4 ms·

He represents a certain ideological constituency which will sustain his campaign as a means of getting their ideas heard. If the US were a parliamentary system,

He represents a certain ideological constituency which will sustain his campaign as a means of getting their ideas heard. If the US were a parliamentary system, then he and his ideological fellows could form a party that would have a decent shot at getting enough votes to form a coalition-of-legislators with another larger party. The US is however not a parliamentary system so coalition-building happens at the voter level rather than the legislator level. Many libertarians are forming a coalition-of-voters with the Republican party and by supporting Rand Paul are hoping to shift the Republican party libertarian-ward. He does not however currently represent a large enough ideological constituency that he would be able to form a coalition-of-voters large enough to actually be elected president. > I've been waiting for years... I'm curious what you thought of Ron Paul's candidacy.

MCRed 11y ago
afarrell-- in the early days of the 1992 campaign I felt exactly the way you do, about Bill Clinton. I was a Paul Tsongas supporter then. We all know how that turned out. After losing twice in a row, the Republicans know they have to change. It's still early and the old style christian-conservative out-dated positions on foreign policy, "law and order" etc people are still around, but it's clear they are on the out. The question is, how fast will the republican party change? And a lot of that kind of change happens during these big elections. So, early broad support for Rand Paul is exactly what could prompt the shift. After all, when a party can count on a constituency (And at this point where are christian conservatives going to go?) they can take them for granted and seek out the constituency that is at risk. That should be the Gay constituency for democrats who have taken them for granted and abused them for decades. (I'm not heterosexual, so that includes me, and that's why I haven't voted for a democrat for 20+ years.)
- joshuapants 11y ago
  > After losing twice in a row, the Republicans know they have to change. Are you sure? Incumbents rarely lose, and it was a very close election. Couple that with the wave the Republicans had in the midterm elections (especially in a few states that typically go blue), I could see the Republican party just thinking it's their turn now. If anything the Republicans would want to avoid a split caused by alienating their base. I should note that I am not a Christian conservative, just doing some backseat political analysis.
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    > Incumbents rarely lose, and it was a very close election. But Romney wasn't a hardcore Christian Conservative either. > If anything the Republicans would want to avoid a split caused by alienating their base. The religious right may not love Rand Paul but they hate Hillary Clinton. Most of them would show up to vote against her regardless of who the Republican candidate was. Meanwhile Rand Paul has more appeal with swing voters and libertarian-leaning Democrats than any of the other Republican candidates. If he won the nomination he would have a solid position in the general election.
    - tsotha 11y ago
      >The religious right may not love Rand Paul but they hate Hillary Clinton. In light of the recent revelations regarding CGI I don't see how anyone, Republican or Democrat, could vote for Hillary Clinton. It'll be disastrous for the party to nominate her, and even worse for the republic if she wins.

MCRed 11y ago

afarrell-- in the early days of the 1992 campaign I felt exactly the way you do, about Bill Clinton. I was a Paul Tsongas supporter then. We all know how that turned out. After losing twice in a row, the Republicans know they have to change. It's still early and the old style christian-conservative out-dated positions on foreign policy, "law and order" etc people are still around, but it's clear they are on the out. The question is, how fast will the republican party change? And a lot of that kind of change happens during these big elections. So, early broad support for Rand Paul is exactly what could prompt the shift. After all, when a party can count on a constituency (And at this point where are christian conservatives going to go?) they can take them for granted and seek out the constituency that is at risk. That should be the Gay constituency for democrats who have taken them for granted and abused them for decades. (I'm not heterosexual, so that includes me, and that's why I haven't voted for a democrat for 20+ years.)

joshuapants 11y ago
> After losing twice in a row, the Republicans know they have to change. Are you sure? Incumbents rarely lose, and it was a very close election. Couple that with the wave the Republicans had in the midterm elections (especially in a few states that typically go blue), I could see the Republican party just thinking it's their turn now. If anything the Republicans would want to avoid a split caused by alienating their base. I should note that I am not a Christian conservative, just doing some backseat political analysis.
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  > Incumbents rarely lose, and it was a very close election. But Romney wasn't a hardcore Christian Conservative either. > If anything the Republicans would want to avoid a split caused by alienating their base. The religious right may not love Rand Paul but they hate Hillary Clinton. Most of them would show up to vote against her regardless of who the Republican candidate was. Meanwhile Rand Paul has more appeal with swing voters and libertarian-leaning Democrats than any of the other Republican candidates. If he won the nomination he would have a solid position in the general election.
  - tsotha 11y ago
    >The religious right may not love Rand Paul but they hate Hillary Clinton. In light of the recent revelations regarding CGI I don't see how anyone, Republican or Democrat, could vote for Hillary Clinton. It'll be disastrous for the party to nominate her, and even worse for the republic if she wins.