Most US presidential elections are won by persuading the relatively small number of undecided voters to move the needle just to the right or just to the left of 50/50.

All of the public sector unions that would be at risk from a libertarian president are 100% democrat anyway.

It seems like you're falling for the fictional narrative that is provided each election when the % of voters for R or D slides to 51% and the media sells this as some kind of change in the political landscape of America. It's not.

I don't think Ron Paul is so much vying for the presidency but rather just doing his best to find the tallest soapbox he can for the purpose of exposing Americans to libertarian ideas (I have him to thank for discovering libertarianism). He's pulling less punches this time around and I think it'll serve him well. ♥ Ron

Seriously.

It's just a (usually fairly reactionary) change in mood from white, college-educated, middle and upper-middle class people that almost always has to do with the state of teh economies.

Nobody else matters because nobody else ever changes their vote.

I don't know if people have it in them to martyr themselves like that. He must have SOME aspirations of grandeur to motivate him through all the dirty work, but he's probably motivated by honest things too a lot more than the others.

talking to crowds of tea partiers that adore you isn't exactly my idea of 'dirty work'

He's not a martyr. He's a hero. And I don't think any true libertarian is attracted to the power and prestige of the presidency. Only the mainstream zombie suit politicians who believe in nothing and will sell their souls to hold office have such motivations (in my opinion, of course).

I agree with you for the most part. You can't discount his chances though. He's got a 25 to 1 shot at winning it all, according to bodog. Add in some high inflation and economic turmoil and his chances go up. But yea, hopefully he can plant some ideas in a lot of peoples' minds even if they aren't convinced. Lay the groundwork for his son to run in 2016.

Although Ron is indubitably the best candidate for the economy, I don't know if voters will necessarily recognize that. I mean, Obama got elected vaguely campaigning for "change." People are gullible idiots. If the economy does worsen I'm sure there will be plenty of noise from the other candidates who will attempt to present themselves as people who can solve our economic troubles. So I'm not sure that would necessarily help Ron.

This seems about correct.

An economy in turmoil would help Ron by decreasing Obama's chances in the general election. Secondly, it would change the focus of the republican primary voters away from social issues toward economic issues.

Cutting down on foreign intervention will sound a lot better. Cutting the federal budget by 50% will sound a lot better. There will even more attention paid to the federal reserve (no questions asked about it during the 1st debate) and inflation.

Sure, the other candidates will present ideas for solving the economy. But only Paul (and Johnson) will explain the situation exactly as it is and not sugarcoat it. Will the other republican candidates call for abolishing the federal reserve, getting out of iraq/afghanistan, reforming entitlements, abolishing several federal departments? Even if the economy is obviously in decline, I doubt it.

Maybe not, but going on all the interviews and trying to stay principled while you skirt around the wrong trigger words and stuff like that doesn't seem too fun. And I'm not sure how exciting the past thirty years had been for him before 2008. Maybe he enjoys the rock star aspect of it, but that's sort of fodder to my point. Without that treat for him at the end of the tunnel, it's just tedious stuff that he probably doesn't regard as the best way to talk about liberty or whatever.

<<<Negative Nancy over here. Just sayin'. I don't know how you can assume "oh he's doing it for liberty", rather than for his own gain or whatever.

I see them as one in the same.

I'm not too worried.

If Bodog is offering 25-1 on him, it means that he is far less than that to actually win. They don't let you short him at 25-1, or else i'd be all over it.

4% over a year and a half is hardly worth getting excited about.

This is a good point, but if you didn't require escrow, it's better than nothing.

Yeah, no escrow I would put down every penny in my name and more if they let me. Granted if a real book let people make bets like that without taking the money first they would go broke pretty fast unless they had Tony Soprano running the collections department.

So does Mitt Romney. I agree that the things that actually promote freedom are fun and for your own gain while you do it, but I'm not sure being involved politically accomplishes that, so I assume RP has at least SOME motivations that are different than promoting liberty (even if for the most part he's driven by different things than the average politician).

Ron Paul vs. Morton Downey, Jr.'s audience 1988
awesome clip of Ron Paul defending his stance on the drug war in a heated Q&A.

edit: wow the whole show is like this. so good.

A+

This could be the slowest pony in politards history. But this clip is so good that you get a free pass.

ron paul of '88 for 2012!!

There are idiots... there are slimes... and then there's Morton Downey Jr.

I love how that guy's says "I'm a little overweight?!?!?!" as if its such a preposterous accusation.

Awesome clip.