He’s attracting the anti-war crowd only, that’s it. If you’re not anti-war on terror, you’re not for Paul.
All the other issues are just cover for the anti-war issue. A means of justifying support for Paul “beyond” anti-war support.
Not true. I support Paul's stance on freedom from government excess. I support his candidacy (his right to run, that is) because he exposes promises the big R party has failed to deliver on. I hope he makes voters hold Republicans in FedGov office to a higher standard.
I also wade in to defend him now and then just because we have folks cooking up all sort of litmus tests to define conservatism that have nothing to do with lowers taxes and less government micromanagement in everyday lives. Also, there was a time when Republicans could disagree on foreign policy and nation-building. Hell, George Bush ran on that platform. Now suddenly its taboo to oppose wading out into some third-world country at ungodly cost?
Finally, I hope that voters will find and promote federalist/small FedGov candidates for Congressional and Senate seats, not just fawn at the feet of the favorite son picked by the party machine. Oklahoma chose Tom Coburn over the party man in the primaries, and we are better for it.
Exactly.
When I was in Boston a month ago a small platoon of fifteen Paul supporters paraded by and the ONLY thing they said (chanted) was, "Ron Paul. He's against the war."
Nuff' said.