But he can serve a purpose. That purpose is to prevent the Not Romney for coalescing around one candidate.
He is quite useful for Obama. What could be better for Obama than a crackpot polluting the GOP primary process?
Cuckoo on foreign relations — absolutely cuckoo. The GOP convention would sooner drink cyanide Kool-Aid than nominate Paul.
I have voted Republican in every presidential election since my first one in 1972. If Ron-Paul Ahmanutjob is the nominee, it would be the first time I would NOT vote Republican.
Ron Paul is a Re-set Button....
Better than Obama, but still just as painful, maybe MORE painful inthe short run....
The issue is is after Ron paul re-sets would it lead to a Backlash Swing back to the Democrats? Yes, probably.
Even Don Imus knows Ron Paul is a lunatic.
Votes for Run Paul serve a purpose for those who want Obama to have another four years.
He wouldn’t just “not win”, he wouldn’t even carry Utah, the reddest of the red.
Someone needs to get a new script.This lunatic nutcase stuff is boring. Also can’t win business which has been used on every candidate except Romney. Look anyone that thinks Romney or the GOP can win without the Tea Party is NUTS.
Ron Paul himself probably doesn’t think he could win. But this does not negate his candidacy one bit, in fact, by not winning, his ideas could become a lot more powerful.
For example, imagine if the eventual candidate (other than RINO Romney), were to name Ron Paul as his VP? Those who agreed with *most* of Paul’s ideas would click their heels, especially if the presidential candidate openly tasked Paul with planning bit cuts in government.
Or, just as good, possibly better, the new president could appoint Paul as head of a major government agency, and task him with eliminating it. And then, when it was gone, to make him head of another agency, with the same prerogative.
Importantly, such agencies spend a lot of time trying to come up with something important to do, to justify their bloat. So if there was something legitimate, Paul would have to identify just it, and arrange for it to be transferred to a surviving agency.
Ironically as all get out, Paul would be able to do this *better* as a VP or cabinet officer than he would be able to do as president.
However, the only way this can come about is if Paul gets such a following as a candidate, that whoever wins the nomination has no choice but to either invite Paul in to a position of real power, or to split the party.
Mind you, this would *not* be Paul splitting the party, as some pundits have suggested, but the *other* candidate. And by doing so, he would almost guarantee he would lose. So he would have no choice in the matter.
So even if you don’t believe in all of what Paul is saying, or have other reservations about him, you can still root for his candidacy, and hope he comes in with a close second place.
The author is absolutely right in that Ron Paul will not win the gop nomination. That’s already spoken for by Mitt Romney.
But that’s not the point. The question is whether he can win the general election as a third party candidate.
Of course, the pre-determined theme on this thread is that “Ron Paul is CRAZY, NUTS, HE HATES JEWS, HE’S AN APPEASER, HE’S DANGEROUS!!”
So I guess we’ll see what happens.
For the only time I can remember, I agree with Chait about something.
Go back to TNR and you'll likely find more of this tripe, but aimed at George W. Bush.
Jonathan Chait, for anyone who cares.
I don't.
Under some strange scenarios Ron Paul could win the presidency. Mitt Romney gets caught embezzeling money from his corporation,and fraudulantly funding his campaign with the money. At the same time Newt gets caught in a gay trist. He want give up his lovers name, but says its ok cause he didn’t mess around with other women like he promised his wife he wouldn’t. Barack Obama resigns. Telling the media he was tired of cleaning two houses, after divorsing his wife. Ron Paul is the last man standing.