re: Ron Paul

And by the way, if nominated, Ron Paul does not have a ghost of a chance of getting elected. You might choose to admire what look like principled stands on quite a number of issues. He comes off as philosophical in that way sometimes. But put him on stage with Obama and much of it will sound kooky to the American electorate in general election season. Obama could just remain calm and watch the Paul campaign implode over the course of the summer; Paul just can’t play the game, which might be viewed abstractly as a virtue, but isn’t going to win the 2012 election.

For example, you’ll have Obama the guy who nailed bin Laden in Pakistan (a staggeringly popular act among the U.S. electorate; well over 90% approve) and Paul who will probably say he wouldn’t have done it. And perhaps you sympathize with that view, but Paul might as well put a pistol to his head and pull the trigger if he tries to win a U.S. Presidential election while taking that position.

And, there are also some things about Paul that were uneasily put to rest in 2008 but may be dug up again this time, such as some fairly unsavory associations.

It might be more interesting and fun if Ron Paul is the nominee, but the Republicans have a much better shot with Romney. If it’s Paul, I think it will be a concession, and more of a “statement” than an attempt to win.