Earlier (4 years earlier, actually....) I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos
...if anything comes of the Paul phenomena, it will be a regeneration of ideas which have long been floating in the air out there, that are largely ignored in the mainstream political discourse today, and yet at various times in our history have been front and center.
|
Looking at some
exit poll data I notice that Paul polls extremely well amongst the 40-ish and younger set, whereas Mitt Dole McRomney is mostly carried along by the 40-ish+ crowd.
As the saying goes, the future belongs to those who show up.
I don't give Paul any more of shot this time around than last, and if anything I'm less interested in Paul now than before, but I remain quite happy to see him making an impact that may redound for decades.
---------------------------------
Strategy wise -- I think Paul is blowing it a bit by being too adamant about not running as a 3rd party.
The only 'appeal' (such as it is) of Mitt Dole McRomney seems to be that he is the most likely to beat Obama. If Paul were to run as a 3rd party, I think you could forget about any chance for a McRomney win in the general election.
Point being, Paul effectively has veto power over the one thing that makes McRomney attractive to conservatives. A Paul
threat to run as a 3rd party candidate is a very effective attack on McRomney's #1 selling point. This threat of a 3rd party candidacy is potentially negotiating leverage which could earn him some valuable concessions from the GOP Powers-That-Be, such as:
1) a speaker's slot in the convention;
2) a 1-on-1 debate with McRomney;
3) real input into the GOP platform;
4) etc....
But Paul is being super adamant that he won't run as a 3rd party, that it's completely safe for the party establishment to get behind Mitt Dole McRomney....
...mistake, imho.