Skip to main content

Have Ron Paul and Mitt Romney already made their "separate peace"?

This is the picture that Mitt Romney
positively has to have come out of
the Tampa GOP Convention.
The political world is abuzz right now with the question about what Congressman Ron Paul and his delegated (pledged and unpledged) are going to do at the Tampa GOP Convention this August.

NPR, for example, thinks it's all about handing the revolution over to Senator Rand Paul in 2016.

The Christian Science Monitor has a list of five things Ron Paul wants from the GOP Convention, including:
1.  To change the soul of the GOP
2.  An orderly show of force on the floor
3.  To irritate Ben Bernanke
4.  To prohibit indefinite detention
5.  To keep the internet wild and free
Other sites have similar takes on the issue, and I'm sure that there is a good bit of truth in all of them.

I'm also fascinated by what's missing:  any discussion of military interventions abroad.

It may just be that I am going to the wrong sites, but I sense a sudden toning down of the insistent rhetoric about military interventions abroad.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm sensing the outlines of a deal here.


Make no mistake about it, I don't think Dr. Paul would change his longheld views on foreign policy.  But in working within the GOP he knows he will have to build coalitions and make deals, and he knows he will have to be realistic about what he can get from Governor Romney without "breaking the bank," so to speak.

Romney can give Paul "the soul of the GOP."  If Romney gets elected, he is the leader of the party, and no matter what dreams the Campaign for Liberty might entertain, he's not going to worry about a primary challenge in four years.

Romney will give Paul his "show of force" on the convention floor.  It is, after all, Romney's best chance to capture at least the tepid support of Dr Paul's followers.

Romney will give Paul his opportunity to discredit and prod Ben Bernanke.  The Governor has already committed to letting Bernanke go if elected, and giving Paul room on economic issues (at least with lip service) is something he can afford.

Romney won't give Paul a prohibition on indefinite detention, but what he will promise is a full and thorough review of all terrorism and Patriot Act-related policies, and he will give the Paulites at least a strong minority voice in that review.  If you thought W got blamed for a lot, wait til you see how the first year of a Romney presidency treats The Big O.

Romney will give in on the internet issues--at least on the surface, and for now.  His corporate backers want concessions, but Romney will argue that they need to wait for a year or two until he is fully entrenched and not so dependent of the Paul movement to give it to them.

And at least one Paul supporter, I'd guess, will get into the cabinet, if not Dr. Paul himself.  He won't give him Treasury, but he might give him Commerce.

What will Romney get in return?  Paul will give Romney an indirect endorsement ("we support the party's nominee"), will not run as a third party candidate, and will not lift a finger for Libertarian Gary Johnson.  Most especially that:  Paul will keep his various Campaigns for Liberty at a distance from the Libertarians, because Johnson (with Paul support, even tacit support) would be able to fundraise and affect swing states--probably against Romney.

Romney will also get an armistice on foreign policy.  In the General Election it is one thing for a Ron Paul or a Gary Johnson to run as "peace" candidates.  Romney has to be able to make President Obama look soft on defense issues.

This is going to be tough against a President who has started four or five wars on his own, and raised the military budget to unprecedented heights, but Romney cannot win if he cannot make Obama look like he's bowing to Muslim potentates and secretly planning to hand over the keys to the Washington Cathedral (or the DC Mormon Temple) to mullahs from Iranistan.

So the deal will be that Romney gives Paul about as much as he could ask for on everything but defense and terrorism, and Paul agrees not to change his views but to shut up unless asked.

That's my prediction for the day.  How well that would play with Paul's supporters, and how many would then defect to Gary Johnson--that's a question for another day.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?