Basically, it comes down to defining the counter to Liberalism. Who are the Liberals going to vote for? The answer is obvious. It's ironic because in-fighting used to be the sole property of the Dems. Envirnomentalists vs. Unions vs. Minorities vs. Gays and so on. Now the infighting is in the GOP. The contention is the new definition of Conservatism. Personally, I prefer Paul over any of the GOP hopefuls. His biggest asset is also his biggest problem: He is so incredibly honest, he blows people away. While Obama, Romney, Perry and Whackmann are probably lying about whether they think it would be a good idea to legalize pot, Paul doesn't hesitate to verbalize it - knowing that will cost him votes. He offers many such examples. So Conservatives have to decide whether or not they want to talk the same old hypocritical bullsh1t about "less government", while sticking their noses into every social issue they can manage, continuing bullsh1t wars etc... or do they want to put someone in who will actually champion the Less Government they do nothing but give lip service to. These people are stronger in their conviction and willingness to do what is right, in the face of incredible odds, than anyone I've seen in a long time. No, I don't agree with them on everything and yes, like any other group, they have their hostile whackjobs. No surprises. But as an Independent, I am free to admire and respect (many of) them for not conforming to the same old definition of "Conservative" that so many Americans have become frustrated with. Kudos Ron Paul Supporters. I still don't agree with you on a lot of your views but I was wrong to think they weren't insightful or valid.