How Did Ron Paul Become The 13th Floor In A Hotel?

I don’t think my dislike of Ron Paul as a presidential candidate needs any introduction. I think he’d make a poor president, for his foreign policy positions if nothing else.

That being said, Jon Stewart makes a fair point (watch all the way to the end):

I’d only add that the these straw polls are a little silly. They’re rarely indicative of anything other than whose supporters are the most enthusiastic in Ames, Iowa. John McCain, for instance, took 11th in the straw poll in 2011. So Ron Paul finishing 2nd isn’t especially meaningful, I think.

That said, if the media is going to hype the results they should maybe mention the guy who took second place.

Again, I’d not support Paul for President, but the nomination race is supposed to be a contest. He’s a participant in that contest playing by the same rules as everyone else. He doesn’t deserve to be ignored just because some in the media have a distaste for his politics.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

    Fixed News isn’t honest.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Maybe you didn’t watch the clip, you’re fond of weighing in despite being ill-informed, but it wasn’t just Fox News.

  • Neiman

    Quite frankly I get tired of all the bitching and moaning about things being unfair – in case you have not noticed – life is unfair from birth to death. Worse than those above crying in their soup, the Paulites love to cry us a river of how Paul is ignored and not treated as a legitimate candidate, they scream he is the smartest guy around, he’d make the best presidents and on and on flow the ocean of tears.

    Winners do not complain about the unfairness of the world, they learn that if they are losing it is always their fault, they failed to plan and put in place all the necessary elements to insure victory. Oh, about now I hear from the Paulites and most conservatives about the damn main stream media and their bias – hell yes they are mostly liberals, they are mostly incredibly biased in their reporting – so what? That too is life, get used to it and learn how to get around them.

    It is up to Ron Paul to sell his message and to sell himself and if the message fails because it seems extreme, as Paul’s appears to be, well tough cheese, change the message or expect to lose. If the messenger is not appealing and lets face facts, Paul by appearance and manner turns people off, then get another more appealing messenger to take his message or a better version of it to the people. If he fails it is his fault, he has to take responsibility, rather than as is his pattern, which is not to change anything, but just blunder forward with the conviction he is right and everyone else is wrong. As a last note, Paul’s supporters (Paulites) are not doing him any favors, they are terribly off-putting, offensive people, they are loud mouthed and people reject everything about Paul because his people are just not very attractive human beings.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      It is up to Ron Paul to sell his message and to sell himself and if the message fails because it seems extreme, as Paul’s appears to be, well tough cheese

      Well he sold his message well enough to take 2nd place in the Iowa straw poll.  But you’re saying that’s ok for it to be ignored?

      • Neiman

        You know that in these Caucus states his loudmouthed disciples just organize and get out to vote better than average voters, it was not a groundswell of public support. At least we have no polling data to support that fact, although even if we did, it does not matter at all.

        I am not saying it is okay to ignore him or it is not okay, I am talking about life – it is not fair and if someone wants to win, they, not someone else, must find a way to break through to the people in such a way as the media cannot ignore them. You are no different that any welfare dependent soul, you are demanding things be fair, that the world changes to meet your standards, you are seeking equal treatment without earning any respect.

        If you want this blog to be one of the most influential in the country, do you want that position because you earn it or because you cry loudest and demand attention. Or, would you constantly reexamine, tweak and in many ways make the changes necessary to break out from the pack and earn that position?

        If I have a product to sell, a good product, a life saving product and my sales are in the toilet, I can act like you and the Paulites and cry and lay on the floor, holding my breath and kicking my feet to get my way, which only means I am spoiled rotten and would get something I have not earned. But, I can change how I market my product, I can change my appearance or my sales technique, I can get experts to help me package my product better or just be a freaking loser because no one would buy my product. You who bellyache about personal responsibility and individual initiative are now contradicting yourself and demanding results whether your deserve it or not and to that I say Bovine Excrement!

        If the media is ignoring Paul and even if by your crying about it he gets more attention, is that fair, has he earned that attention on his own? Has he made the changes that will demand attention, or is he demanding it just because he thinks he deserves it?

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          You know that in these Caucus states his loudmouthed disciples just organize and get out to vote better than average voters, it was not a groundswell of public support. 

          Well, that’s certainly your opinion, but don’t all the candidates try to get out the vote?  And if the media is going to make a big deal about this straw poll (and I don’t think they’re indicative of much, personally) shouldn’t the mention the guy who, you know, took second place?

          • Neiman

            You are being so dishonest, you have said here on occasion that the Paulites are the loudest and do good in such Caucus states but not elsewhere, now you pretend otherwise just because you hate the fact I may have a point to make.

            Should they, shmould they? Who cares? It is the way of the world and if you want to win and you obviously do not care about winning really, then you don’t cry about the lack of fairness in life. You get off your over ample buttocks and find a way to break through, which does not include crying like a baby, “it’s not fair, waw waw waw.” When Reagan ran and even lost the first time he tried to get nominated, he was not given to crying even though the media was only the MSM and they absolutely hated him; but he examined what he was doing and made the necessary changes to break through and win, he did not compromise his core values, but he didn’t make excuses either.

            Conservatives today are just a bunch of crying liberals in more conservative clothes. You people are all excuses, you refuse to look at what you are doing with a critical eye, not compromising your values, but being willing to look at how you are communicating, examining your strategy, being proactive and taking responsibility, those all being dirty words. You are all a hand full of give me and a mouth of much obliged. You are professional excuse makers.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            I’m not being dishonest. I’ve made it pretty clear that I don’t like the straw polls, and one reason is the ability of one candidate to kind of swamp the results. You’re right, Paul’s supporters do that.

            But the media folks know it’s a flawed measure and they choose to hype it anyway. And if they’re going to do that, they should mention Paul.

            And it goes beyond that (which you’d know if you’d bothered to watch the video). Listen to the anchor at the end tell the reporter not to even bother to send video of Ron Paul.

            That kind of out-and-out bias is just plain silly.

  • Brenarlo

    Straw polls show fundraising ability, organization, and enthusiasm.  We’ve always known that Ron Paul supporters were enthusiastic and he could raise money.  Now we know that he has real organization in Iowa.  I think that’s significant. 

    Keep in mind that he received the 4th most votes (I believe) in the Ames straw poll history. 

    We don’t want to overstate the importance of a straw poll, but Rob is right… if you believe that it is significant, then you have to talk about Ron Paul.

    My gosh, the dimwit at FoxNews said that Rick Santorum was a winner?!?! 

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Straw polls show fundraising ability, organization, and enthusiasm.

      I think that’s something people say when their candidates do well in straw polls.

      Really, they’re kind of pointless.

      • Brenarlo

        Then what else does it show?  Nothing?  People just randomly showed up and randomly voted for people?

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          Well how can it be an accurate measure if they rarely predict the ultimate nomination winner?

          • Brenarlo

            I didn’t say they predict winners.  They’re a show of organization and of fundraising.  Organized and well-funded candidates don’t always win (see Hillary Clinton).

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Fair enough. i just don’t put a lot of stock in them personally, but I don’t think it surprises anyone that Paul is well-funded and well-organized.

  • robert108

    He revealed his nuttiness in the Debate when he went off in his rant about it being OK for Iran to get nukes.

    • headward

      Why is ok that other countries have it?

      • robert108

        You tell me, since it’s your belief, and not mine.  Don’t pay any attention to Iran’s long and bloody record of murderous terrorism, of course.

        • headward

          Last time I checked they haven’t had any act of war to us.  We should be trading with them.  Trade partners don’t kill each other because it’s in their best interests

          • robert108

            You really don’t understand islam, I guess.  Look up taqiyya.
            As far as acts of war toward us, they did it the entire time we were in Iraq. They also sheltered Saddam’s Air Force during the first Gulf War.
            Anyone who wants Iran to have nukes is certifiable.

    • Jamermorrow

      I wish individuals had nukes it would keep the government off our backs. If you want peace you need to have nukes otherwise countries try to challenge your sovereignty. 

      • robert108

        The Cold War was the result of a British scientist selling our nuclear secrets to the Soviets, in the interest of “fairness”.  He believed, as do you, that giving nukes to our enemy would ensure peace.  He was wrong, and so are you.

        • Brenarlo

          Key word there… COLD. 

          • robert108

            You obviously didn’t live through it.  It wasn’t so “cold” for all the Eastern Europeans who got enslaved, declared non-persons and liquidated.

          • Brenarlo

            So why didn’t Reagan invade the USSR?  Isn’t that would W would’ve done?

          • robert108

            So, it’s one extreme or the other with you?  Good thing you aren’t in our military.  History tells you that President Reagan did the right thing, after all the appeasers had their way.  He pushed them over the edge economically, because their system couldn’t compete with ours.  Now, obama is trying to subvert our system from the inside.
            BTW, going into Iraq was the right move, and history will bear that out.

    • Brenarlo

      Here’s the bottom line:  Iran WILL get a nuke unless we use a ground invasion to stop them.  Are you prepared to send in 250,000 troops?  I guarantee you that the other candidates would not. 

      So there is no practical difference between the world that would unfold if Ron Paul were president or any other Republican.

      • robert108

        Obviously untrue.  Paul would bow down to them more than obama has.  Very bad for the free world.

        • Brenarlo

          If we agree that the only way to 100% guarantee that they don’t get nukes is to invade that country with ground troops and that Romney, Perry, and the others won’t do that… then we can agree that Iran will eventually get a nuke.  Therefore, there’s no difference.

          • robert108

            “If we agree.;.”

            We don’t.

  • Jimmmypop

    nobody likes ron paul for the same reason most dislike palin….theyd come in and wreck all the goodies. theyd take on their own party and CHANGE things the NEXT DAY. that scares all the rich people…theyve spent billions to buy their way in. that scares all the old people and lower 50% that dont pay taxes because they think their checks will stop (and they wont)

    this is all about control and money…. those people that want BOTH those things left in peoples hands scares the bat shit out of the establishment.

    the funniest part, you all know damn well the president cannot do squat unless the congress backs him. so even if palin or paul got in, nothing BIG would change. NOTHING. the rich will still have power and the needy will still get their checks (as they should)…..  i just might be a little less nice for the crooks. but only a little.

    the ‘pauls’ are our only hope. the rest are all just mcsames.

    • robert108

      Possibly the worst false equivalence I have ever seen. Paul is a hope for nuttiness, while Sarah is a hope for a return to basic American values.  Big difference.

      • Jimmmypop

        as always, demonization and name calling….its YOUR only hope. keep your support for the mcsames. i prefer my ‘pauls’.

        ps: you forgot to call paul a nazi.

        • robert108

          I did no demonization/namecalling, and don’t regard paul a Nazi.  Wrong on both counts.  I regard his position on Iranian nukes to be insane, though.
          As for your other false accusation, I voted for Sarah.

        • Spartacus

          He does look like one of the Illinois Nazis in The Blues Brothers.

      • Guest

        Wow…give me a break. BTW – prior to being considered for the McStain VP position – when asked by the “media” who she was supporting/liked in the 2008 GOP primary – Palin answered Ron Paul. So she’s for nuttines too I guess!

        • robert108

          Ask her now.

    • Neiman

      The Paulites are Ron Paul’s worst enemies!

      • Bat One

        I think not.  Dr. Paul’s own policy prescriptions are his worst enemy.

        • Neiman

          Well I think we are both right, but me being slightly more right.  :)

    • Bat One

      Dr. Paul’s foreign, monetary, and fiscal policy prescriptions would all have fit quite nicely into an early 19th century America.  This is not, however, the early 19th century.

      Besides, Americans are looking for a reasoned and decisive leader, not some nasally, hectoring shrew.

  • http://pocketjacksblog.blogspot.com Jay W.

    Of course, if Ron Paul was the Republican candidate in 2012, The Daily Show would waste no time trashing him and making the same “he’s a nut” jabs that they ridicule the MSM for. That Gary Busey clip would get recycled faster than you can say, “Jon Stewart is voting for Obama in 2012″.

    • Brenarlo

      That’s true.

  • Brenarlo
    • Brenarlo
      • Neiman

        He may be doing better, he may play spoiler, but he’ll NEVER get the nomination or the White House!

      • Jimmmypop

        as said here, he could never win. too much change too fast. the old school gop will never allow that to happen…..neither side wants to give up power. they want mcsames.

    • Neiman

      Texas Governor Rick Perry, the new face in the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, has jumped to a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann with the other announced candidates trailing even further behind.

      The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary voters, taken Monday night, finds Perry with 29% support. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran unsuccessfully for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, earns 18% of the vote, while Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman who won the high-profile Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on Saturday, picks up 13%.

      Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who was a close second to Bachmann on Saturday, has the support of nine percent (9%) of Likely Primary Voters, followed by Georgia businessman Herman Cain at six percent (6%) and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with five percent (5%). Rick Santorum, former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, and ex-Utah Governor
      Jon Huntsman each get one percent (1%) support, while Michigan Congressman Thaddeus McCotter comes in statistically at zero.

      http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/gop_primary_perry_29_romney_18_bachmann_13

      • Brenarlo

        All that matters right now are the early states.

        • Neiman

          He cannot get the nomination, please do not fool yourself. He will never win over the GOP and can only play spoiler. He has some very rude, over bearing, loud mouthed disciples, but they will fade state after state.

          • Brenarlo

            You could be right…  probably will be right.  The chances of ANYONE becoming president are next to nothing. 

            He’s already influenced the campaign greatly.  Bachmann, Perry, and Gingrich are all talking about reining in the federal reserve.

          • Neiman

            Gingrich and Paul are great idea men, top consultants, but presidents they are not.

          • Bat One

            The difference is that while one, Gingrich, is looking forward, the other, Paul, has his sights firmly fixed on the rearview mirror.

          • Jimmmypop

            rearview mirrors are good for looking back at what you screwed up….. if i could back the budget up 30 years, id vote to do it.

          • Jimmmypop

            no more rude, over bearing, loud mouthed than the sheep that follow the horde of mcsames.

            all you people do is call names…its sickening. you cant beat him on policy so ‘HES A NAZI!”… sorry, i dont agree with 10% of his ideas either, but i agree even LESS with all the other mcsames. from open borders, global warming to national healthcare these people are all the mcsame as we had since ronnie. at least i know paul will get SOMETHING substantive completed with our budget. heck, if nothing else if he uses the executive order to eliminate all prior executive orders and then declare an executive order banning all future executive orders as unconstitutional we are worlds ahead.

          • robert108

            As far as I know, you’re the only one doing namecalling and calling Paul a Nazi.

  • Grizzler1

    The point of this I think is not whether Ron Paul would be a good president or if he has support. He obviously does. The Point is that the dominant media, fox included, is purposely ignoring him because he is the only candidate who dares to really tell the truth as he sees it, no Politically Correct mumbojumbo, no ambiguity. He says what he thinks clearly and with conviction. Since the media, including fox, are obviously taking orders from the permanent government, and since Ron Paul is the only candidate who will not bow to the propaganda they push, he would be the biggest threat they have.
      Since the dominant media is controlled by the permanent government, and since Ron
    Paul cant be controlled by either, he will never get nominated and he will never be president. The whole “Ron Paul vs. the rest of the republican party drama” is irrelevant outside of a certain entertainment value.
     As soon as you realize the game is rigged, the only thing you have left is the entertainment value.

  • borborygmi

    Go Ron Paul.   Stewart nails it one more time.    Fox is still ticked off  from 2008 debates.  Ron Paul won the debate (at least to the internet voters) and made Hannity puke

  • Joeblower

    I think someone needs to give Rob a mandatory shot or reality!  He is nothing but a joke on the internet here in North Dakota.  One has got to laugh at this fool and anyone who takes him serious.  He is one of the last that thinks the left/right para-dime is a good thing and is nothing more than a fool. Once again, lets all give a big laugh to this idiot and the sheep that follow him, LOL, hahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

Top