Libertarian Republican candidate Ron Paul is a one-trick-pony whose lack of substance and a plan to implement his ideas (some of which are good, by the way) were highlighted in the Iowa debate. While followers of Ron Paul claim debate victory, they fail to say how or why. What did Ron Paul say or do that made him stand head and shoulders above everyone else on stage? Objectively, Ron Paul stood out as the most uninspiring and un-presidential candidate on stage based solely upon his answers and how he answered the questions. The take away from Paul's performance is that he explained to the GOP what America shouldn't be doing domestically and in the world. Re-watch his answers and one will discover that he falls back on the premise, "America shouldn't be <insert domestic or foreign policy issue plaguing Obama>..." nearly every time. Will someone please explain to the dear congressman that its a presidential race and not an ethics class.
To be clear, I am not a Ron Paul hater. I happen to fully agree with ending the Federal Reserve and restoring the Gold Standard. I simply find Ron Paul dull and repetitive, and based on what I have seen to date, I will not vote for him in my state's primary.
Despite my perception of Ron Paul's performance in the debate, I feel he will do well in Saturday's Iowa Straw Poll and finish in the top 3 with Romney and Bachmann. If he doesn't, then Rep. Paul should stop moonlighting as a presidential candidate and keep fighting his fight in Congress.