It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Ron Paul's Supporters Doing More Harm Than Good to His Campaign?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
As has been pointed out a few times before on here Ron Paul's base tends toward the youth vote. He has won this demographic in almost every primary and polls done by sites like the Daily Paul reflect this as well. Unfortunately for Paul this demographic also has the lowest voter turnout. So even if Paul has massive numbers of supporters they're simply not voting. This got me wondering why supporters who appear so passionate would not vote. The easy answer would be because they're lazy, but I think it goes beyond that. I think it's because they're disillusioned with the voting process. These are the people that have claimed voter fraud after every single primary. If they don't believe their vote matters then they aren't going to vote. However, if they don't vote then Ron Paul loses and then they use this as evidence of voter fraud since he has such a vocal and passionate group of supporters. This then creates a loop where Paul loses, his supporters call fraud, then they don't vote as a result of "fraud," then Ron Paul loses. So I'm wondering if people think this might be what's happening. Even Paul's campaign has stated that his supporters aren't voting. Is this because the claims of voter fraud and such have caused disillusionment in other supporters and as a result they're not voting?




posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
No, i would say the election fraud is doing more harm than good. Can't blame people for small voter turnout while they are ADMITTING precincts are being ignored.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   
I think, if they aren't voting it is because they feel beaten? That is of course if they truly aren't voting. Personally I think they are, but their votes are coming up missing. Nevada is a good example.

While I would in a heart beat vote for RP, the fact is, MSM's blatant ignoring of him is killing his chances. Every time I read an article about this "election process", they only mention Romney, Gingrich and Santorum. I mean, Santorum lost big time to RP in Nevada, yet they don't mention that. As far as they are concerned, Dr. Paul isn't even IN this election. And that is the biggest problem. People who are on the net know about Ron Paul. His supporters know about Ron Paul and they TRY to get the word out. But there are so many who at this point still say "Who is Ron Paul?". If the media gave him a fare shake from the start I think his numbers would be A LOT higher than they have been.

And the claims of voter fraud I think at this point are warranted. Especially after the situation in Nevada. They declared Romney the winner almost immediately. That way even if the remaining votes came in and showed RP won, it wouldn't matter. Romney gets the delegates. And Ron Paul is once again ignored.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Where would Ron Paul be without the supporters spending countless hours volunteering for his cause?



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


People keep bringing up Nevada but the fact of the matter is that Paul's key demographic only accounted for 8% of the total voters. In Nevada there are about 60,000 registered, Republican, youth voters. Out of these only about 2,300 showed up to vote in the primaries. So, if Paul truly does have the support his fans claim they simply aren't voting.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


But what if there isn't voter fraud? This kind of mindset is defeatist. You believe the system is fixed and as a result don't vote. But what if the system isn't fixed? Then all you're doing is screwing over your candidate. You would think that if Paul's supporters were as passionate as they claim to be they would vote regardless. Instead you just see a large portion of his supporters not voting and then complaining about him not winning.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by theconspirator
 


But what good does that campaigning do if none of them are voting? They could get the entire world to support Ron Paul except for one person, but it doesn't matter if none of them end up voting but that one guy does. Not to mention I'm sure the "holier-than-thou" attitude a lot of Paul supporters exhibit has turned a lot of people off to his cause.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
I agree.....people aren't showing up because they are expecting others to go "vote for them" considering Dr. Paul has such a large support. That mindset is hurting him. If you support Ron GO VOTE!!!!!



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I believe it may be a little of both. There absolutely are issues with voter fraud. If you look even closer, it's worse than you think. There's a reason they don't want a paper record of voting overall or at the least in the most strategic points, it should be obvious to everyone no matter who they support after seeing how it works.

But even if it's being stolen from within the margins, a stronger turnout means things change for the better, one he wins or two it's so obvious that people become outraged and force real change.

Win or lose, he's been exposing the media to people that never would have realized it's just a part of the government propaganda machine. You only get to choose from a pool of pre-approved sellouts and not who you want. He's showing how people in real time that elections can be easily manipulated. The corrupt banking systems recent disasters combined with his long term record of urging reform only give his ideas more credibility.

No matter the outcome of the election, win or lose, manipulated or not, people are at least waking up en masse, let's just hope it's not too late to salvage what's left of our country. But I think most know it's going to get worse before it gets better.
edit on 14-2-2012 by Paschar0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
You would think that with all the people screaming about how this country will cease to exist UNLESS we vote for RP, that he would be doing much better in the primaries. I used to like RP, I really did, but then he decided to run for the R nomination. And the fact of the matter is, I'll vote for a democrat, an independent or anyone else, but I will not vote for anyone with an R by his name. Sorry if that's shallow or narrow minded, but I will not cast my lot with any christianists or values voters or any of the do as I say but not as I do crowd that infects the republican party. And I really think that was his downfall, because a lot of the far left that would support him if he were an Independant or green or libertarian simply won't because of the R.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I find that with a number of RP supporters I've debated with, there is a definite 'holier than thou' attitude. Specifically, the idea that RP by defaulty of his libertarian values is a better leader than any other contestant, current or previous. People see that and are put off by what essentially is an air of arrogance.

The issue regarding rigging doesn't help - I would be the first to say that there has been significantly less coverage of RP successes in the MSM than the successes of others - but that doesn't mean his supporters have to go around crying about it.

Sometimes, the facts don't lie. At the moment, RP is not the most popular candidate in the contest. Deal with it.

Finally, there seems to be a lot of hypocrisy - aimed mainly at Gingrich / Romney supporters who 'big up' their man. They are shouted down for doing what RP supporters do every day - trash talk the opposition. Some consistency in actions please!



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by theconspirator
 


What good is that doing him?

I don't see him reaping much from this support.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
I find that with a number of RP supporters I've debated with, there is a definite 'holier than thou' attitude. Specifically, the idea that RP by defaulty of his libertarian values is a better leader than any other contestant, current or previous. People see that and are put off by what essentially is an air of arrogance.

The issue regarding rigging doesn't help - I would be the first to say that there has been significantly less coverage of RP successes in the MSM than the successes of others - but that doesn't mean his supporters have to go around crying about it.

Sometimes, the facts don't lie. At the moment, RP is not the most popular candidate in the contest. Deal with it.

Finally, there seems to be a lot of hypocrisy - aimed mainly at Gingrich / Romney supporters who 'big up' their man. They are shouted down for doing what RP supporters do every day - trash talk the opposition. Some consistency in actions please!


I like many of Ron Paul's ideas, but can't say I agree with all of them, so I'm not a rabid supporter by any means.

But I would like to ask you this, it's a FACT that there has been voter fraud, to what extent should be irrelevant, it's also a FACT that the MSM has intentionally trying to diminish minimize him. Aren't these reasons enough to "go around crying about it", you'd rather nothing be said? really? Also, if the numbers have been changed, then they do indeed lie which is the whole point of why people are upset.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paschar0

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
I find that with a number of RP supporters I've debated with, there is a definite 'holier than thou' attitude. Specifically, the idea that RP by defaulty of his libertarian values is a better leader than any other contestant, current or previous. People see that and are put off by what essentially is an air of arrogance.

The issue regarding rigging doesn't help - I would be the first to say that there has been significantly less coverage of RP successes in the MSM than the successes of others - but that doesn't mean his supporters have to go around crying about it.

Sometimes, the facts don't lie. At the moment, RP is not the most popular candidate in the contest. Deal with it.

Finally, there seems to be a lot of hypocrisy - aimed mainly at Gingrich / Romney supporters who 'big up' their man. They are shouted down for doing what RP supporters do every day - trash talk the opposition. Some consistency in actions please!


I like many of Ron Paul's ideas, but can't say I agree with all of them, so I'm not a rabid supporter by any means.

But I would like to ask you this, it's a FACT that there has been voter fraud, to what extent should be irrelevant, it's also a FACT that the MSM has intentionally trying to diminish minimize him. Aren't these reasons enough to "go around crying about it", you'd rather nothing be said? really? Also, if the numbers have been changed, then they do indeed lie which is the whole point of why people are upset.


Thank you. I'm not on board with RP just yet, but Obama is a huge disappointment and I won't be voting for him again and can't even imagine any other Republican candidate getting my vote.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Paschar0
 


No and I have not suggested it be ignored.

As I indicated, RP the person has been disadvantaged by MSM coverage - but the impression I have - and i'm confident others will agree with - is that this is being prepared as an excuse by RP supporters for when he doesn't win. The evidence I have seen for electoral fraud does not appear to change the fact that results would still be very, very similar to what they transpired to be, even taking this into account.

The fraud has not been solely at the expense of RP either. The late night voting session that RP dominated - do you really think all those attending had a legitimate reason to (as in, that they were all worshipping at the time of the actual vote) to do so? That some might have actually fraudulently cast a vote (and given he did so well, its quite likely through reasoning that RP stood to benefit from a number of these votes) in RP's favour that shoul not have been allowed to be cast?



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
I think you might be watching too much TV.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The Ron Paul support from the younger voters is indeed passionate, but they simply don't vote. The only Ron Paul supporters that are convinced of voter fraud keeping the man down are the ones on conspiracy websites. For them, anything short of a landslide victory for RP is proof of voter fraud.

The guy has many fans, but not many voters.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by usernameconspiracy
The Ron Paul support from the younger voters is indeed passionate, but they simply don't vote. The only Ron Paul supporters that are convinced of voter fraud keeping the man down are the ones on conspiracy websites. For them, anything short of a landslide victory for RP is proof of voter fraud.

The guy has many fans, but not many voters.


Lol. Definitely watching too much TV. Seriously wake up already.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
As has been pointed out a few times before on here Ron Paul's base tends toward the youth vote. He has won this demographic in almost every primary and polls done by sites like the Daily Paul reflect this as well.


...but not in other polls. If you check RealClearPolitics and other sites, his support is usually around 12% of registered and likely Republican voters.


Unfortunately for Paul this demographic also has the lowest voter turnout.

It's also smaller than other demographic cohorts.


So even if Paul has massive numbers of supporters they're simply not voting.

Nope. They run out, vote for Paul (and in no other races) and run back to not voting as a rule.


I think it's because they're disillusioned with the voting process. These are the people that have claimed voter fraud after every single primary.

Because their candidate isn't winning. They aren't even issues voters -- they're single candidate voters. The rest of us are involved because we're voting for issues, laws, and other electoral activity. So we know when caucuses and elections are because we're not focused on ONE candidate to the exclusion of everyone else.

And I think you guys are WAY overestimating his support and his likeability. For every one of you who thinks he's the only answer, there are (according to the national polls) five other voters who think someone else is a better choice.



posted on Feb, 14 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Indellkoffer
 


Just to make it clear I don't support Ron Paul (I don't support any of the candidates. I'm pretty ambivalent when it come to politics). I was just trying to bring up the fact that Ron Paul supporters are blaming everyone else for his losses when they should be looking at themselves.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join