The title of this thread says it all. Ron Paul is the ONLY republican candidate that even has a snowballs chance of defeating Barrack Obama in the
general election. This, obviously, is my opinion but I will put some links at the end of this post that support what I am saying that will qualify
The other candidates, it is very clear have very little appeal among other sectors of the population. There is not a democrat alive that would vote
for Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum. Their appeal among independents is very small. These candidates simply have nothing to say that
appeals to people outside of their limited base of support.
Ron Paul on the other hand does garner support from democrats and independents. Though many would not support his entire platform he has large
support among those who have become disillusioned by Barrack Obama and his campaign promises that never came to fruition. I personally know many
people who were on the Obama bandwagon in 08' that have completely changed their minds and have stated they will either vote for Ron Paul or if he
doesn't win the nomination they will vote for Barrack Obama again because to them he is the lesser of two evils.
The narrative of the 2012 republican nominee process has been "defeat Obama". The main objective of all republicans I talk to in my personal life and
many I have spoken to and heard speak online or in the news simply have one objective and that is "Anyone but Obama" or "Lets be sure Obama is a one
So it seems very silly to me that they would decide to rally around candidates that have such a small chance at completing that objective. They
ridicule and disrespect the one person that would actually challenge Obama in a general election.
It seems to me as if they would actually rather have Obama in office over Ron Paul?!?
The average republican that doesn't support Ron Paul will say something along the lines of "Well, I really like a lot of what he has to say but I just
can't agree with his dangerous foreign policy". While I don't agree that his foreign policy is "dangerous" it is clear that his foreign policy is the
main reason he has support among those who would not consider themselves republicans.
So instead of voting for somebody that can challenge Obama on his rhetoric and for his supporters, they instead give their support to someone whose
foreign policy matches more closely with Obama yet can't challenge him on his rhetoric or for his supporters. That to me seems like a sure fire way
to make sure that Obama wins a second term in office.
It would seem that the primary and caucus voters so far, despite their rhetoric, are more concerned, and think it more important to continue the
foreign policy of Bush and Obama than the many issues that are effecting this country that they would agree with Ron Paul on.
It would also seem as though they would be unhappy with an Obama re-election, though in one respect they would be happy if only because he will
continue the "war on terror" and expand the warfare around the world.
I have been a registered Republican for 13 years (my entire adult life). While I don't always agree with the Republican party as a whole, they at the
very least pay lip service to things I truly believe in such as a small, limited federal government, adherence to the constitution and a true
unregulated free market.
I try to distance myself from the "Religious Right" as I have found they tend to believe in big government as well, though in different ways and wish
for constitutional protections for themselves but not specific others. I have seen them use the power of government in an attempt to legislate their
religious beliefs. I feel in many ways, the religious right has taken over the party and in the process the true republican message has been diluted
and less important.
To me, even if I didn't agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, it would be more important to me that the majority of my "republican" ideals were being
represented and that the person running against Obama was the candidate that had the best chance of winning supporters from the other side of the
fence to ensure the greatest chance of a victory.
Make no mistake, it is going to be extremely difficult to stop Obama from serving a second term. Despite his low approval ratings, there are just to
many people that will view Santorum, Romney or Gingrich as the greater of two evils and will do everything they can to make sure any of those three
does not become president.
That is simply not the case with Ron Paul. So why do republicans ignore the facts? Why do they support people that they know do not have appeal
beyond their main base of support? Why do they seem so keen on losing an election when they express and acknowledge so much is at stake?
Six Reasons Ron Paul Has Appeal Beyond the GOP
Former Obama Supporter for Ron Paul - Appeal to Dems and Independents
Ron Paul Can Beat Obama: CNN Poll
Democrats for Ron Paul
In case you missed it Ron Paul leads rivals with independent voters vs Obama
Rasmussen Poll Showing Obama and Ron Paul Neck and Neck
What are your thoughts?
edit on 21-2-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)