Can Ron Paul win?

With Ron Paul rising in the polls, the media has begun to cast its attention towards the libertarian GOP Congressman. With Paul rising in the polls, people have begun to ask whether he can win in Iowa and perhaps even New Hampshire. The Washington Post published a mainly positive profile of Paul in today’s paper, calling him “a force to be reckoned with in this presidential cycle,” which is certainly and objectively true. However, it concludes with “There is no Ron Paul 2.0,” which is certainly not true, and until now has hardly been mentioned in this primary campaign — perhaps because until now, no one thought that Paul could win anything.

I wonder what these young and gender-transcendent and differently melanined people would make, for example, of the racism charges. There is debate on this point, but back during the 2008 campaign, The New Republic’s James Kirchick tracked down old copies (late 1980s and early 1990s) of a newsletter that went out to subscribers under Paul’s name. The sentences that appear in these documents are so astonishing that they’d have stood out in Alabama in 1960. Martin Luther King was a “world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” (who were, interestingly, of both sexes). The name of New York City should be changed to “Welfaria,” “Zooville,” “Rapetown,” “Dirtburg,” or “Lazyopolis.” David Duke’s near-win in the 1990 Louisiana Senate primary was celebrated. Mountains of material about welfare cheats and animals and arming oneself for the coming race riot and so on.

Andrew Sullivan endorsed Paul today

Can Ron Paul win?


Can Ron Paul win?

Gilliam, who cannot help loving the little guy:). I’ve been considering him all along as a write in choice,who knows with the way things stand at the moment:shrug:
Peace, Carlan

Yes he can win, especially if people start voting for a qualified candidate - instead of merely trying to vote against Obama.

He is the only candidate with integrity. And there’s no debate about that.


There’s plenty of debate.

I would vote for Paul in the general, but he is not my first choice if he makes it to my state in the primaries.

That depends on the ficklrness of the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

“he sneezed…that proves he is a LIBERAL!!!” :rolleyes:

And none of this will matter on the Catholic Forums, with its majority who are single-issue voters on who is THE most antiabortion candidate.:shrug::shrug:

If Ron Paul did win the nomination, I might be tempted to vote for him, instead of my traditional vote. (I am a registered Libertarian):coffeeread:

It’s a good thing he opposes abortion.

I’m registered as independent, but I’m going to re register as republican, just so I can vote for him in the primaries.

I hope and pray not. He’s a disaster as bad or worse than Obama waiting to happen, just in the opposite direction. The only policy of his that I believe is admirable is his pro-life stance, but I can admire the man himself for not being a “flip-flopper” when everyone else is, even if I don’t agree with any of his policies, and think that many would be disastrous beyond reckoning.

no ]

Honestly I don’t think so. And I’ll tell you there is no-one who understands economy better who’s running. But geez look at the fellow, he’s getting up their in the years. 75 and taking on the President? I don’t know.

I have no problem with anything with Paul, However, I’m not sold on his foreign policy. I don’t believe we should leave Israel for dead. Maybe he’ll define a few “what ifs” as we move along. I have a bad feeling about Iran and Israel. IMHO the middle east was handled all wrong. I see mistake, after mistake, after mistake.


Uber-Con to supporter of RON!

Talking to my friends about my new found support for Ron has been interesting. Until this year I’ve been a died in the wool conservative republican (former US Marine, never ex…).
But this year, several budget/debit ceiling issues “tripped my trigger” and sent me running to Ron. (End the Fed, Stop excessive spending,Reign in the Federal Government, etc…)

The most ardent negative against him from my friends is his foreign policy. Ok, i see that at some level, it’s a valid concern. But I contrast “Foreign” with our current “Domestic” policy and my immediate priority is Domestic Policy’s right now. Ron has a substantial plan to right the wrongs with the excess of our Federal Government. He is not anti government, his is just PRO State government. Honestly considering all the issues or single issues (abortion) I cant see a good reason for Catholics not to vote for Ron.
Go RON! 2012!
(BTW: watch this vid of Ron on his PRO LIFE (&thus Liberty) view…

Click here to read for yourself: RON PAUL “PLAN TO RESTORE AMERICA”

Hardly - but it would be a huge change. The question is this: Do we continue down that path we’ve been on since about 1960 (regardless of Democrat or Republican administration), or do we decide that we’re heading in the wrong direction and need a drastic (which is usually painful, initially) change?

Regarding foreign policy, especially our perpetual state of war, isn’t it interesting that Ron Paul receives more money in donations from military member and those that work for the military than all the other candidates (including Obama) combinded?

What does that tell you about how our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines feel about way our government decides to carry our violent diplomacy? Interesting that even the military members are more in favor of a small military and less foreign intervention than either major party, with the notable exception of Ron Paul.


To answer the original question: No - emphatically.

He’s the absolute devil to the Socialist Left, and he’s a foreign-policy kook to the majority of people who don’t drink the Soft-sell Communist Koolaide. Seriously, the man can’t help but fall in love with conspiracy-theorist rhetoric.

To quote the man himself:

[quote=“Ron Paul”]“Think of what happened after 9/11. The minute before there was any assessment, there was glee in the [Bush] administration because now we can invade Iraq, and so the war drums beat.”

Never mind when you let him go off on the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, or the Middle East.

Yeah, thanks for playing, Dr. Paul. I’ll just quietly make my way to the exit now. No need to get up. Just stay in the House where you can work on domestic issues. Thanks.

  • Marty Lund

Ron Paul is doing terribly in match ups against Obama.

Carlan, does your state count write in votes if someone written in has not officially registered aa a write in candidate? I’m not sure mine does. I don’t think it does. But some might. Maybe if Paul does not win the GOP nomination, he will run as an Indep.

But to answer Gilliam’s question, absolutely I believe Paul could win Iowa.

No he’s really not. But more to the point, there is a big difference between complaining about a problem and complaining about a problem and proposing a solution. It’s the same difference that exists between merely voting against someone, and voting for a candidate and his or her policy positions.

I have tend to discount the opinions of those people who merely complain without proposing solutions.


Zactly, I admit there is no-one who can talk economy with him. He talks they listen. Period. The rest follow the art of rhetoric. In fact if you listened to the ABC debate a couple up there admitted reading what Ron recommended to them. Thats how cool this guy is. He’ll help his rivals get up to speed on whats going on.

I see this statement ad nauseum from the Paulbots (Hello, 9/11 Truthers!) but do you realize those donations are self-proclaimed?

I could go to the Paul website, make a donation, and list my occupation as “Chinese fighter pilot” but that doesn’t mean I am.

Does that mean that Paul has the highest amount of Chinese fighter pilot donations?


Sincerely, a military combat vet who hasn’t donated to Paul.

Is that like voting against a budget, then soaking up earmarks during the committe appropraitions phase, and then claiming “I’ve never voted for an emark”?

My solution is voting for another candidate.

Gingrich Signs NOM’s Marriage Pledge, Leaving Only Paul Among Major Candidates Not To Have Signed

“Many of Ron Paul’s supporters in Iowa believe that he is on their side when it comes to preserving traditional marriage, but he isn’t,” Brown said. “While Paul says he personally believes in traditional marriage, he has refused to sign our pledge and, worse, has said that marriage is strictly a private affair and that government has no role in regulating marriage. This is a dangerous position with profound consequences for society.”

Here is your choices:

Democrat: Start a war today and bankrupt the country tomorrow.

Republican: Go to war tomorrow and bankrupt the country next week.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit