Ron Paul and the Iowa Straw Poll
GOP congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul continues to fly under the radar of both the media and the top-tier candidates for the 2008 GOP nomination. However, based on the results of Saturday’s GOP straw poll in Iowa, the big dogs in the race need to be watching their rear view mirrors very closely. Candidates in the mirror may be closer than they appear…
The GOP Iowa straw poll was conducted on Saturday, with results being delayed because of a voting machine glitch (as Steve Benen says, insert joke here). There were few surprises.
Why should anyone care about GOP presidential politics at this early stage of the game? Believe me, it’s completely unimportant that most of the chatter surrounding the Iowa GOP straw poll is centered on the strong showing by Mitt Romney. His wide-margin first place finish was expected.
Today, corporate media folks are keying on the relatively strong second place showing by former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, with Sam Brownback and Tom Tancredo close on his heels. All three were slugging it out for the fundie vote, and it looks like they sliced this desirable GOP demographic pretty much cleanly into thirds. Essentially, if you add up the fundie votes for Huckabee, Brownback, and Tancredo, it’s clear that Romney didn’t win the straw poll - the fundies in Iowa won the straw poll by a wide margin.
Most surprisingly, perhaps, is that GOP congressman Ron Paul was competitive. While he finished 5th in the polling, he wasn’t a distant fifth, and the straw poll will certainly give his supporters a big lift. If nothing else, the Iowa straw poll is about strength of the respective candidates organizations, and Ron Paul’s finish shows that he has some organizational juice behind his campaign.
At some point between now and the actual Iowa caucuses, we can expect that two of the three social conservative candidates will drop out of the race. Plus we can expect Rudy, Fred, and St. John to actually participate in the caucuses (all three declined to push their supporters to the straw poll).
So, here’s what I’m thinking: In the caucuses, Romney and Rudy split the non-social conservative GOP down the middle. The remaining fundie candidate (Brownback?) will draw in the radical religious right vote. McCain (if he’s still in the race by then) will draw in the nucking futz vote. Thompson is the wildcard in all three of the above demographics.
And Ron Paul is sitting pretty. Why? Because Paul’s organization is catering to the truly conservative demographic - those who see Iraq as a big mistake, and those who really want a libertarian-style minimalist government. And, from what I’ve seen and read from supporters of Ron Paul, they are “true believers” who aren’t going to be peeled off by the marquee names on the ballot. They are ideologically driven, not motivated by the pretty face or where the big money is lining up.
Don’t get me wrong. As a progressive, I could never get behind many of Ron Paul’s policies. What I am saying, though, is that he injects a dynamic into the GOP presidential race that is very, very interesting. The top tier GOP candidates ignore Ron Paul at their own peril - and I don’t think that either they or the media will be ignoring him for much longer.
Here’s the results from the Iowa straw poll:
1. Mitt Romney • 31.5% (4516 votes)
2. Mike Huckabee • 18.1% (2587 votes)
3. Sam Brownback • 15.3% (2192 votes)
4. Tom Tancredo • 13.7% (1961 votes)
5. Ron Paul • 9.1% (1305 votes)
6. Tommy Thompson • 7.3% (1039 votes)
7. Fred Thompson • 1.4% (203 votes)
8. Rudy Giuliani • 1.3% (183 votes)
9. Duncan Hunter • 1.2% (174 votes)
10. John McCain • 1% (101 votes)
I agree. It’s pretty hilarious that some of the anti-Paulians are trying to paint him getting 9% as a failure. He spent way less time in the state than any of the other top 5 finishers (17 days, compared to brownback’s 115 days!).
Paul is going to win the nomination.
Fox News is ignoring Ron Paul:
Fox News Censors Straw Poll Results
Richard Blair: “Don’t get me wrong. As a progressive, I could never get behind many of Ron Paul’s policies.”
I can understand why you wouldn’t get behind many of Ron Paul’s policies, but I also know that other progressives will. Why? Because they understand Ron Paul does not represent the faction that believes that the one-size-fits all policies of Washington D.C. is beneficial to the social causes that they support.
Without D.C. taking so much money from states and local communities, these communities, if they choose to do so, could set up programs that are more responsive to the people and less wasteful. Such a system works better for the people and is more in line with the idea of freedom in that there will be many less unwilling participants dragged into programs/policies which they do not support.
De-centralization offers more opportunities, more choice, and is a better fit for today’s society than the illogical centralization which has a single central government dictating policies for over 300 million people.
Even if you don’t agree, at least consider it. Right now, there is way too much to lose through the current system.
Anyways, thanks for the well-written article.
The Poll was Saturday, not Friday. And the delay was around 90 minutes while the paper ballots were counted from either one or two of the Diebold machines which did not scan all the paper ballots inserted. This seems to be a victory for paper based ballots as the Iowa GOP reportedly switched from Diebold touch screens to Diebold machines which read paper ballots. Without this no manual count would have been possible.
It was a great expression of support for Ron Paul. Romney bussed in huge numbers and gave away thousands of $35 entry tickets for his supporters but still his supporters were only just over 3 times that of Ron Paul’s- many of whom paid their own way there and bought their own entry tickets.
Thanks, Brian. I’ve update the story with the correct dates. Appreciate the Diebold info.
Hey, nice posting. I agree that Paul’s 9% has a lot more staying power than many of the others. I see this reflective of the whole race to the nomination. The Ames top four will find much of their support siphoned away by other candidates once the race really begins, I fully expect that not to be the case with Ron Paul’s base of support.
Well-written article, and an interesting analysis. I agree that Paul’s supporters are almost solely there for philosophy and cannot be purchased by the other candidates. The observation that the the “fundies” won, not Romney, was also dead-on.
The whole straw man poll is BS and everyone of the candidates make me want to puke. Guess I’ll have to vote for a different party.
Oh, enough already with Ron Paul!
As far as I’m concerned, if you packed every “libertarian” in America aboard a rusty old battleship, towed it to the middle of the ocean and sank it, this country would be better off.
What’s a “fundie”?
Indeed, I can respect your position as a progressive to not want to support Ron Paul.
However, if it comes down to Hillary vs Paul (in my bizarro fantasy world at least), who would you vote for?
For me, it comes down to Iraq. Hillary will NOT get us out of Iraq. Ron Paul will. We are at a crucial moment in history, and our nation’s policies in the Middle East are sending us into oblivion.
Excellent article, thanks for the analysis.
As a measure of Ron Paul’s international support, have a look at the websites listed here of Ron Paul Supporters in different countries.
http://indiansandpakistanisforronpaul.wordpress.com/2007/08/14/an-african-anthem-of-freedom-for-the-ron-paul-revolution/
People really need to look closely at what he is saying about the Federal Reserve. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild said ” I care not who controls a country so long as I can control it’s money supply”. Therein lies the true power and the charade of changing politicians every few years is really elaborate window dressing to conceal the identity of the real decision-makers.