America was founded on the ideas of distinct individuals. The Founding Fathers had unique ideas on how the country should be run, and specific visions for the ideal United States. Before two political parties dominated American politics, politicians stood for something.

Today’s politicians stand for very little, and this inauspicious trend has manifested itself in the Republican race for the presidential nomination in 2012. Over the last few months, the wide field of candidates has dwindled down to four but I only see one option.

As a conservative libertarian, I like to see Republican candidates with a twist. Many in the Grand Old Party share my viewpoint that the most important quality in a candidate is his support of limited government—a people’s government, more dedicated to maintaining the liberty of the market and its people than anything else.

That is where the libertarian wing of the Republican Party—a wing I believe to be growing with the new generation of conservative thinkers—differs from what many see as the archetypal Republican. I believe in the freedom of the individual. Secular humanism is my mantra. That means that if there are Americans who desire a personal right that will not greatly harm the whole of society, I support it.

Many Republican libertarians (especially younger ones) support same-sex marriage, a woman’s right to abortion, and the legalization of marijuana. However, this is not what you will see on the national stage—especially not among the GOP candidates.

Three of the Republican candidates seem to have decided early in the race that they had no chance to win if they did not pull the typical party line on every issue. Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum may have different histories, but they all preach the same thing.

Though the historically more conservative Gingrich and Santorum have persistently sought to quash Romney’s front-runner status with his more moderate voting record, he has abandoned any trace of what once was an individual, progressive thinker. According to whyromney.com, the man who once emphasized “making equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern” and stood up for Roe v. Wade has sat down. He is no longer a man—he is a party pawn.

The only candidate who has strayed from the status quo is Texas Representative Ron Paul, who has proven himself pre-eminent in the political field regarding a strict code of values. Whether one agrees with Paul or not, his tenacious defense of the principles he has preached for decades is unquestionably admirable. He is the only Republican that has taken a step away from the party line. According to ronpaul2012.com, he opposes capital punishment and federal use of torture and supports the legalization of marijuana, three stances which are uncommon among Republicans.

Unfortunately, Ron Paul still opposes same-sex marriage and the right to abortion, stances which may be attributed to his age and the state in which he serves. Paul still follows the party line on most major issues, but at least he has demonstrated capacity for some individual thinking.

The travesty of this race for the Republican nomination is that Ron Paul seems to have no chance to win. Most Republican voters disliked him from the start, as his stances seemed to be too radical. This is what American politics have come to—if you do not pull the party line on every issue, you are a radical.

Therefore, there is only one option left for Republican voters. It is the Romney-Gingrich-Santorum vote, which would produce an extremely similar presidency if all three candidates mean to enact the policies they have proposed on the campaign trail.

Free-thinking Republicans will be left without a choice in November 2012. It will be the generic GOP party pawn, President Obama, or an ineffectual third-party vote. Since most politically conscious Americans would not abstain from voting in a presidential election and most Republicans strongly oppose the bulk of the president’s ideology, they will vote for Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum. Bereft of a free-thinking candidate, we will perpetuate the trend that has become our demise.