Selling small government to Republicans, in particular conservatives is a no brainer. We all buy that, we just can’t find too many politicians who can accomplish it. In part, that’s because too many Americans are demanding a never ending stream of government solutions to personal problems.
Where most conservatives disagree with Paul is on national security and foreign policy. It’s no more complicated than that.
But where we become angry with the Paul campaign, is when it adopts the leftist talking points of the anti-national security left and uses leftist money to promote party-jumping in an organized effort to hijack the Republican nomination process.
Now, there is NO debate as to whether or not this is true. All you have to do is go to many Ron Paul campaign sites and read their promotions of just that.
The idea that a Republican nominee for the highest office in the land should be funded or chosen by leftists who simply agree with the anti-war rhetoric he adopted from them, is insane.
If you can’t understand why that is causing such anger towards his campaign, after all his poll spamming and heated leftist rhetoric against the war on terror, then I can’t help you much...
We disagree on the biggest issue facing our nation today, not the idea of smaller government.
And we sure disagree on the topic of leftists funding and picking the Republican nominee...
Returning to the principles of non-interventionism is not a 'leftist' idea, it is an American idea.
It is not an issue of 'left' vs 'right' but American ideals vs the Warfare/Welfare ideals held by the leadership of both major parties.
Neither Party is against Big gov't, they just want to be the ones to control it.
The Ron Paul candidacy is an appeal to a coalition against that government Leviathan.