Now do you mean like he was supposed to 'fade back into oblivion' by the end of the 2nd quarter after giving St. Rudy a history lesson? Or like he was supposed to 'fade back into oblivion' at the end of the 3rd quarter?
I don't see where any liberals are converting to conservative beliefs. All I see is some leftists willing to hold their nose and support Paul because of his foreign policy stances.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm not) but I remember quite a few 'liberals' (i.e. Democrats) switching sides for certain specific aspects of Reagan's platform. What? You don't think they bought into the whole thing do you?
But, that is the key part of Paul's Iraq policy. If the GOP doesn't adopt it, how can they ever count of Paul's supporters to vote for them?
They can't. And next November they will lose the Presidency and even more in Congress.
I think the bulk of Paul's support are the type of people who regularly read antiwar.com and voted for Buchanan in 2000 rather than Bush. The type of people who think "Zionists" and "NeoCons" control our government and think that the America First Committee was swell.
Not true. Again, a small portion but not the majority. Now there are some in my family that do believe we have overreached our foreign policy yet again and it's time to try another tact. But they believe none of what you state. And I think I wrote in Dr. Paul's name in 2000 like I did in 1996...
Because the nominee is going to have such a different view on Iraq, Iran, the Middle East, foreign policy, etc., do you really think it's wise to let him speak at the convention? It would only send mixed messages to the general electorate
If they hope to win, that can only be a good thing. Perhaps confuse some of the more easily led that the Republican party's agenda isn't as hawkish as it actually is.
Paul has inspired thousands of people with his message and you think he's going to fade into oblivion? You think the volunteers and grassroots that's supporting him now are just going to pack it in and return to their apathetic lives? These people are going to continue to be involved in politics and may even run for office themselves.
I don't see where any liberals are converting to conservative beliefs. All I see is some leftists willing to hold their nose and support Paul because of his foreign policy stances.
That's just ignorance on your part. Have it ever occurred to you that leftists are supporting Paul because maybe they're tired of being leftists and want some real change? You don't appreciate the fact that Paul is converting these people, just like Rush and FR has done for years. That's your opinion, but the facts say otherwise.
But, that is the key part of Paul's Iraq policy. If the GOP doesn't adopt it, how can they ever count of Paul's supporters to vote for them?
If they want to win back the WH, they'll try to talk to Paul and reach a compromise. Whether or not Paul stands his ground or the GOP stands theirs, I don't know. But I do know that there's going to have to be some sort of deal on the war. If the majority of Americans are against the war and want the troops to come home, then they're going to vote for those candidates who'll promise such, and there's really nothing you, I, or the members of FR can do about it, unfortunately.
Because the nominee is going to have such a different view on Iraq, Iran, the Middle East, foreign policy, etc., do you really think it's wise to let him speak at the convention? It would only send mixed messages to the general electorate.
If Paul's allowed to speak at the convention, I think he'll tailor a traditional Republican message of limited government and free markets for the most part. He'll probably talk about the war and say our troops need to come home but I don't think it'll send mixed messages, because everyone already knows Paul opposes the war.
But like I stated. The GOP has a huge dilemma on it's hands, and it's better for them to reach out to Paul now instead of ignoring and denigrating him. Paul's not the smoky backroom type who's going to meet with party insiders and compromise the positions he's held for 30 years, so the ball's in the GOP's court.
West Coast Conservative: I don't see where any liberals are converting to conservative beliefs. All I see is some leftists willing to hold their nose and support Paul because of his foreign policy stances.
What EEE said is true, I have seen it myself, from reading some comments by crossover Democrats. I've read some people who have changed, or are in the process of changing their position on abortion, as well as other conservative issues, such as the role of government, limited government, etc. I think it is amazingly cool, and I think it is because of how Dr. Paul explains these things and because they have a lot of respect for him, and they can see that he is a consistent and honest man in government (which is rare).
So, he really has brought in new people, and young people to the cause of conservatism, liberty and the constitution, and if nothing else - that in itself is a success, imo.