The consistency with which Ron Paul comes to the assistance of Romney has been clear since the fall debates, and Paul almost never has a harsh word to say about Romney.
Paul’s media staff put together some of the most vicious and effective ads, but always against the rising not-Romney.
So, this is the question being asked in many places including by Chuck Todd:
And also by Mark Levin:
Perhaps there is no promise, it’s just power politics. Paul wants to be the not-Romney, or at least keep the others down so that he can be the kingmaker whose delegates push Romney over the top.
Paul doesn’t need promises now. He’ll do his bargaining when he is at maximum power, which will be in a couple of months.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
While it may be subjective…my subjective side is pretty accurate.
Paul has always given me the creeps. There is something “not right” there.
Having just met Dr. Paul last week at the New Gloucester Maine caucus I could not have been more impressed. Genuine integrity – transparent. You are either a shill for another candidate or an extremely bad judge of character.
I think the Romney/Paul alliance is nothing more than a show of kindness and a mutual truce toward a common goal.
“Ron Paul is Romney’s Wingman” That’s just another reason why we have to make sure Romney’s primary campaign goes down in flames.
Newt for Top Gun!
Ron Paul and Mitt are forming an alliance.
Mitt Romney and Ron Paul haven’t laid a hand on each other. They never do. Despite deep differences on a range of issues, Romney and Paul became friends in 2008, the last time both ran for president. So did their wives, Ann Romney and Carol Paul and one of his relatives is married to one of Ron Paul’s relatives. The former Massachusetts governor compliments the Texas congressman during debates. There is not a single issue on which Mr. Romney has taken a stand that is not the opposite from what Ron Paul has been preaching ALL OF HIS CAREER.
The Romney-Paul alliance is more than a curious connection. It is a strategic partnership: for Paul, an opportunity to gain a seat at the table if his long-shot bid for the presidency fails; for Romney, a chance to gain support from one of the most vibrant subgroups within the Republican Party.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-paul-and-romney-a-strategic-alliance-between-outsider-and-establishment/2012/01/20/gIQAf8foiQ_story.html
If Mitt asked Paul to be VP, he’d have the Paulbot vote sewn up.
Scary thought.
Ron Paul wants the money. It’s that simple.
Answer: Rand Paul.
This.
The question is not whether it is about vaulting Rand into greater prominence.
The questions are exactly how much juice will Ron have, and how much will Romney be willing to give up in order to get it?
Romney fears this as much as anyone else.
There is a certain similarity or kinship of spirit to their hordes of typing commenters on every blog. Romney’s and Obama’s are far more vehement, venomous and vituperative than the average Paul supporters.
There are some that it is hard to discern which candidate they are supporting…or if they are just letting off some steam just before blow a gasket and go shoot someone at the mall or post office.
teri described Paul’s supporters as “one of the most vibrant subgroups”
Romney’s, Obama’s and Paul’s supporters are really more of the vehement, venemous, vituperative and vengeful sort…than vibrant – at least on the blogs.
When you consider the demographics, the groups and people supporting Ron Paul, that is scary indeed. It’s like watching Ron Paul’s early videos and reading his newsletters.
Romney and Ron Paul and their supporters are similar in some ways… if you look below the surface.
There are some social and political policies of each of these men would have a negative effect on our society. That is different than the length and number of their marriages.
Hi Uncle Samuel, just to clarify, that phrase “one of the most vibrant subgroups within the Republican Party” came from WP, in the article that is linked.
Thanks, Teri.
I thought of another V word – that certainly does NOT describe Romney or his followers or the Obama camp and their campaign ads: VERACITY.
What about Paul and his following? Are his campaign ads more truthful?
Are his followers more truthful by comparison?
On the surface, they don’t seem to be as blatantly false as Romney and Obama as far as I have detected so far.
Anyone got examples of Paul’s campaign publishing an outright lie?
Don’t forget – TONIGHT – CNN – 8PM – GOP Debate in Arizona.
Wonder if anyone will call Romney on his seven documented lies on stage last time?
Newt spoke to the Oklahoma Legislature yesterday. Conservatives4newt had this link I posted below – it is the audio of the speech – it mainly addresses his energy policy (which is spot on) and the whole thing is about 15 minutes long:
http://dmanager.streamtheworld.com/media/default_audio_player.php?audio_file_id=101489971
Sometimes it can be as simple as “They like each other.” Both Paul and Romney have been through two presidential primaries together. They and their wives have gotten to be friends. While they don’t agree on specific policies or politics, they respect each other. Paul doesn’t like or respect either Gingrich and especially Santorum.
I don’t doubt for a second that Romney and Paul have either explicitly colluded or implicitly aligned with one another.
Mitt tried to “go it alone” in 2008 and was tag-teamed by an extremely effective, joint Huckabee/McCain take-down. If Mike had not stayed in, the results of that primary would have been remarkably altered; the contest would have absolutely lasted longer than it did. Because Mike stayed in, and was so forthright in his attacks (and counter attacks) on Team Romney, McCain was able to more easily finish the only real threat he had after the New Year.
I think he, Romney, at least partially took a page out of their collective playbook so that any opposition arrayed against him now would never be able to entirely focus their efforts on him and him alone. We have seen how certain surrogates have kept the panoply of “not-Romneys” off-balance and reacting to their (rather than Romney’s) thrusts; I personally see the possible/likely Romney-Paul alliance as nothing more than an extension of that effort…
Correction: “…McCain was able to more easily finish off* the only real threat…”
[…] Professor Jacobson at Legalinsurrection, who […]
hmmmmm was reading this: Mitt is really trying to get as many allies as possible.
The Tea Party Needs Allies
Someone like Mitt Romney and not someone who’ll end up like Christine O’Donnell or Sharron Angle.
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/22/the-tea-party-needs-allies
Do you think this could be a reason? Afterall, they do say that Ron Paul is the “Grandfather of the Tea Party”
Dunno…..
Since Romney is clearly the Establishment Republican, and Ron Paul is clearly the candidate most different, I don’t think Romney has anything to offer. I suspect that Ron Paul is betting that given the choice of voting for him or Romney, millions of Tea Partiers will vote for him. Personally, I’d prefer Santorum or Gingrich over Romney or Paul. I’m a Tea Party Sympathizer, but given a choice between Romney or Paul, I’d vote for Romney. Like Ron Paul, I think we should consider the interests of the United States first, but he takes the idea too fast and too far.
Thats where you’re wrong – we cannot turn around fast enough. The entire world is falling apart. We are broke, 15 trillion in debt actually – Romney does not propose any real cuts… Ron Paul would be tempered by Congress – but would also VETO any budget that did not make REAL cuts!! ROn Paul will expose the FED for the treasonous cartel of international bankers that they are – and once and for all give the USA back its money.
Now that Bachmann is out, someone has to be a stalking horse for Romney.
Ron Paul isn’t running for president, that is, he has no expectation of winning and has said, more than once, that he does not see himself ever attaining the White House, an odd thing to say for a perennial candidate. Paul’s agenda is to keep the libertarian agenda front and center and his campaigns are merely the chosen vector for doing so.
In that, Paul doesn’t need to make deals or seek promises until crunch time – a possible convention, or more likely whenever Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich close in on the required delegate number. At that time, any quid pro quo would favor Paul’s agenda – libertarianism. The expected trade-off might be Paul’s endorsement and delegates for a promise to incorporate libertarian fiscal policies into the winning GOP nominee’s platform. This is SOP for nonserious ‘issue’ candidates like Ron Paul.
Maybe, just maybe Ron Paul realizes that Romney has hands on problem solving experience in an executive fashion while Santorum has zero of such experience.
Add to this that he’s starting to resemble Gingrich with the ability to “step in it” and whine about the fallout…
Er, small clarification… When I refer to “he’s starting..” I mean Santorum.
Bachmann rarely went after Romney either.
I have come to the conclusion lately that Ron Paul only wants a platform at the GOP convention in Tampa. Then, if we have a brokered convention, he will throw his delegates to Mitt then he will be the nominee.
Never under estimate Ron Paul. I think he’s sneaky and clever. Certainly, his supporters are all over the internet in spreading the negativity about Gingrich and Santorum that are most of the time, lies.
Mark Levin likes to target the Paul people. I love it when he does it.
Just as a follow-up on this Romney/Ron Paul ‘collusion’ possibiiity — most people who have met Romney always come away with a “he’s a nice man” comment. Then there is the “but” that seems to follow, explaining why they are suspicious of his authenticity, or being a real conservative. However, besides these stated problems with Romney, they all talk about how polite, evn-keeled he is; how he has problems personally going after people, which is another reason they usually support someone else — a more red-meat candidate.
So, I just think that even politicians, competing with each other, can have a whole other life off the national stage where they like each other and find more common ground than what appears when they are debating each other publically.
For instance, both Paul and Romney have been married for decades to the same wife, have children, grand children, have both been involved in private sector careers, as well as other presidential runs. There are lots of similarities which the other candidates simply don’t share with each other.
I think you are right on the mark here tsr.
Kinda off topic but maybe not! Has anyone noticed that Romney is getting really fidgety on stage, acting like a young lad with ants in his underwear! He seems to bounce from side to side, perhaps not literally but certainly in his efforts, to speak out with his latest rhetoric against the current anti-Romney.
IMO Romney seems the most ill-at-ease on the stage than any of the candidates. Both Gingrich and Santorum seem to relish addressing a crowd — not so with Romney. Romney is more of a private person, which is why he appears self conscious and sort of forced when he is being interviewed and while on the stump.
Irrespective of any machinations by certain candidates, I think Ron Paul would make an excellent Secretary of the Treasury. As VP, he would be irrelevant.
I would be willing to bet money that Romney has promised the Secretary of the Treasury position to Ron Paul so long as Paul behaves himself during the future debates and doesn’t go after Romney in any meaningful way.
Paul doesn’t want to be VP. He knows it’s a ceremonial position at best, and he knows that this is his last hurrah in terms of campaigning given that he’s 76 now. There have been older campaigners for national public office to win, but those have been incumbents with LONG records (Thurmond, Byrd) and only at the statewide level (a MUCH smaller campaign).
However as Sec. Treas. Paul could conceivably do most of the things that he’s been railing about on the campaign trail regarding economic policy (basically gut the free-flow monetary policy and just about single-highhandedly crush inflation to zero (although it’s pretty close to that now) by ending stimulus programs (obviously with the support of Romney as President). You would hear a bunch of economists screaming about “deflation” but that’s not as bad of a thing as everybody keeps saying provided it’s properly managed in a gradual fashion.
[…] (h/t: Legal Insurrection) […]
[…] (h/t: Legal Insurrection) […]
[…] Romney and Rand Paul 2012? There’s been a lot of speculation from some very smart people lately over what appears to be a friendly relationship between the presidential campaigns of Mitt […]
I agree, I’ve come to believe Paul has been Romney’s Wingman all along …. It is too obvious now !!!
I hope they give you and Mark Levin credit for this…don’t anyone tell Dick Morris about this.