If you look at the history of Republican, or for a better term, traditionalist philosophy, it is Ron Paul who makes the perfect fit. The Texas congressman is committed to the Constitution, would remove America from the mess in Iraq, return fiscal order to Washington and balance social issues as to respect individual liberty.
But Dr. Paul cannot win, so the argument goes. To support such a contention, politicos have pointed to campaigns of Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan and Alan Keyes. The dynamic of the 2008 election, however, is different from 1988, 1996 and 2000, for there is no clear front-runner leading the GOP pack.
In 1988, George H.W. Bush was candidate of choice for the ivory tower. That meant he received the money, endorsements and the full support of the RNC. The same was true of Bob Dole in 1996 and George W. Bush in 2000. This time around, the establishment has been unable to crown its nominee.
Then you add the money factor. Unlike his dark-horse counterparts, Dr. Paul has raised over $9 million this quarter with more on the way. He displaced Mr. Romney as the candidate who raised the most money in a single day, and his supporters are organizing yet another fundraising blitz. Finally, Dr. Paul has the message. The electorate is as volatile as it has been in years. Frustrated by illegal immigration, tired of fighting a war it did not want and disgusted with the establishments of both parties, Dr. Paul's day has come.
The revolution is real, and those in the ivory tower had better start digging a bigger moat.
~ Joe Murray, "How Real Is Ron Paul's Revolution?," The Bulletin, November 30, 2007