Posted on 07/29/2007 6:22:19 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Yesterday I looked at the Ron Paul phenomenon as an expression of the anti-big government sentiments among some people in each of the major parties. Such voters have limited options among the other candidates this year. While the Paul supporters commenting vigorously disagreed, I also expressed the belief that Paul cannot win the Republican nomination. What if I am right? What will his supporters do?
It is hard to see Paul supporters being loyal Republicans and backing their party’s winner–which should be a matter of concern for the Republicans. If I was a GOP leader I’d be questioning Paul’s loyalty to the party and pressing him for a pledge to support the nominee and encourage his supporters to do the same should he lose. Of course it is questionable as to how many votes he could deliver to the authoritarian war mongers who dominate the Republican field should he be willing to do so.
I don’t even know that Paul would agree to support another Republican candidate. Would Paul jump ship and run as a Libertarian again? If not, will the Libertarian Party candidate benefit from what Paul has done? That will depend partially upon the candidate, but the LP will have the problem that many people are reluctant to vote for a third party which has no real chance of winning.
If they are reluctant to support a minor party, will many Paul supporters back the Democratic winner as the best shot of having an anti-war candidate win? That will depend a lot on the nominee. Richardson already has some libertarian support but remains a real long shot. Edwards will have a real tough time attracting any libertarian support, between his previous support for he war and Patriot Act when in the Senate to his current populist economic policies. Clinton will also have problems here, but I could see Obama managing to find a way to bridge liberal ideas with libertarian ideals as he has shown he is willing to avoid pandering to traditional Democratic special interests.
While I don’t think Ron Paul has any real chance of winning the Republican nomination, his candidacy is doing far better than might have been expected initially, and he very well may have a lasting impact on the race. Between the out right libertarians, as well as the more traditional conservatives who are becoming increasingly outraged by the current Republican leadership, there will be a number of Republicans looking for an alternative. Whether the Democrats can become a majority party will depend partially on whether they can attract a portion of these voters. To do so will mean not only opposing the war but showing they recognize that the 2000’s are not the 1930’s and their old New Deal coalition is long gone.
Nice work
BUMP
Nice excavation work. RP is consistent on these matters over the years, always calling for more limited federal government.
Paul is polling strong in N.H. and it’s possible he could come in 2nd in Iowa, after Tommy Thompson
Oh be still my beating heart.
In 2006 only Dennis Kusinish and Paul voted no on condemning Hamas violence against Israel.
He sees no issues with Iran’s threats against Israel. Paul continually says we are misrepresenting the threat.
And what’s the deal with “he does not hate all Jews”? you mean he hates some?
Why does he hate anyone?
There are many more examples. Really all you have to do is listen to him.
The author is a moron.
People who don’t normally participate in partisan politics, or even those who do but have never been Republicans, are supporting Ron Paul because he is an alternative to the garbage that both parties usually front. So why on Earth would those people suddenly become enamored of the very junk they are protesting by supporting Dr. Paul?
The answer to the author’s problem is that he places a higher value on his political party affiliation than he does on the fate of our republic. In short, he is part of the problem.
To those who would vehemently oppose a Giuliani, a McCain, a Romney, or even a Thompson, but who will turn around and vote for the object of their ire, I say this: Look to your own soul. You are only lying to yourself.
Have you ever actually heard the man speak?
He is as as stated an anti-semite, defeatists, blame America first kind of guy...all you have to do is listen to him.
One of the lovely things about this country is that you can believe what you wish, no matter how delusional it may be.
More than likely you’ll sull up and sit home.
Yes, and we couldn't possibly be providing financial support to Ron Paul because we're all pot-smoking, unshowered 30 something unemployed geeks living in our parent's basement playing on the computer 18 hours a day...never mind that Paul doesn't accept corporate donations, and gets almost all ofhis campaign funds from individual contributions of < $200....
Enjoy that minority party status.
Then it shouldn't be difficult for you to provide examples of those. Have at it.
“The idea that the US government is the enemy and that Islam is not is, well, NUTS.”
You’re mistating what I said. I said the US gov is a greater threat than Islamic terrorists. I think this is sort of self evident. After all, who steals 40-50% of what we own, Islamic terrorists or our government? Who indoctrinates our children, Islamic terrorists or our government? It goes on and on.
Debate...blame America for 9/11.
2006 voted no on condemning Hammas for violence against Israel.
On the house floor saying we are misinterpreting Iran’s “we want to wipe Israel off the face of the map”.
His you tube messages and all the other examples posted on FR.
All you have to do is listen to him.
“In 1996 grass-roots favorite Pat Buchannan upset the Republican establishment candidate, Bob Dole, in the New Hampshire primary. It could happen.” Yep! And look at Buchanan now!
That's because Ron Paul's staff are highly motivated but unskilled real loyal believers.... whereas Duncan Hunter's staff are opportunists who saw an exploitable mark and are just taking the poor sucker for all they can before he is expended and worthless.
After all they will say "we tried hard, really, ::snicker:: but he just didn't have much of a shot anyway ::giggle::, so don't blame us".
I think it is possible for Paul to come close in a primary, because he’ll pull spoilers from the left who just want to stir things up. Remember how close McCain came in a few primaries, because the unions coordinated efforts to “spam”, for lack of a better term, the primaries? But as soon as it becomes evident Paul won’t be the nominee, they’ll dump him just like the dumped McCain.
grass-roots favorite Pat Buchannan
And how many others did he win?
“”..authoritarian war mongers” Yeah, that fair and balanced reporting we’ve come to know and love.”
Well you got to admit, we do have a fair share of them lately. They lost us Congress, last time around. Maybe they should rethink what they’re really accomplishing.
And how many others did he win?
None. The point being that the Republican Party leadership wanted Bob Dole, even though he could not win the general election.
In other words; a parallel situation could be developing as we write.
Even though Pat was hugely popular with the more conservative members, our "leadership" preferred to nominate Dole, even though the outcome was easily predicted (by myself, and probably many others).
Now we see another under-appreciated candidate, Ron Paul, with support by some in the Party, but not the Republican leadership.
FYI: In case anybody is at all interested; a RINO cannot win the general.
One aspect of returning to the constitution is a first step: enact the FairTax. It's not a matter of if, but when the first country installs a consumption tax type FairTax as the primary means of tax collection.
The first developed country that does that will have an almost unfair advantage for attracting productive citizens, new businesses and jobs.
To stay competitive for jobs and tax dollars other countries will have to follow suit or lose increasing number of productive citizens to countries that use a FairTax consumption tax as the sole or primary means of collecting taxes.
United States must take the lead in this true solution to defeating terrorism. First defeat it from within and it will spread on it's own to other countries. Science and business can defeat terrorism with the help of the government held to the original meaning of the constituion. The sooner the better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.