Republican and Conservative political analysis and commentary

Per Jonathan Martin, Ron Paul's latest mail drop in South Carolina, interestingly, does not mention his opposition to the war in Iraq, the signature of his campaign:

In fact, the piece touts at the top that Paul "Pushed for an official Declaration of War with Iraq."

 Now this is true, but he did so only because he takes a literal interpretation of the Constitution.

This is the only mention of Iraq, though, so it may leave a South Carolina voter who is uninformed about Paul's anti-war views to think he merely wanted a congressional green light to topple Saddam and was fully on board with shock-and-awe. 

Paul does come out and state his opposition to invading Iran, but that a piece focused on national security would not make any mention his stance against the Iraq war is striking.

That it may, just may, have something to do with the fact that South Carolina is a military and retiree-heavy state is reenforced by other flashes of GOP politics-as-usual: a shot of a young Paul in uniform, a picture of Paul with a vet, a Ronald Reagan quote and promises to improve the VA. 

This is the first indication I've seen by the Paul camp that they may be taking a serious shot at the nomination. No candidate who campaigns on being anti-war will win the Republican nomination, however I think it is very possible that an anti-war Republican could win the nomination. The key is selling oneself as a traditional Republican, and that means campaigning on the Republican sweet spots: fiscal and social conservatism.

Paul's first ads lead me to believe that he was going to run a token campaign and carry the anti-war flag, but perhaps his newfound wealth has made him think twice. This mail piece, with its emphasis on his personal biography and Republican-friendly issues, was what I thought his first ads would look like.