry about the detour.

We've been the ones to drag them off the Arabs in the past. Maybe they figure next time they go ahead and take Damascus and Cairo instead of holding up for a peace treaty that never happens.

"Ron Paul is no laughing matter. He's tapping into a side of the Republican Party that's never had its issues addressed," said David All, a GOP strategist and Internet expert. "And he's doing it by running a truly Web 2.0 campaign."

USA Today jumps on the Paul Presidential Bandwagon...
USA Today

USA Today jumps on the Paul Presidential Bandwagon...
USA Today

I don't trust any of those debate polls.

You are correct on what actually happens but I think that most folks don't see it that way with some "good" reasons.

The major funding mechanism for the Federal gubment is an income tax that basically does not tax half of the citizens with earned income not to mention the many more folks without earned income but other income who pay no income tax. It is "understandable" why these folks think more gubment services do not lead to higher taxes for them.

I see it here at the local level. The voting residents of our little beach town represent less than a third of the property owners in the town. They vote for candidates who promise to provide more services requiring town to spend more money and raise more money (balanced budget required) however the bulk of the money comes from property taxes and most of the property taxes come from the areas of town with significantly lower percentage of residents and much higher percentage of out of town owners who cannot vote in out election. It's tough to make the argument here that "we" voters cannot "afford" these new services when "we" voters are not paying a substantial part of the bill. Any argument that it is not a function our town should even consider providing whether we could "afford" it or not totally falls on deaf ears... much as the argument Dr. Paul makes at the Federal gubment level does...

So I vote globally... but live locally... they do not tax the taxable income I no longer earn... Property taxes a little more problematic... staying away from crazy growth properties helped... A few oceanfront lots value here each went from $5500 (not buildable) to $500,000 (don't care) valuation.

I don't trust any of those debate polls.

Only poll that matters will be registered on State voting machines early next year (well sort of, parties may end up largely tossing State presidential primary results) and the first Tuesday of November.

The one Paul will do worst in if things keep trending this way.

The one Paul will do worst in if things keep trending this way.

Yet the poor don't vote that much, so most programs are aimed at the middle class, who does most of the bitching as well as voting. They all think they should live like the rich on the government dime, while the poor are happy to get anything.

I wonder about that level of voter participation by income... will have to try to find some voter statistics about who actually votes... Certainly the middle class has the voting numbers (despite what Lou Dobbs might say) to get what they can collectively decide that they want and they have collectively decided to get a lot more gubment over the last 70 years or so... I also need to find a good up to date chart on total gubment revenue sources by income distribution. Spending would be a lot harder to track down by income distribution

why the gubment should grow when the economy grows is counterintuitive at best...

I saw an article a long time ago and believe it. The rich and poor get shafted on taxes compared to the middle class, who gets pandered to so much they've come to believe the hype of Dobbs and his ilk. The rich are still rich (I'm not really talking the super-duper rich) despite their tax burden, they live well. But the poor get little for their small tax bite and are still poor. Bang for the buck the American middle class does damn well, the problem being that isn't good enough. Maybe they should spend a year in Mexico to see how bad it could be.

Smaller is a relative term. I've said from the start Libertarian thinkers would do better to focus on selling an electable message than falling on their swords over dogma every election. Where did all the Libertarians go? Have they all gone back to just arguing among themselves until they get excited for a few weeks before the next election?

Run the argument by me, if you would. I try to have an internal pug heckling me when I teach about social stratification (patterned, institutionalized inequality in the distribution of valued material and symbolic goods). So, why does the economy growing not, in part automatically, expand the sheer size of governemnt expenditures?

The upper-middle class gets taxed most absolutely and gets the most, in terms of its wishes, from government. Subsidized public higher education being a big part of that.

Ron Paul Better in the General Election than Giuliani and Thompson Among 30 Year Olds; Leads Hillary Clinton 47% to 44% Among 40 Year Olds

Those that have premium account access with Rasmussen Reports are provided with a flurry of great polling data tabulated by gender, age, race, party, and ideology. This is some great stuff for those of you hard core political junkies.

We put up the results of a Zogby poll yesterday that showed Hillary Clinton was the most objectionable Democrat and that Ron Paul was the most objectionable Republican. We got a bit curious to see how those two fared against each other and with access to the archives with Rasmussen Reports, we tallied it here below for you.

Well for me gubment funding should be as a result of gubment expenditures on required services. I don't see a direct correlation between gubment service growth and a growing economy other than perhaps the feeling among voters and pols that "we can afford it". If anything during an economic downturn there could be a case made for a larger temporary gubment financing role of a safety net (largely private sector fine by me thanks) and so that is the counterintuitive part.

I suppose you can make an argument that a growing economy does not require mass participation by citizens and so just overall economic condition would not be sufficient to judge need for any particular size gubment and I can buy that. Far more important criteria for me is does anyone need help and is the gubment the best way to help them?

If a large part of gubment is to regulate the economy then a growing economy would require larger gubment expenditures to oversee the larger economy. I ain't a big fan of gubment regulation of the economy but I suspect it is a large component of Federal and State gubmetn spending.

My observation of Federal gubment and other gubments too is that a lot of spending is on autopilot. If the folks working for the Fed would from time to time do a serious review of old spending programs and make a show of tossing some number of them out and/or replacing them with something that could be at least more effective that would help at least some of the marginal libertarians along the way. I suspect I am a hopeless case... even if it might be doing some good... I still don't think it's the gubments role...

Generally I'm all for getting rid of stupid regulation, which so much is. If we want to prime the pump I'd still go with checks to SS #s, or something equally simple. Most stimulus packages take forever to pass and get into the economy. They hit when the economy has already rebounded.

Oct. 27, 2007, 10:22AM
Ron Paul's campaign takes to the airwaves
Maverick boosts pursuit of votes in early primaries

By BENNETT ROTH
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Hoping to defy more expectations, Rep. Ron Paul is ratcheting up his maverick Republican presidential campaign by launching TV and radio commercials in early primary states and setting an ambitious $12 million fundraising goal.

For a candidate often relegated by pundits to second- or third-tier status, Paul's ability to make a big entry into advertising wars is unusual.

With just over two months until the first primaries, experts question whether the libertarian-leaning congressman from Lake Jackson can expand his intense following to make a credible showing in these early contests.

Officials with Paul's campaign acknowledge they have an uphill battle, but say they plan to broaden his support with an advertising campaign that includes $1.1 million in television spots that begin airing Monday in New Hampshire.

Campaign spokesman Jesse Benton said the purpose of the ads was to "give people a full picture of who Ron Paul is. The war is a component, but there is a heck of a lot more, too."

The television spots feature people in New Hampshire talking about Paul's stands, including bringing troops home from Iraq. The ad also includes biographical material, emphasizing that obstetrician Paul is the only doctor in the race, said Benton.

This month the Paul campaign began running about $430,000 worth of radio spots in New Hampshire and early primary states of South Carolina, Iowa and Nevada. Those radio ads stress his domestic stands such as opposition to tax increases and amnesty for illegal immigrants.

To help pay for the stepped-up efforts — of course the campaign hopes to reach beyond past donors who included a self-identified clown and a wizard — the campaign has also set a target of raising $12 million for the last three months of this year.

That would be more than double the $5.2 million campaign took in during the third quarter of 2007, and about as much as better-known GOP presidential contender Fred Thompson raised last quarter.

Also, Paul — whose district includes Galveston and areas on three sides of Houston — has run a frugal campaign, spending $2.8 million for the first nine months of this year compared with $30 million by GOP front-runner Rudolph Giuliani and $53 million by Mitt Romney.

Unlike some rivals, Paul mostly flies commercial, except for two trips where his campaign paid $40,000 for a charter.

His catering tab included Costco and Sam's Club in Des Moines, Iowa, and Peters' Cut Rate Liquor in Freeport.

The Texan has surprised political observers and party officials with his fundraising, almost 80 percent of it via the Internet. He has attracted many donors with his opposition to the Iraq war and a limited-government message.

(more) http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...ro/5250310.html

My sister-in-law, my neice, and her husband are all Gettysburg College graduates same as Dr. Paul. They are visting this week and I asked them if they have made a donation to Dr Pauls campaign. Unfortunately they said they had not and had not seen Dr. Paul mentioned in the usual college alumni literature.

... and they said it's not like there are a lot of famous Gettysburg graduates taking up space in the alumni literature...

$15 billion (million, I assume you meant) seems quite ambitous and based on how judiciously he spends donations it would be like much more as compared to the other candidates and their spending habits...

an ambitious $12 million fundraising goal

JESSEP
I felt that his life might be in danger once word of the letter got out.

KAFFEE
Grave danger?

JESSEP
Is there another kind?

KAFFEE
You said, "He was in danger". I said, "Grave danger". You said--

Taking Ron Paul Seriously In New Hampshire

26 Oct 2007 04:48 pm

CONCORD -- When I visited Ron Paul's New Hampshire campaign headquarters this morning, only one member of his staff, Kate Rick, was there. The other six were out building a contraption to capture the unique energies of the Paul movement here. Excitement -- Paul is moving up (slowly) in the polls and has only, to this point, run a single radio ad.

A check of the parking lots at Paul events in New Hampshire finds many Vermont and Massachusetts license plates. An evolved campaign fills its crowds with voters, not just fans. Rick, the founder of the unofficial RonPaulHq.com, spent hundreds of her own dollars to print large yard signs. A campaign with millions in the bank can probably afford to pay her back.

For the longest time, many journalists, myself included, did not take Ron Paul seriously. It wasn't that his politics -- a combination of libertarian constitutionalism and social conservatism -- were unusual. It was, principally, that he was anti-war in a party where that view dare not express itself.

Paul is now emerging as a serious threat in New Hampshire, perhaps not to win it -- although the winner may need only 25% or so -- , but to influence the outcome in a way that reflects his worldview. He will spend most of the $5.3M in his campaign budget on television, mailings and field organizing in the Granite State. There are 450 people in largest Ron Paul Meetup group, and they're canvassing in Claremont and dropping lit in Manchester this weekend.

Who likes Paul? His aides say there is no single demographic. Many are former members of the Buchanan Brigade, suddenly re-energized by Paul's anti-interventionism and strong border stances. Others seem to be casual libertarians who never really found a sympathetic voice in any of the other presidential candidates. Yet others are self-described constitutionalists. They blame the monetary system for the credit crunch and for economic dislocation. Monetary policy has been Paul's other big bugbear.

Today, thousands of New Hampshire Republicans began receiving a glossy, 12-mail mailer -- the campaign's first major lit drop. The first Paul television ad should hit the airwaves soon. Paul will increase his campaign appearances here. He's hesitated to spend too much time on the campaign trail because he's a freak about serving his Texas constituents and never likes to miss a vote.

(all) http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archiv...d_ron_pauls.php

If NH has an open primary he might not draw from the other R candidates but from voters who would have otherwise not voted in the R primary. That is true of this not R in the upcoming NC R Presidential Primary... If not for Dr. Paul I would probably make mischief in the NC D Presidential Primary...