Ron Paul

Reason Writers Around Town: Brian Doherty At Fox News' Site on Why the GOP Needs to Mind Ron Paul's Supporters


Reason Senior Editor Brian Doherty, author of the new book Ron Paul's Revolution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired, writes at Fox News' site on why the Republican Party can't afford to ignore the supporters of Ron Paul. An excerpt:  

Ron Paul's rEVOLution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired

Even though Paul's budget plan, with its three-year glide path to a balanced budget with no tax hikes, was found by U.S. Budget Watch, a non-partisan research group, to be the only budget plan offered by GOP candidates this year that would not balloon the national debt, the Republican Party is scared of him. Even though his supporters continue to win control of delegations (Maine, Minnesota, and Louisiana) or state party structures (in Iowa and Nevada), the Party doesn't want to embrace him.

Because if Ron Paul is right about the dangers of government overextension both at home and abroad, it means the GOP has to actually be serious about this limited government, living-within-our-means stuff that is supposed to be the very marrow of conservatism. 

If they have to swallow some sour apples about returning the U.S. military to its original goal of just actually defending the U.S. and make the government respect citizens' civil liberties, that should be a small price to pay to attract the loyalty, votes and money of a rising generation of activists. 

Reason's Ron Paul archives.

NEXT: Sheldon Richman on Keeping the U.S. Out of Syria

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. it means the GOP has to actually be serious about this limited government, living-within-our-means stuff

    If history teaches anything, it’s that giving up power is contrary to human nature.
    Especially the power to spend money that is not yours.

  2. All true, but it was still disappointing to see Ron Paul get only 10.2 percent of the vote in California yesterday, with just 147,900 votes. Even though it was more than double what he earned in 2008, it was an abysmal turnout in a state with over 37 million people. Assuming 20 million adults and 10 million registered voters, a candidate like Ron Paul polling at 10 percent could theoretically get one million votes in the primary, enough to challenge Romney (1,151,275 votes) for the win.

    1. Most potential supporters probably thought he dropped out and so didn’t bother showing up to the polls. No doubt the campaign didn’t help by spending no money there and sending out emails to their list (quickly picked up by the media) that basically admitted defeat.

      But even that is probably giving the voting public too much credit. I remember coming across more than a few who thought Ron Paul dropped out of the presidential race nearly a year ago when he announced his retirement from Congress. The vast majority of non-political junkies just don’t pay much attention at all, a fact that MSM is happy to exploit.

  3. just actually defending the U.S. and make the government respect citizens’ civil liberties

    Good lord man, you just shanked the neo- and so- con wings of the Republican Party. I think neither will look too kindly upon such.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.