NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — In some presidential campaigns, various candidates tend to emerge as the hopefuls that the media love to hate. These folks are routinely bashed.

But 76-year-old Texas congressman Ron Paul has a different kind of problem, as he presses his campaign on the eve of the Iowa caucus. Paul, as the beloved comedian Rodney Dangerfield used to lament about himself, can’t get no respect. Paul has surfaced as the candidate that the media love to ignore or overlook

Even though Paul’s Iowa poll numbers have put him neck and neck with Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, the Des Moines Register, late on Dec. 25, posted a major story on its website asking: “Can Ron Paul Win” in Iowa?

Ron Paul

As the Register’s story pointed out: “Paul...came in a close second in the Iowa straw poll in August and he has remained in the top tier in polls in Iowa ever since. In recent weeks, he has surged to the top in some polls of likely Iowa caucusgoers.”

And yet, the headline wonders: “Can Ron Paul win?” By now, wouldn’t a more reasoned angle go somewhere along the lines of: “What if Paul won?” or “What Paul’s strong showing says about the Iowa caucus.”

No respect!

It’s as if the media were waiting for the glamorous candidates finally to steady themselves to shove Paul off the road altogether. So far, Romney and Gingrich, the most well-covered Republican candidates lately, have faltered at times and resembled boxers who are unable to land a knockout punch. The longer they prolong the fight, the better Paul’s chances look.

I suspect that reporters give Paul short shrift for two main reasons: some of his policies appear to be so far out of the mainstream of American life that they can seem a little kooky.

Indeed, some of his libertarian positions go against the grain, to put it mildly. He wants to end aid to Israel, which is widely considered to be the United States’s most trusted ally in the Middle East. He also opposes federal anti-marijuana laws.

How's your health? Ask your teeth

Also, he has run before, without much success, and it’s the old, “what-have-you-done-for-me-lately” syndrome of journalism.

And some might wonder if he’s too old for the job.

In 2008, Paul snared about 10% of the vote in Iowa, placing fifth, and 8% in New Hampshire, again coming in fifth.

The Chicago Tribune wrote last August: “The media filed this under lesson learned: Paul’s supporters could make a lot of noise — but it was misleading noise.” The Tribune remained unimpressed by Paul’s favorable results over the summer in 2011 and called them “deceptively impressive” and “the product of his army mobilizing for relatively low-turnout events.”

Thanks to support from young voters, Paul has received kudos for assembling an impressive grassroots “machine” in Iowa.

Still, Paul doesn’t seem to get much love from the Washington press corps. He must be used to this kind of treatment. On Aug. 29, the Washington Post blared this headline: “Is Ron Paul being ignored?”

At the time, Paul’s campaign manager, Jesse Benton, told the Post in an email message: “Dr. Paul has emerged as a top-tier candidate in this race and deserves coverage befitting that status.”

It’s fascinating to imagine what kind of political havoc might break loose if Paul did finish No. 1 in Iowa. The way that the media and the pundits alike do their polling clearly would have to be re-evaluated.

Journalists would get their comeuppance. That, alone, is enough to make some people root for Paul in Iowa.

MEDIA WEB QUESTION OF THE DAY: Is Ron Paul getting his due in Iowa from the media?

(Please feel free to post your comments below)