the media and political process could tear him to shreds with just that alone.

If there is a nominee, Paul should go back to the senate, crystallize his thoughts and start writing detailed proposals (without skimping on the specifics or facts) as to what he’d like to see happen with the country. Possibly form or endorse a government watchdog group.

If there’s a brokered convention he should take whatever he can grab and then do what I previously suggested.

He has the capacity to shape voters opinion, because he’s knowledgeable and has integrity, and his straight-forward honest approach appeals to moderates, young voters and the disenfranchised. This capacity can allow him to affect what issues the parties address and how they address them.

He can have a significant impact on the country over the next decade maybe two, but it’s not going to be as President. He’s not going to win this year and realistically he’s too old to run again, but he doesn’t need to be President to help fix the country.

1) What if both of them run, concurrently, against each other (as well as the Demican and Republocrat nominees)…?

OR

2) What if the two join forces and run under one ticket? Bloomberg-Paul or Paul-Bloomberg?

Here’s my take. I think he’s waiting to see how strong his support is on Feb 5th, if it’s not quite enough to give a good shot in a brokered convention, but strong none the less. I can see him going for it. He’s waiting to see how things pan out, thats just smart. One thing is for sure, if he runs third party, his new donation totals would far surpass anything we’ve seen thus far. Although it’s harder to get on the ballot, if you have cash pouring in, its not quite as hard. Also, getting enough votes might be easier than anyone expects, when everyone can vote, and the only other options are Hitlery or an Insane-Mccain/Ghoulian ticket.

Bloomberg, of course, is waiting to see if RP is going to run 3rd party, because if he does run, the Republicans need him to save their ass. Whatcha think?

Cedric

2) In any mix of the leading candidates, the Republican Party is going to lose the 2008 Presidential election, with or without Bloomberg and/or Paul participation. Which means we are on a hellbound train for at least two years of single party Democratic Government with a real possibility of a 60 vote Democratic plurality in th Senate. The only hope is that they are unlikely to do as much damage in two years as it took the single party Republican government to do in six.

3) There is one additional possibility which is also unlikely but possible with Romney or McCain leading the Republican ticket. Since the Republican party is already so far behind the 8-ball and unpopular due to the policies of the Bush administration, (70% think the country is going in the wrong direction), and either candidate will experience tissue rejection from a significant segment of the GOP itself, the best answer may be to just swim with the tide, and work actively for the complete destruction of the Republican Party. History shows that there is no path for a 3rd party to succeed in our system. However there are precedents for one of the two major parties self-destructing and being replaced by a new second party. Problem being, you have to blow up one to make room for the new. This may be the year to do just that. It would be a fitting legacy for George W Bush. The man who destroyed the Republican Party.

Justin, Could you add an “I told you so” tag for new posts? I am going to need it.

Check it out though…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0nJH6zB9VM

I have come to realize this past year that those currently in leadership of the GOP are statists as much as the Democrats are which is why they despise Paul’s government-reducing policies. The only difference is that the Democrats do not try to disguise their socialistic positions with terms such as “compassionate conservatism.” Both major parties love big government and look forward to their turn at controlling it; they only disagree on which pet projects that big government should be directing all that power it has accumulated towards.

Those who are anti-statist (libertarian) in their political views are quickly discovering that the modern GOP has little interest in defending and promoting their views, only in their votes on election day. Furthermore, they are banking on the anyone-but-Hillary mentality to win them the election regardless of whom they choose as their nominee, but I doubt it will pan out for them in the end.

So, we’re looking at Paul, Romney and McCain. McCain cannot differentiate himself from the Democratic candidate and the naive American voter is going to vote for a Democrat just because they aren’t a Republican and they aren’t faced with a real choice. Romney, too, will be unable to differentiate himself sufficiently from the Democrats because of his record in Massachusetts… and I’m sad to admit that his religion will become an issue and very well may be used against him. Both candidates are warmongering fools who are in total opposition to well more than a majority of Americans who are against the war in Iraq. Only Paul has the ability to set himself apart from the Democrats and offer a real choice to the American voter. The fact that he speaks so passionately against the war will gain a lot of attention from Democratic voters and his straight talk about our destructive economic policies is going to be very well received. In a debate with a Democrat, Ron Paul is the only one who will be able to go toe to toe and actually walk away with victories.

We must nominate Congressman Paul or we WILL have a Democratic victory. Mark my words and take them to the bank.