I think Ron Paul is to libertarians what Howard Dean was to greens / lefties in 2004. He looks new and exciting compared to the rest of the field, and his nominal platform appeals strongly to technically literate young men (keep your hands off my pot, my porn, and my stock portfolio!). Once you scratch the surface, however, just as Dean wasn't all that much of a lefty (at least, no more than any of the other major candidates - his one distinguishing feature was opposing the Iraq War), Ron Paul isn't all that much of a libertarian. He's morally pretty conservative (for instance, he opposes abortion and gay marriage, and desires regulation of both at the state level - a solution that would almost certainly result in many states banning both), something that alienates large chunks of the libertarian base. His big support comes from (like Dean) his opposition to the Iraq War (and overall isolationism). Take that away, and he's not much different from any of the other GOP candidates - and in some ways, more conservative. I consider myself to be somewhat of a libertarian (although I'm probably more of a civil libertarian at this point - I'm more willing to support the need for taxes and government services than I used to be), but I don't really get a good vibe from Paul...he's a bit more polished than some of the crazier parts of the libertarian party, but even if he did somehow survive the Republican Primary, he'd get ripped up in the general election.

You sure about that? You could be right, because he's probably the only one who would say what needs to be said (everyone else is sold out on both sides).  If I could vote in your elections, he's the only one candidate aside from a Obama/Clinton ticket that I see as worthwhile.

Tipping Sacred Cows

   Odd. I've run into a few folks (in print) who felt the same way about Kucinich, if he ever won the Democratic nomination.

Ex ignorantia ad sapientiam; e luce ad tenebras

Seriously. Why are they attempting to drive things further to the right? This should be an election where the candidates are jumping over each other to avoid partisianship and move toward a more centrist position, or at least have "something for everybody." What ever happened to the party of the "Big Tent?"

The point is, while shenanigans like that can help energize a base it doesn't matter if the base gradually erodes over time and is a small minority anyway. Didn't Bush & Co try that in the days before the last election cycle? And we all know how that ended up.

I'm an idiot who cannot use HTML appropriately, I guess.

Anyway, here is the real link to the poll: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18963731/