Ron Paul Flubs Appearance on The View


Before he appeared as a guest on The View, Hot Air predicted that this would probably be the “first time that Ron Paul makes more sense than anyone else on the stage.” Paul has been on several stages where he made more sense than anyone else, such as at every Republican debate he has participated in and discussed Iraq. It seemed like a sure bet that Paul would make more sense than anyone else on the stage at The View. As seen in the video above, that was not the case. This was one of the weakest appearances I have seen by Ron Paul.

Without the benefit of questions on topics such as Iraq or civil liberties, Paul came across as someone remarkably uninformed and incapable of making a coherent argument. The questions started on on abortion, placing Paul at an immediate disadvantage. While I might disagree, it is possible to make a coherent argument in opposition to abortion rights, but Paul simply could not do so. Although introduced as a Gynecologist, making him someone who should know better, he even referred to “partial birth abortions” as if the term had some medical validity.

Lacking any intelligent arguments, Paul resorted to his standbys of the Constitution and state’s rights. He stated, “I want to sort this out the way the Constitution mandates and that is at the state level.” This ignores both Constitutional issue of the individual’s right to privacy and promotes a view of state’s right which is not supported by the Constitution. I recently quoted historian Joseph Ellis on his view of the five core achievements of the founding fathers. In addition to disagreeing with Paul’s view denying separation of church and state, Ellis also explained how the founding fathers created over-lapping sources of authority in which blurring of jurisdiction between federal and state power became an asset. Paul ignores the extension of Constitutional liberties from the federal government to the states under the 14th Amendment and ignores the important role of the federal government in protecting these liberties as opposed to allowing the majority to restrict the rights of the minority at a state level.

After the discussion of abortion the discussion was weak on both sides. The next two questions coincidentally were two of the topics at NPR’s Democratic debate, immigration and China but the questioning was superficial. They ended with a particularly inane question as to which other candidate Paul would support. While everyone other than some of Paul’s supporters realize Paul has no chance to win, we still must allow the candidates the hope of victory rather than to expect them to endorse an opponent.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. 1
    Vote for Hillary says:

    Who would you rather vote for, a candidate who looks at vaginas all day or one that actually has one. Talk about a no-brainer.

    Vote For Hillary Online

  2. 2
    Eric Dondero says:

    Been paying close attention the RCP running average. What’s amazing, Paul’s support has held steady for 3 weeks now at 4.7%. Neither up, nor down. The other 5 are all over the place: Rudy down, Huck up, McCain up slightly, Fred way down, and Romney all over the place.

    But Paul is stuck at 4.7%

    This suggests to me that he has a solid base of hardcore commited support, but can’t nudge past that. I think 4.7% is all we’re ever likely to see out of Paul.

    He’ll do well in New Hampshire. Somewhat well in South Carolina. After that, he’s toast.

    In Florida his polling numbers have been stuck at 3%. California similar.

    His shelf life is limited.

  3. 3
    Ron Chusid says:

    It will be quite interesting to see how Paul does in the caucus and primary votes. Now that he has more money, and we see how he is willing to hide his views when campaigning (such as in the letter to vets noted in another post) it is possible he might move a bit over 5%. Caucus votes and primaries come down to organization and dedication of supporters and it is possible that he will totally collapse or possible that he will get well above 5%. Obviously he can’t do well enough to actually be competitive.

    Another wild card is independent and cross over votes where that is illegal. If one candidate comes out of Iowa looking like a sure winner, lots of people will see no point in voting in the Democratic primaries and might vote for Paul as a protest against the war. In Michigan most of the Democrats aren’t even on the ballot and it is easy to cross over so it would be a good early state for Paul supporters to inflate their numbers.

  4. 4
    Eric Dondero says:

    Note, Paul has actually dropped in a couple statewides today. Not by much, but down 1 or 2 points, including New Hampshire.

  5. 5
    Ron Chusid says:

    Polls this far out before a primary don’t mean much as there’s still a tremendous number of people who haven’t made up their minds. Plus if Paul beats expectations in Iowa he could do better in New Hampshire.

    New Hampshire is Paul’s best shot. At this point it wouldn’t surprise me if Paul totally bombs there or (more likely) that he significantly exceeds his standing in the polls. I wouldn’t be surprised if he does manage to pull ahead of one of the top tier candidates, especially if a lot of independents cross over to vote for him. Of course even a first place finish in New Hampshire still wouldn’t be enough to allow him to win the nomination. If it came to it, the Republicans would manage to unite behind a more establishment candidate to keep Paul from getting the nomination.

Leave a comment