A friend and I were talking about politics, and he stated that almost everyone who he talks with says that they like Ron Paul, but they are not supporting him because he is unelectable. I told him that I sincerely believed that those were cop out answers, and that they were just trying to avoid an argument. Because, while Ron Paul is unelectable, there is a reason Ron Paul is unelectable, and that is because most Republicans have multiple reasons why they would not consider him an acceptable candidate for President.
Unlike many of Paul’s supporters who have jumped on the bandwagon, I am able to think for myself, and so I have no need to post something written by someone else or a video that is little more than propaganda; so without further ado, here are my three primary reasons for refusing to support Ron Paul.
1. He does not support ending abortion on the Federal level
Abortion is one of, if not the most, unjust acts that is legally allowed in America. For the purposes of this discussion, I am going to assume that most of my audience agrees with me on this point. If not, fear not, for I will be writing on this soon.
Because I believe this about abortion, I believe it is not just an option for the American public, but it is actually a duty to use all means possible to end abortion. Ron Paul does not believe this. Though he claims that he opposes abortion, he thinks it should be left to the states to end abortion. The problem is that while there are some conservative states that would ban abortion, there are other states which would allow abortion to continue, all while the government was sleeping on the job.
Paul claims that his position is the “Constitutional” position, but I think that is an unreasonably strict interpretation. The Constitution establishes delivering mail as a function of the government, but Paul doesn’t think that it can take care of murder? Do his supporters honestly think that there is validity to this? That the government can imprison people for making fake money, but not ending murder?
Further, since I am writing to a Christian audience, there is a document which trumps the Constitution. There are things that are more important than a piece of paper, and life is one of those things. The Christian is always to stand for life. Anything less than full-throated support and a willingness to use all means available to end abortion is enough to disqualify a candidate in my eyes.
2. His foreign policy is simplistic
This one is a lesser problem to me as there is some truth to what Paul says. Notice I say some truth. America has created a lot of trouble in the world through sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong. Of course, it can be argued that this was a necessary evil to prevent another world war (which was the intended purpose of Interventionism, which would technically be a success). However, whether Interventionism is right or wrong, that is not actually the question at this point. This is because the trouble has been created, and simply backing away just provides an opportunity for the enemies of the country to exact their revenge. To think that if we just go back home they will leave “us” alone seems simplistic at best.
In addition, isolationism was the predominant American foreign policy until after the close of World War Two. Those last three words should be a pretty good clue as to why it was no longer the predominant foreign policy.
3. He is a “traitor” to the party
When I say this, people say, “Well, that doesn’t matter if you are voting your convictions.” Well, I disagree. Why? Because I am a member of the Republican Party because they most accurately represent my political views—I obviously do not support every position the party holds, but am comfortable enough with their positions to consider myself a Republican. Ron Paul, does not. How do I know this? Because he abandoned the Republican Party in the 80’s. Now, I do not hold grudges when there is a change in how someone thinks, such as being a Democrat, and changing to the Republican Party, but that is not the same as being a member of the party, leaving and opposing the party, then coming back when you need them. In addition, Ron Paul will not rule out a third party candidacy. What does this mean? It means that while Ron Paul may be a true conservative, he is not a true Republican, but is simply using them as a tool to get what he wants. This will not do when choosing someone to become the de facto leader of the party.
While I may be able to overcome one of these reasons, or maybe even two, but if you put all three of these reasons together, Ron Paul becomes an untenable candidate for my support. He is not fully pro-life, he has a simplistic foreign policy, and he is not a Republican but wants the Republican nomination.
