Wednesday, February 8, 2012

How the Santorum Victories is a Plus for Ron Paul

Overall, it wasn't a pretty primary night for Ron Paul, in terms of direct votes. It appears Dr. Paul will come in at second place in Minnesota, but only third in Colorado and Missouri.

The good news is that Rick Santorum beat out Mitt Romney in all three states, not that anyone in their right mind would want Santorum as president. However, what the Santorum victories do is make it more likely that no Republican will end up with enough delegate votes to lock-up the nomination before the Republican convention in late August in Tampa Bay.

Thus, those delegates that Dr. Paul is quietly collecting will become very valuable. It's very doubtful, but I'm sure there is a scenario where Dr. Paul is able to edge his way into the nomination with the delegates he has, given no victor going into the convention.

But more likely, Dr. Paul's delegates will be very important in choosing the Republican nominee. Romney, and the others, will want those delegates desperately. This is why it is more important than ever to keep up the effort to get the Ron Paul votes out. Every additional delegate that Dr. Paul walks into the convention with will make him that much stronger in terms of negotiating power.

The key question than becomes, what does Dr. Paul demand for his delegates? Two or three of cabinet positions for him and his people? A Ron Paul person at the Treasury would be awesome, same at State, Defense and Homeland Security. A Ron Paul person heading the non-cabinet position at the Office of Management and Budget would also be awesome. Other interesting positions for Ron Paul people would be as Ambassador to the United Nations or Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors.

Let's hope Romney, Santorum and Gingrich continue to split votes, so that Ron Paul will be able to flex some serious muscle at the convention. It could very well be the first serious step toward liberty in the United States in decades.

 “Give me a place to stand and a lever long enough and I will move the world” -Archimedes, 220 BC


27 comments:

  1. "However, what the Santorum victories do is make it more likely that no Republican will end up with enough delegate votes to lock-up the nomination before the Republican convention in late August in Tampa Bay."

    I believe that is exactly the purpose of the Gingrich and Santorum candidacies. They are in the race to keep Ron Paul from directly challenging Romney for the nomination.

    My prediction is that the Republicans will go into convention with no clear winner (but Romney in the lead with delegates,) back room deals will be made - just like the good old days - and Gingrich and Santorum will each through their support to Romney, for the good of the Party, of course. Even if Dr. Paul ends up ahead in delegates, but without a majority, my hunch is that Goldman Sachs's Romney will get the nomination.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This has been my belief as well. Still there have been miscounts and dead voters so perhaps there never was any reason to hope.

      Delete
  2. I was at a caucus here in Colorado last night. In my precinct Romney got zero votes, Ron Paul 30%, while other precincts had zero Ron Paul votes. It became clear immediately that Santorum would do very well. The crowd was mostly older and I knew several older folks from Church, they responded to the Focus on the Family call for Santorum which was disappointing to me. My feeling is that many of these Santorum voters would have stayed home had conservative Christian political groups not gotten the word out at the last minute. The closed caucuses helped him here and hurt Ron Paul. I know many other young Ron Paul supporters, they are not republican voters. I did make sure our new precinct captain and delegate though was a Ron Paul voter.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mr. Wenzel, You and other Freedom-Loving people need to seriously look at getting Ron Paul to be the "AmericansElect" nominee (see AmericansElect.org) on the Presidential ballot. Currently, Ron Paul has the HIGHEST # of votes (for this 3rd candidate/party slot). Please invest a few minutes and familiarize yourself with the AmericansElect.org process, in order that we get Ron Paul on the General Election ticket.

    Ron Paul will be marginalized by the GOP establishment regardless of how many true R's he has coming to the GOP Convention. The GOP/Internationalist Establishment will see that RP gets buried and forgotten even as he gets a larger and larger following.

    This is exciting and positive news for us Conservo-Libertarians (I think I just coined that phrase).

    ReplyDelete
  4. I doubt very much that Ron Paul would want a cabinet position for himself. Moreover, cabinet secretaries can be fired. The Fed Chairman serves a fixed term. Jim Grant for Fed Chairman would have to be the key appointment. That would be a VERY big concession for any candidate to make, however, because presidents count on the Fed Chairman to juice up the economy in time for them to seek re-election as Bernanke is doing for Obama right now.

    A full audit of the Fed would be another key demand, but most candidates seem to be on board with that one. It's a vote-getting issue. Making private gold and silver coins legal tender along with federal reserve notes would be another important condition. And real spending cuts and a balanced budget within one term would be another. Those promises cannot be enforced once the president is in office, but having them as part of the platform would still be important.

    But that's not necessarily all that important. If you have effective restraints on borrowing and on money creation, that will limit the president's foreign policy options far more effectively than any replaceable adviser.

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Rob

    While I agree Jim Grant would be excellent the fact remains that Congress must approve the appointment of the Fed Chairman. So, whomever the nominee is (if not Paul), they cannot "concede" this position. Or any position really. Are not most cabinet positions approved by Congress as well?


    This is why I don't like the idea of negotiating for his delegates. There is no guarantee that the nominee will keep his word. Also, there are things that the nominee could not control (Congress).

    Simply giving them away for something to be "part of the platform" means nothing because most politicians will say anything to get elected. We know this already. So, if Auditing the Fed becomes part of the platform it doesn't guarantee that an audit would take place or that whoever is in power will actually make it an issue if/when they become President.

    I can't imagine Mitt Romney in a debate against Obama saying "We need a full Audit of the Fed". That wall street cash would go right to Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I know you mean well, Robert, but I have to admit seeing something like this coming from you is disappointing.

    Effective agreements not only have to be win-win, but they have to be enforceable. There is no way a Ron Paul trade for "cabinet positions" would ever make it to an administration, and even if they did, they'd be gone with the first unpopular decision they made. If they didn't make unpopular decisions, they'd be worthless. The most likely trade that could take place is Rand Paul for VP, but that would be a disaster as it would be a total dominating win for the establishment. Not only would it put a Ron-Paul-lite in a mostly meaningless position, but it would remove him from the Senate. The establishment have to be creaming themselves over that possibility.

    Unless we can get Ron Paul into the White House, it's difficult to see how delegates do much.

    The cynic in me says the U.S. is doomed; time to get out.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Psychologically, it would be nice to see Ron win one. If anything, just so we can see that political victory, at least in theory, is possible.

    Santorum's success is very disheartening.

    I agree with the more cynical forecasts: Newt and Santorum will hand over their delegates to Romney, likely in exchange for a cabinet position of some kind. The VP will be someone we haven't seen: likely either a woman, a Hispanic, a Southerner, or a more traditional Christian— likely a combination of 3 out of 4 is preferred.

    Ron will be ignored and his ideas buried. No Fed audit will occur in a Romney administration, and we will have 4 more years of economic anger and pressure building.

    If Romney wins the presidency, it will solely be because he's not Obama. The GOP will keep the same policies and double speak in place.

    Ultimately, while Ron may not win office, his ideas will win. Events are controlling the presidency, not the other way around.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I was at the Minnesota caucus last night. Shockingly Rick Santorum actually did edge out Ron Paul in my precinct by one vote (counted them myself). But *at least* 7 of the 8 of the delegates from my precicnt are Paul supporters. I think he'll do better than expected at the end of March when it's time for Minnesota to actually parcel its support for the nominees. Hopefully other caucus states are similar.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with those who state that bargaining with delegates is meaningless.

    The only meaningful pursuit is to continuing campaigning for the nomination to build support for the message/policies until May/June, then run 3rd party under American'sElect and/or the LP. Get in the Debates, and continue to build support for liberty.

    I don't buy into the theory that this would hurt Rand's chances in 2016 or 2020. I think it would only help Rand and, more importantly, the liberty movement in the long run.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Robert,

    I agree with previous commenter: think that the GOP depriving Ron of his 2nd or First place finish in NV and round-robining these other two guys for victories that keep them in the campaign as long as possible is the party strategy to counter Paul's stated aim of victory or major platform concessions.

    Honestly, think the best hope going into the convention is that reported personal friendship between Mitt and Ron Paul will make Romney at least sympathetic to the Paul agenda. And certainly, he must come to realize, less he be trounced like McCain, that he will need the Paul wing of independents & republicans in order to unseat Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Remember what Mises said he would do if appointed dictator: resign. I don't like the idea of libertarians being appointed to non-libertarian jobs so they can be corrupted and co-opted by the establishment. If Ron Paul doesn't win the presidency, there is NO political victory. Don't be stupidly naive, people. Romney is not going to adopt Paulian policies, regardless of what he might promise. That would defeat the whole purpose (to the banksters) of having Romney in office. It's time to hunker down or expatriate.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What's going to happen is, no one will win on the first vote, which will release the delegates, and the good Dr. wins on the second or third vote. This is why Dr. Paul has his people getting elected to delegate positions, pledged delegates are only obligated to their candidate for the first vote.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's disappointing to read people talk about concessions already; the race has really just begun! Ron Paul CAN win - if not a brokered convention at the horrid Repugs then as a third party candidate.

    Ron's support among progressive Greens and Dems is growing and many of his supporters will split with the party and vote third party for him. He'd actually pull a lot of votes away from Obama - with people sick of the rhetoric and the killing and the out of control spending.

    NDAA, SOPA and PIPA as well as ACTA, stopping the military invasions - all of these things appeal to R libertarians and progressives - I see tech companies like Amazon, Apple and Google giving Paul lots of support aka money.

    He can win it, but it will be a stealthy plan - first to campaign vigorously and get his name out there and well known - then to slide through as a third party candidate that Greens, Libertarians and Independents can all get behind. He can pull off a Clinton win.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Every additional delegate that Dr. Paul walks into the convention with will make him that much stronger in terms of negotiating power."

    So that means Paul will be in a position to negotiate with one of the three psychopathic liars? They can promise the sun and moon... what good will it be?

    ReplyDelete
  15. @Anon 8:32 - "The cynic in me says the U.S. is doomed; time to get out."

    Where to? I'm looking but every country seems to be either already a statist ghetto or working overtime to become one. You can add freedom lover to the endangered species list.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the problem. I also have to talk my wife into wherever I'd decide to go. She's Taiwanese, so I've been pitching Singapore. It's at least better than the U.S. is currently (except for gun ownership). She's not hot on the idea, but I feel like the U.S. is 1935 Germany. When you have Romney, during a debate, say that Obama won't abuse the NDAA and he wouldn't abuse it, you know you're near the endgame.

      I'm also interested in the sea-platform venture seeded by Peter Thiel. If they create a reasonable environment with an accessible airport, that might be a pretty cool place to live. I know the idea gets dissed by lots of libertarians, but at least it's an idea in the right direction.

      Delete
  16. Robert, I'm with @Anon. The Republicans and Democrats are two wings of the same bird. RP is not really part of this party. He's using it to get his message out there, but he's not part of the family and he never will be. Concessions? Cabinet positions? Whatever. Even if he were to gain the White House, he'd be assassinated (he's old, it'd be a heart attack). I fear we're too far down the road.

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time..."

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Not only would it put a Ron-Paul-lite in a mostly meaningless position, but it would remove him from the Senate. The establishment have to be creaming themselves over that possibility"

    ^That is a really great point

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ron Paul not getting the Republican nomination is the same as Ron Paul running third party. There is no way that many Paul supporters will vote for Romney or Santorum, and the Paul supporters will likely write in Ron Paul as a protest.

    I agree, it looks like a brokered convention is a real possibility. Yes, the Romney and Santorum camps will be in the driver's seats. I agree with Anon. 8:32 a.m. that Rand Paul or promises of audits and cabinet positions mean nothing; V.P. is nothing but a 'warm bucket of spit,' and Republican promises and plank statements mean absolutely nothing.

    I think Ron Paul supporters will refuse to vote for any Romney or Santorum headed ticket, even with Rand Paul in a V.P. slot. So, the Republicans in Tampa will have to decide whether they run Romney or Santorum, to a sure loss to Obama, given that Romney and Santorum have little appeal to independents and no appeal to Democrats. Or, miracle of miracles, they decide to nominate Paul, who has great appeal to independents and real appeal to disappointed, idealist Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
  19. You know what would be a plus for Ron Paul? If he would win a few of these silly things. A bunch of thirds and a few seconds is not going to overcome the firsts split by the other two (should Gingrich survive past Super Tuesday)

    ReplyDelete
  20. For what it's worth, I have written the national and Texas Republican Parties and told them in no uncertain terms that I would not vote for Mitt Romney even if Obama took off the sheep's clothing and declared himself an official Communist. (And in fact I mean it -- I'm done smearing the name of capitalism and the USA with these villains.) If enough folks said, "THIS time we won't go along with the latest Bush/Bush/McCain/Romney, THIS time you've gone too far," ... what? Would it have any beneficial impact? Is there a way to turn the delegates into something bigger?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm quite surprised no one has brought up the fact that NO DELEGATES WHERE DETERMINED IN ANY OF THOSE RACES.

    Colorado - zero national convention delegates are allocated during the Precinct Caucuses - national convention delegates are first elected in March.

    Minnesota - zero national convention delegates are allocated during the Precinct Caucuses - national convention delegates are first elected in April.

    Missouri - non-binding Primary. Today's primary has no effect on delegate allocation.

    So Bob, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

    ReplyDelete
  22. In answer to your question about what to do with delegate leverage:

    You get one our people in as:

    Treasurer and/or Secretary of the Treasury and have them promptly refuse to sign notes.

    Even better, make Ron Paul(or one of our "own") head of the Federal Reserve with the delegate leverage...refusing to nominate anyone else until he's confirmed.

    We can unwind the most harm done by gov't by forcing shrinkage upon gov't by hard currency. They'll instantly have to choose between welfare rolls and empire just as a start...

    In one fell swoop you could prune back the beast and unwind large numbers of atrocities by default when the beast has no ability to enforce its will with printed up dollars upon us and the world.

    ReplyDelete
  23. To all the doom sayers: you may not realize it yet, but Ron Paul already won (if you don't define victory as getting the post of the figurehead-in-chief). He managed to create a very steadfast (can't unlearn the truth, can you?) and vocal segment of population which accepted libertarian positions and got organized. And, most importantly, this segment of population is already bigger than the threshold (about 10%) required for the radical change of prevailing opinion in the culture. Now it is only a matter of time for the US to crumble and become history.

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-07/rpi-mrs072511.php

    (Not that we should stop spreading the libertarian ideas... but the time for pessimism about the future is past).

    ReplyDelete