Ron Paul for President? No Way. Why? Two Words.

Two words:

Goldwater 1964.

More words:

Barry Goldwater was the Republican Party nominee for President of the U.S. in 1964.
He ran against the incumbent President Democratic Party hack Lyndon Johnson.
He lost. Big Time.

What was Goldwater's message? Very similar to that of Ron Paul's today.
Barry Goldwater was classified as a conservative. A rather radical one at that. But he got press coverage.

Ron Paul is classified today simply as a radical. He gets negligible media coverage.

In contrast with Goldwater, Ron Paul is not even going to get the Republican nomination.
(If he does, I will reconsider my philosophical beliefs regarding "God" and miracles.)
He is not going to be elected President, neither as a Republican nor as an independent nor as a libertarian (either capital or lower case "l").

Why?

It would take an intelligent and informed populace with a subset of intelligent and informed voters to vote for someone other than a Republicrat or Demopublican.
Think that will happen? Fuggedaboudit.
It would take a majority of voters to be intelligent and informed.
Look around you. Most people, including voters, are stupid and ignorant. 'Nuff said.

Well, a few more words:

"Nothing has been more amply demonstrated during the past three thousand years than this: that the great majority of men do not esteem, or understand, or even desire personal liberty." [Freeman Tilden, from A World in Debt, 1936.]

"... monstrous economic delusions have never once, in history, been removed by being exposed
in printed form by thinkers upon the subject." [Freeman Tilden, from A World in Debt, 1936.]