by Sukrit Sabhlok

Created on: December 06, 2007   Last Updated: March 19, 2008

Those who have been following American politics in recent months may have noticed something different about the Republican presidential primary race. Instead of presenting a clear front-runner candidate, the polls don't appear to have settled on a favourite.

As usual, the "bought and paid for" candidates favoured by the special interests have led the way in fundraising. But this time, a Congressman from Texas named Ron Paul has proved to be the wildcard to watch as he could cause an upset in the New Hampshire and Iowa ballots in 2008.

On November 5, the Ron Paul "Revolution" collected over $4 million on a single day. The campaign continues to bring in top-tier money, but remains stuck in the single digits in the polls.

Dr Paul is a Republican representing the old right-wing of the party. This means he's adamantly opposed to the neo-conservative belief that America must engage in nation building overseas. He favours bringing troops home from Afghanistan given they've failed in their mission to find Osama bin Laden. Paul wants to end American "empire" overseas and eventually bring troops home from Korea (where they have for over 50 years been stationed at the border between North and South), Japan, Europe and any other location not directly linked to defence of American borders.

Dr Paul favours complete free trade and open diplomacy but opposes US military and foreign aid to all nations, especially military dictatorships such as Pakistan. His goal is nothing less than to change the international relations environment so America is no longer the police-man of the world.

As a consequence of these strident foreign policy views, Paul has attracted a bipartisan following. His supporters span the whole political spectrum. They are Democrats, Independents, Republicans, Libertarians and people who were apathetic about politics until they found Paul.

If he can get the Republican nomination, Paul is the party's best chance to win the 2008 general election, because he would be able to unite America in a way never before seen with foreign policy views even more non-interventionist than the Democrats. Unlike Democrat Hilary Clinton, he voted against the Iraq war. While leading Democrats refuse to set a timetable for withdrawal, Paul has said he would withdraw all troops "immediately", or within six months.

The only problem with Paul's approach is that it's unlikely to get him the nomination, as the party's base is fiercely loyal to President Bush's Iraq adventure. In a recent CNN

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>