Rep. Ron Paul (R- Texas) found himself in an unusual position at the South Carolina GOP presidential debate. According to most polls, Paul was the frontrunner of the five candidates on stage. Though some big names were missing, it signals how far Paul has come in four years. Consider that Paul registers more national support than former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who is already running, and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who may soon enter. Pawlenty and Daniels are widely considered to have a chance at winning the GOP nomination.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is barely ahead of Paul in the Real Clear Politics polling average. With Donald Trump and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee not running, the only declared candidate who consistently runs ahead of Paul in national polls is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Paul has a chance to make major strides in 2012 if he can remember he is running a presidential campaign and not a seminar on Libertarianism 101. In 2008, Paul expected to do little other than inject libertarian and antiwar arguments into the televised debates. He ended up raising millions of dollars and finishing ahead of some presumed top-tier contenders.
The issue environment is more favorable to Paul this time around and the GOP field looks weaker. Yet Paul still allows himself to be drawn into defending libertarian theory, when he could be winning votes.
For example, in South Carolina, Chris Wallace of Fox News listed a variety of personal habits drug use, prostitution, gay marriage Paul had said should be legal if states want to permit them. Wallace asked, [W]hy should social conservatives in South Carolina vote for you?
Paul made brief mention of the social conservatives right to pray without government interference before eloquently defending drug legalization and doing an amusing impression of a heroin addict.
He got a good crowd reaction. I never thought heroin would get applause here in South Carolina, Wallace quipped.
But in terms of gaining support, Paul should have spent his time answering Wallaces question. Social conservatives in South Carolina should vote for me, he could have said, because Im pro-life on abortion and my bill would prevent federal judges from forcing gay marriage on their state.
For Pauls states rights position is unlikely to lead to making gay marriage, prostitution or even drugs legal in South Carolina precisely because South Carolinians dont want any of these to be legal.