How 'dangerous' is Ron Paul to the Republican platform?

Ron Paul finished a strong second in New Hampshire, which means his 'dangerous' ideas will likely shape the GOP platform. Ron Paul followers are younger and older independents.

(AP Photo/Bill Sikes)
Republican presidential candidate, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, speaks to supporters during an election night really in Manchester, N.H., Tuesday, Jan. 10, 2012.

Outside of his campaign, few people think he is a threat to win the Republican nomination for president.

And yet, Texas Congressman Ron Paul has pulled in a big chunk of the votes in both states where Republicans have voted on potential nominees.

On Tuesday, Paul finished second in the New Hampshire primary with nearly one-quarter of the vote, a week after finishing third in the Iowa caucuses.

For Paul, 76, it was the latest example of how his anti-establishment campaign has made him a player in the Republican nomination process - and even a potential force as a third-party candidate.

RECOMMENDED: Ron Paul roars: Five unorthodox economic proposals

Paul has been pilloried by rivals as being out of step with mainstream Republican views - a charge he doesn't seem to mind - but his appeal to a core group of young voters, retirees and others is becoming difficult to ignore.

At the very least, his continued success ensures he will continue to be a factor in the campaign as it heads south for primaries in South Carolina (Jan. 21) and Florida (Jan. 31).

During a fiery speech before supporters last night in Manchester, Paul hit on familiar themes.

He railed against the Federal Reserve's influence on the economy, basking in chants of, "End the Fed, end the Fed."

And Paul, who has spoken out vociferously against the military-industrial complex and the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, vowed to stop unnecessary wars.

Paul's detractors call him an isolationist with lax views toward defense and Iran's efforts to obtain a nuclear bomb.

"I sort of chuckle when they describe me and you as dangerous," Paultold cheering supporters late Tuesday. "That's one thing where they are telling the truth, because we are dangerous to the status quo.

"We have had a victory for the cause of liberty tonight," Paul added.


Many observers say Paul's appeal is limited outside of states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, where his libertarian appeal is particularly strong.

But on some economic and budget issues, Paul's persistence could drag the Republican Party platform closer to his views. Some of his supporters are pushing Paul to consider running as a third-party candidate, but he has not embraced that idea.

"I don't care that he can't win," Claire Pengelly, 23, a student who voted in Manchester on Tuesday. "It's important that the message gets out."

A key to Paul's strength is his ability to capture supporters among independents or those who don't traditionally consider themselves Republicans.

That has raised questions about whether Paul supporters would vote for another Republican candidate if he were not in the race. At his rally on Tuesday, many of his supporters seemed to confirm that.

"I'm ecstatic" over Paul's finish in New Hampshire, said student Judith Ayers, 20. "He's going to keep getting bigger."

Ayers said that, within the Republican Party, "there is a huge shift between the older people ... and the younger generation. The older people are on the way out and the younger people are bringing the cause of liberty back to the party."

New Hampshire is known for producing conservative voters who don't like to walk lockstep with the national Republican Party.

Harvey Lewis, 64, a vegetable farmer from Concord, New Hampshire, voted for Democratic President Barack Obama in 2008 but voted for Paul on Tuesday.

"I don't think he's as corrupt a politician as the rest of them," Lewis said.

"The biggest issue is getting rid of incumbents."

"The deficit problem is something Congress brought on us," Lewis said. "The House and Senate aren't working for the country, they're working for themselves. Can you vote yourself a pay raise? They're a bunch of crooks." (Reporting By Samuel P. Jacobs in Washington and Jason McLure and Mary Milliken in Manchester; Editing by David Lindsey and Todd Eastham)

RECOMMENDED: Five unorthodox Ron Paul economic proposals

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to