I think that a lot of people may be over-analyzing the supposed strategic alliance between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. It’s pretty simple, I think:
- Ron Paul would like to have some influence over the GOP. Particularly since his son’s now a US Senator, and probably will be one for a while.
- Ron Paul cannot get a direct position of power, because when it comes to foreign policy he’s nuts. That means the best that he can hope for is influence.
- Ron Paul cannot hope for influence with Rick Santorum. Paul is rumored to be somewhat… well, I hear that he’s got libertarian leanings; and Santorum despises libertarians*.
- Ron Paul cannot hope for influence with Newt Gingrich. Gingrich will find it impossible to tolerate Paul’s commentary on foreign policy for any length of time.
- Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are actually friends, and Romney would very much like to have support from a portion of the GOP base that’s, well, enthusiastic.
- And there aren’t any more viable candidates at this point.
So. Seems obvious enough. Paul needs access; Romney needs energy. Deals may be made, under such circumstances.
Moe Lane
*To be fair, they’re happy to return the favor.
To tell you the truth, I am not too happy with Libertarians either. I thought myself libertarian until I dug down into what they believe in. Of late, I’ve become almost completely conservative.
_
I’m not happy with the idea that a moderate and a libertarian are making a deal to shape the future of the conservative party.
So the thing about Ron Paul is that 75% of what he stands for every single Republican should stand with him (and far too few actually do). Now the other 25% can kind of get out there, but I do understand the support he gets.
If the mainsteam national Republicans plausibly stood for and were actively trying to achieve the 75%, Paul would have zero standing whatsoever.
Romney can try to sway the Paul-bots or the Tea Party with his VP pick if he is looking to energize the base. For the latter he will need to tap Rubio (which will also help him with Florida). I’m not sure Rubio would agree, though. And I’m not sure that I would be that energized. Sigh.
Just say no to that, @jetty. If anyone right of Romney is the VP nominee they’ll be destroyed from within as fast as possible.
Libertarians? Arent’t those the guys who voted for Obama in ’08 because tehy thought he was better on civil rights and would legalize weed and gay marraige and stuff?
@DaveP, no, those are libertines. Despite the similarity, not the same. Just like social conservatives and values voters aren’t the same… the former understand about things like federalism and fiscal issues, the latter will vote for Satan himself if he promises to end abortion.
acat: You need to go tell Reason Magazine, and a lot of the Libertarian bloggers then. They don’t seem to know.
“Liberaltarian”… ha.
@DaveP, are you suggesting that magazine publishers or internet trolls must get things right? That sounds kinda like a utopian fantasy… (Cheshire grin)