If Ron Paul is the only "true conservative" why are no congressmen or governors willing to endorse him?

Question

Ron Paul keeps toauting himself as a true conservative, if so, why won't his fellow congressional members endorse him?

My first though is that he may be delusional, but I'm open to other ideas.

Answer 1

Ron Paul is an isolationist, that is neither a conservative or a Libertarian ideal. He is 72 years old and has absolutely zero respect inside, or outside of his party. His sole business experience is running his small medical practice and he has no experience manageing large bureacracies.

The majority of the people supporting his candidacy are foreigners. He is known throughout the world more than he is in his own country... and he's been a presidential candidate.

The closest thing we have in our history to Ron Paul is Jimmy Carter, opposite ends of the political spectrum, but he will be equally ineffective and embarrassing as President. And like Carter, Paul will gut out military and economy at record speeds.

Plus he is pretty delusional.

Answer 2

If the "Champion of the Constitution" would be considered delusional to think he is a Republican, then it may be so. Well then again if you look at the Bush administration, the so called "America lovers" have classed the constitution as, "just a piece of paper".

Ron Paul advocates a strictly limited role for the federal government, low taxes, free markets, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and a return to monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. I thought they used to be the Traditional Republican Values or has the Republican party changed so much that they don't even recognize their past.

In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.[2] He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay, and refuses to participate in the congressional pension system or take government-paid junkets. This alone is respectable for Ron Paul.

Answer 3

Other than his stance on a couple Social issues--Ron Paul would be a nice addition to the DNC. But he's much more valuable on the campaign trail as caller of the other GOP candidate's rhetorical BS. Sorta like our Mike Gravel. Current (R) officeholder's can't break from this President and not endorse one of the top 3--that would mean that they wouldn't be connected to all the lies and corruption we are seeing now...

Answer 4

My impression is he has the integrity to vote according to good principles and to honor his oath of office in supporting the Constitution. This approach doesn't sit well with the, "you vote for my pork and I'll vote for yours" mentality or the other time honored approach of doing whatever it takes to get or keep your party in power.

Please study the principles of the Constitution and why they're so important for our freedom, and then take another look at Ron Paul.

Even though his chances are slim to none, supporting him will help educate people on these important principles. That has a chance of actually doing some good.

Answer 5

Yes, you're first thought was wrong, and I'm glad you are open-minded. If you'll click on this link, then scroll down and click on Ron Paul's picture, you will then watch a video of him talking with Jon Stewart of the Daily Show. In essence, this interview, I believe, answers your question . He explains WHY he is running Republican. Thanks! Have a great day!

http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/videos/celebrity_interviews/index.jhtml?siclientid=1838&sitrackingid=8009735&yahoomatchtype=std

Answer 6

Because he's a nut case! If they endorse a nut case that has a less than 0% chance of winning it would make them look bad.

Anybody that has only one issue that they talk about, the Iraq War, isn't qualified to be president. You have to discuss other issues.

Tom Tancredo, a strong anti-amnesty candidate, talks about other issues. Why can't Paul do that?

At the debate, I heard him answer a question on immigration. He turned the question around and talked about the Iraq War.

Answer 7

From what I can see cons have a rather inconsistent view of liberals/dems. Numerous answers to this question and others suggest Ron Paul is really a liberal/democrat. Not one of them actually supports this with a quote or policy stance or anything.
So let's look at what Ron Paul actually stands for and how that differs from 1. What Liberals really stand for and 2. What cons seem to think Liberals stand for
Taxes - Ron seems to think there is no such thing as good taxation. he keeps saying lower taxes are good (never says how low though). Libs/Dems favour progressive taxation in able to provide for the whole country. Cons think libs just like taxing the hell out of them for the sake of it. So on taxes the idea of Paul being a liberal is removed from both reality and con perspective.
Defense/Foreign Affairs - both Paul and a majority of Dems seem to disapprove of the war. They have that in common. Paul is also very much an isolationist - he rants against the UN and any other global body that has the potential to produce global solutions to global issues. Dems approve of multilateral international cooperation. Cons think Dems want to sell off all soveriegnty of the US to international bodies. Again the truth is that Paul has very little common with the Dems either in reality or in the twisted con perception of the Dems.
Imiigration - Paul wants to send everyone home - even people who were born here and have never known any other home. Dems are actually split on the best solution but generally agree that overly simplistic solutions to illegal immigration (eg walls) are counterproductive. Cons think Dems want to let everyone - especially terrorists into the country. Again neither the reality nor the perception of Dems has anything in common with Paul.
Is the new definition of a Liberal anyone who just disagrees with Bush on the war? That seems to be all paul has in common with them? In which case about 70% of the population and most of the GOP candidates qualify as Liberals.

Answer 8

i've got been itching to communicate with somebody in the easily place of work so i've got basically phoned. Now, it's time to roll up my sleeves and drop a can of increasing foam into their sewer strains. heavily, i will settle for an digital mail notification. The astounding factor is that it already has 179 co-sponsors, final I checked! that's staggering! ...

Answer 9

Neocons and the religious right have hijacked the term Conservatism. Conservatism used to mean balanced budgets, fiscal responsibility, protection of constitutional rights and intervening abroad only when attacked or in the most extreme humanitarian situations.

The neocon version of conservatism is undercutting the individual rights in favor of the corporations, nation building, preemptive attacks on foreign countries who do not directly threaten us, ignoring human rights especially when there is a buck to be made doing so and justifying this all because you claim to be a good traditional Christian and the rapture is coming soon anyway, so lets pave the way for it to happen! Hallelulah!!!

Answer 10

Ron Paul is a Libertarian. He should run under that party or as an Independent.