ron%20paul.jpgI have received many emails from Ron Paul supporters, including this one from John in response to my column today:

I appreciate your contemplative remarks on this subject (presidential politics), and measured reaction (analytical vs. emotional).
I thought I’d share a brief observation of my own, if you have the time to consider it….
The Iowa straw polling data you refer to that put Huckabee at #2 was taken of the same field of respondents at the same time that 51% indicated they would like to see our troops withdrawn from Iraq within six months. Six months! Add to this the fact that the general public would like to see a general draw down (to the tune of 71% of respondents), and we’re talking about a significant contingent of the voting public that holds views quite divergent from the views espoused by all the RP candidates, save one….

It is my humble opinion that there is absolutely no chance for any pro-life candidate to beat Mrs. Clinton, other than possibly Ron Paul. As a pro-lifer myself, he is my “pragmatic” choice, and is receiving all of my support at this time. I wish others in the pro-life movement would consider the practical consequences on the movement itself by insisting on “stay-the-course” foreign policy endeavors against the will of the people. (Like … how do they think Nixon got elected?)

I have previously heard the sensical theory advanced that Paul could beat Hillary by garnering the conservative as well as anti-war vote.
Add to that the all important cash Paul has on hand, and his odds of winning, according to Newsmeat.com, are certainly First Tier, even better than Romney’s (click to enlarge):

But, as I asked John, why hasn’t Paul gotten any traction?
[Photo credit: Washington Post]

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...