Ron Paul in Negotiations for Big Day-Time TV Appearance?
Submitted by bedr1 on Wed, 10/24/2007 - 10:50Tuesday, October 23, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com
Sources tell FMNN that there are negotiations to put GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-Tex) on a major day-time TV program in the near future. It would precede or follow his upcoming major TV appearance on the Tonight Show With Jay Leno on Tuesday, October 30.
Every time that Ron Paul makes an appearance on the national stage, it helps with fund-raising by expanding his base, campaign sources say, likely doubling or even tripling the amount of potential voters who are aware of him.
His name recognition is up around 10 or 11 percent now and as his base expands, his fund-raising base ability expands as well. Ron Paul’s campaign has set an ambitious goal of $12 million, and to reach it, more and more people have to become aware of the candidate within the requisite 4th quarter time frame.
The View
I pretty dang sure its the View. I contacted campaign headquarters about a week and half ago explaining how Dr Paul would be the first and probable only republican candidiate to be on their show , blab blab etc etc, anyways the email I got back was promising , so....... thats gotta be the show.
I would say The Ellen
I would like to see RP on The Ellen Degeneres Show.
The VIEW
I think, because he's and OB-GYN, and that would have an added interest for women, plus Hasselbeck is pregnant, etc.
Would be a nice fit on several levels.
That's thinking!
Forget the news media biases.....they'll clamor all over President Paul one day. They are having to march to the orders of their corporate bosses that like things just as they are - But look at Ron Paul rise. Hell, people are tired of the government hogwash, and guess what? The media's obvious bias is "blowing back" on them. They're exposed! We Paul fans see it for sure, and even some members of the media are having to own up to it. And we're just getting good traction. Ron Paul's messege is being well received everywhere.
Back to my point, excellent idea of going on the soft daytime shows. Women really don't like Clinton, they sure don't like Rudy, Mitt's a little flakey, Barak's a threat..........but Ron Paul offers hope, and he's a gentleman. All women like a gentleman........and when he turns on the OB/GYN authority.........they'll be puddy in his hands. Go to the audiences that will listen. Late nite shows, daytime............make your own waves, and let the media chase RON PAUL
alan laney
"puddy"?
"when he turns on the OB/GYN authority.........they'll be puddy in his hands."
I think you mean "putty" -- but considering cartoon "Tweety Bird"'s famous "puddy tat" comment, your spelling works out to a rather coarse double entendre of severely amusing proportions....
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Get active NOW to put Ron in the general election. ronpaul.meetup.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What is begun in anger, ends in shame.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Give me liberty....
______________
"Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment." - Ron Paul
RP as a 3rd party candidate?
Pennsylvania, for one, has what is known as a "sore loser" law, which
says, in effect, that IF you lose a primary as a candidate of one party,
you cannot run as the candidate of another party.
It might be possible to avoid the restriction of that law, but only if RP were to drop out of the PA primary, and eliminate himself as a candidate
in PA's Republican primary.
I do not know when the Constitution Party plans to hold its presidential nominating covention.
The LP, I believe, has its convention scheduled for Memorial Day weekend. But even if the LP were to give its nomination to RP, the LP and/or the Paul campaign would need to gather some 50,000+ signatures to qualify him for the ballot in Nov. 2008.
Concentrate on winning now: there is no Plan B.
So?
PA's law is unconstitutional because it conflicts with the LP national bylaws concerning candidate eligibility. In 1986 SCOTUS ruled in the Tashjian case (look it up) that the GOP bylaws trumped Connecticut state laws. Someone ought to drop that ruling and the appropriate bylaws into the PA SoS's lap.
CP Convention is April 22-27 in Kansas City. Ballot access in 40 states
LP Convention is Memorial Day Weekend in Denver. Ballot access in 48 states
Not all states have signature requirements. Richard Winger over at http://www.ballot-access.org has the best details that I know of.
What?
What state law could ever be unconstitutional because of a bylaw of a political party? Its either unconstitutional or not. This does not sound very Paul like to me.
Same States?
Do we know if those states overlap to cover all 50? I believe he recently got the endorsement of another party as well. If we could unite 3 smaller parties together under Paul's platform, this might be viable....
The View...trust me :-)
Look for it in December, and YOU KNOW we'd better do another "Flower Shower" similar to the deal for Leno with a stage full of WOMEN! They'd NEVER let us hear the end of it otherwise...LOL!
Yes, they HAVE talked about Ron quite a bit on the show, which is all the more reason to have "the source" ON the show to answer their questions in person. And I agree with several below that he should have a very warm reception on this program, being the absolute "gentleman" that he is. GREAT press potential there...especially if we pave the way with "flowers"...:-)
Take it with a grain of salt...
Is it just me, or is FMN not a reputable RP news source? Isnt this the sight that claimed CNN was planning a Huckster RP debate? Anyone remember that!
Huckster RP debate?
Huckster RP debate?
--
http://www.ronpaulradio.com/
24/7 Ron Paul Coverage and Discussion
I recall it...
But, in their defense, it was stated that CNN was interested in putting that debate together right after their "argument' about bringing the troops home after the debate.
This was the argument summarized:
Huckabee: I think more troops should die until I feel good about myself.
Ron Paul: And just how many more is that?
Maybe is Good Morning America
ufcama
GMA has been interviewing presidential candidates for the last couple of weeks
It may also be the Today Show on NBC
ufcama
Can Ron Paul turn the two-party system into a three-party one?
I am a Ron Paul Supporter through and through, but still, here I have some if-questions:
If Ron Paul does not get the Republican nomination, would you urge him to run as a libertarian? Would you vote libertarian?
If he runs as a libertarian, do you think that his candidacy could turn the two-party system into a three-party one?
Been there, done that...
It *WILL _NOT_ WORK* under current ballot laws, and Dr. Paul knows it just like me, from experience. Please don't think about that anymore, it's a TOTAL waste of your time because it's not-happenin'! Focus your energy on winning, instead, because that's more-possible than some quixotic 3rd party attempt. We WOULD NOT be in the "debates" (lame as they are...) without that "R." behind his name. I was a partisan-Libertarian, and I've gotten used to it. You can too. The law is unfair, it affects our tactical decisions, and we need to just deal with that fact.
Below is something nice, to think-about instead.
JMR
Common Sense with Paul Jacob
A Matter of Loyalty
October 24, 2007
Is loyalty important in politics?
Well, yes. Sure.
But I don’t think of loyalty as dedication to a party or a president. I think, instead, of principle.
In a debate early in October, Republican candidates Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul eagerly declared their disloyalty . . . to the Republican candidates that they thought were sending the country in the wrong direction. Neither Tancredo nor Paul said they would be willing to support the ultimate Republican nominee for president if the candidate chosen did not align with their views.
For Tancredo, that is about illegal immigration and border control. For Ron Paul, it’s about getting out of Iraq; he says America’s presence there has been a disaster. Ron Paul said he wouldn’t support any of his Republican competitors unless, and I quote, “they’re willing to end the war and bring our troops home.”
Sen. John McCain quickly replied, “You don’t want me then, pal.”
Now some may see it as disloyal to the party to run for its presidential nomination without agreeing to support the eventual nominee. And party regulars are certainly free to vote against such candidates. But as for me, whether I agree with a candidate’s ideas or not, I like it when they are loyal — not to their party or some clique of supporters, but to their ideas, their principles.
Loyalty is important — Loyalty to the people one represents and the principles one stands for.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Click here to listen to an MP3 audio file of this episode.
Common Sense website shot
Click here to visit the new Common Sense website, which has archives of Paul's commentary since 1999!
Toolkit
Check out the Sam Adams Alliance Action Toolkit, with tips and tricks for starting a campaign and winning! There are new updates weekly, so visit often!
[-502.402559-]
The Sam Adams Alliance- 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 3330, Chicago, IL 60606 312-920-0080
It's not an either-or proposition, though...
...try the "both" option and you might be surprised.
In any case, it's not really worth much discussion until February anyway.
Come on...
Oprah.. I want the women / black vote (Hillary / Obama) damnit. It's Ron Paul's for the taking, all they need to do is hear him speak. :D
Oprah
Yes, even though she's a big-time Obama fan, she would treat the good doctor with respect as she does with all of her guests. I think it would open her eyes to just how much she is supporting the wrong candidate. And if Ron wins the nomination and Obama does not, she may really help us then.
By all means, let see if we can get him on her show.
Bob W., Naples, FL
Oprah WILL NOT have other candidates on her show
Oprah has publicly stated that she will not have other candidates on her show, as she thought that was disloyal or unfair. Ron Paul will certainly not be her top pick, even if she were to revoke that statement. Which I don't think she will. Perhaps concentrate on another as-of-yet unaligned program.
Dear Lord, in the name of all that's holy
Please, don't let it be "Dr. Phil." ("The View" is grating-enough!)
JMR
Couldn't she pick one from each party
Given the way presidential selection works, an influential person like Oprah could be involved in supporting a candidate in each party. In fact, if you check donations, I'll bet you'll find many rich people donate to politicians in both parties.
The view?
Do you think it is the view?
That would be great!
I'm sure Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg would be VERY receptive to RP - I'd also like to see the Good Doctor put that neocon shill, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, in her place!
Don't count on Whoopi
Whoopi held a fundraiser for Richardson. Who would have thought?
agreed!
The Whoopster is big time pro-abortion, hope i'm wrong but I don't think she would be that courteous to Dr. Paul. Seeing as this one issue seems to cloud her thinking about all else.
The View
They talk about him all the time on The View so my guess is that would be it. A bit of a disappointment simply because they do talk about him all the time. Most of those listeners know about us already. BUT would still be a VERY good thing.
The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.jonathangullible.com/mmedia/PoL.English.The.Philo...
My guess Regis
My guess on this would be Regis