Ron Paul Soars In GOP Race, But Foreign Policy Views Are An Albatross

IBD's Capital Hill ^ | 12/13/2011 | Sean Higgins

[Slyscribe]

Ron Paul is surging in Iowa according to the latest polls, but if the libertarian Texas Republican does become the flavor of the week, his foreign policy views will likely leave Republican voters with a sour taste.

The latest IBD/TIPP survey asked respondents which GOP presidential candidate they preferred on four issues: the economy, budget/taxes, health care and foreign policy. Paul is third behind Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, being the preferred choice by Republicans on the first three issues by margins of 9%, 10%, and 6%, respectively.

As today’s IBD story touched on, Paul is weakest on foreign policy, where he is the choice of just 4%, tying him with Jon Huntsman.

[Windflier]

“Ron Paul isn’t a conservative, but a nutjob libertarian. Condemning his liberal foreign policy positions isn’t “eating our own.”

You prove my point. ANYONE would be better than O.

Please don't try to turn my post into an endorsement for Ron Paul. A nutjob liberaltarian might turn out to be no better than Obama is, and could be even worse.

[llandres]

“They feared losing their life style and power as much as we did. Doesn’t work with an insane and suicidal culture.”

Right, and that’s the huge difference. But RP people don’t care to learn about the death cult of Islam and the murderous commandments of its Prophet (peace be upon him /s - peace my a$$.) They would likely never read up on it or listen to/read first-hand experts such as Brigitte Gabriel, Robert Spencer, Pam Geller, Jed Babbin, Steve Emerson, David Horowitz, etc. That’s bad enough, but it’s downright dangerous that their candidate won’t either.

“The fact that Iran is closing on nukes as well as achieving orbit in their space program should strike fear into any sane American.”

Yes - any sane (and properly educated) American.