"If he’s never seemed depressed in interviews by his results thus far, it’s because everything is sort of going to plan. The only real disappointment was Maine, which he stood a chance of winning. Otherwise, Paul is exploiting the new rules that apportion delegates according to one’s share of the vote."

How Ron Paul’s McGovernite strategy can win on Super Tuesday … and beyond

Tim Stanley

Today’s Super Tuesday primaries give Ron Paul a rare chance to shine. There are 49 delegates up for grabs in Virginia, and Paul is the only candidate to have filed against Mitt Romney. How well he does will be the first real field test of the Paulite constituency.

The libertarian is playing down his chances. He says that he’s looking instead for a strong performance in Alaska, Idaho or North Dakota. All of them are caucuses in small states, so it’s easier to out-organise the opposition and leverage his activist muscle into a victory. This was the Ron Paul strategy from the very beginning. He never expected to win anything in the early rounds (except, perhaps, Iowa). Instead, he hoped to pull in a consistent 20 to 30 percent of the vote in every contest – snagging the odd caucus here and there.

If he’s never seemed depressed in interviews by his results thus far, it’s because everything is sort of going to plan. The only real disappointment was Maine, which he stood a chance of winning. Otherwise, Paul is exploiting the new rules that apportion delegates according to one’s share of the vote.

So long as Romney, Gingrich and Santorum split the “big government” conservative bloc, Dr Paul can remain competitive with that consistent, nay stubborn, 20 to 30 percent. He can go to a divided convention with enough support to have an impact upon the platform and perhaps even shape the ticket itself. Whatever happens in 2012, Paul’s impact on the GOP will last for years. The recent election of AJ Spiker, a Paulite, as chairman of the powerful Iowa Republican Party is a case in point.

In some regards, Paul is echoing the primaries strategy of antiwar liberal George McGovern. In 1972, McGovern entered the Democratic primaries and got beaten in the early rounds. Like Paul, he scraped second in Iowa and New Hampshire (Paul was technically second in Iowa because Romney and Santorum effectively tied for first) but got torn apart in Florida. On the sly, he out organised his opponents in local caucuses. All the while that the big beast candidates were winning states like Illinois or Pennsylvania, he was quietly catching them up in the delegate count.

Eventually, McGovern did start winning primaries. But he didn’t win very many (seven) and he only started to do so half way through the election calendar (Wisconsin on April 4, 1972) and by a low plurality (30 percent). Yet McGovern still became the nominee of his party. His victory was a mix of cynical math and brazen wonkery.

For the McGovern scenario to work for Paul in 2012, two things have to happen. First, he needs Santorum and Gingrich to stay in the race as long as possible. While they split the big government conservative vote with Romney, Paul’s percentage still matters. A divided establishment is the only way that he can ever hope of slipping through the middle and eking out a primary.

Second, Paul needs to win somewhere fast. Alaska is not beyond his grasp because the other candidates haven’t visited it that much. Other good opportunities are Kansas on March 10 or Hawaii on March 16. Failing a caucus win, Paul needs at least to do well enough in Virginia to show that he can break out of his narrow libertarian demographic. If Santorum wins Ohio and Gingrich takes Georgia, a good 40 percent for Paul in Virginia would contribute to the sense that Romney hasn’t yet sewn things up. Paul would remain a legitimate part of the anti-Mitt coalition.

It’s almost inconceivable that Paul will pull all of this off. But the effort is just as important as the results. This year, Paul has gained a national platform for his ideas that guarantees him a lasting influence within the Republican Party. One CNN exit poll from the Michigan primary found that the candidate won the votes of citizens aged 18-29. You can call these voters Ron Paul babies, and they prove just as important to the future of Republicanism as the McGovern kids were for the Democrats.

Link:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100141613/how-ron-pauls-mcgovernite-strategy-can-win-on-super-tuesday-and-beyond/