http://dailycapitalist.com/2011/09/17/ron-paul-can-win/
"...Sometimes, perhaps once in a few generations, a nation can undergo what a mathematician or physicist would call a “phase change.” The classic example of such a thing is a pile of sand. Every grain you add makes the pile slightly steeper and slightly higher without moving any of the other grains inside the pile, until eventually one grain is added that causes an avalanche of sand down the sides of the pile, moving thousand of grains and changing the shape of the pile.
Such behavior can be exhibited by all complex systems, and a nation — it should be obvious — is much more complex than a pile of sand.
The important point for those who would presume to make such grand predictions as “Dr. Paul cannot win” is that no examination of the pile of sand before the point of avalanche would tell you that, or when, the avalanche will eventually happen...."
Also from the comment section:
"...The question is not whether or not Dr. Paul can win. The question is, how can we hope to survive without him. The phase shift will occur, whether through political change or when the entire house that scrip and hegemony built collapses in on itself..."
i think that if he pledges to not enforce the drug war as unconstitutional, to end the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, and wherever else, and pledges to begin the end of the American empire he could win.
Whoa Daily Capitialist is a little late on the reprint...this is this guy who writes all this awesome stuff for (believe it or not) the Huffington Post where this one was published 3 weeks ago...
I remember a recent post here with a link to an article pointing out that Democrats could find Ron Paul attractive. Any idea where it was?
EDIT: JJ, you are right. Quite a late reprint for an Aug 29 article. Better late then never, I guess.
z1235: I remember a recent post here with a link to an article pointing out that Democrats could find Ron Paul attractive. Any idea where it was?
It's probably not this one but this is a really good and about the same kind of thing:
http://www.dailypaul.com/163107/smoking-article-to-send-to-any-left-and-or-obama-supporter-on-why-they-should-vote-paul-2012
And there is this if you haven't seen it:
A-L, thx for the good/relevant links. Though I remember the article being a different one.
z1235:I remember a recent post here with a link to an article pointing out that Democrats could find Ron Paul attractive. Any idea where it was?
Koerner wrote multiple ones like this. You're thinking of this one. Another that was posted is this one. Check out his archives here.
JJ, yes, that was the one. Thx.
""...The question is not whether or not Dr. Paul can win. The question is, how can we hope to survive without him. The phase shift will occur, whether through political change or when the entire house that scrip and hegemony built collapses in on itself...""
What's with this "we" stuff? Isn't it the goal of libertarian-anarchists to break down this state? This hegemony?
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
The single greatest determiner of electability is likability.
Translation: Ron Paul cannot win.