Watching the Republican candidates for the 2008 party presidential nomination talk gets kind of repetitive after a while. Most of them support the War in Iraq, want to continue President Bush’s neoconservative policies and liken themselves to Ronald Reagan. “I’m a true Reagan conservative.” “No! I’m a true Reagan conservative.” Many of the candidates of today’s Republican Party like to characterize their leadership and platform with the Reagan Era-the supposed Golden Age for Republicans. Ron Paul is different. Ron Paul supported Reagan before it was the cool thing for a Republican to do-as a delegate to the 1976 national convention when Reagan challenged incumbent president Gerald Ford. Ron Paul also does not refrain from criticizing Reagan in the places he went wrong-huge deficit spending and intervention in South America.
The infamous modern welfare state manifested itself during the 1930s under FDR. The welfare state, which is a precursor to socialism, called for ever higher tax burdens on the American worker and increased government intervention in people’s lives. The supposed “conservatives” in much of the 20th century made peace with the welfare state. Coming to what would be known as the “Reagan Revolution” in the 1980s, President Reagan halted the growth of the welfare state. With a little charisma and much-needed common sense, he said “government is not the solution, government is the problem.”
A “revolution,” by definition, must bring something new to the table. This is not present in other Republican candidates-they are the same old business-as-usual. While they claim the general platform of the Reagan Revolution, they do not innovate or expand upon it. Just as Reagan helped to halt the growth of the welfare state-Ron Paul can finally shrink it. This includes the neoconservative philosophy of policing the world-another form of welfare state. Instead of mimicking Reagan like the other candidates like to do, therefore chasing after an impossible ideal, Ron Paul expands and innovates on what the Reagan Revolution helped to accomplish-thus creating a revolution of his own. I assume that many of the readers of this blog have seen the “Ron Paul Revolution” signs.
Both revolutionary candidates were preceded by more mediocre Republicans. Nixon campaigned on ending the Vietnam War-which he started to do originally-but later expanded it. Our current president also campaigned with the promise not to intervene like with Kosovo, but we all see how that turned out. Reagan employed an out-with-the-old, in-with-the-new philosophy that I am hoping Ron Paul will do as well. Reagan had no need for the old elite that dominated the Nixon and Ford administrations. “They have experience, yes, but it is experience in screwing up.” Instead he hired young, enthusiastic believers in limited government (like many of Ron Paul’s supporters.) This can help a revolution work.
There are still many naysayers of the Ron Paul Revolution. I’d like to compare the current election campaign in 2008 to that of 1976 for a moment. The 1976 campaign also featured a candidate far behind the frontrunners who came from behind to win the nomination and the presidency: Jimmy Carter. For the record, Ron Paul is not comparable in any way, shape or form to Jimmy Carter as a politician-only his place in the electoral contest. Carter, as disappointing a president as he was, learned to exploit an advantage for himself that gave him the edge over “top tier” candidates seeking his party’s nomination. For Carter it was the new primary system and the modern media. For Ron Paul it is the internet. Ron Paul entered this race a long shot candidate-but has built a grassroots campaign largely through online popularity-which has helped him fundraise, get interviewed by the media and build the support of a recognized major candidate. After all, what has happened so far in the Ron Paul campaign has been nothing short of phenomenal.
So how has the internet helped this dark horse candidate so much? The internet is the newest, most personalized and most interactive form of media technology and it is a good medium to get to voters. Arianna Huffington, former candidate in the California Recall of 2003, said “It was clear to me, the 2008 campaign was going to be dominated by what’s happening online — new technologies, new media like never before.” Ron Paul saw an opportunity and capitalized on this resource, more than other candidates have. This resource has not been a factor in past elections so it is only natural that they overlook it. I believe that in all future campaigns the internet will play a stronger roll. After all, the thought of a major candidate disregarding the primary or the news media in today’s elections is unthinkable.
So once he wins the nomination…there is still the general election against a democrat (probably Hillary.) During the general election, people will already know much of Ron Paul’s platform from the nomination race. I think once he has time to go over it more in depth in the debates, a victory will be in sight. As certain fellow campaigners of mine have said, “I cannot wait to see Ron Paul debate Hillary.”
Sphere: Related Content
Posts
Recent Comments