"Somehow, a woman who has not regularly filled her own gasoline tank in well over a decade, who with her husband made $109 million in the last eight years and who vacations with Oscar de la Renta, has transformed herself into a working-class hero."

Just goes to show, the working classes need to choose their heroes more carefully. And they trust these people with the vote?

Dear Mr. Boyle,

please read up on Ron Paul and see if you can muster it to smear him once more (by putting him at the same level of Hillary / populism / appeal to emotions etc.)

I love the Independent, but your analysis seems more neocon puppet than I would assume based on the title of your newspaper.

Hillary has attended Bilderburg meetings along with Bill-an elite group of people that run the world--media, banking, government officials, etc. She is funded by big corporations and yet she tells the people that she will put big corporations "in its place". Ron Paul on the other hand is not funded by big corporations and special interest groups. He is funded by the people who know and value the true American heart and spirit. The Constitution was written to put restrains on the government, not on the American people. The government does not have the right to strip peoples' God given rights. This year's election is at it's pivotal moment in history because our God given rights are being taken away "legally". Just remember that Hitler was able to get away with things the legal way in his own land. He also created such things as Protection of the Homeland, sounds familiar... Homeland Security. Not to mention the Patriot Act is really similar to the law that Hitler passed to strip away their own citizens' rights. The meaning of fascism is equalled to the saying of big corporations in bed with big government. Just look at who supported the Nazis and still those corporations are still around today fully operating. Who truly is to blame here, government is like the puppet while big multinational corporation heads are running around doing immoral and unethical acts.

Hilary is evil. The Times got something right for once. She has no idea what its like to be working class. Her socialist policies pray upon the ignorant hoping that someone will come up with a solution for our economic problems. Socialism may appear to ignorant people as a solution to our economic woes, but socialist policies are what created them. Russia proved that socialism (yes communism is a form of socialism) does not work.

Thanks for the hearty laugh, Mr. Doyle.

Wow.

Ron Paul
pure capitalist
anti-government
personal and economic freedom
NON-intervention foreign policy
Understanding Paul's points on issues takes serious research
Paul doesn't care if he wins but cares to wants to teach knows he is not winning but continues his campaign in hopes of better educating the public

Hillary
pure socialist
pro-government
anti-economic freedom (pro personal)
Interventionist foreign policy
Understanding Hillary's stance on issues takes 5 minutes of watching Fox news or CNN.
Hillary wants to win so badly that she depends on your ignorance on any social or economic issue for the votes.

Wasn't the populist movement a socialist movement anyway??
If you can say anything about the Ron Paul movement it despises socialism.

Oh... I was kind of hoping this was a story about Ron Paul. Cheers from Australia.

Ron Paul is in the race to spread a message(he could still win as the delegates are not bound to the Constitution and we kknew this long before Nevada) while Hilliary is in it only to get into the White House. BIG DIFFERENCE!!

Please don't put Ron Paul and Hitlery in the same sentence unless it reads Ron Paul beats Hillary to win the presidency.

Its not a comparison rather a contrast between Ron Paul and the wicked witch. How America could excepted the wife of a disgraced ex president, democrats have no shame. Ron Paul seeks to reestablish the political direction and course established by Jeffersons' Declaration of Independence from europe. This has nothing at all in common with counter revolutionary HillBillery.

While Ron Paul may have tapped into a populist message, he and Hillary are polar opposites. "where emotion trumps rational argument every time." is the complete opposite of Ron Paul's appeal. He appeals to the rational, not the emotional.

Hellary comes up short and delves our country into further debt!
Dr. Paul has correctly diagnosed the economic crises and has the correct treatment for this cancer that threatens to consume Americans liberties and condemn future generations to serfdom.
Go Ron Paul!

Ron Paul a populist! Please give me break.

I did not realise that relativism ,as a mode of thiking, could do so much damage. Until! until I read your article. Comparing gold to brass. what is this beautiful world coming to? Whatever happened to good old british journalism?

What is done out of malice or sheer ignorance? May be we will never know.

God save the queen.

You're realling missing something here. It's actually OBAMA who has broken into the same vein as Ron Paul: people who are totally fed up with Washington. Hillary is exactly what people who are fed up are sick of.

Also a KEY focus of both Obama and Ron Paul is on our militant foreign policy, and how we've lost track. Both candidates have made this a central tenet of their campaigns (and with regard to foreign policy, Ron Paul said that Obama would be better than McCain). So the ignore the foreign policy issue and claim Paula and Hillary have anything in common... well quite frankly you are totally not getting what's happening on the ground in America.

Hillary Clinton is to Ron Paul what Karl Marx is to Thomas Paine.

You sir have probably misunderstood the beginning of the biggest political and historical education movements in American history. The Remnant is alive and growing...we will not stop!

Hey he atleast got one thing in the article correct....

HIS OWN NAME>>>>> LOL what a tool. Usually someone needs to know something about a topic before engaging in an article on some sort of political issues or candidates. This tool has none of previous said qualifications, IN other words STFU fool. I apologize for the absurdities...

Here is Doyle's bio for the paper;

'Whether traveling around the country or in his Washington DC base, The Independent’s US Editor Leonard Doyle keeps a beady eye on the country’s low-down and dirty politics. Until recently The Independent’s Foreign Editor, he chronicles a country where George Bush exploits the politics of fear, and venal politicians are locked in a dizzying embrace with money and corporate interests and voters hardly get a look in'.

THE "beady eye" is that of another clueless Brit with his look what I see attitude that reins in the UK. Never mind looking into the low down and dirty media and journalism that is bought and paid by the same interests he is keeping an eye on FOR US.
I lived in the UK for 10 years.
The Brits still enjoy looking down on us and educating ALL the inferiors here or at home. Their own people know this and don't pay much attention to them which is how they like it. They have learned the art of relying on apathy from the US so that they might influence those that care while the rest don't squeal.
They have never spent any time worrying about the truth in their media, although early on the BBC lead the word in fair journalism and news, but no more. The queen has been banning media for 40+ years and most Brits know they get the party line shoved at them. Look at the SUN, it is the best tabloid in the world with its page three girl(S), and the NO 1 paper in the UK. These people write for pay, plain and simple. As always, follow the money.

The Independent? Not independent thinking that's for sure! Read the book! We've had 20 years of Bush and Clinton dynasties over here and look where we're at! Less liberties, less secure, so deep in debt our grandchildren will still be paying this off! Send me your address and I will send you a free copy of Dr. Ron Pauls book on my dime, then maybe you'll see the light!

This article is an embarrasment to my fellow countrymen. Did this guy actually get paid for this outragously poor article?

Where did the Independent find this Leonard Doyle? Where ever it was, they need to throw him back there.

What a lame piece of journalism. If one can call it that.

If it wasn't for the likes of these Murdoch shills, Ron Paul would be storming ahead as the GOP nominee.

Ron Paul is by far the best hope for America. This race is not over yet, we have six months to go before the Republican National Convention and anything can happen to McInsane from now until then.

Drivel Tripe & Rubbish is what this lousy article is

ruh roh rou rissed roff ra ron raul reople

"where emotion trumps rational argument every time"

Precisely the opposite my socialist friend.

This whole newspaper is a sick joke. It's just more of the same unidirectional shouting in your face the self-serving opinions you're supposed to submit your moral and intellectual capacities to, until you either puke or give in.

Check out the links underlying the authors names: none of them actually want to hear from any of you. They just want to keep shouting in your gagged face the sick twisted evil their paymasters want you to believe.

Independent?

In a pig's eye ...

Doesn't this limey have some security and traffic cameras to primp in front of in the United Police State Kingdom?

Sorry, but what the UK knows about Dr. Paul or libertarianism couldn't fill a thimble at the English Channel.

What else do you expect from a Murdoch controlled hack.

You are a terrible writer. Ron Paul's message is good

Yours stinks... INDEED

You can also find this article by google searching DRIVEL, TRIPE, and RUBBISH

lol

Is this for real? LOL!!!!

What an uninformed and biased article...

Equating what Ron Paul's freedom movement with that place where "emotion trumps rational argument" is just plain ignorance.

I think it's funny when Brits try to talk out their rectums about the American political process. My wife is English and it's taken a while to get her to admit she was completely biased by the prevailing political ideologies in her home country, a country whose populace likes to wax pompous on every affair while being unable to either understand or iterate the basic tenents of the American Bill of Rights.

A word of advice to The Independent and the MI6 agents who apparently are directing your editorial department: try talking about something you KNOW next time.

Mr Doyle,
Get off the booze and read DR Paul's book, might just wake you up to the world around you.

By even trying to compare Dr. Paul and Mrs. Clinton you show a basic ignorance of the voting records of each candidate. Paul wants to kick out our new king and restore the republic, while Clinton just wants to be the new king. It is as basic as that.

This guy is a wanker. Thats right. A yank called you a wanker.

Ron Paul and Billary have nothing in common. Ron Paul reminds us how our country was lead to prosperity. Billary wants to adopt socialist ideas and 'give' everybody something.

The Revolution: A manifesto

Read it. Then report.

Wanker.

The comparison is apt, in a superficial way. Ron Paul wants to tear down the Federal Reserve which he says is oppressing Americans. Hillary wants to tear down OPEC for the same reasons. But there are vast differences.

The Fed is a creature of the US federal government and it is entirely within the legal and moral domain of the government to dismantle it. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve being a government-mandated and protected monopoly - whose only purpose is to produce counterfeit money - is on its face an instrument of thievery and is an abomination.

OPEC on the other hand is entirely outside of the US federal government's jurisdiction, and is none of the business of any citizen of the United States. It's their oil, they can sell it to whomever they like, and demand whatever payment they like. The urge to throw down OPEC is nothing but imperialism, that is, the use of government force to rob and plunder. This policy fits in well with Hillary's threats to murder Iranians if their government shows insufficient obedience to US domination.

Ron Paul's platform is peaceful - it is based on the Golden Rule. Hillary's rule is Might is Right. Both are "populist". The only question is, which one leads to peace and prosperity?

As a ron paul supporter, I don't really value my opinion of the democratic candidates but honestly out of those two, I would say obama is running a campaign on unrealistic intentions. During his speeches, he acts like he has been endorsed by god with the intangibles (hope and change). When he speaks, the audience moans "amen" and he talks about crossing party lines and unifying the country when he has no record of collaborating with republicans, he has no record of doing anything for that matter.

If you don't know who Ron Paul is or what he believes in, read his book, The Revolution: A Manifesto.

Ron Paul isn't anything like Hillary Clinton. This blog is a joke.

Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul have absolutely nothing in common. This post is not worth the electrons used to transmit it's signal across the interblags.

Leonard,

Do you believe that George Galloway is a member of Hezbollah as well? You should probably live in the country that you are writing about instead of just speculating on what actual Americans are thinking.

This comparison is downright ridiculous. It may be populist to threaten to obliterate another country, but if so then Ron Paul is no populist. Further, he would never argue that we have any business destroying OPEC. Clinton and Paul disagree far more than agree. Furthermore, Clinton (and Obama and McCain) are panderers. Paul can little be accused of that. If you took the time to look into the intellectual background of Ron Paul's ideas you might understand. Clinton has zero intellectual background to her ideas, which is what makes her 'populist'.

The drivel that passes for political commentary in the press never ceases to amaze me. This article makes loaded assumptions that Ron Paul's ideas are irrational, impractical or kooky but doesn't even attempt to explain why. I'm yet to see any "journalist" or "political commentator" address Ron Paul's stances without loaded bias or sneering mocking remarks.

I recommend you guys at least go read some of his books before you form an opinion. Your depth of analysis of Ron Paul is simply atrocious.

Justin, this is more like it:

Hillary Clinton is to Ron Paul as Vladimir I. Lenin is to Thomas Jefferson.

r u serious?! Hilary and Ron Paul are absolutely othing alike. You are obviously misinformed and ignorant! How can you make such a comparison?! They are polar opposites you frakking idiot!

Hillary couldn't be further from Dr. Paul's positions. To use an analogy that British and Americans can both relate to:

Ron Paul is like the patriots of the American Revolution (ironically trying to depose of a George. Hillary is like a Tory maintaining loyalty the the establishment(crown).

Hillary is a neo-con.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tory#American_Revolution

Good lord! I know you brits have been slowly suffocating under the warm embrace of nanny-state socialism for a while now but confusing Ron Paul with a populist?! Methinks someone needs to read up on the candidates' policy positions.

Yes. The world is complex. The economy is complex.

THAT IS THE POINT!!!!! When you tinker and try to control a complex system, you have no way of knowing what will happen. This is called the LAW OF UNINTENDTED CONSEQUENCES.

Therefore, one is reduced to doing what they believe is "right" and "fair". This invariably involves theft from one to give to another or exclusion of one in favor of the other.

The only right thing to do is abide by: THOU SHALL NOT STEAL.

Blow your commie propaganda out your bunghole.

Hillary's Populist surge? LMAO.

Oops! I meant "Hillary as George Bush II". Sorry.

You're comparing a commie/socilist (Hillary) to Ron Paul? Now I heard it all. The elites support Hillary, Obama, and McCain and despise Dr. Paul. Why the people can't figure this out is beyond me. The multi-billion dollar media empires sure go out of their way to brainwash the public. The elite control both overnment and corporations. They want a dumbed down public who bathe themselves in debt. Then cry for more government which they control too. Either way, they get your money, and control society for their own selfesh pleasure.

Hillary Clinton is to Ron Paul as George William Frederick is to Thomas Jefferson.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But Hillary Clinton is a poor imitation of Ron Paul because she lacks his credentials, his history and his sincerity. As bad as Obama and McCain are, Clinton is worse. She is ruthless and unrelenting in her pursuit of what she wants. The only candidate worth anything is Ron Paul. And that is becoming more evident as this race goes on. No amount of media insulting or snubbing can change that; the r3VOLution has a life of its own. Go Ron!

Why don't you try being more objective. Campaign going nowhere zzzzzz

"Ron Paul *is* a populist. That is what libertarianism is all about. It is a simplistic appeal to people's desire for equity amidst the seemingly endless stream of injustices that arise in a highly complex system of almost 6.7 billion people. Rather than attempt to deal with modern complexity, libertarians promise to kill evil government in favor of noble private enterprise."

Libertarians have noticed that you need a more complex system to deal with more complex problems, that is why they favour decentralisation. You have it wrong from the start.

Any person with a brain would know that there are some good people and some bad people in government, and the same goes for private enterprise. However, at least private enterprise cannot legally steal and kill. And a company, in a free market, needs to satisfy its customers to survive. The customers are boss, and the customer doesn't need to wait around for a few years to be able to choose someone else.

"They promise a return to an 18th century simplicity that never existed and that cannot, in fact, exist at any time. Libertarianism proposes that everyone could be counted on to behave to the highest ethical standards *and* be counted on to act rationally *and* the amount of easily accessible resources will always exceed per capita demand."

No, no, no. They do not want to go back to anything, they are simply pointing at some parts of history in which show humans coexisting without an insane number of laws or welfare schemes. If they could look into the future I'm sure they would point to some situations things that work in the future too...

It is pretty sad that obviously intelligent people simply do not give libertarianism a chance because they fall for a middle of the road fallacy.

Just because libertarianism starts from a basic premise does not mean it is simple, it means that more people will be making more decisions---rather than a few people, as part of a monolithic government, making a load of blanket decisions.

It seems so hard to find good critiques of libertarianism, they usually consist of elementary errors.

I don't understand how you can compare Hillary to Ron Paul. Ron Paul's campaign is about severely cutting the size of the government and bringing all the troops home immediately. Hillary's is about implementing Socialist Medicine (which has been a total disaster everywhere it has ever been tried), raising taxes, and waging non-stop wars. Ron Paul is actually much closer to Barack Obama (there is significant overlap between their supporters). Paul's strength, like Obama's, is among the young and everybody disgusted by the Neo-Con War on the Middle East and the War on Civil Liberties (although, Ron Paul actually means what he's saying).

Don't be surprised if the Libertarian Party (the party that nominated Paul 20 years ago) catches fire and draws 10-15% in November, if they can get over their latest spat of infighting and nominate somebody credible at their convention. However, I expect Hillary or Obama to be the president and to last only 1 term (let's face it, neither of them are anti-war or pro-civil liberties and neither of them has any clue about how to fix the economy).

You seem to be confusing genuine and extremely well deserved popularity with "populism". Dr.(MD) Ron Paul exposes the banking cartel, so this is no ordinary politician.

The author of the article seems to lack even a dim understanding of Ron Paul and his supporters. Smashing OPEC? Obliterating Iran? What in the wide, wide world of sports is this guy talking about, and how in God's creation is it anything close to what Ron Paul advocates? Good Lord, education must've sunk to a new low if this is what passes for commentary in the U.K.

Libertarian ==/== Populist

Populist policies are socially conservative and fiscally liberal (meaning yes for social regulation and yes for economic assistance and redistribution over economic freedom)

Libertarian policies are socially liberal and fiscally conservative (meaning no for social regulation and yes for economic freedom over economic assistance and redistribution)

So they're opposites.

Just because you're appealing to the people doesn't mean you're a populist OR a libertarian. That just means you're popular, especially with middle class folks.

Money does not equal politics.

Ron Paul? A populist? No, no, and no. Ron Paul's campaign was the most policy-driven campaign I have ever seen. Populism is a Left-wing phenomenon in which the candidate or showman bashes the successful as somehow having "exploited" the "poor," and the only way to get back at them is to take all their money. Does that sound like free-market, classical liberalism to you? Or does it sounds like the progressive fascism of the Democrats?

Dr. Paul advocates knowledge of the Constitution and our inalienable rights. Jealously conserving those rights is what made Americans different. Hillary Clinton like her Husband will gladly sweep away these rights to "protect" us. No thanks!
God save America!
God bless Dr. Paul!

"Populism" is just another name for unbridled democracy, something that Ron Paul has warned us against, indeed the Founders also had a less than favorable view of democracy because it allows for the politicians to pander to the majority vote, as such it leaves a minority with little more than contingent freedom based upon various classifications of freedom.

Hillary, like McCain or Obama are simply playing the same entrenchment game that their strong-hold Party power-brokers have the play; if either of them are elected I can guarantee that by 2012 we will all look back as realize that they did nothing to change the way this crumbling government works. They will simply continue with the Status Quo with a few new splashes of paint on it to make people think they have actually accomplished something of note.

Each of them are Interventionist, a policy that hasn't worked or helped provide this security since prior to the McKinley Administration. For the last 110 years this country has intervened in the internal affairs of over 200 countries; in fact, it might surprise people to know that the U.S. has been intervening, in one way or another, in Iraq for the last 87 years. If such a policy worked you would think we would see far better results around the world, but it not only doesn't work, but it has drastically morphed our world in ways that we don't seem to be able to grasp, ways that have not benefited either our country or the other countries in the world.

Hillary, is, like McCain and Obama, nothing but a wolf in sheep's clothing. She, like the others, will continue their systematic rape of this country and its people. Ron Paul was the only REAL CHOICE offered to the voters of this country and they have yet to realize that fact, by 2012 they will realize it when everything that Dr. Paul said will happen happens.

C'mon, people. Don't give the guy such a hard time. Granted, he should of put a lot more thought and research into his poorly choosen comparison with Hillery and Ron Paul, but it doesn't necessarily mean he is writing with malicious intent. All you freedom lovers also should understand that Fabian Socialism is apart of Britsh history, and having spoke with some Britons, they're Socialist ideas are benevolent at heart, even if I personally do not agree with it -- hence the possibility why the author puts a positive spin on Hillery.

The sad truth is that Hillery, Obama, and McCain will be the death knell of American society if any of them become President. Even worse is the fact that Ron Paul has been marginalized, illegally denied fair coverage, and has a campaign which failed to make people understand that "winding down" is not synonymous with "quitting" the race. Read about how Abraham Lincoln won and you'll see how Ron Paul still has a chance; slim as it may be.

Anyway, please cheer for us my brothers and sisters in Europe. Our government is turning into a Corporate-Fascist Global Police State, and us Americans need to remember what Freedom is and to let it ring once again. To be the beacon of Peace and Prosperity we once were.

Seriously, these comments before me say it all.

Tanto-
I'm from the UK and I see it this way: It is the DUTY of ALL people worldwide who love freedom, peace and the fair rule of law to support Ron Paul.

Yes indeed Europe and most of the world infact are also on a steady decline like the US, so we should do all we can to get this HERO for liberty elected as POTUS, in the US, the most powerful country on earth, as a role model for the world to follow in these murky times.

I, and many Europeans ENVY you Americans, you have a REAL DEAL, honest, uncorrupted candidate for the people standing for election, and most of us have never even seen one of them with a viable shot for winning our entire lives!

I pray that you do the right thing, vote for the right man, rather than the slickest talker with the whitest teeth.

Hell, if he wins and turns the US around, I'll emigrate there to escape the coming tyranny here in London! MANY people here have learnt to mistrust the government and their BS, especially in media: like this poor piece of reporting & the BBC (Blatent Bullsh*t Channel).

We see dark times ahead.

The Tories are coming! The Tories are coming! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!

RON PAUL 2008!!!

Mr. Doyle, methinks you're attempting to garner page clicks by sullying Ron Paul's good name. Congressman Paul is about as far from populism as one can get - he favors *limiting democracy* to protect the rights of the minority. I'm not sure if you've actually seen Congressman Paul speak, but if you have, I'm surprised you come away with the idea that he speaks with "emotion trumps rational argument every time." In fact, Congressman Paul consistently comes under fire for, well, telling the truth, devoid of emotion. The populist li(n)e is that the attacks of 9/11 sprung from a deep-seated Islamofascist hatred of freedom, while Paul rationally suggests that our belligerent foreign policy might have something to do with it. The populist li(n)e is that the government can print all the money the US will ever need, while Paul points out that we're spending our way into bankruptcy. The populist li(n)e is that the US has to stay in Iraq to save face, or to secure democracy, or to root out al-Qaeda, Paul points out that we should make the unfortunate decision to abandon the policies that got us there in the first place. You call Hillary Paulian in her rejection of economists, but which other candidate quoted economists in the debates, much less Austrian economists? Which other candidate has, well, a philosophy? You can call Ron Paul a lot of things, but you can't call him a populist. Poorly written article, Mr. Doyle, with questionable details, trite analysis, and a thoroughly sophistic conclusion. Please consider writing well.

Ron Paul *is* a populist. That is what libertarianism is all about. It is a simplistic appeal to people's desire for equity amidst the seemingly endless stream of injustices that arise in a highly complex system of almost 6.7 billion people. Rather than attempt to deal with modern complexity, libertarians promise to kill evil government in favor of noble private enterprise. They promise a return to an 18th century simplicity that never existed and that cannot, in fact, exist at any time. Libertarianism proposes that everyone could be counted on to behave to the highest ethical standards *and* be counted on to act rationally *and* the amount of easily accessible resources will always exceed per capita demand.

Fat chance.

Likewise, Clinton is making wild promises to provide equity using simplistic solutions that she fully knows cannot work. It is true that the color of her populist pony is different than Paul's, but they both are still riding populist ponies trying to reach the same destination. The real difference is that Paul may not realize his policies would be disastrous; Clinton knows that hers would be. But it is traditional politics that gets the incompetent and the grease bags elected all too often. It is the politics that got Bush Jr. elected. It demonstrates the inadequacy of a democratic model designed when square rigged ships were high-tech.

Ron Paul is a strict fiscal conservative and firm supporter of individual liberty, these ideas appeal to all Americans. Hillary is just talking, but Ron Paul will follow up on his ideas with real action, you can count on that!! I still think the media has no clue what is about to be unleashed over the next year as the Revolution takes hold!! Buy the book.

Ron Paul is not about emotional decision making: he is about doing the RIGHT THINGS.

He is different from other politicians who base their decisions on whatever is popular and can help get them elected.

Hillary may be acting "populist" but Ron Paul sure is not.

Does this reporter actually not know the difference between populism and libertarianism?? Apparently not.

Obviously this report doesn't have a friggin CLUE about Ron Paul's policies. Obliterate Iran?? What a ridiculously uninformed article.

Ron Paul is not about emotional decision making: he is about doing the RIGHT THINGS.

He is different from other politicians who base their decisions on whatever is popular and can help get them elected.

Hillary may be acting "populist" but Ron Paul sure is not.

Does this reporter actually not know the difference between populism and libertarianism?? Apparently not.

Obviously this report doesn't have a friggin CLUE about Ron Paul's policies. Obliterate Iran?? What a ridiculously uninformed article.

Ludicrous. The Clinton and Paul camps have no overlap whatsoever. Doyle is an embarrassment to your reporting team.

Memo to the Independent:

Provide your journalists with access to a dictionary. "populist" doesn't mean what he apparently thinks it means.

Wow, I guess everyone has pretty much summed it up for me. About the only thing I can add is Leonard needs to watch America Freedom to Fascism, Fiat Empire and Votergate. Probably wouldn't hurt to check out Zeitgeist too. When your done with this little education I predict you will be embarrassed with your current level of knowledge of the world around you. Cheers.

My goodness! What a stupid liar you are! Ron Paul's polices have NOTHING to do with attacking Iran or "smashing OPEC" or any other big government nonsense you are trying to pass off as "libertarian"!

It's rather funny how the "Post a comment" sections of articles about Ron Paul are so much more thoughtful and relevant than what the supposed journalist are writing.

Maybe there is hope after all.

I have read a lot of nonsense this cycle about Ron Paul, but this takes the cake. There is ZERO is common between Hillary and Ron Paul. If anything, Ron Paul is the anti-Hillary - anti-tax, anti-bigger-government, anti-nanny-state, anti-spending.

Honestly, Mr. Doyle, your complete incomprehension of such basic differences in political philosophy is breathtaking.

Momma always said, "Stupid is as stupid does". -- Forrest Gump

Wow! I can't believe what I just read. Please do yourself a favor Mr. Leonard Doyle and stop covering the 2008 Presidential campaign because you clearly have no understanding of what is actually going on and what Ron Paul's message is all about.

Uhh, Why is anyone surprised that someone who is touting Hillary has no Idea what Ron Paul stands for. I know this guy isn't in the US, but he sure belongs here. He is a perfect fit for our mostly asleep population.

On a positive note. I really think America is in the stage, right after you get woken up from a deep sleep. The lights are on but it takes a little while before you actually start processing things. Ron Paul and the Revolution is your mom waking you up when your going to be late for school. Our current Government and power structure is the nightmare you have been having all night long. America is waking up, and when it fully comes to, I would not want to be the target of its anger.

www.TrueWorldHistory.info

And they told me British are quite intelligent?
Not in this case...

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

Bless you Dr. Paul for educating us about Freedom, Prosperity and Peace.

In my eyes, you've ALREADY WON!

Ron Paul is the answer to America's problems and also to the countries in which America is involved with. If we elect Ron Paul, other countries will see us as a respectful nation but if we don't than we're not any better than the Hollywood image we've given to the world.

Ron Paul for President 2008

In case you haven't surmised it yet. The supporters of Ron Paul find it extremely offensive to even put Hitlery in the same category as Ron Paul.
They are polar opposites when it comes to stances on issues. Hitlery stands for big government fascism/communism. Ron Paul stands for free markets, low taxes.

Comparing the two is like comparing Hitler to Ghandi in supporters minds.

Are you really covering the USA election? As other posters have pointed out, there is NO! relationship between the messages of Clinton and Ron Paul what-so-ever. Perhaps a knowledge of the history of southern politics would help you understand Clinton's appeal among Dems in NC. Perhaps an understanding of the US constitution and Ron Paul's would help in your coverage of the election.

Mr. Doyle: You could work for Fox News! Your that good!

You are fairly uniformed on one side, and balanced by your bias on the other.

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies" - Ron Paul

What? Who wrote this? What reality are you in? Are you even engaged in what is going on? I let this one sentence make my case at how poor this article is:

"Hillary is tapping into the same vein of populism, where emotion trumps rational argument every time."

Ron Paul is waking fat lazy Americans up and telling harsh truths. Hillary is a lack of substance bimbo looking for attention.

Get all you Ron Paul news here:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/

There's only one thing I can say about this, which has been said before, but not like this: American populism is what Obama and Hillary are after (pandering), and American prosperity is what Ron Paul has been after during his entire campaign (education). Americans are waking up.

Comparing the feigned populism of Hillary "Rich people, god bless us" Clinton, with Paul's truly revolutionary grassroots campaign is rather insulting to the overlooked congressman, whose policies are possibly the embodiment of rationalism over emotion.

Unashamedly propelled by the same media whose corporate interests (or astonishing incompetence - you decide) plague fair and balanced reporting, it is Clinton who is in the race but going nowhere.

Ron Paul's ideas on the other hand, with little fanfare, are becoming increasingly embraced by a large number of Americans - who are suffering the results of the same disasterous foreign, economic & domestic policies that Hillary herself seeks to continue.

The only change Americans will see with multi-millionaire Clinton or McCain is the pennies in their bank accounts.

And a bunch of other reasons to be fearful & dissapointed.

Hillary cried the day after the IOWA when the polls suggested she wasn't emotional enough. That's who Hillary is, a politician who will do ANYTHING to get elected. Ron Paul, However, is HONEST and does not flip flop just to get elected. He will say the truth even if he knows he'll get booed (like he did at the Spanish debate and many many other debates.)

You people in the european union have your heads so far up your 'arses' there's no longer hope any hope for you. So piss off with the populism bullshit, please. You've got no credibility on this. Just go on blindly enjoying your tiny little homes and vanishing freedoms. Slaves.

"Hillary is tapping into the same vein of populism, where emotion trumps rational argument every time."

It always seemed to be the opposite for Ron Paul: argument trumps emotion every time.

Don't try to create an association between Paul and Clinton. She is a demagogue and a socialist.
Populism and popularity are two different things:
Paul is popular because he tells the truth.
Clinton is a populist because she tries to appeal to the masses by bribing and telling them what they want to hear.

Mr Doyle: Journalism is reporting the facts not publishing propaganda for your favorite candidate. This article has no journalistic value.

Hell, I'm not even American so no fear here but there is a VAST difference between the two. Ron Paul has come up with the perfect solutions for the USA's economic problems however most of your population is too stupid to actually know anything about what hes talking about...its a crying shame. Hillaries just a corporate whore who will abandon any promises once she gets her hands on some power.

There's a vast difference under the hood of the two candidates, however. Ron Paul's "populism" encourages education, while Hillary Clinton's populism is rooted in ignorance. Both might start from fear (to be fair), but the journey and the destination are extremely different.