It’s a two-man race in the Pine Tree State. But the contest isn’t between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich; it’s between Romney and Ron Paul.
In 2008, Paul won third place in Maine’s caucuses with 18 percent of the vote. But he was only 178 votes shy of tying John McCain for second. And this year, with an extra push, Paul might just be able to win the state outright.
“The Paul campaign has really dedicated the resources to the state that make it possible for them to win the caucuses,” says Ken Lindell, chairman of the Maine Republican Liberty Caucus. (The caucus’s national organization has endorsed Paul, but Lindell has no official role in the Paul campaign.) “They’re doing real voter-ID calls — not robo-calls like they did last time,” he adds. “As far as I can tell, they’re the only campaign that has a real ground game.”
Advertisement
The seriousness of Paul’s efforts was on display last weekend. On Friday, he met with Governor Paul LePage; on Saturday, he led several rallies, including one in Freeport that attracted 1,000 Mainers. Although LePage didn’t endorse Paul — the event was more of a “meet and greet” — LePage’s spokeswoman Adrienne Bennett says, “I hear [the interaction] was positive.”
Paul did receive the endorsement of state representative Aaron Libby, who met the congressman while visiting Washington, D.C., in 2010 with a delegation of apple farmers. Asked why he supports Paul, Libby mentions a characteristic that many of the congressman’s supporters admire: consistency. “It’s so rare for a politician to stick to their principles,” he says. “Congressman Paul truly represents something different.”
But Libby is an outlier among Republican elected officials, many of whom have lined up behind Romney. In September, the Romney campaign released a list of 40 Maine politicos who had endorsed the ex-governor, including state attorney general William Schneider.
“Mitt Romney appears to be leading significantly among the Republicans that I’ve been in touch with,” says state-house majority leader Phil Curtis.
Their support is indicative of Romney’s strength in the Pine Tree State. He won 52 percent of the caucus vote in 2008. And his campaign is organized — unlike Newt Gingrich’s or Rick Santorum’s, neither of which is highly visible in Maine.
But Paul’s forces are especially organized. They are training their members in the intricacies of caucus politics. Last Friday, for instance, they held a conference call in which they explained the delegate-election procedures for potential candidates. A Maine GOP official tells NRO that Paul’s supporters have even been helping Republican town committees organize. They’ve been making sure committees elect chairmen, which enables them to hold caucuses — caucuses that could deliver more delegates to Paul.
Although Romney’s organization is predictably formidable, “I haven’t seen any organized effort by the Romney campaign to do that,” says Richard Bennett, the Republican national committeeman for Maine and a Romney supporter.
Consider Penobscot County. Traci Gauthier, chairwoman of the county Republican committee, tells NRO, “[Paul’s] campaign has been calling and making sure they have the times right and which towns will be at the caucus. I’ve also been contacted about a speaking opportunity by his ground people. And the only other candidate we’ve heard from is Mitt Romney.”
Or try the town of Palermo, which held its caucus on Sunday. Republican-town-committee chairwoman Cheryl Parkman tells NRO that 14 people attended the caucus. Despite the small turnout, Parkman says four people representing the Paul campaign showed up and spoke on behalf of the congressman.
“They’re very articulate,” she says. “They’re really great with their grassroots.” Although Parkman couldn’t reveal the results of the caucus vote, she hints, “Every candidate was represented there in the vote.”
Only Paul’s campaign showed up at the caucus in Millinocket, says David Duplisea, chairman of the town Republican committee, which caucused on Monday. Forty-eight people attended the caucus, and there were a couple of Paul backers, brandishing brochures and signs.
Before the vote, the committee allowed a representative from each campaign to speak. “We had a call from Mitt Romney’s campaign,” Duplisea says. “But for them to travel it would have been a three-hour trip; they’re down in Portland.” Instead, a local supporter spoke on his behalf. (No one spoke for Gingrich or Santorum.)
Great post! And very pertinent, considering Obama's faults (and Paul's appeal to young independents).
I too am liking Ron Paul - the crusty, honest, frugal old geezer - more and more each day. This is in spite of (not because of) his isolationist foreign policy. Yet somewhere along the line recently, I grew tired of America spending the blood of her best soldiers to make the Middle East safe for Sharia regimes.
There's nothing isolationist about not murdering people. Calling Ron Paul's foreign policy isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't throw a rock through your window, it's ridiculous. I'm not an isolationist because I haven't murdered half your family am I? Would you have more respect for me if I did murder them? Come on, use your head.
Ignoring a rogue nation with nuclear ambitions is the equivalent of not throwing a rock at your neighbor's window? Or "murdering" random people?
The problem is, Ron Paul's gone way beyond advocating against further military interventions abroad, which would have been acceptable to even "neocons". If I understand him correctly, he wants to close down every military base overseas, effectively end military and foreign of all kinds, and use the army for purely "defensive" purposes. His past remarks often indicate that he bought into wild leftist fantasies about 9/11 inside jobs and oil quests in Iraq.
A free market approach doesn't necessarily work in foreign policy. A company might win back consumers they once betrayed with goodwill gestures. Fanatic terrorists brainwashed by radical ideology will find ways to rationalize their hate no matter what Ron Paul does. If he pulls the military out of the middle east completely or sides with Palestine in disputes involving Israel, they'll interpret that as a sign of victory or mandate from Allah to further their mission. No one in Al Qaeda will suddenly turn to diplomacy or make an effort to spare American lives because President Paul nixed offensive campaigns against terrorism.
So, the question is, are our efforts paying off? Is the military winning hearts and minds? Do we have more friends in the middle east thanks to our interventions? Are our military victories substantial enough to offset the enormous cost?
Our actual national defense is terrible. We need to get our priorities straight.
Who says anything about closing every base? How about starting with 1/2. How about smart strategic bases, there is a thought. No reason to continue wars that were over 50 years ago.
A free market approach doesn't work? But borrowing billions from China is better. An actual belief in blowback is sound policy. Would we like it if other countries dictated to us? Didn't think so.
The more I see Romeny, Newt.......Paul is looking better everyday. To bad the establishment, neocons, and the media refuses to even mention him in any discussions. Shows how scared they are.
I'm less committed than Paul to his non-interventionist foreign policy, but what drew me to him is the solid truth of two to three of his claims:
1) He is the only one discussing real cuts on the campaign trail.
The others discuss moon bases or cuts in rates of growth.
2) The Federal Reserve needs serious reform. I support its end,
but if you think that's going too far, Rep. Paul Ryan agrees
having multiple, conflicting goals is poor policy.
3) ObamaCare is bad medicine. We push up costs and push down quality.
Still, where I can get on board with Paul on foreign policy is on this small, accessible idea-tarmac: We should rollback our bases in places like Germany, and when we have to confront global threats, we shouldn't be ~eager~. Maybe Iran becomes a serious threat (they can't hit us now - that missile won't make it over), but we shouldn't be chomping at the bit for another decade of "supplemental budgets" and nightly news updates on how many died in theater. That's not something to relish.
We also have to stand firm to make sure "national security" isn't a catch-all for an all-powerful executive branch. Some domestic actions are never justified by the executive's sole assertion of its version of the facts, and that includes indefinite detention because they claim you're an enemy combatant (when you're a citizen), or letting the military get involved in law enforcement. McCain's boy-wonder in the Senate, Lindsay Graham, wants to "shut up" Americans asking for a lawyer just like his mentor wants to use McCain-Feingold to shut us up 60 days before an election. They need a reminder - they are there to protect our rights, we're not here to protect their privilege!
I would be a fan of our current military stance if:
1. We were actually making the world safer rather than mucking it up.
2. If our military was lean and mean, rather than obscenely bloated and hampered by Washington.
3. If our actual *national* defense was substantial (if, for instance, we all had access to gas masks, bomb shelters, and assault weapons.)
As it is, we've neglected to actually protect our own country (which is why guys with box-cutters were able to destroy the twin towers) and are running the nation into bankruptcy to protect Israel from a nation it could, in a fight, handily destroy.
How many electoral votes does Maine have? Not sure I can count that low.
Even if he wins it, to borrow and reverse a phrase, you can't get here (the nomination), from there.
Hopefully, history will view him a a pleasant little asterisk on the political record. Slightly less significant than that other crazy Texan, Ross Perot.
No offense, for you may be right. But 'crazy Texans' (and crazier Tennesseans) defeated General Santa Anna; and we might just help defeat Governor Romneycare.
Your comment proves that your not at all familiar with how things work in Maine
While Maine may not have that many delegates in the grand scheme of things it does have a history in determining how things will pan out for the rest of the country.
We Mainers have a saying that has proven it's self true time and time again.
The saying is, "As Maine goes, So goes the Nation."
If Mainers vote for Rep.Ron Paul and he does win the caucuses it will ultimately lead to other states doing the same. Of course you don't have to agree but I've lived here for a long time and I've seen it happen many times over.
So your little quip about Maine being meaningless is full of hot air.
No matter the delegate total, a Paul win would be significant. It would mean that each remaining candidate has won at least one contest. It would be the first Northern state lost by Romney (Florida counts as a Northern state, IMHO, because of the many retirees who have moved there). It would be indicative of the soft support enjoyed by Romney, undercutting his elect-ability argument.
Forget the practical matter of delegate count. A Romney loss would be humiliating.
I think that may be understating the victory it would be for Paul, but overstating the blow it would deal Romney. A Maine win for Paul would level the playing field going in to Super Tuesday. They could almost introduce the candidates, "New Hampshire & Florida choice, Mitt Romney...Maine's choice...Ron Paul..." you get the idea. (Plus, I like to leave open hope that the Moon's choice or the Union's choice might drop out by then.)
If Paul does well (40%+) in Maine, I think the "Free State Project" should become the "Free States Project". How odd that freedom may become a New England niche project. Perhaps there will someday be, "Concord II"
Maine has 4 electoral votes and like Nebraska ours can be split by congressional districts. I think Obama carries Maine in November, but Romney has a chance to carry the 2nd Congressional District and win an electoral vote.
In the caucus Romney should win with 50 to 55 percent of the delegates. Paul in second with 40 percent of the delegates.
Anyone who's ventured west of I-95 can attest that there are enough exotics up there to translate into a win for njutjob (assuming they can find their way to the caucuses). BFD.
