Why doesn't Ron Paul step up at the next debate and lay out the circumstances where he would use military force?
His writings and voting record are quite clear on the use of military force. He voted for the war in Afghanistan. He later offered up the Letters of Marquis and Reprisal act against Al Qaida so that they could be pursued into Pakistan, Sudan or anywhere else in the world they went. That went down due to lack of interest.
With Iraq, he has all but begged to have a declaration of war and never got it.
I have met and spoken with the Congressman on two occasions (long before he ran for president, he was my congressman). He is NOT charismatic. He is not what you'd point to as a leader based on that. He is somewhat shy and pretty reserved. He likes to talk about ideas.
No- I don't think he will be elected. Regardless- the Republicans would be a rather steamy pile of stupidity to not glance over and see some totally uncharismatic man, with few raw leadership skills, who has so energized about 10 million people behind him in an almost fanatic way by talking truthfully about (of all things) Monetary Policy.
Maybe a slight shift from the neoCon side towards the libertarian bent, might pick up enough of these people to win an election. Maybe not, but the more Republicans talk liberty and freedom, the better they tend to do in elections. When Republicans talk about how big they'll grow their favorite agencies, they tend to lose.
Ideas win elections for the Republicans when delivered with some charisma. The Democrats can win elections on Charisma alone.