TX Poll: Paul @ 6%

The work of libertarians and independents alike has obviously fueled Ron Paul’s rise in Texas. Let’s keep that up.

Source: DallasBlog.com

And big news from the British press: McCain could soon be dropping out—what’s that say for libertarian open-doorers?

38 Responses to “TX Poll: Paul @ 6%”

  1. matt Says:

    Thanks for the links, Joey.

    I think that writing all of McCain’s problems off as immigration problems is shortsighted. The American people are probably just creeped out by McCain. I know I am.

    According to this link, RP is the only candidate who doesn’t stand to lose votes when Thompson is added to the picture. I doubt that’s exactly accurate, since Thompson will hog media attention, and media attention is needed to make old people change their votes, but the numbers are interesting nonetheless.

  2. Jay Matthews Says:

    Thanks for the good news Joey! I think we’ll have more good news after June 30 when the campaigns report their fundraising figures.

  3. George Whitfield Says:

    I was really impressed by Congressman Ron Paul of Texas in the first three debates. His dedication to the US Constitution makes him the best hope for peace, prosperity and freedom for Americans.

  4. Michael Says:

    In Texas, it’s winner-take-all by congressional district for the delegates. We know Paul will take his home district, the vote increase will improve the chances of taking other districts. In Arizona, should McCain leave the race, it will mean a huge boost for Paul because he’s already been drawing good crowds there.

  5. Trent Hill Says:


    Texas is part of Super-duper-Tuesday. It wont matter by then.
    Paul needs a headstart in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Nevada.

  6. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Let’s keep that up.

    No. Let’s not. Here’s my reasons why.

  7. Trent Hill Says:


    The allegations of racism are basically unfounded. For every David Duke or League of The South member that supports Paul, there is a jew, a black, a hispanic.

    Amongst his most prominent proponents are Walter E. Williams (black), Alan Keyes (black), Howard Phillips (jewish), Aaron Russo (jewish), Frank Gonzales (Hispanic), and Tomas Estrada-Palma—the grandson of the first President of Cuba (Hispanic).

    Ron Paul’s articles against racism, collectivism, and group ownership speak to his alledged racism.

  8. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Trent: I have no doubt he has other supporters than the white supremacists. I wish you hadn’t mentioned Howard Phillips, though, since there are quite a few who regard him as a white supremacist as well.

    More to the point, Ron Paul has never told the Ku Kluckers to take a hike- something that most politicians who have the dubious privilege of getting their support do as a matter of course.

    As for his article, I’ve addressed that; it basically says that racism wouldn’t exist without government action, which turns reality on its head. In truth government action on race exists because of racism, and eliminating the government will not make the racism go away.

  9. khan tusion Says:


    “In fact it is the federal government more than anything else that divides us along race, class, religion, and gender lines. Government, through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails in our society. This government “benevolence” crowds out genuine goodwill between men by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility between us.”

    You overstate your case in your characterization of the statement.

    Racism would certainly exist without government action, but at the same time it is the policies of government cited above that do more than anything else to perpetuate it. Racism would not cease to exist without these policies, but it would likely diminish.

    And, certainly, (mostly state and local) government Jim Crow policies played a large role in perpetuating racism in the past.

  10. G.E. Smith Says:

    When Barry Goldwater was supported by white supremacists, he made a point of highlighting his own Jewish ancestry and his disdain for bigotry.

    I’ve seen no such efforts by Dr. Paul, but quite the contrary.

    If someone advocated true libertarianism/classical liberalism, there would never be a problem with the likes of David Duke or Stormfront or the League of the South supporting him. Dr. Paul has cultivated these bases by his own racist stance on immigration, as well as select other bones he’s thrown to these people. His weak “refutations” only underscore the point.

  11. Eric Dondero Says:

    Funny that there’s no blaring headline stories here at Third Party Watch about Ron Paul’s drop in the Zogby poll from a high of 3% in March down to 0% in the May poll.

  12. G.E. Smith Says:

    The idea that racism would not exist without government is the ultimate in absurdity. Pre-state civilizations were tribalist, and tribalism is the ultimate form of “racism.” In the ultimate absence of government, the “voluntary confederations” that anarchists speak of are nothing more than tribes, and in pre-government, these tribes were based on geography (i.e. race). If government were stripped away, the tribes might not directly be based on race, but they would eventually evolve into new races. Limited government and the free market is what extinguishes racism and tribalism by allowing Man to be an individual. But our particular government reinforced racism to such an extent that the mere de-enforcement was not enough to end it or correct it. Programs like affirmative action help perpetuate it, but Ron Paul’s own insistence of “cultural purity” by government force is the ultimate in government-supported racism.

  13. Robert K Stock Says:

    Kris Overstreet:

    I am a member of the League of the South and I am not a white supremacist. I would like to see an independent Southern republic where all people are judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.

  14. Trent Hill Says:

    “I wish you hadn’t mentioned Howard Phillips, though, since there are quite a few who regard him as a white supremacist as well.”

    A jewish white supremacist? Jews are semitic…not european.
    As for Ron Paul, he has (in many articles) already distances himself from any sort of racism. The ideology he clings to so dearly, is diametrically opposed to collectivism. He has sworn off all forms of collectivism as CAUSING racism.
    As for what Paul said about government causing racism, he obviously was talking about Affirmative Action, preferential racial treatment, and Racial Preference Scholarships. That sort of thing is a government-sponsored racism. So are Jim Crow Laws.

  15. Trent Hill Says:


    “Funny that there’s no blaring headline stories here at Third Party Watch about Ron Paul’s drop in the Zogby poll from a high of 3% in March down to 0% in the May poll.”

    That’s because it isnt true dumbass.

    Look at this:
    Strategic Vision
    Republican Voters in Iowa
    Mitt Romney 23%
    Fred Thompson 17%
    Rudy Giuliani 14%
    John McCain 10%
    Tommy Thompson 6%
    Mike Huckabee 5%
    Newt Gingrich 4%
    Sam Brownback 3%
    Tom Tancredo 2%
    Ron Paul 2%
    Duncan Hunter 1%
    Jim Gilmore 1%
    Chuck Hagel 1%
    Unsure 11%

    =thats just Iowa. And its only 4 days ago.

    Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll
    Rudy Giuliani 28%
    Fred Thompson 17%
    Mitt Romney 9%
    Tommy Thompson 4%
    Mike Huckabee 3%
    Ron Paul 2%
    Tom Tancredo 1%
    Duncan Hunter 1%
    Sam Brownback 1%
    Jim Gilmore 1%
    Chuck Hagel 1%
    Unsure 29%
    Other 4%

    =National poll.

    USA Today/Gallup Poll
    Rudy Giuliani 29%
    Fred Thompson 21%
    John McCain 20%
    Mitt Romney 8%
    Mike Huckabee 3%
    Tommy Thompson 2%
    Duncan Hunter 2%
    Sam Brownback 2%
    Ron Paul 2%
    Tom Tancredo 1%
    Jim Gilmore 1%
    Chuck Hagel 1%
    Unsure 8%

    =National Poll.

    CNN/WMUR Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire
    Mitt Romney29%
    Rudy Giuliani22%
    John McCain20%
    Fred Thompson12%
    Ron Paul3%
    Sam Brownback2%
    Mike Huckabee2%
    Tom Tancredo1%
    Duncan Hunter1%

    =New Hampshire

    Strategic Vision Poll
    Rudy Giuliani30%
    Fred Thompson24%
    John McCain11%
    Mitt Romney8%
    Newt Gingrich4%
    Tom Tancredo2%
    Sam Brownback2%
    Mike Huckabee2%
    Ron Paul2%
    Tommy Thompson1%
    Duncan Hunter1%
    Jim Gilmore1%
    Chuck Hagel1%


    Also, 1% in Nevada and South Carolina (although he hasnt been in any poll in those states since APRIL).

  16. Trent Hill Says:

    He’s been slowly rising in the polls, at a crawling pace. just wait til July 15th when Q2 numbers come out.

  17. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    Trent - One can be a white Black-supremacist. Just look at the Green Party.

  18. Devious David Says:

    Or a black white supremacist. Just look at Clayton Bigsby.

  19. Trent Hill Says:


    And Romney COULD transport his dog by placing it on the roof for a 10 hour drive.

    But its stupid as hell.

  20. Jay Matthews Says:

    The idea that Ron Paul should take a moment during an interview to say something like, “And by the way Tucker, I’m not a racist” is utterly dumb especially considering it would be out of the blue and it’s a non-issue anyway.

    To say he should “tell the Ku Kluckers to take a hike” presupposes he has some sort of relationship with them.

    I don’t see anyone here saying Giuliani should announce he has no mob connections despite the fact his father was a mid-level boss in Brooklyn, NY.

  21. Jay Matthews Says:

    Although Giuliani making such an announcement, if he can do it truthfully, is certainly more justified.

  22. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    Jay - Barry Goldwater didn’t think it was a waste of his time. Maybe he can first stop showing up at League of the South events. That would be a good start.

  23. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    Notice how Dondilgleberry doesn’t jump in on the “Ron Paul is racist” bandwagon. Is it because he’s above it? Or is it because he doesn’t want to give Ron Paul the “credit”?

  24. Jay Matthews Says:

    It’s not that it’s a waste of time, which it is anyway, but it makes no sense to bring something up you’ve denied from the start, something your opponents aren’t accusing you of being, and/or which may curtail the momentum of your campaign. Let sleeping dogs lie.

    Again, see the Giuliani comparision. Is the idea of Giuliani being “connected” an issue now? It’s not. (At least not that I’ve seen in the MSM.) Similarly should Romney come out and say in the next debate, “And for the record I’m not a bigamist or a proponent of bigamy?” Of course not.

    Those of you who make the baseless accusation that RP is a racist and hates immigrants should be jumping all over Tom Tancredo. In the last debate Tancredo suggested there should be a limit on even legal immigration. The moderator seemed to find that concept strange. Note that New Zealand and Australia use such a system. Accordingly this should repulse you and I trust you’ll be showing consistency and crossing those destinations of your “must visit” list while launching some “Tancredo is a racist” or “Steve Irwin was a white supremacist” banter.

    Don’t forget to start boycotting Outback Steakhouses too.

  25. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Except that Ron Paul hasn’t denied it at all, to my knowledge.

    As for Giuliani, he has denied mob connections many times in the past… but no libertarian I know of is calling for the LP to shut down operations to support HIM. Nor Tom Tancredo.

  26. Jay Matthews Says:


    If you check out the 10/1/2001 issue of Texas Monthly he addresses the matter directly.

    Similarly I’m sure Giuliani has denied mob ties in the past. The point is he addressed the matter IN THE PAST. What would be the point of bringing up the topic now? It would only bring negativity to yourself and your campaign.

    Neither Giuliani nor Tancredo are libertarians.

  27. Jay Matthews Says:

    Kris, if by “shut down operations” you mean wanting to see how the Ron Paul candidacy progresses before moving forward with a candidate of their own maybe your beef is with LP members who would prefer just that.

    And if you truly believe he is racist you should call on the LP to terminate his membership.

  28. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    Jay - Tom Tancredo is a racist? No way. Next you’ll be saying that David Duke is anti-Semitic.

    His opponents are bringing it up online—which is where most of Paul’s upport lies anyway. If you ask me, he’s making the calculated decision that distancing himself from the racist statements he’s made will cost him more votes than it will protect. If you think that this stuff WON’T come out if he actually makes any kind of run for the nomination, you are on street drugs.

  29. Jay Matthews Says:

    I have no doubt it may come up at some point. But the premise of addressing it now on his own accord when it’s not in the MSM and not an issue, makes no sense. When your at 2% what’s the benefit and what’s the point? As the saying goes you’re only attacked when you become a factor.

    My previous posts were meant to:

    A. Point out the silliness in the argument

    B. Point out the inconsistency/hypocrisy in those making the argument

    C. Point out how some will really reach to smear him (They certainly cannot do it by his voting record.)

    D. Point out he has addressed the matter years ago and denied making such statements

    Furthermore he does not have a track record of making such statements.

    How about Giuliani also come forward to address his marital affair? Would that make sense?

  30. Trent Hill Says:


    Im in a host of Ron Paul groups. And any time this was brought up,everyone was quick to say—-if we DID find Paul was a racist—we’d drop him.
    That includes a 13,000 member group.
    The fact is, he has denied the crappy statements made by some staffer/ghostwriter.
    The evidence is there. He disavowed the words, and preaches against collectivism often.
    He fired the staffer just a few days after the article came to his attention (Maybe the staffer WAS Dondero,and thats why he wont jump on it?)
    As for the League of the South, although it has many racist MEMBERS. It is not neccesarily a racist organization. I wouldnt go to a meeting because your gauranteed to find at least SOME racism there. The fact is, it is well known that Paul is NOT a racist. Of all the Republicans who you could accuse of racism, Paul is the weakest arguement. You are pitting a 3 paragraph article in a ghostwritten, barely-circulated, newsletter from 1997 against his life’s work. He has black, hispanic, asian, and jewish supporters/staffers and has preached against collectivism since 1976.

  31. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    I’m willing to accept that Paul is not racist against blacks. I am not willing to accept that he’s not a “racist” in a cultural sense. He often speaks about “American culture,” including the necessity of English being the primary language of people who live here. How is that NOT collectivist?

    Hey, I would still vote for Ron Paul. I’m more concerned about his wacky economic views than I am about his refusal to disavow past racist statements made in his name. But I think he is a racial collectivist on immigration, and I think he shows an unnatural tolerance for white supremacists who cotton to his message, and that makes me uncomfortable. You yourself said you would not go to a League of the South meeting because of the racism of many of its members. If the LotS is not a racist organization, then it tolerates racism on a whole other level than Ron Paul, and I don’t think private individuals can morally tolerate racism of such an overt degree.

  32. Trent Hill Says:

    I read an essay of Paul’s saying English should not be the national language, but that each state should be able to determine its official languages. But in the debate he raised his hand for national language. So I wont argue with you there.
    You WILL notice that he has not been to a LoS (or any similar organization) meeting in quite some time. Why? Not sure.

    Paul is not a racial collectivist on immigration, he simply ascribes to the belief that a nation without borders is not one. Adam Smith did the same I believe.

  33. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove (check out my new blog) Says:

    Hey. I’m for enforcing border security. I’m not for Soviet-style quotas.

  34. Trent Hill Says:


    Although it has earned me some dissent in the CP, I advocate for free-trade and larger immigration quotas.

  35. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove Says:

    I’m against quotas period, but I would be willing to merely raise them to account for all the legal and illegal immigrants currently coming here +10% or so. That would be enough. Not everyone in the world WANTS to come to America. Check out this video by my friend:


    As for “national language,” as this power is not authorized in the Constitution, I am opposed to it. The federal government should conduct its business in English, but it should just be conducting less business. States can have “state languages,” but they shouldn’t try to impose them on schools. Schools and other local services should cater to their local bases.

    Your days in the CP are numbered, Trent. That prediction is the highest compliment I can pay.

  36. G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove Says:

    Check out this funny line from Mike Gravel: “Senator Gravel favors protecting our borders and monitoring the flow of illegal immigrants into our country.”

    He wants to MONITOR the flow of ILLEGAL immigrants into the country?

    i.e. put little birdies on the border and watch people come over. It will still be illegal, though.

    Mike Gravel should hire me as a copy writer. That’s assuming, of course, that Joey Dauben doesn’t get me a job with Wayne Root.

  37. Trent Hill Says:


    As of right now—the CP is more home to me than the LP could be.
    There are less crazies (Although the crazies are a different type. Religious as opposed to Truthers). The LP’s pro-choice, open-borders, anarchist positions are just too much for me.
    Despite the the fact that i wish roads and the military COULD be privatized, I dont see it working. The anarcho-capitalists that control the LP do think it could happen, and that shows an even larger disconnect from reality than the rest of us (c’mon,we’re in third parties…). Third party victory is already an unlikely scenario, so if you are going to attempt to fight uphill, you dont do it with rollerblades on (the LP).
    After all consideration, im REALLY just hoping Paul can win the nomination. That would be enough for me.

  38. Jay Matthews Says:

    Note to all Ron Paul supporters: for what it’s worth sportsbook.com has recently updated the odds for the GOP nomination and RP is down to 7-1.

    He was previously at 15-1 and just a few months ago at 200-1.

    Check it out here:


Leave a Reply