So, after church and lunch, my Dad and I decided to head over to a local gun show. It was your typical set-up: guns, knives, weapon paraphernalia, and outdoors paraphernalia. Oh, and there was a Ron Paul 2012 booth as well, which was our intended place to meet some friends from the local meetups. So, we spent the afternoon greeting the local gun owners, talking to them about Ron Paul and what he stands for.
There was one man who stood out, however.
He already knew who Dr. Paul was, and he liked what he had to say. However, as is the case with most, he had his reservations about the Congressman's foreign policy. The typical misinterpretations of the Good Doctor's foreign and military policies.
Now, onto the point of my entry.
Even though I've heard this line like a gazillion times, it seemed blogworthy and memorable for some reason. The man said: "He just can't win."
Okay, fine. He's not polling as high as Governor Romney or Former Speaker Gingrich nationally. However, Congressman Paul
is polling as a front-runner according to mainstream polls in Iowa. And the Iowa caucuses are only a month and a half away. A victory for Paul in Iowa historically changes GOP politics.
To those who are worried about Gingrich (and I'll admit, I worry at times, too): As the weeks go by, Newt has to work
hard to keep his front-runner status as the skeletons in his closet come unveiled. And if the former Speaker loses his front-runner status, as Bachmann, Perry, and Cain have, the only "non-Romney" left is...RON PAUL! People will realize that he
is the right man for the job, and with the way things are going economically, internationally, militarily, and morally, he will be
the choice.
But such is beside the point. I addressed him by saying "If every single person said what you said, which probably amounts to at least a few million, Dr. Paul could, no
would win!" It's the defeatism and lesser-of-two-evils attitude, in combination with the two-party duopoly, that contributes to the degredation of our great country. We don't have any
real choices. We have to "hold our noses" and vote for the big spender, or the warmongering neo-con, or the progressive in conservative's clothing, or whatever.
If you agree with their viewpoints, fine. I'm just saying that according to my views, we can do better. Look at 2008. We had
John McCain. JOHN MCCAIN. The GOP nominee that made Bob Dole...No wait...
Walter Mondale look like a formidable nominee. Do we
really want to make the same mistakes of 2008? Just
settle? Why can't we have someone that will get us excited about voting for him, a man that will draw not only conservatives and libertarians, but also moderates, independents, undecideds, youth, ethnic minorities, intellectuals, and even a handful of progressives...basically everyone? Barack Obama won handily in 2008 amongst the 18-25 crowd. Ron Paul, who is more often on the side of GLBT equality than not, who supports ending the War on Drugs, who supports ending the wars and our pseudo-empire, who realizes that these young people (and I'm one of them) are on the verge of having absolutely
zero future because of the policies of the previous and the current administrations, would take a
significant chunk of the youth vote away from the current Commaner-in-Chief.
I'd love to be watching the TV on November 6, 2012 and seeing the headline: "CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL DEFEATS PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA IN HISTORIC LANDSLIDE."
So, I say: YES, RON PAUL
CAN WIN!!!! But it's going to require relinquishing a defeatist attitude first.
But, hey, at least he gave a $20 donation to the local Ron Paul organization! And we did get a few other people interested in the campaign and the message, also.
So, all in all, a very good day!
