“Romney vs. Not-Romney”? Not hardly

I’ve been doing the hard work of ploughing through the writings of some truly teeth-grindingly stupid commentators.  It is universally agreed that Ron Paul will never win the nomination, much less the Presidency.  It is simultaneously asserted that Mitt Romney is the inevitable nominee, and that the other aspirants are trying to position themselves as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.  Tosh.  There is only one candidate who is obviously different from the others (why do I suddenly think of Sesame Street?), and that is Ron Paul.  What we have is a race between Ron Paul and the “Not-Ron Pauls”.  Seriously, if Paul’s failure to secure the GOP nomination is so inevitable, what possible hope can those getting half of Ron Paul’s votes have?  They are truly the candidates who are not plausible.  Ron Paul is running a national campaign, with boots on the ground in each state.  He raised $13 million last quarter, which isn’t as much as Mitt Romney raised, but then Paul is not depending on banksters to bankroll him.  The other “Not-Paul” candidates are hoping for good showings in a particular caucus or primary to give them the impetus to make it to the next caucus or primary.  Jesse Benton is correct that they should drop out, and that if they truly want someone more conservative (that is, more pro-individual liberty and limited government), they need to throw their support behind Paul.  Whether they do or don’t Ron Paul is the one to beat, not Romney.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: