Everyone knew going in that Romney would win, the big question was who would come in second. That was no doubt a disappointment for the war mongers.
I believe that Paul knows he will not win. His goal is to simply get enough support to gain a voice and change the narrative, which i think has always been his goal. I've always been convinced that he has only run for president out of feeling an obligation and not necessarily for the ego trip. He simply wants his positions heard. Unfortunately a good showing in the first two states doesn't accomplish that. He needs to consistently get around 20-30% of the vote and that is a tough slog once another candidate really jumps ahead and the field narrows. Interestingly, Paul and Romney find their interests aligned. The best thing that can happen for both Paul and Romney is for Paul to do well and the field to stay big. If it is down to just Romney and Paul and the split is 2:1 then all of the talk goes to Romney:Obama. But if there are still four in the field (Romney : Paul : Newt : Perry) and the split is more like 5 : 3 : 1 : 1 then Paul continues to look strong when stacked against legitimate opponents. The commentary stays on the GOP for a few more months and Paul get more press discussing how his "crazy" ideas seem to be resonating with a large portion of the electorate. I wouldn't rule out the idea that Paul even influences the Romney camp to make their current tepid cut:cap:balance agenda into a Paul-esque aggressive CUT:CAP:BALANCE plan.
I can find no fault in this save one thing, due to the fact that almost half the states are now proportional, Paul still has an outside shot to build a nice delegate count that may yet challenge Romney's total. We are moving into two weak states for Paul (SC & Fl) so if he performs near expectations, he's still in it for the long haul. I agree that if nothing else, this campaign serves as a platform for future change and in that regard it has already succeeded. Specifically, he is setting his son up for 2016. By simply staying afloat during the torpedo attack of the corporate media, Paul proved that the corporate media is losing its relevance and alternative media is gaining strength. This means that control of the narrative is changing hands and as that continues to happen, more and more will wake up to reality in today's America (the impending economic downturn will also help in this regard). That is a huge blow to the status quo and a gigantic plus for we the people. Change won't occur overnight, but it is happeneing right now...and I am encouraged by what I see.
In reality I think that the proportionality changes are overblown. There aren't that many states that changed, and the proportionality is not nearly as fair as it seems on the surface. For example, contrary to the hopes of many Paul supporters, it is very likely that he will get zero delegates from Iowa. Many people don't seem to realize this. Even though he very nearly tied for first place there, as they are currently aligned, Romney will get 13 and Santorum will get 12. This is because even though Paul did well, he didn't manage to win any of the districts. The national delegates generally align with the winner of the districts. The way it is setup right now, it is very likely that Paul doesn't get any more than 3 delegates from the first four states, even though he is clearly in second place and commanding more than 1/4 of the vote. Most states only made minor changes to their system such as saying they are proportional but only assigning them to the district winner, which is almost winner-take-all most of the time. Some do winner-take-all for the majority of the delegates, but have a small number of proportional delegates, so in a tight two man race the winner would still get 80% or more of the delegates. Remember that each state is trying to remain as influential as possible, which means staying as close as possible to winner-take-all. Anyway, I actually think that true political change only happens over generations. Paul is influencing the next generation which is evidenced by his large support in that demographic. Thus, it is very likely that we get someone like Paul in the White House, about 20 years from now when that voting block is the most influential. Right now we are in the era of the baby boomers. Guys like Obama, Romney, Gingrich, and especially strong females like Hillary are the poster children for that generation.
Yup. And never in their wildest dreams would they have guessed that the peace and freedom candidate in 2012 would be a fiscally conservative 76 year old Republican.
I believe that Paul is in it to win, but knows that he probably will not win. For some reason people (particularly the media) can't seem to understand this simple concept. If Paul doesn't say, "Oh yes, I'm going to win this!" the media drones say that Paul isn't in it to win. Realistically, a candidate can be dead set and determined to win but if there are three other serious candidates and one of them has a lot more money to spend and has been anointed by the media then he will realize that the odds of winning the nomination are well under 50%. It is true that Paul isn't doing this for his ego. He has some ideas he wants to bring to the table and no other candidate will do this. Contrast this to say, Newt Gingrich. I doubt that there would be any substantial difference in policy if Gingrich or Romney is President. So there's not much reason for Gingrich to run other than ego and perhaps the opportunity to sell access to the presidency just as he sold his access to the House of Representatives.
I didn't say that he wouldn't like to win. Just that he knows that it is virtually impossible. He is much more pragmatic than his supporters give him credit for. I believe that he is more content to simply be heard than his supporters are. If a slightly younger and more financially connected person were there to carry the torch then I don't think he would even be running. Also, the more popular he gets, the closer his supporters get to the moment of truth. How much do they support him vs the idea of him. You are absolutely correct that a Gingrich or Romney presidency would result in relatively slow and minor changes. But a Paul presidency wouldn't result in nearly as much fast dramatic change as his supporters envision. He is incredibly uncompromising and wouldn't have the ability to even get close to some of the changes he would like to see. Specifically in terms of budget issues, congress has more power there. He has suggested in the past that he wants reductions in government of about 70%. That would be well outside his power without an accommodating congress. The only chance he would even have of making many of the changes he wants is if the tea party movement continued to win dramatic increases in congress and he had not only a super majority, but a heavily tea party sympathetic super majority. Also, are his supporters ready to see him endorse Romney in the general election?
Yeah, that's what I'm wondering as well. When all is said and done, Dr. Paul won't likely win. Too bad really, would like to see many of his ideas put into action. Will he endorse the Rep candidate? Have I missed something somewhere? Has he said anything in this regard? c