So your response is to stay at home if your candidate is not the nominee?
What “practical” solution do you propose?
If the GOP establishment keeps dissing Paul and his supporters, they're going to stay home or write in Paul's name in the general. You don't think Paul's supporters aren't aware that they're being pissed on by the establishment? Please.
Real nice strategy there, trash Paul and his supporters but hope they vote for the nominee in the general.
Not sure what you mean by 'practical'. You don't understand. The intent of the Framers was that we vote for the candidate that represents our views at the national level, not for a party. Ron Paul represents my views. None of the other candidates do. So why should I make a 'practical' choice to vote for someone I don't agree with? Just to forward the party? Is that the intent of the Framers? If Rep. Paul is not the candidate, I will most likely write in his name as he would still be the person that best represents my views.
Of course I'm not sure I see the wisdom of allowing the general populace, who allows emotion to effect their vote, to elect the highest office in the nation either.
“What “practical” solution do you propose?”
The argument becomes can one man like RP make a difference? The answer is yes. To believe to the contrary, one would have to believe no other single individual in all of history made any difference whatsoever.
Whatever unfolds in this electoral process, no one can argue RP has not already made a remarkable difference. No candidate in the field, be they republican or democrat, can match his Constitutionally principled voting record. NOT ONE!
Moreover, his lone stance to defend our Constitution in Congress has made him a hero to many. His existence, and his voting record are not fantasy legends captured in ancient folklore. They are now, and they are real. RP represents the stuff from which real Americans are molded.