Ron Paul endorses Constitution Party Candidate

In a move which is sure to alienate some of his more Libertarian supporters - but which is surely in line with his maverick nature - Ron Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin, presidential candidate of the Constitution Party. This can't come as a great shock to John McCain who has been trying to get the endorsement of the congressman who gained notoriety as the only GOP candidate in the primary who opposed the War in Iraq. Personally, I think the endorsement has more to do with a desire to "shake things up" and keep people guessing than with any true sense of alliance between the "Ron Paul Revolution" and the Consitution Party.

It will be interesting to see if this has any impact in the Fall. The Constitution Party was already the fastest-growing third party (much to the annoyance of the Libertarian Party, which has held the distinction of being the largest third party for a long time). But to date, it has shown little impact on the national stage.

Ron Paul drops out?

One wonders how this news squares with the announcement of a counter-convention to be staged by Ron Paul supporters, but apparently Dr. Paul has elected to drop out of the race officially. The move frees up campaign money to be funneled into a fund to elect Libertarian Republicans in local elections nationwide. Apparently, it will also be used to launch Ron Paul's new book "The Revolution: A Manifesto".

Personally, I can't help wondering if McCain called up Dr. Paul and had a frank talk about the problems with a counter-convention. It never made sense, other than to stoke Paul's ego. This way, John McCain can say some nice words about Paul at the convention, and maybe even let the guy give a speech outside of Prime Time. This move certainly is more in line with Paul's intention to be the Barry Goldwater of a new Conservative/Libertaian movement.

Ron Paul: "I'll throw my own convention... with blackjack... and delegates..."

Several election cycles back, I was quite enamored of Steve Forbes as a Presidential Candidate. Forbes ran to give visibility to the Flat Tax - an idea whose time has come in my opinion - and ran a tough campaign, picking up two states and a significant percentage of votes. But when Bob Dole was chosen as the nominee, he had the good grace to step back and realize that his time on the stage was done. His ideas continued to be talked about - even in the general election - but he himself knew when to bow out.

Not so Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has decided it is not enough to be given respect by the candidate - despite not having won a single state in the primary - but that he is important enough to warrant his own Convention, which will be held in the same city at the same time as the Republican Convention. He claims to not want to hurt the party, but is eager to keep his face on the evening news.

I respect Dr. Paul's tenacity, but question his methods. If the Republican Party is so antithetical to his ideals, why remain part of it? And if it is truly a party he wishes to remain a part of, why all this grandstanding? Parties exist to form power coalitions. If you're unwilling to join any coalition, do you really want to call yourself part of it?

Has Ron Paul dropped out?

Ron Paul's "revolution" has been money-rich, but delegate-poor in this election cycle. Dr. Paul has cast himself as the "true conservative" of the G.O.P, and has suffered for standing against many of the ideas that the so-called "neoconservatives". He had pledged to fight to the very end, but recently sent a letter to his supporters that appears to indicate he is ending his presidential bid in order to defend his Congressional seat.

But with so many primaries and caucuses now over, we do not now need so big a national campaign staff, and so I am making it leaner and tighter. Of course, I am committed to fighting for our ideas within the Republican party, so there will be no third party run. I do not denigrate third parties — just the opposite, and I have long worked to remove the ballot-access restrictions on them. But I am a Republican, and I will remain a Republican.

I also have another priority. I have constituents in my home district that I must serve. I cannot and will not let them down. And I have another battle I must face here as well. If I were to lose the primary for my congressional seat, all our opponents would react with glee, and pretend it was a rejection of our ideas. I cannot and will not let that happen.

Of course, with Dr. Paul winning only 14 delegates nationally, one must wonder if that itself was not a rejection of his ideas on some level. Or at least a rejection of his personality. Then again, it was nice having someone on the platform forcing the other candidates to defend the Iraq War. It sharpened and clarified their differences. And that was a useful thing to everyone.

Why I Should Vote For McCain

For about a month and a half now, I have been considering voting for McCain. Saying that sounds so completely foreign to me, that I have spent this time trying to both find reasons not to vote for McCain and reasons to vote for one of the other candidates. CRChair has both asked why he should vote for Huckabee and stated why he won't be voting for McCain. Here is my logic for why I should vote for McCain.

First, let's start with the field of candidates:

Rudy Giuliani - His decidedly pro-abortion stance and liberal views has knocked him out as a candidate in my mind.

Mitt Romney - I just don't trust him. He reminds me too much of Kerry. He'd probably do a great job if he would pick a side and stick to his guns, but I can't vote for him without knowing who he is.

Ron Paul - He has many online supporters and I'll probably be blasted for this, but he's crazy. When I hear his ideas, I think, "That would have been great information to have when we were making the wrong decision." Getting us back to the gold standard just won't work without a complete upheaval and revaluing of things. Personally, I don't want my house value to drop just so we can get back on a gold standard.

Alan Keyes - With less visibility than Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo, Keyes may be the only person who seriously thinks he's running... and even he may not think that. Besides, he's already lost to Obama once. Going up against Clinton would be even worse.

Fred Thompson - I like Fred Thompson. He's one of my top three picks. Unfortunately, he's rumored to be leaving the race. Even if he doesn't, he's not running like he wants to be president. Clinton would chew him up in the general election. I'd like to see him make a strong run or even be the VP on the ticket, but I don't see it as a winning ticket.

Mike Huckabee - He's a second of my top three picks. He's got support, especially among religious conservatives. Unfortunately, while he's socially conservative, he's fiscally liberal. Huckabee would be like having four or eight more years of GWB, but with less foreign policy experience than GWB currently has. I feel like I voted for the social conservative and got duped the first time GWB ran, so I'm hesitant to vote for the same thing again. I do like the idea of not having an income tax, but a national sales tax promotes saving, not spending. I don't know if our economy could handle less spending.

John McCain - That leaves John McCain. I hate to vote for someone because they're the last one left. After all, he could just be the last one I looked at and be worse than the other candidates.

First, I'll answer Matt's points.

Age: Yes, McCain is the oldest candidate, but then, so was Reagan when he ran. People are living longer and McCain will be younger than when Reagan left office. That being said, age isn't really that important. Health is. If McCain is healthy enough to be president for one term, then age shouldn't be a factor. After all, President Harrison died of pneumonia shortly after taking office. None of us are guaranteed life, that is why we have measures set up to take over the office if the president should fall sick or die.

Immigration: Yes, McCain has been soft on immigration, but he also realizes that we need to fix the problem of illegal immigration by securing our borders before we start kicking people out. Otherwise, we'll just have to kick them out again and again.

Fiscal Responsibility: This is actually one of the reasons I am voting for McCain. He is against pork spending and realizes that we need to be good stewards of our money. Yes, he did vote against the tax cuts, but that was because we needed to cut spending. Cutting spending means that someone is upset about not getting as much federal money. Tax cuts resonate well with constituents. McCain wanted to make sure that spending was cut rather than furthering the national debt and knew that without a tax cut, spending wouldn't be cut.

Pro-Life: Yet another reason that I am voting for McCain. The National Right To Life PAC has up a PDF with the candidates views here, but the do not appear to fully quote McCain. While McCain is OK with stem cell research on existing lines and in cases of in-vitro fertilization, he is not OK with creating new stem-cell lines. Would I like him to be against all stem cell research? Yes. Personally, I haven't seen evidence of neonatal stem cell research taking off. The advances seem to be in adult stem cell research. That being said, McCain does make the point "I would remind you that these stem cells are either going to be discarded or perpetually frozen. We need to do what we can to relieve human suffering. It's a tough issue. I support federal funding." I have an easier time agreeing with babies that will be discarded. I, admittedly, have a hard time agreeing with purposefully destroying babies that are in a frozen state. I'd much rather see them used for couples that desperately want to have a baby, can't, but would be willing to carry another's baby from their in-vitro attempt. You can see McCain's voting record and his National Right To Life report card.

McCain-Feingold: I agree with McCain that political votes should not be bought. Having contribution limits is one way to do this. The other part of the bill, the part that limits free speech is the bigger issue in my mind. This part should be overturned by the courts.

The McCain Surprise: McCain is a maverick, but he's a maverick that sticks to his guns. If we realize what it is we're voting for, I don't think there will be too many surprises. He also has a lifetime conservative rating of 83% from The American Conservative Union. In comparison, Fred Thompson has an 86% rating.

Is McCain a perfect candidate? Absolutely not. As I stated above, McCain-Feingold, while good intentioned, should not have passed as it restricts free speech. I'd like to see McCain not only be anti-abortion, but also be anti-stem cell research. I don't agree with him on his views on the environment.

I do think that he will vote conservatively when it comes to abortion and I do think he will help rein in the federal budget, which will in turn help cut taxes and bring about a turn in the economy. I also think he can win. He won conservative South Carolina. Rasmussen Reports gives him an over 50% chance of becoming the Republican nominee. At the end of December, they had him beating Clinton 49% to 43% (Google cache).

What worries me about McCain? First and foremost, in the past McCain has not been known as being the friend of the conservative. Why am I leaning towards McCain? What am I missing? Second, I fear that he will choose Joseph Lieberman as his running mate. Lieberman is more liberal than McCain which would trouble me. Hopefully McCain will choose a more conservative running mate who has the heart of the evangelical voters... perhaps a McCain-Huckabee ticket? This would bring in the evangelical voters while giving Huckabee the foreign policy experience he would need to make a run for president following McCain.

Will I vote for McCain? As far as I can tell, I think I should. He appears to fit my views more than the other candidates and he has a chance to win. That being said, why should I vote for your candidate instead?

OK, I'll give Ron Paul a mention

I think he showed himself to be on the fringe at the debates, and showed himself to be the next candidate that will self-destruct in the Howard Dean mold. But also in the Howard Dean mold, you have to admit his campaign is creative. Consider these two interesting ways to get his point across:

• The Liberty Dollar: a fake currency backed by copper, silver, and gold
• An iPhone Ron Paul Website: A website specifically added to be viewed on portable devices.

Here is hoping a few of the more mainsteam campaigns catch onto these innovative ideas.