SIREN – GEORGE WILL, for Sunday: “When recently asked if he might mount an independent candidacy, [Ron Paul] said: ‘I’m not thinking about it because, look, I’m not doing badly right now. … So we concentrate only on one thing: Keep moving up in the polls, and see how things come out in a month or two.’ … [A]ssume three things. That Obama is weaker in 2012 than he was when winning just 53 percent of the vote in 2008. That Paul could win between 5 percent and 7 percent of the vote nationally … And that at least 80 percent of Paul’s votes would come at the expense of the Republican nominee. Based on states’ results in 2000, 2004 and 2008, and on states’ previous votes for third-party candidates, and on current polling about the strength of potential Republican nominees in particular states, it is plausible to conclude that a Paul candidacy would have these consequences:
“It would enable Obama to carry two states he lost in 2008: Missouri (10 electoral votes), which he lost by 0.13 points, and Arizona (11), which he lost by 8.52 points to native son John McCain. … It would enable Obama to again win four states he captured in 2008 and that the Republican nominee probably must win in 2012: Florida (29), Indiana (11), North Carolina (15) and Virginia (13). … It would secure Obama’s hold on the following states he won in 2008 but that Republicans hope to take back next year: New Mexico (5), Colorado (9), Nevada (6), Michigan (16), Ohio (18), Pennsylvania (20) and New Hampshire (4). At a minimum, a Paul candidacy would force the Republican nominee to spend time and money in places he otherwise might be able to economize both. And a Paul candidacy would make 2012 much easier for Obama than 2008 was. Now, reread Paul’s words, … particularly these: ‘right now’ and ‘in a month or two.’ … Disclosure: This columnist’s wife, Mari Will, is an adviser to Rick Perry.”