The Ron Paul Postmortem Part III - Autopsy of a Revolution
Sean Scallon
March 25, 2008
The turnout in many GOP primaries and caucuses was higher than expected this election year, but didn´t do Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) any favors. Although dwarfed by Democratic totals, Republican turnouts in many contests were higher largely due to the competitive nature of the race.
A good example of how this hurt Rep. Paul in came in Alaska. Paul´s forces there though they would do well and had the turnout been the expected 5,000 voters, their 2,004 votes would have made up 40 percent of the total, good enough to win. Instead the turnout was over 11,000, a record for the Alaska GOP caucuses. Mitt Romney´s campaign´s proved to be Paul´s biggest nemesis in many caucus states as they used their sophisticated get-out-the-vote techniques to juice up the turnouts, especially in states that had large Mormon populations. Romney´s forces needed wins in the straw polls of these caucuses to show his campaign had "momentum". Local GOP officials, like those in Maine, even aided the Romney campaign to help boost the turnouts and hurt Paul´s efforts.
But while Romney went for what turned out to be meaningless straw poll wins, Ron Paul´s supported stuck around to make sure they got picked to be delegates for district and state conventions that pick the delegates for the national convention. It´s this work within the party that may very well determine the eventual fate of the Ron Paul Movement in the years to come.
Part III
No one else running for president over the past year and a half has had a following quite like Ron Paul´s
Dedicated enough to stand in heat, snow and rain to wave save signs or hang signs from freeway overpasses or even pilot a blimp, yet ornery enough to damn the campaign´s own TV commercials, the Paul campaign truly was a model of decentralization. Everyone basically did their own thing or did their own thing in small groups, for better or worse.
The Paulites were not the most sophisticated when it came to politics. Because the campaign was so decentralized, its opponents and reporters could figure out what was going on, or figure out where Paul´s supporters were making strong efforts by just reading Ron Paul Forums.com. But being mostly amateurs at politics, what could one reasonably expect?
Yet, no candidate on the GOP side at least had as many passionately dedicated supporters to one candidate as Rep. Paul. Indeed that passion for the man and for what he stood for was the only thing that kept the whole enterprise together given the individual difference and rivalries which split even the best of campaigns. No candidate on the GOP side had supporters as creative as Paul´s, using the internet, the Ron Paul Blimp, Ron Paul Radio and Ron Paul Audio, self-produced DVDs and campaign commercials, a whole host of ideas and methods to spread Paul´s name far and wide. Isn´t it fair to ask if Republican´s problem is the candidate generating the most passion among the voters averaged just 5 percent in most state primaries? Where are the passionate McCain supporters? Or did McCain win more-or-less by default?
What will those Paul supporters do in the future now that the campaign is "winding down?"
Those supporters who were Libertarian and Constitution party activists will go back to the LP or CP. Some may leave politics. But most are staying involved by working in their local Republican parties. It´s tedious, almost thankless work. It can easily burn people out and local party leaders aren´t helping. I get emails from Minnesota supporters of Ron Paul detailing some of the crap they´re putting up with from party regulars at district conventions determined to hold onto power by any means necessary. They would have made good apparatchiks for the Bolsheviks.
But really there´s isn´t much of a choice if the movement is to have any impact at all. Hopefully such work can pay off by winning for Rep. Paul majorities in five caucus states that will allow his name to go in nomination at the GOP convention (it will be the only way Rep. Paul will speak at the convention). Such work at least will provide Paul supporters valuable political experience and establish connections that will help in the future. Two things are working in their favor: 1). Paul supporters tend to be younger that most Republicans and 2). The movement is bigger than Rep. Paul. Paul supporters can win a war of attrition with the "old guard" so long as they stick with working within the GOP. They can also make alliances with Republicans who may share their views on small government or abortion which overstep Rep. Paul´s unpopularity with Republicans. Indeed, with Paul on his way to passing from the political scene within two to four years, one will have to find a new name to label his supporters than "Paulites".
It would be so much easier to just go and take over the Libertarian Party or CP or some other non-major party apparatus. It would be so easy to go off and start a new party. The Paulites have the numbers and the money to do so in either case. Certainly they´ve been urged to do this by many observers. But what would come after November 2008? Rep. Paul could possibly, on the high side, obtain 8% of the vote as either an independent or as the LP or CP candidate? But what does that gain his supporters in the long run? Like it or not we have a system, validated by the voters election year after election year, that favors two major parties. Political change on the national level can only happen within such parties. Barry Goldwater knew this. Ronald Reagan knew this. That´s why they never indulged in fantasies about a conservative "third party." American political parties have always been bigger than ideology and only through such parties can ideas be promoted and validated through the candidates they run. Non-major parties are ghettos the elites steer movements into in order to minimize their impact. As Washington Post and American Prospect columnist Harold Meyerson put it: "Third parties divide movements." There were many who thought (myself included) the man and the hour met with Pat Buchanan back in 2000 and his Reform Party nomination. A far cry we were from being right.
One of the things Paul´s supporters are doing that the Buchanan´s movement did not is trying to elect candidates for various offices besides the Presidency. Some are running for Congress (like New Jersey´s Murray Sabrin for the U.S. Senate) and others for the state legislature. Four Paul supporters won local GOP nominations for Congress in Maryland. Now they may not win in their heavily Democratic districts, but the fact they did win gives them control over local GOP organizations within those Congressional Districts which pick delegates to the GOP national convention every four years and gives their views a legitimacy they would lack if they were LP or CP candidates. Paul himself has been kind enough to set up a PAC with his remaining campaign money to help fund such candidacies. Not only that, but Paul supporters are also trying to change GOP platforms and places like Alaska for example, where they´ve been successful.
Washington Monthly blogger Kevin Drum wrote this about the current state of the Republican Party:
"Despite this catastrophic failure, the neocons have essentially taken over the Republican Party without a fight. The younger generation of neocons has long argued that, lacking their elders´ epic transformation from liberal to conservative, they are really just conservatives, full stop. There´s nothing "neo" about them. Today, with their grandest project in tatters, they finally seem to be right. Despite their failure, it´s hard to find more than a tiny handful of Republicans who don´t support the neocon agenda wholeheartedly. From John McCain´s insistence on staying in Iraq forever to Rudy Giuliani´s invocation of the "terrorists´ war on us" to Mitt Romney´s call to "double Gitmo," the neocon temperament is now, purely and simply, the conservative temperament."
This may be true but it also means there´s a vacuum waiting to be filled in opposition to the neocons takeover of the GOP. They may control things for now, but after November passes, and the party faces the prospect of having lost control of Congress and the White House due to their mismanagement of the country, then the situation will be up for grabs. The neocons do not completely control the great mass of Republican voters outside of their cosmopolitan world, especially if there´s not a Republican in the White House or Republicans running Congress giving orders from on high and controlling patronage.
Remember, it was back in 1999 that many Republicans shared Ron Paul´s view on the war in Kosovo, i.e. non-interventionist. Would they have felt differently if it was Republican president ordering the Air Forces´ planes to drop bombs on the Serbs? That´s hard to say, maybe they would have fallen in line. But there would have been no underlying rationale for it (and it would be hard for them to explain to their constituents why their country´s planes were dropping bombs on a white, Christian people.) The cosmos may very well have influence and intellect, but they do not have numbers and control nothing if no one lets them. After 9-11 however, all the rationales for our interventionist foreign policy a neocon could ever need or want was in place. And because of them, they led the way.
There´s a very good chance after 2008 Republicans will have no power whatsoever in Washington D.C. and thus its every politician for themselves. It´s in that kind of atmosphere that an opposition to the neocons has to be created. For a lot of Republicans on foreign policy, with the exception of Ron Paul, they see no alternative than interventionism. That´s why it was so important for Paul to run even if he didn´t win. You can´t win any battle unless you choose at some point to fight. You have to offer another side voters can turn to. And so long as Paul supporters continue to fight, they can win in the end.
Sean Scallon is a freelance writer and newspaper reporter who lives in Arkansaw, Wisconsin. His work has appeared in Chronicles: A magazine of American Culture. His first-ever book: Beating the Powers that Be: Independent Political Movements and Parties of the Upper Midwest and their Relevance in Third-party Politics of Today is now out on sale from Publish America. Go to the their website at www.publishamerica.com to order a copy.
A good example of how this hurt Rep. Paul in came in Alaska. Paul´s forces there though they would do well and had the turnout been the expected 5,000 voters, their 2,004 votes would have made up 40 percent of the total, good enough to win. Instead the turnout was over 11,000, a record for the Alaska GOP caucuses. Mitt Romney´s campaign´s proved to be Paul´s biggest nemesis in many caucus states as they used their sophisticated get-out-the-vote techniques to juice up the turnouts, especially in states that had large Mormon populations. Romney´s forces needed wins in the straw polls of these caucuses to show his campaign had "momentum". Local GOP officials, like those in Maine, even aided the Romney campaign to help boost the turnouts and hurt Paul´s efforts.
But while Romney went for what turned out to be meaningless straw poll wins, Ron Paul´s supported stuck around to make sure they got picked to be delegates for district and state conventions that pick the delegates for the national convention. It´s this work within the party that may very well determine the eventual fate of the Ron Paul Movement in the years to come.
Part III
No one else running for president over the past year and a half has had a following quite like Ron Paul´s
Dedicated enough to stand in heat, snow and rain to wave save signs or hang signs from freeway overpasses or even pilot a blimp, yet ornery enough to damn the campaign´s own TV commercials, the Paul campaign truly was a model of decentralization. Everyone basically did their own thing or did their own thing in small groups, for better or worse.
The Paulites were not the most sophisticated when it came to politics. Because the campaign was so decentralized, its opponents and reporters could figure out what was going on, or figure out where Paul´s supporters were making strong efforts by just reading Ron Paul Forums.com. But being mostly amateurs at politics, what could one reasonably expect?
Yet, no candidate on the GOP side at least had as many passionately dedicated supporters to one candidate as Rep. Paul. Indeed that passion for the man and for what he stood for was the only thing that kept the whole enterprise together given the individual difference and rivalries which split even the best of campaigns. No candidate on the GOP side had supporters as creative as Paul´s, using the internet, the Ron Paul Blimp, Ron Paul Radio and Ron Paul Audio, self-produced DVDs and campaign commercials, a whole host of ideas and methods to spread Paul´s name far and wide. Isn´t it fair to ask if Republican´s problem is the candidate generating the most passion among the voters averaged just 5 percent in most state primaries? Where are the passionate McCain supporters? Or did McCain win more-or-less by default?
What will those Paul supporters do in the future now that the campaign is "winding down?"
Those supporters who were Libertarian and Constitution party activists will go back to the LP or CP. Some may leave politics. But most are staying involved by working in their local Republican parties. It´s tedious, almost thankless work. It can easily burn people out and local party leaders aren´t helping. I get emails from Minnesota supporters of Ron Paul detailing some of the crap they´re putting up with from party regulars at district conventions determined to hold onto power by any means necessary. They would have made good apparatchiks for the Bolsheviks.
But really there´s isn´t much of a choice if the movement is to have any impact at all. Hopefully such work can pay off by winning for Rep. Paul majorities in five caucus states that will allow his name to go in nomination at the GOP convention (it will be the only way Rep. Paul will speak at the convention). Such work at least will provide Paul supporters valuable political experience and establish connections that will help in the future. Two things are working in their favor: 1). Paul supporters tend to be younger that most Republicans and 2). The movement is bigger than Rep. Paul. Paul supporters can win a war of attrition with the "old guard" so long as they stick with working within the GOP. They can also make alliances with Republicans who may share their views on small government or abortion which overstep Rep. Paul´s unpopularity with Republicans. Indeed, with Paul on his way to passing from the political scene within two to four years, one will have to find a new name to label his supporters than "Paulites".
It would be so much easier to just go and take over the Libertarian Party or CP or some other non-major party apparatus. It would be so easy to go off and start a new party. The Paulites have the numbers and the money to do so in either case. Certainly they´ve been urged to do this by many observers. But what would come after November 2008? Rep. Paul could possibly, on the high side, obtain 8% of the vote as either an independent or as the LP or CP candidate? But what does that gain his supporters in the long run? Like it or not we have a system, validated by the voters election year after election year, that favors two major parties. Political change on the national level can only happen within such parties. Barry Goldwater knew this. Ronald Reagan knew this. That´s why they never indulged in fantasies about a conservative "third party." American political parties have always been bigger than ideology and only through such parties can ideas be promoted and validated through the candidates they run. Non-major parties are ghettos the elites steer movements into in order to minimize their impact. As Washington Post and American Prospect columnist Harold Meyerson put it: "Third parties divide movements." There were many who thought (myself included) the man and the hour met with Pat Buchanan back in 2000 and his Reform Party nomination. A far cry we were from being right.
One of the things Paul´s supporters are doing that the Buchanan´s movement did not is trying to elect candidates for various offices besides the Presidency. Some are running for Congress (like New Jersey´s Murray Sabrin for the U.S. Senate) and others for the state legislature. Four Paul supporters won local GOP nominations for Congress in Maryland. Now they may not win in their heavily Democratic districts, but the fact they did win gives them control over local GOP organizations within those Congressional Districts which pick delegates to the GOP national convention every four years and gives their views a legitimacy they would lack if they were LP or CP candidates. Paul himself has been kind enough to set up a PAC with his remaining campaign money to help fund such candidacies. Not only that, but Paul supporters are also trying to change GOP platforms and places like Alaska for example, where they´ve been successful.
Washington Monthly blogger Kevin Drum wrote this about the current state of the Republican Party:
"Despite this catastrophic failure, the neocons have essentially taken over the Republican Party without a fight. The younger generation of neocons has long argued that, lacking their elders´ epic transformation from liberal to conservative, they are really just conservatives, full stop. There´s nothing "neo" about them. Today, with their grandest project in tatters, they finally seem to be right. Despite their failure, it´s hard to find more than a tiny handful of Republicans who don´t support the neocon agenda wholeheartedly. From John McCain´s insistence on staying in Iraq forever to Rudy Giuliani´s invocation of the "terrorists´ war on us" to Mitt Romney´s call to "double Gitmo," the neocon temperament is now, purely and simply, the conservative temperament."
This may be true but it also means there´s a vacuum waiting to be filled in opposition to the neocons takeover of the GOP. They may control things for now, but after November passes, and the party faces the prospect of having lost control of Congress and the White House due to their mismanagement of the country, then the situation will be up for grabs. The neocons do not completely control the great mass of Republican voters outside of their cosmopolitan world, especially if there´s not a Republican in the White House or Republicans running Congress giving orders from on high and controlling patronage.
Remember, it was back in 1999 that many Republicans shared Ron Paul´s view on the war in Kosovo, i.e. non-interventionist. Would they have felt differently if it was Republican president ordering the Air Forces´ planes to drop bombs on the Serbs? That´s hard to say, maybe they would have fallen in line. But there would have been no underlying rationale for it (and it would be hard for them to explain to their constituents why their country´s planes were dropping bombs on a white, Christian people.) The cosmos may very well have influence and intellect, but they do not have numbers and control nothing if no one lets them. After 9-11 however, all the rationales for our interventionist foreign policy a neocon could ever need or want was in place. And because of them, they led the way.
There´s a very good chance after 2008 Republicans will have no power whatsoever in Washington D.C. and thus its every politician for themselves. It´s in that kind of atmosphere that an opposition to the neocons has to be created. For a lot of Republicans on foreign policy, with the exception of Ron Paul, they see no alternative than interventionism. That´s why it was so important for Paul to run even if he didn´t win. You can´t win any battle unless you choose at some point to fight. You have to offer another side voters can turn to. And so long as Paul supporters continue to fight, they can win in the end.
Sean Scallon is a freelance writer and newspaper reporter who lives in Arkansaw, Wisconsin. His work has appeared in Chronicles: A magazine of American Culture. His first-ever book: Beating the Powers that Be: Independent Political Movements and Parties of the Upper Midwest and their Relevance in Third-party Politics of Today is now out on sale from Publish America. Go to the their website at www.publishamerica.com to order a copy.