New Hampshire Primary Election: Ron Paul Looks To Motivated Supporters For Strong Showing

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Ron Paul scored a solid second place finish in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday, positioning him as the leading anti-establishment alternative to Mitt Romney and ensuring a platform for the Texas congressman's libertarian message for weeks to come.

Paul won about 24 percent of the state's primary vote. It was an improvement from his showing in Iowa, where he placed third behind Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

Inside a Manchester banquet hall, Paul told a cheering crowd the results repudiated critics who've warned that his views – particularly his anti-interventionist approach to foreign policy – were dangerous.

"They are telling the truth. Because we are dangerous – to the status quo," Paul said to loud cheers.

His New Hampshire showing represented a dramatic shift in fortune for Paul, a largely ignored also-ran in the 2008 Republican contest who placed a distant fifth in New Hampshire that year. This time, Paul's pledge to adhere to the Constitution, audit the Federal Reserve and reduce the size of the federal government found an audience among voters angry over government spending and bailouts and disillusioned with both parties in Washington.

While far behind Romney in New Hampshire, Paul was comfortably outpacing his other GOP rivals in the state.

The 76-year-old Texan ran strongest among young voters, according to exit polls conducted for the AP and the television networks. Paul carried nearly half of voters under age 30. About 4 in 10 new voters backed Paul, though first-timers made up just 1 in 8 voters in the state.

Paul ran even with Romney among voters with household incomes below $50,000, and among those who cited the deficit as their top issue.

Paul garnered about 4 in 10 votes among those who said it was most important that their candidate be a true conservative or have strong moral character. He ran even with Romney among those who said a candidate's issue positions were more important than their leadership skills or personal qualities.

Still, a majority of New Hampshire voters said they ultimately would be dissatisfied if Paul became the nominee.

Paul told supporters he had called Romney to congratulate him on his strong showing.

"He certainly had a clear-cut victory But we are nibbling at his heels," Paul said, declaring a win for "the cause of liberty."

Paul planned to fly to South Carolina on Wednesday for a noon rally in Columbia. The state holds its primary Jan. 21.

___

AP Deputy Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta in Washington contributed to this report.

Also on HuffPost:

 

 

Comments

[baharmon78]

10:59 PM on 01/10/2012

I am afraid that Ron Pauls dream to restore America is going to kill him. He is to old to be fighting this lost cause. I doubt seriously that America will ever recover from what these two wothless parties have done to it.

[Frank the Tank]

11:26 AM on 01/11/2012

You may sadly be right... but at least there is some hope with Ron Paul. The others.. not so much.

[baharmon78]

02:42 PM on 01/11/2012

I believe he is our only hope.

[Peter Vida]

12:33 PM on 01/11/2012

Winston Churchill was 76 when he was elected to the office of prime minister the second time., Nelson mendala was 76 when he was elected president of South Africa. Golda mier was 71 when she was elected prime minister of Israel. With age comes wisdom and to be frank i would rather have Paul for only 2 years then have any of the other choices for 1 day. You never know when you are going to die, 40 year old men die of heart failure and other reasons all the time.

[baharmon78]

02:42 PM on 01/11/2012

I see nothing wrong with his age or mind. But people i talk to age is the first thing they bring up. I will cast my vote for him if he is the chosen candidate.

[onlyonecandor]

06:33 PM on 01/10/2012

Thanks to Dr. Paul and many others, that small secret group that controlled “finance,” is not secret any more. Americans are fed up with the disastrous economic situation created and perpetuated by the Federal Reserve and the bankers.

Lindsey Graham's most recent estimate is the EU will collapse in the 3rd quarter, 2012, followed by the US 3-6 weeks afterwards.. We are in for a rough year and it doesn't look like there is any way to stop it? One thing is for sure, if this doesn't wake up the remaining Americans who are still asleep today, nothing will ever help them.

[Keith Cossairt]

05:56 PM on 01/10/2012

huffpost used to be mainly a right biased news outlet.
now, you have been trying to bias primary elections....
your coverage is all Mitts Romney.... whats with that. ???
he is not a landslide front runner.... he is in a dead heat with
two other guys.... yet 80% of all your coverage is Mitts.

quit using the CNN model.....report... dont be a puppet.

[walk softly]

06:30 PM on 01/10/2012

Huff post was right biased?

[hnomadh]

07:12 PM on 01/10/2012

AMEN !! Where is Huntsman?? Where is PAUL??? Both within grabs of this primary.. but all we hear is biased medial CONTROLLED by lobbiests.

GO RON PAUL... THE MEDIA CAN'T SHUT US DOWN !!!

[hnomadh]

05:22 PM on 01/10/2012

Paul continued to refrain from congressio­nal benefits and in 2009 was featured by CBS on Up to the Minute as one of two members of the U.S. Congress that had pledged not to receive a pension from the United States government­. The other was Howard Coble of North Carolina.

During 2001, he was one of only eight doctors in the House of Representa­tives; even fewer had continued to practice while in office.[cl­arificatio­n needed] He is occasional­ly approached by younger area residents to thank him for attending and assisting their deliveries at birth.


THIS MAN ISN'T OUT FOR THE MONEY... HE IS HERE FOR YOU and YOUR FAMILY. VOTE RON PAUL !!

[hnomadh]

05:21 PM on 01/10/2012

During 1998 and again during 2000, Paul defeated Loy Sneary, a Democratic Bay City, Texas, rice farmer and former Matagorda County judge, running advertisements warning voters to be "leery of" Sneary. Paul accused Sneary of voting to increase his pay by 5%, increasing his travel allotment by 400% during one year, and using increased taxes to start a new government bureaucracy to administer a license plate fee he enacted.

Paul continued to refrain from congressional benefits and in 2009 was featured by CBS on Up to the Minute as one of two members of the U.S. Congress that had pledged not to receive a pension from the United States government. The other was Howard Coble of North Carolina.

During 2001, he was one of only eight doctors in the House of Representatives; even fewer had continued to practice while in office.[clarification needed] He is occasionally approached by younger area residents to thank him for attending and assisting their deliveries at birth.

Paul says his fellow members of Congress have increased government spending by 75 percent during the presidency of George W. Bush.

After a 2005 bill was touted as "slashing" government waste, Paul wrote that it decreased spending by a fraction of one percent and that "Congress couldn't slash spending if the members' lives depended on it." He said that during three years he had voted against more than 700 bills intended to expand government.

[hnomadh]

05:20 PM on 01/10/2012

He traveled the country for a year speaking about issues such as free market economics and the rising government deficits: "That's why we talk to a lot of young people. They're the ones who are paying these bills, they're the ones who are inheriting this debt, so it's most likely these young people who will move into this next generation in government."

After the election, Paul continued his medical practice until he returned to Congress. He also co-owned a coin dealership, Ron Paul Coins, for twelve years with Burt Blumert, who continued to operate it after Paul resumed office.

In 1992, Paul resumed his private medical practice as well as taking part in other small business ventures.

Paul considered campaigning for President during 1992, but instead chose to endorse Pat Buchanan that year, and served as an adviser to his Republican presidential campaign against incumbent President George H. W. Bush.

Paul won the election by a close margin. It became the third time Paul had been elected to Congress as a non-incumbent Upon his returning to Washington, Paul quickly discovered "there was no sincere effort" by Republicans toward their declared goal of small government.

VOTE RON PAUL !!
THIS GUY HAS KEPT HIS VIEWS FROM START TO FINISH. UNLIKE EVERY OTHER POLITICIAN WE HAVE SEEN.

[hnomadh]

05:18 PM on 01/10/2012

In 1980, he continued to deliver babies on Mondays and Saturdays during his entire 22nd district career.

In 1984, he decided to retire to run for the U.S. Senate, but lost the primary. In his House farewell address on September 19, 1984, Paul said, "Special interests have replaced the concern that the Founders had for general welfare. Vote trading is seen as good politics. The errand-boy mentality is ordinary, the defender of liberty is seen as bizarre. It's difficult for one who loves true liberty and utterly detests the power of the state to come to Washington for a period of time and not leave a true cynic."Paul submitted his resignation letter addressed to Frank Fahrenkopf, then chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Paul then resumed his full-time medical practice and was succeeded by former state representative Tom DeLay.

According to Paul, his presidential campaign was about more than obtaining office; he sought to promote his libertarian ideas, often to school and university groups regardless of vote eligibility. He said, "We're just as interested in the future generation as this election. These kids will vote eventually, and maybe, just maybe, they'll go home and talk to their parents."

[Peter Vida]

05:18 PM on 01/10/2012

Wow, how misleading. The link on the front page talks about unorthodox campaign. The campaign they speak of is the one he has been running the whole time. The headline gives a sense of desperation.

[mislz7]

04:14 PM on 01/10/2012

I like the "libertarian, isolationist" label slapped on Dr. Paul in this article. More fascist propaganda. Paul is more mainstream than any of the other Republican candidates and the President himself. I voted for President Obama in 2008, I wanted "change". I didn't know that "change" meant suspension of habeas corpus. Ron Paul in 2012.

[The Linda]

04:18 PM on 01/10/2012

What is not isolationist about Paul's views? "Fascist propaganda?"

[mislz7]

04:50 PM on 01/10/2012

Yes, fascists believe that they and they alone determine the common good. As for isolationism, we could trade with folks rather than bombing them into oblivion. Money wins more goodwill than ordinance.

[junah081]

05:07 PM on 01/10/2012

Do you not understand the difference between non-interventionism and isolationism?

[fixit103]

04:21 PM on 01/10/2012

Ron and Jessie Vetura 2012

[fredlynn07]

03:58 PM on 01/10/2012

Get out of the way Paul this is big boy stuff. Take your cry baby PR guy with you!

[Peter Vida]

05:20 PM on 01/10/2012

What are you talking about?

[wizeanne]

06:02 PM on 01/10/2012

CNN Dana Bash asking Ron Paul...an immature A$$anine question....coming from an experienced reporter was so immature and irrelevant...Paul's staff just cut her off. Use to think she had a bit more class than some of the others....but she really came off caddy and dumb.

[doitron2012]

06:09 PM on 01/10/2012

you are the dumest stupid person,ron paul is the man you vote for obama,and look were your at you fool ..i gues all you care about is getting free stuff from the gov. you bum

[missiontango]

03:49 PM on 01/10/2012

Paul is like a broken clock. He is absolutely right two times a day. What I mean to say is that I absolutely agree with Paul on several issues. On the balance of his positions he is questionable at best. It's a shame because he has more integrity than the rest of the bunch. While I am a mid-60 something, I consider Paul's age to be a possible issue. I think the reason he appeals to a lot of young folks is that they are completely turned off with the phony, greedy, out of touch alternatives being served up. I'm on the fence about voting for Obama again. It would be a real shake up for the GOP if Paul got the nomination.

[The Linda]

04:23 PM on 01/10/2012

I agree with you on Paul. I'm not on the fence about Obama, because I believe, contrary to the media spin, that he is doing a wonderful job, especially with what he faced when he took office. The trouble with him has been that he came in hoping to work with Republicans, but it fast became apparent that they were not willing to work with him. He compromised, or as some on the left might say, caved to what Republicans wanted, like getting rid of the public option, only to find that they did not vote for the bill. There are many, many more examples of this.

[rlupia]

04:43 PM on 01/10/2012

That is what is wrong in this country. Obama has been an abyssmal failure, and not because of what he faced, it's because he is an inept leader and stubbornly stuck in his radical left wing political ideology, and liberals think he is doing a "wonderful job." He compromised on the public option, because most Americans recognized that that was just the first step into full blown socialized medicine that has proven over and over that it doesn't work. Obama doesn't work with Republicans, and for that matter democrats in Congress. When he wants to get his way or pay back the unions and other big contributers, he simply appoints a czar or makes an illegal "recess appointment." He bypasses Congress all the time. The hold up in congress is the democrat controlled Senate lead by Reid, who has taken almost every bill passed in the Republican house and refused to bring them up for votes.

[Fingdower1]

05:15 PM on 01/10/2012

The Linda

Pres. Obama had a democratic Congress and Senate a situation which allowed him total control. You can't blame anyone for his failures. Think... Pres. Clinton had a Republican Congress and Senate and was able to accomplish many positive changes.
Obama squandered his opportunity for greatness for his selfish agenda.

[Peter Vida]

05:25 PM on 01/10/2012

That is two more times a day than Obama. Yes, some of Pauls ideas may seem radical or extreme but Equal rights amendment and giving women the right to vote seemed extreme when it happened also. It is only the last half of the 20th century that we STOPPED being a nation of nonintervention. It is the ultimate in hubris to think that ONLY we Americans can fix the worlds problems. It is time we concentrated out efforts to righting our own ship before we concern ourselves with someone elses.

[junah081]

06:45 PM on 01/10/2012

Quite right. I disagree with Dr. Paul on the need for regulation and other issues, but in terms of his foreign policy, his distrust of the Federal Reserve, and his return to the rule of law and the Bill of Rights, he is spot on. To me, those issues are of more importance. For me I would like to see him act on these things, and then oppose him on say eliminating the EPA, the SEC, etc. We do not have anywhere near a level playing field in economics and to pretend that we do is just stupid. But on those other issues, he is a lone voice for sanity. "Kooky"? yeah, that whole Bill of Rights thing is so wierd isn'[t it?

[HarmonTerr]

03:43 PM on 01/10/2012

Would someone please tell me where I can find HP's story on the US News & World Reports poll finding Americans fear Obama's re-election by a 2 to 1 margin?

[fredlynn07]

03:59 PM on 01/10/2012

No one can. It doesn't exist!

[HarmonTerr]

10:16 PM on 01/10/2012

Oh, Fred????

[HarmonTerr]

04:08 PM on 01/10/2012

I found it!

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/01/09/poll-americans-2-1-fear-obamas-reelection

[gingercas]

03:34 PM on 01/10/2012

Paul is the only candidate with a realistic plan to put America's financial house in order. He is the only candidate that truly represents the American people and owes nothing to Special Interest and the Foreign Lobby that now controls Washington. He may be the only hope left for the disappearing American Middle Class.

[hnomadh]

04:58 PM on 01/10/2012

You are a wise citizen.

[freerangevoter]

05:54 PM on 01/10/2012

Well said. Romney or Newt will give us 4 more years of the Bush-Obama-Greenspan- Bernanke print & spend policies that have already stolen any hope that young people have of living the life that we Baby Boomers were handed from the WW2 Generation.

Ron Paul will push to Audit The Fed and end the Military Industrial Complex.

[gingercas]

03:33 PM on 01/10/2012

All we hear in the Media is how well all the lessor candidates are doing, they ignore Ron Paul who despite all the negativism from the establishment is doing remarkably well. This is because the Oligarchy of Special Interest and a Foreign Lobby that now control Washington controls the Media, and they are scared to death that Ron Paul might win. This Oligarchy does now want the American people in control of their own government and does not want the interest of the American people represented in Washington. Ron Paul is the only hope that the American people have of wresting control of their own government away from this oligarchy.

[oink2u2]

03:55 PM on 01/10/2012

Ron Paul would be eaten alive in Washigton DC. He has no support - probably less than Obama ever had - no credibility, and is considered a looney toon. One man, as we've seen, cannot turn the tide.

[Kirk Allen]

05:48 PM on 01/10/2012

not when in two years americans vote and kick out 1/2 of congress .

[Peter Vida]

06:11 PM on 01/10/2012

Ron Paul has been in DC for 30 years, he has managed just fine. When Paul is elected DC will either see the writing on the wall and help or be voted out. It is time for politics as usual to be a thing of the past.

[fredlynn07]

04:00 PM on 01/10/2012

Ron Who?

[wavesofgreen]

03:32 PM on 01/10/2012

The problem is that this kook is giving more moderate and rational libertarian leaning politicians a bad name with his kookiness, extremism and isolationism.

[AustinMike45]

03:46 PM on 01/10/2012

You are right, we need more of the same politicians we have been getting.

[fredlynn07]

04:01 PM on 01/10/2012

Nope, but a homophobic racist is diffinetly not what we need!

[freerangevoter]

05:56 PM on 01/10/2012

Please provide a link. Ron Paul is as far from your portrayal as any politician.

[Peter Vida]

06:13 PM on 01/10/2012

Just because someone disagrees with homosexuality does not mean they are a homophobe. I wont bother commenting of the racist allegations, i know it will be a waste of keystrokes.