Pretty matrices are not significant when based on axis terms far from the minimum ELS.
There are some issues where Ron Paul makes some sense. He is not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He does not like big government, or taxes, or foreign aid. But he is clearly a long shot for the Republican nomination. The matrices shown below do not help his case. Although one 24-letter matrix is almost as small as the 17-letter matrix for Mitt Romney, it is based only on the 33rd lowest ELS of RON PAUL in conjunction with PRESIDENT. With the 17-letter Mitt Romney matrix what was found was at the lowest ELS. The 24-letter Ron Paul matrix has about 1 chance in 5 to be there. The lowest ELS of Ron Paul required 247 letters to get a match with PRESIDENT. It had about 1 chance in 2 to be there (compared to 1 chance 1,379 for the Romney matrix). Most Americans will likely find Ron Paul too extreme, and thus it's not surprising to see him lack a spectacular matrix here.
A FEW SELECT POSITIONS OF RON PAUL (taken from Wikepedia):
(1) Taxes: Paul's campaign slogan for 2004 was "The Taxpayers' Best Friend!" He would completely eliminate the income tax by shrinking the size and scope of government to what he considers its Constitutional limits, noting that he has never voted to approve an unbalanced budget; he has observed that even scaling back spending to 2000 levels eliminates the need for the 42% of the budget accounted for by individual income tax receipts. He has asserted that Congress had no power to impose a direct income tax and supports the repeal of the sixteenth amendment. Rather than taxing personal income, which he says assumes that the government owns individuals' lives and labor, he prefers the federal government to be funded through excise taxes and/or uniform, non-protectionist tariffs. However, this position is now suspect. During the 2011 CPAC conference, he said he would support a flat income tax of 10 % at 19:23 of that speech. A citizen would be able to opt out of all government involvement if they simply pay a 10 % income tax.
(2) Israel: During the 2009 Gaza War, Paul addressed Congress to voice his staunch opposition to the House's proposed resolution supporting Israel's actions. He stated: "Madame Speaker, I strongly oppose H. Res. 34, which was rushed to the floor with almost no prior notice and without consideration by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The resolution clearly takes one side in a conflict that has nothing to do with the United States or US interests. I am concerned that the weapons currently being used by Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza are made in America and paid for by American taxpayers." He then went on to question the very purpose of America’s support for Israel asking: "Is it really in the interest of the United States to guarantee the survival of any foreign country?"
When later asked about his comments by Russia Today, Ron Paul added: "[This support has] been going on for more than 50 years, because there has been a pretty strong case made for the Jewish people being treated quite badly, and emotionally there was an argument for having a place they can call their homeland, and people bought into this. But even then there was no justification for us to be using our money for doing that. There’s one thing being friends, getting along with people and trading with people versus subsidizing them.”