I love answering rhetorical questions!
Ron Paul Support is a Conspiracy, claims National Media: "Major media outlets have denied fund raising reports, rally attendance, and record breaking internet support as the work of a small secretive group of Ron Paul supporters conspiring to defraud the public. Is it time for them to give up this conspiracy theory before they lose credibility?"
Why, yes. Yes, it is.
His grassroots campaign boasts twenty thousand members and he has over 20,000 videos dedicated to him on YouTube.Com, dwarfing all other republican candidates. He sells out rallies wherever he attends and has won a straw poll in crucial New Hampshire. In fact, there is only one metric which measures his support to be on the same level as second tier candidates, national polls. National polls ask small groups of people, often less than one thousand, who they plan to support for the White House. In July of 2007 how can this be taken as a metric of anything besides name recognition when the election is over 12 months away.I'm old enough to remember catcalls of "Jimmy who?" I recall them being reported as news by the MSM. That was President Jimmy Carter.
And then there was President Clinton - written off in the early stages as a nobody from nowhere, certainly not anyone to take seriously.
So I don't take anything very seriously this early in the campaign. But Dr. Paul's appeal to the sensibilities of independent voters, rather than to partisans of either party, is surely a threat to the "mainstream candidates."
I'm pretty sure that Ron Paul would be pleased as punch to get a mere ten percent of the vote - a goodly slice of the electorate, if you think in terms of message as being as or more important than winning. And indeed, one tremendous difference you can gather from watching Ron Paul speak is that he clearly doesn't give a tinker's damn how any particular statement is going to go down with any particular audience. From any sane political viewpoint, there are some positions he should distance himself from - but he simply will not. He believes as he believes, votes as he votes and let's the chips fall where they may.
That impresses me a hell of a lot more than his stands on issues that I disagree with.
Like millions of other voters, I can calculate the difference between what a President would like to do, and what Congress, Courts and Constitution will allow. Nor am I concerned that "Dr. No" will trample the Constitution in his crusade to restore it. I think his strong Constitutional stance is key, giving the dubious respect for Constitution and civil liberties displayed by the current Supreme Court And as much as I look forward to a probable sweep of Congress by progressive brooms - I very much doubt that a majority of them would understand how to write a bill that is Constitutional. The Presidential veto will be key in restraining their enthusiasm.
That is why he's the choice of this blog and this blogger for the Republican presidential nominee.