Again...weighing a Ron Paul Presidency

In the Conservative Political Action Committee straw poll for President, Ron Paul won a massive victory. Whether this means he will run or not is unknown, but how he'd be as President isn't so mysterious. In 2008, Ron Paul secured his name in history as a famous alternate possibility to the standard Democrat and Republican Party lines. Although fiscally he is farther to the right than perhaps all of his Republican colleagues in the House, Democrats can appreciate his anti-war stances. Whatever the matter, Ron Paul doesn't want government in it, and he is probably the most consistent of all members of the House on policy. Paul being a Representative is excellent...we need his perspective in Washington, but being President is a little different.

The pros of a Ron Paul presidency would be numerous. First, we'd have a President absolutely committed to balancing our budget by cutting government. Second, he would be openly hostile to the Departments of Education and Energy and would seek market solutions for our current healthcare debacle, rather than harnessing the government with more power. He would also veto more bills than any President in history as he is committed to the core to limited government. We would see no "compassionate conservatism" from him.

The cons of a Ron Paul presidency unfortunately are also numerous. First, Paul and Congress would not get along. Even if it were a GOP Congress, even they might think Paul would go too far with his limited government, especially when it comes to Social Security and Medicare. Second, Paul supports positions that although I often think are quite good, are political suicide for a President to take...like dismantling Medicare. Third, I have reservations about the state of national security if Paul were to become President. Although it probably is a good idea to give the Defense Department a cut, I think Paul might go too far, given that on foreign policy, he is pre-Pearl Harbor. I think Paul's ideas on foreign policy and national security could work...perhaps sometime in the future, but right now in this international climate they are unfeasible.

I imagine the positive and negative impacts of Paul's presidency would be muted by Congress, which would force him to make a compromise or two, even if Paul as a Representative is seemingly incapable of compromise. I think a Paul presidency would be economically healthy for the nation, but foreign policy has the potential to be disastrous if Paul finds himself blind to certain realities. In all, I'm unsure about whether Paul should be President but it would be a refreshing change to the politics of late.