WI: Senator Ron Paul?

...and it'd take serious stumbling by the Democrats for him to win the general... Of course, Obama had similar luck getting his Senate seat, so it's hardly ASB... But, yeah, he'd also be a one-termer, I agree.

Both his campaigning and issues are mediocre to horrible. It takes a seriously racist rural House seat for the wanting Jim Crow back bit to turn Mr Goldbug into a winner.

HTF would being on the Libertarian ticket help him, any more than it won him the Presidency?... He's still a LAME CAMPAIGNER. And libertarian tickets regularly get as thumped here in Texas as the rest of the country.

Well, he'd still be the incumbent Senator. This scenario assumes he's denied renomination in 1990 by the Republican Party, but decides to run as a Libertarian in the general election to hold his seat.
 
I heard that even though Paul is pro-free trade, he's actually against free trade agreements such as NAFTA, calling them "managed trade".

This is true, but he could easily rewrite his version of NAFTA instead of going the Perot route and embracing tarrifs, which he would never support. So not Paul/Perot or Perot/Paul. Simply not possible.
 
...and it'd take serious stumbling by the Democrats for him to win the general... Of course, Obama had similar luck getting his Senate seat, so it's hardly ASB... But, yeah, he'd also be a one-termer, I agree.

Both his campaigning and issues are mediocre to horrible. It takes a seriously racist rural House seat for the wanting Jim Crow back bit to turn Mr Goldbug into a winner.

HTF would being on the Libertarian ticket help him, any more than it won him the Presidency?... He's still a LAME CAMPAIGNER. And libertarian tickets regularly get as thumped here in Texas as the rest of the country.
It is possible that in the 1984 Senate Campaign that Kent Hance, after losing to Lloyd Doggett, would then endorse Ron Paul for the Senate Race; as it was, within a year he had switched over to the Republican Party, and was one of its most Conservative Members at that time. That alone should ensure that Paul could eke out a narrow victory.

In 1990 though I am not as sure, it largely would depend on how he was received by the base. Likely that Dan Morales would challenge him.
 
I think he can hold onto his seat for at least a second term in 1990, when things were going well for the Republicans and the last thing they would want would be a bitter primary. After two terms if he is primaried, he can pull a Lisa Murkowski.

At some point he may try his hand at running for Governor though. Just a feeling.

I don't think he's interested in running for Governor of Texas. Not much he can do there.

Being the odd man out that he is, what if, with a win, Ron Paul decides to declare himself Libertarian, going full out 3rd Party, no caucusing with the GOP or anything.

It would be extreme, but while 3rd Party platforms have been weak running for President, having the odd person(s) in the Senate or House under a 3rd Party platform isn't unusual.

Perhaps, with his influence and resources, Ron Paul could help to gain three or four Libertarian House seats over the next few years. Nothing major, but not something that can be ignored either.

It's a possibility, and having a former Senator on your side would give a party more clout than it would otherwise. A more interesting scenario is Ron Paul growing so frustrated with Bob Dole that he leaves the GOP and joins the Libertarian Party while still in the Senate.

Personally, the scenario I would find most interesting is that in 1990, after six years of Paul attacking Reagan, Bush, and the rest of the GOP for Iran-Contra and military spending, the Texas Republican establishment gets a more doctrinaire conservative to challenge him in the 1990 Senate primaries, narrowly beating him.

But Ron Paul, undetered, accepts the Libertarian nomination to run for reelection and, in a massive upset, narrowly defeats the Democrat nominee (Ann Richards?). And then a fed-up (no pun intended) Paul, who is now the first third-party Senator since Jim Buckley in the 1970's, decides to go all out in the 1992 presidential election, running as the Libertarian nominee...

(Also, if I were to fully flesh out this scenario, Phil Grammy remains part of the conservative Democrats in the House, then in 1990 runs for Governor and becomes Texas' Zell Miller: a true Democrat-in-name only.)

I think Ron Paul would definitely make a run for the Republican nomination in 1988 when Reagan is on the way out. However, I don't think it would really get him anywhere, though it would give him more visibility.

I also think that, if did lose the battle for renomination to the Senate in 1990, he would try to primary President Bush in '92 as an antiwar and anti-tax Republican. It's not likely that he'd get anywhere and I predict that he'd come in third place behind Pat Buchanan, though he might come in second too depending on how much of a base he's gathered.

Though imagine if he actually did successfully primary Bush in 92 and won the nomination? I LOL at the thought of Ron Paul debating Bill Clinton.
 
Top