vector art

Ron Paul Vs. Hillary Clinton.

Is it David vs. Goliath? The Fight of the Century? The Underdog and the Behemoth?

The headline promises long-concealed information just now coming to light: the story delivers something else: a bland look at how many Americans have opinions of Hillary Clinton vs. how many have heard of Ron Paul
More from the merry pollsters at Rasmussen:

A recent Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey featuring a match-up between Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul highlights one of the perils that comes from overanalyzing poll results between candidates with different levels of name recognition.

In that survey, Clinton held a fairly modest 48% to 38% lead. But, a careful look at the results tells us a lot about the public’s opinion of Hillary Clinton and virtually nothing about their opinion of Ron Paul.

The story goes on to say what is well-known: more Americans have heard of a former first lady than of a Congressman from Texas.

Why? First, because just about everyone in the United States has an opinion of Hillary Clinton. She has been a major player on the national and international state for 15 years. Half the country has a favorable opinion of her and half holds the opposite view, but all have an opinion. Our most recent survey results show that nearly 60% of voters have a strongly held opinion about the New York Senator and former First Lady.

As for Ron Paul, 42% don’t know enough about him to have an opinion one way or the other. He’s one of 435 Congressman whose life is way below the radar screen for most Americans. Still, his presence in the GOP Presidential Debates has raised his profile a bit--26% now offer a favorable opinion and 32% say the opposite. But, only 16% have a strongly held opinion about Paul (7% Very Favorable, 9% Very Unfavorable).

The reaction to this "news" will be predictable: the Ron Paulistas will shout it out that it's proof their man is the Great Bright Hope; the equally-rabid anti-Paulistinians will paste it up as more proof that Paul is getting too much attention. It's getting so there is a definite negative element to covering any news of Ron Paul. Even more so for the disinterested observer trying to play it straight.

Us? We thought about it and decided to comment on this story instead of this weekend's NFL games.

Barely.



Back to Front Page.

by Mondoreb

by Mondoreb

David Fredosso of The Corner at National Review Online makes the same point that has been bothering any fair-minded observer of the feeding frenzy that is all things Ron Paul:

On the Right, or in parts of it anyway, hatred of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) arguably matches or even exceeds antipathy toward Hillary Clinton. So eager are conservative bloggers to pounce on Paul that a number of them have accused him of "paying" $1,300 to 9/11 conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.

Fredosso then goes on to reveal this little gem:

The "payment" to Jones (and yes, it is that same Jones) was not a payment at all, but a partial refund of Jones’s $2,300 contribution. It is clearly marked as such, if you look in the right place on the electronic FEC forms. Paul's spokesman said he put a line in to the campaign treasurer when he noticed it being discussed on the blogosphere, but that's the answer he's going to get.

That sound you hear is certain bloggers scooping up myriad forks and knives to help choke down the barrels of ink written damning Paul for "paying" this scoundrel. One doesn't have to be a Ron Paul supporter to note the salacious glee that every tainted contribution brings to a select portion of the right wing blogging brotherhood.

Sure, Paul has his crazed minions; so does Hillary, Rudy and anyone running for President. But there's something of the smell of chum in the water when the Paul campaign pulls a boner.

Allah Pundit of Hot Air, offers a tight-lipped apology--sorta.

Duly noted and duly corrected. You’ll find the disbursement here about three-quarters of the way down. I could have done without the insinuations of laziness (”bloggers can’t be bothered to do five minutes of research”), especially when bloggers are credited in the same post for having discovered the donation from Don Black — can the campaign “not be bothered” to police for that sort of thing, given their unsolicited yet rising support among white supremacists? — but kudos to Paul for returning, well, not quite all of Alex Jones’s filthy $2,300 but a good-sized chunk of it.

Call it an apology with an attack addendum added to the end. A. Pundit goes on to add one more observation.

The first step is always the hardest.

Couldn't agree more. A little less Attack -Paul-on-Autopilot might be good advice for my fellow right wing madmen.

It takes a big pundit to admit a mistake.

UPDATE: He is a big pundit. Allah puts up a Paul ad video "to make amends". That's the spirit. As MadisonConservative comments at Hot Air: "The integrity of Hot Air stands untarnished. Let’s see Kos make such a retraction." Those were my thoughts exactly. They'd be heading to the mattresses and hunkering down.

At the same time, some over-zealous Paulistas attack DBKP for quoting those who link Jones with white supremacy and the Troofers. I need another cigar.

Like the man says: some days, no good deed goes unpunished.




Back to Front Page.

by Mondoreb

Evidence that the Ron Paul campaign received a donation from a Neo-Nazi White Supremacist is reported a bit breathlessly by the Lone Star Times. While it is news, is it the earth-shattering scoop the anti-Paulistas will spin it into?

From the Lone Star Times:

[a] contribution to the Paul campaign by a known white-supremacist has been identified.

The evidence is as follows:

* Black proudly and openly identifies himself as Stormfront’s guiding hand, and publishes a contact address on the Internet– PO Box 6637, West Palm Beach, FL, 33405
* A search by LST of public databases indicates that there is only one “Don Black” residing in West Palm Beach, Florida, zip code 33405
* A 7/16/01 USA Today article identifies Black’s wife as being named “Chloe”
* That same article identifies Chloe as being the ex-wife of close Black associate and former “Grand Wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke
* Minutes of a 9/7/07 City of West Palm Beach code-compliance hearing identify “Chloe H. Duke” as owning a residential property located at 203 Lakeland Drive
* According to Federal Election Commission records, on 9/30/07 the Ron Paul presidential campaign received a $500 contribution from a Mr. Don Black, who lists his address as 203 Lakeland Drive and identifies his occupation as “self-employed/website manager”

In light of these facts, we believe our previously asked questions continue to have merit.

One sympathizes with anyone in the news business: in this age of instantaneous communication, any news is old news in a matter of minutes. Any digging up of facts not previously known is an achievement.

Opponents have tried to attach the pro-Nazi label to the Paul campaign for some time now. Paul should be held to no higher or lower standard than other candidates: they have all had donations from groups or individuals who espouse a variety of disagreeable views. That's America: one's free to donate to whomever one wishes.

A disinterested observer will conclude that any campaign receives hundreds of contributions and it's hard to scrutinize each one. This especially applies to the Ron Paul campaign, with its thousands of small donation supporters. The campaign should be given some time to address the issue before trying to tar them with the "Nazi Supporter" brush.



DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.