Based on the latest RealClearPolitics poll, which measures an average of multiple polls, Dr. Ron Paul is running third place in the GOP presidential primary. He’s even running a close second in Iowa, based on a recent Public Policy Poll. And while charges of ‘extremist’, ‘kook’, and ‘fringe’ are once again being thrown his way, the public would do well to consider the following three key credentials of his increasingly competitive campaign.
First, based on a recent Public Policy poll, Congressman Ron Paul is the most competitive GOP candidate when it comes to the independent voter category. Public Policy Polling writes:
“Paul as the strongest of the Republican candidates with independents has become more the rule than the exception in our recent polling across the country.”
Other polls have revealed a similar trend. Paul not only outperforms the other GOP candidates when matched up against Obama in the independent voter category, he often beats President Obama.
By some accounts, Independents are the largest and fastest growing segment of the national electorate and are arguably the most coveted group of voters by Republican and Democratic candidates alike. Independents are usually viewed as more pragmatic, more moderate, and more nonpartisan than Republicans and Democrats. If this is indeed the case, then one could make the following arguments. First, based on current poll numbers, Paul’s campaign would prove competitive against President Obama in the general election. With his advantage in the all-important independent voter category, his ability to attract a small, but not insignificant number of anti-war, anti-Patriot Act, anti-Wall St bailout, anti-drug war Democrats, and his mass appeal to libertarian-leaning Republicans, Paul could be the ideal Republican to challenge President Obama. Second, ‘extremist’, ‘kook’, and ‘fringe’ labels no longer apply; instead, his statistical advantage with independent voters serves as evidence that his campaign is particularly popular with ‘mainstream’, ‘moderate’, and ‘pragmatic’ voters.
Second, Congressman Ron Paul is attracting the youth vote. At this stage, President Obama, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and the other Republican candidates are not. Obama attracted and energized young voters in 2008, but 2012 may be Ron Paul’s year when it comes to catalyzing America’s younger voters. Both major parties often view the youth vote as a difference maker come election time, so Paul’s ability to inspire this portion of the electorate is especially significant.
Third, Congressman Ron Paul receives the most military donations. This is particularly relevant because these donors are the men and women who have made or who are currently making the tremendous sacrifice of serving their country during a time of war. As reflected in the third quarter numbers, Paul’s campaign receives more military donations than President Obama and more military donations than the rest of the GOP candidates combined. In fact, the top three donors to his presidential campaign are employees of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Paul’s consistent advantage in this often overlooked category could make his anti-war/non-interventionist foreign policy more credible in voters’ eyes.
To be clear, these three credentials of Ron Paul’s campaign do not guarantee a strong showing in the Republican presidential primaries, nor do they guarantee a competitive bid in the unlikely scenario that Paul decides to run as an Independent at some point. However, they do seem to be indicative of a serious campaign that is able to appeal to important segments of the electorate, across the partisan spectrum.
Four years ago, Paul attracted a small, but passionate following. Four years later, his influence has waxed, not waned. Four years later, he has become more of a contender, not less of a contender. Four years later, his movement has grown, not shrunk. If the trend line holds, expect Paul and his politics to play a major role in the 2012 election, win or lose, Republican or Independent.
Join the discussion Please be relevant and respectful.
I could not Support Ron Paul.I do like a few things he says but not everything.I will skip his name if he ran as an Independent.
I'm just glad something other than the usual bandwagon mind numbing crap is part of the public discussion this election campaine. Maybe people will actually vote this time.
We NEVER killed bin Laden, Mark. The dude died years ago, as intelligence figures like Steve Piesznik (spelling approx.) have told us long before the phony 5/11 raid. You can't kill a corpse. Nor do you destroy evidence by dumping it into the Arabian Sea before confirmation by the world, since OBL was an International criminal. Obama is taking credit for something he didn't do. This is perfectly consistent with the treasonous, unconstitutional passage of the NDAA that Obama just signed. Now, anybody who the President "suspects" of being a threat can be detained indefinitely, as in a lifetime. Perhaps instead of calling Obama Mr. President, we should just say heil.
He polls well because he says more reasonable things than any other Republican. Unfortunately, he's still a loony, just like the rest of them, and just like Obusha himself.
I called myself thoughtful in response to your claim that I was substituting my reality for reality itself. That was a really unnecessary remark.
I found it dishonest of you to call yourself a "thoughtful person" as way of defending what was basically a "I'm right, your wrong" defense.
Okay Lennon, tell me what he consistent track record is, then. How I debate RP supporters and defenders is by using what other RP supporters and defenders have told me about their hero.
Seriously theres no need to be agressive here- everyone has valid points, what Im wondering is wheres all this coming from, the facts I mean? is any of this published somewhere ? a place we can reference? just saying I love facts. Its simple to make an educated choice when you know where your going based on a track record...
how can anything be of a 'higher' intelect in this manner?
I see more of an argument of opinions here rather then debate-
points on passion tho lol
Dishonest of me to do what?
Naturally, consistently bad is not to be admired. I certainly never suggested it was. Did you misread something I wrote? What is your gripe?
So the idea that businesses should still be allowed to refuse service to blacks for the past 2 decades is smart?
My grandmother was consistent in her unapproval of blacks, non-Southern Baptists, and interracial marriages for the 15 years I knew her. If she were running for any political office, I wouldn't find any respect in her consistent track record.
As time changes, so does the social norm. Those who refuse to allow change into their lives should not be praised for the "consistent track record."
I'm not hostile. I just found it dishonest of you to do so.
Not at all Tiger. I am not sure where your hostility to me comes from, but I have made no opinions about your intellectual capacity.
This racist smear, which he, and the head of the NAACP of his state, who is a long time of friend of his, have rejected, simply is not believable.
Nice job giving yourself a title such as "thoughtful person", trying to put yourself above us on a level of intellect.
Paul is extremely firm and steady in his opinions. He has a pretty consistent track record for nearly 2 decades on almost every major issue of our time.
If that is how you want to characterize a thoughtful person who finds your argument unpersuasive, I guess that is your choice.
Soooooo..... how can you trust someone who wont have an ultimate opinion over any matter? its like a puppet, useless until the strings are pulled.
Thats no safe bet. I would rather dote on a candidate who can stand by his or her word. I have more respect for them this way- I guess Im alone here ~
I know he didn't write it, but how on Earth could he let it be distributed widely for years 0-- even while he was in Congress. He never put out a statement saying it wasn't him. He never tried to find the source and stop it. The writer (s) were putting out a newsletter supposedly published and written by him. His explanation is just not plausible.
Lennon; Strange how they went on for so long without him knowing then, though.
Alma; He wants the states to decide, just like with drugs and every other controversial topic that could possibly make him unpopular.
He is pro-life, and that will kill him with a lot of solid Dems, who otherwise hate Obama's war on the constitution
No one believes he wrote that stuff. People can distribute anything they want in anyones name. That is a lame smear
There is some bizarre stuff about Paul not yet widely publicized, which would kill his chances. Google "Ron Paul newsletter Martin Luther King." He insists he didn't write vehement racist propaganda for more than a decade distributed in his name. He cannot explain why he allowed it to be sent out in his name.
This is the man who said we should of tried to capture Bin Laden instead of kill him. Housing him and trying him and protecting him would have cost the tax payers millions
I'd prefer him among the other republicans (face it, he hasn't been "libertarian since 1988), but I still wouldn't vote for him.
First, Paul frowns upon getting into wars that only benefit the military-industrial complex. Second, he honors the Constitution, which the money-changers only assert when it's to their advantage and totally ignore when it isn't. Third, the other type of two-party leadership has led this country to the brink of disaster, especially economically, and Paul is a refreshing change from that greed and mentality. He also has an excellent economic mind. Finally, Paul has remained consistent throughout the years in all of his positions. He hasn't adjusted just to try to get votes. A third party presence is desperately needed, so if Paul does get elected, the Congressional traitors who voted for the NDAA should all be removed from office and replaced with third party candidates, whether Paul wins as a Republican or a third party candidate.
While Paul's ideological consistency is rather attractive, as is his anti-war stance, he nevertheless remains committed to Austrian economics and certain bigoted beliefs (re: race and marriage equality). He is certainly someone to worry about. I would much rather see someone like Bernie Sanders in the headlines than Ron Paul.