Why Ron Paul is still in the presidential race

Recent delegate counts show that Ron Paul is picking up a part of the anti-Romney protest vote, and he remains popular among young voters, but it's unclear if that will amount to anything. 

Lara Solt/The Dallas Morning News/AP
Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R) of Texas gives a thumbs up to his supporters while leaving the stage at a town hall meeting at Will Rogers Memorial Center in Fort Worth, Texas, Wednesday.

There are a number of compelling reasons why Ron Paul might want to drop his presidential campaign.

First off, Mitt Romney has pretty much won the GOP nomination. That means the single-digit chance Congressman Paul had of sitting in the White House has now fallen to a number perilously close to zero.

Second, the trail is long, and the days are hard. Food is bad and sleep is limited. It can be tough to find the time to get in a good walk in the morning and an afternoon bike ride, as Paul likes to do.

“When I don’t get my adequate amount of exercise I get very grouchy,” admitted Paul last week during an interview with John Stossel on Fox Business News.

But Paul remains in it, if not to win it, then to promote his ideas. He’s long said that he wants to build a political movement as much as anything else, and if you look at his upcoming events, they remain heavy on appearances at colleges, which remain his most fertile ground for winning converts.

On April 18 Paul is scheduled to speak at the University of Rhode Island, for instance. On April 19 he’s supposed to be at Cornell. On April 20 the venue is the University of Pittsburgh.

This emphasis on youth points out one of Paul’s remaining electoral strengths – he’s relatively strong in the 18-to-34 demographic, while presumptive nominee Mr. Romney is relatively weak. A Gallup poll from April 12 shows them about tied in that sub-group, though Romney leads comfortably among GOP voters overall.

This could give Paul some leverage in regard to speaking spots and platform planks leading into the GOP National Convention in Tampa.

“Romney has a significant problem among younger Republican voters ... Romney’s challenge is to capture some of the enthusiasm young Republican voters have for Paul in an attempt to blunt Obama’s strength among this group,” wrote Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport last week.

Paul’s leverage may be enhanced by the fact that he appears to be picking up some former supporters of Rick Santorum, who are turning to him as the means for an anti-Romney protest vote.

For instance, at Colorado’s state GOP convention last weekend, Paul and Santorum supporters joined in a “Conservative Unity Slate” to win national convention delegate spots that the Romney forces had thought would fall to them.

The Paul/Santorum forces won 13 of the Colorado delegates chosen by congressional district. The Romney forces rallied to take at least eight at-large delegates, according to the Denver Post.

Paul’s continuing strategy of focusing on delegates as opposed to straw-poll beauty contests also paid off last week in Minnesota. Of delegates and alternates chosen last week by the Minnesota GOP in congressional district meetings, the Paul forces were “18 for 18: 9 dels/9 alts,” tweeted Pat Anderson, a national committeewoman from Minnesota for the Republican National Committee.

Paul’s campaign crowed about these successes last Saturday, issuing a release saying that the Texas libertarian “achieved consequential delegate wins in Colorado and Minnesota today, affirming his delegate-attainment strategy and auguring a prominent role for Paul at the Republican National Convention in Tampa.”

The fact is, however, that “consequential delegate wins” is in the eye of the beholder. According to the Associated Press delegate tracker, Paul has won 52 delegates. Santorum, in contrast, had 270 when he dropped out. Romney has 684 and counting.

Going forward, Paul is thus facing the somewhat difficult task of continuing a campaign devoted to spreading his ideas without appearing as if he is out-of-touch with electoral reality.

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 CSMonitor.com.