Although Republican Congressman Ron Paul has a slim to none chance of winning the GOP nomination, I could still see Paul shaking up the election come next November. I could truly see Ron Paul running as a third party candidate. Ron Paul could be the conservative version of 2000's Ralph Nader. In 2000, Nader ran as an alternative to those who were unhappy with Gore or Bush. Ron Paul has a chance to do the same next year.
While Paul would have a zero percent chance of winning the general election, he would take away votes from both the Democratic and Republican candidates. Which party he takes more votes from will depend on how he positions himself come next year. Nader, in 2000, positioned himself to the left of Al Gore and therefore attracted more Democrats than Republicans. If Paul runs solely on his anti-war position, then clearly that would hurt the Democrats. It would provide a second option for those who dislike Hillary, or for that matter, dislike whomever the nominee may be. The money, so to speak, however, lies with Paul running as the social conservative alternative if Giuliani is the Republican nominee.
Ron Paul is clearly not seen as a typical "christian-right-wing" politician, but he is, possibly more than any other candidate, socially conservative. He has a 100% pro-life voting record----And, by the way, I should also point out that the official pro-life position states that unnecessary war is a big no no, so in that sense, Paul might be the only pro-life Republican candidate. Paul would also prove to be a challenge to Rudy on Rudy's pro-gun control position in states where that issue is very important. If Ron Paul ran as this type of candidate, he would definitely detract voters from Guiliani and would likely prove to be like Nader in yet another way---he would cost the Republicans the election, much the way Nader cost the Democrats the election in 2000.
One big difference between Nader and Paul is that Paul has money. In just one day, Paul raised $4.3 million. That broke the record for the most money any Republican has raised in one day. Ron Paul has a huge following and slowly, but surely, he is getting his name out there. Paul's ability to raise a lot of money would be a huge asset if he does indeed decide to run as a third party candidate. What I'll look the most for, though, is seeing how Paul will define the central message of his campaign---would it be solely anti-war, which would hurt the Democrats, or would it be a socially conservative alternative to Giuliani? The latter, as I mentioned, would almost guarantee that a Republican wouldn't win the White House. The GOP will need every last vote it can get in '08, and a conservative third party option would undoubtably throw a wrench in the GOP's already damaged plan if Giuliani wins the nomination. So I say to all those Ron Paul fanatics----keep up the hard work and you might just see your candidate on the ballot in '08.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Ron Paul: 2008's Nader?
Labels:
2008 election
,
GOP
,
GOP candidates
,
Hillary Clinton
,
Ralph Nader
,
Republicans
,
Ron Paul
,
Rudy Giuliani
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)