Ron Paul scares the GOP for one reason.
Because a sizable number of people who would ordinarily vote against Hilbama will walk in, and vote for him. I'm thinking at least 2-3 points.
Maybe this time they'll actually LEARN something from it? Present a candidate whose most-public example of government service DOESN'T involve a blatant violation of the First (or any other) Amendment? Someone who's demonstratedly PRO-liberty?
I would have voted for Paul in the general election (actually, that can read, "...WILL vote for Paul..." - thanks to the wonder of write-in voting, and I'm making sure the Republican Party knows it). Might even have been willing to hold my nose and vote Thompson, if he'd come out on top. But MCCAIN?!? Not a frakking CHANCE. The Republican Party's been selling their "Vote for us or Candidate (D) will be voted in!!!!!" Koolaid for decades now, and I'm tired of hearing it and seeing the quality of the (R) frontrunners decline pretty steadily (on the premise of "Well, what are you going to do, vote Democrat? HAHAHAHA!!!!"). I MIGHT think about voting (R) when - IF - they get back to what they allege their Party is all about. I certainly won't vote for them and present the false front that the current actions of the Republican Party are acceptable. If they want to keep Candidate (D) out of office - well, it's probably too late this time, unless Hillary and Obama eat themselves/each other in the run up to the (D) nominating convention. I won't shed a tear, either way. It's far too late for that. Spiteful? Perhaps. But I refuse to blithely accept being ... spit on by those who want me to vote for them, just because they think they can get away with it since "the other guy is so much worse." If that means "the other guy" gets voted in by those who don't know better, or care, well, perhaps they should have thought of that before they ... spit all over those of us who demand something better from those chosen to represent and lead this country.
El T, I'll grant you every problem you've got with certain Paul supporters - note that I have not defended in any respect the specific ones you mention, nor the ones Manedwolf mentioned. Behavior like that reflects poorly on Paul, no question. Of course, it's virtually certain that for every individual like that, the ones the media preferred to focus on, there are hundreds or thousands of just-plain-folks, calmly and quietly holding down jobs, supporting families, raising kids, maintaining households, and doing all sorts of entertaining/useful/socially-redeeming things as hobbies. In all, thousands upon thousands of people who just aren't INTERESTING (read - not newsworthy, since they aren't raving loons), in the media's eyes, but who think that Ron Paul was the best candidate in the field anyways. People who don't get talked about in the media, who aren't presented as a support base for anyone, except maybe in aggregate when talking about vote or donation totals (hey, SOMEONE gave Paul a whole bunch of money for the campaign, and I doubt that your "Cheeto Loon" living in his mom's basement could afford it, from what you say). And you tarred all of US with that same brush you slapped the nuts with, too. You apparently bought into the media-generated stereotype - any wonder some of us here are a little torqued at being lumped in with them?
Besides, I hate Cheetos, I don't have a Wookiee costume, and I haven't lived in my mom's basement for over a decade. If you're going to insult me, is it too much trouble to ask you to at least make it accurate?
