It looks obvious

Andrew Sullivan linked today to, what seems to be, encouraging support for Ron Paul from the US Military:

Paul has a staggering 52.53 percent of all military contributions. Here’s the data:

    52.53% Ron Paul
    35.4% McCain
    7.9% Romney
    5.2% Giuliani
    2.2% Hunter
    2.6% Others

It is interesting to note, as did Sullivan, that those who are effected the most by the policies a future administration will apply are more likely to support a candidate with a clear agenda. While it is a sound interpretation of the numbers I would suggest another insight of what they might indicate.

Military personal, mostly in the tactical level, tend to analyze situations in distinct terms; One either seized the hill or failed, A unit rich it objectives or not - a solution for a situation is a clear solution and it often final. Therefore a candidates like McCain and Ron Paul are more appealing for these crowed. However, clear distinctions and final solutions aren’t what we should expect from the next President.The ability to develop and execute strategy is much finer art.

I agree with Dr. Paul main position that the US should not try to reshape the world, nor should it attempt to force it to accept our way of life. Further more, I think that Dr. Paul argument that being busy maintaining a position of superpower is harmful and cause more damage than blessing. But I don’t believe that any country can maintain a policy of isolationism, nor should it. 

Ron Paul has, I hope, a very important role in reshaping the American political arena. Only he and Obama are offering hope for a change, for a different contract between the people and their government. It is natural that Obama get more support, for reason that I might discuss in a different post, but the fact is that Ron Paul triggers what was cover for too long, but is in the spirit of this country - the yearning for liberty and individualism. And in this role, as the person who calls to arms a renewed movement, Ron Paul, the uncompromising figure who offers a fundamentalist implementation of the constitutions,  is extremely important.  But the future President, the Reagan or Eisenhower of the future, will be much more disappointing in terms of ideology - and much more effective in achieving it.