It seems here on out Ron Paul only has only a few options, the choice of which will determine the ultimate viability of his candidacy along with his future ability to shape the federal government and our cultural discussion on freedom, constitutional governance, just war, sound money, etc.
Ron Paul could either:
a) Keep on keeping on in the GOP nomination process. In other words, continue with the same strategy he's been using, hoping for a sudden major shift in the nomination process or a contested convention where he has surprisingly amassed 1144 delegates to clinch the nomination. Or, perhaps, radically shift his own campaign strategy so that a sudden major shift in the GOP nomination process is somehow more likely to occur in his favor.
b) Run third-party or support a third-party.
c) Make a deal to secure a place for the Liberty movement in the next GOP administration so that libertarian ideas are part of the regular American discussion and part of the elite roundtable discussions in the executive branch, thereby drastically increasing the likelihood that some libertarian ideas will either be enacted or will help balance the discussion so that the more radical authoritarian ideas aren't normalized but are polarized through contrast.
I could be wrong, but I don't see option A working and the natural phenomenon of subsequent decision-making (an economic truism) causes the momentum to continually push Ron Paul down rather than prop him up or at the very least keep his candidacy stable [not because he has any less support (he might actually have more) but because voters are trying to maximize their voice in government and so most only seriously consider those candidates they perceive as viable (and that perception of viability is determined through the consideration of the choices of previous decision-makers who are, in this case, previous voters in other states)].
Likewise, as much as I would love him to do so (and I really, really, really would like this), I don't see Ron Paul running third party or endorsing a third-party candidate. I know he hasn't fully ruled it out because he doesn't speak in absolutes, but his personal passion for it simply isn't there (at least at this moment); and you can't win an election without personal passion, especially not as a third-party candidate.
Finally, there's the Romney equation to consider:
Even though they disagree greatly, Romney and Paul like each other, respect each other, and at least consider each other's opinions (even if they later reject them). Romney is lacking a passionate grassroots base and, in the states where he's losing, is consistently losing by a only a few percentage points; but those small losses perpetuate the meme of his weakness as a front-runner, whereas his wins help push Santorum/Gingrich down, if not out.
Just as Newt is angling for Santorum to make a deal with Newt as part of a Santorum administration (either as VP or elsewhere), Ron Paul could make a deal with Romney to help move support to Romney and thereby push Romney over the edge in all the states where he's losing by small margins. In doing so, Ron Paul would secure the influence of libertarians in the GOP party for a long time to come because (even if Romney loses the general election) Ron Paul would be able to shape the American discussion, shape the GOP party platform, and shape the 3 branches of federal government because he'd have a distinguished seat at the Executive's table, the Senatorial table, the press table, and the roundtable where judicial nominations are considered (or if Romney loses the general, Ron Paul would still retain influence in the press and the GOP party platform as their most recent VP nominee, much like Palin has done). And, beyond that, Ron Paul would retain a perpetual chance to become President since he'd be only one Romney breath away from executive decision-making.
From my perspective, this last option is now Ron Paul's best option--not that it's my preferred option. But I believe this option is our best hope at seriously changing America in the near future because it keeps libertarian philosophy in the mainstream discussion. And, even when Ron Paul's libertarian ideas are rejected by the Romney administration (which of course many of them would be), their mere discussion would undoubtedly influence Romney's administration (simply through the natural workings of small group decision-making) so that authoritarian alternatives would be more accurately balanced rather than normalized in their extreme.
Considering all of the above, what do you all think Ron Paul should do next?
Connect With Us