Libertarian Librarian

Who, perchance, are you thinking of when you say "...and it seemed to go pretty well for him"?
 

Well I was talking about Ronald Reagan-- which is why I threw the "morning again in America" line. But I think the rapid ascension of Bill Clinton to become the Democratic nominee in 1991 and 92 was pretty similar. Both tapped into a huge sense of discontent with a message of hope and change and both had strong, charismatic personalities.
 

From the latest Marist New Hampshire Primary Poll:

Question Wording: If the New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary were held today, whom would you support if the candidates are:

Mitt Romney - 33%
Rudy Giuliani - 22%
John McCain - 13%
Ron Paul - 7%
Mike Huckabee - 7%
Fred Thompson - 5%
Tom Tancredo - 1%
Duncan Hunter - <1%
Undecided - 12%
(percentages reflect responses of likely voters)


Question Wording: Regardless of whom you are planning to vote for, which Republican candidate [for president] do you think has the best chance of beating the Democrat next November?

Rudy Giuliani - 40%
Mitt Romney - 37%
John McCain - 9%
Fred Thompson - 3%
Ron Paul - 2%
Mike Huckabee - 2%
Duncan Hunter - <1%
Tom Tancredo - <1%
Undecided - 7%
(percentages reflect responses of likely voters)


Paul does seem to be tapping into discontent, but I don't think that he has the backing to truly go anywhere. If his poll numbers and backing would happen to rise dramatically, then he will be covered more by the media; and at that point Paul will need to deal with the national media asking pointed questions regarding his support from white supremecists, 9/11 "truthers," and other odd fringe groups. If the media starts to pose such questions, his broader support could quickly drop-off due to guilt-by-association, especially if he and his campaign don't respond well.

You may find him strong on the issues, but I just don't see him as a realistically strong or viable candidate.