Could Ron Paul actually win the GOP nomination?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Paul forces are planning to take control of the Idaho state convention on June 22 to overturn the results of this Spring's caucus there. With all 32 of Idaho's delegates, I estimate that, up until May 1, the Paul forces have 361 delegates, all anti-Romney forces have 742 delegates, and the pro-Romney forces have only 723 delegates.

Including the May 8 results, the Romney forces have 807 delegates, the Santorum+Gingrich bloc has 393 delegates, and Paul+Unc. has 397 delegates. However, this assumes that the results of the June 1-3 conventions in North Carolina and June 8-9 conventions in Indiana allocate Romney his deserved delegates from these regions.

If Paul seizes the North Carolina state convention, then he comes away with an additional 52 delegates. If he seizes Indiana's state convention, he comes away with all of the state's 46 delegates. In that case, there is no way Romney reaches 1,144 on the first ballot.

Of course this is assuming the Gingrich and Santorum delegates don't go to Romney. Granted there is evidence there are Paulites embedded within them as well, if Gingrich releases his delegates before the convention Paul will no doubt get a bunch out of Georgia.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BRTD, are you an ironic Paul supporter because he'd lose to Obama or do you legitimately like him?

Both. It's well known that Paul is my favorite Republican, he's better than many Democrats on some issues and certainly preferable to any of the joke "moderates" in the modern day GOP. Also God reached me and changed my heart through a die-hard Paulite.

However my support of this has little to do with Paul and rather with how much trouble and headaches his deranged cult is causing for the GOP.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I fail to see why the Paulites causing an epic embarrassment for the GOP and securing an even more easy re-election for Obama is something to be concerned about.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So we're not only assuming that Paul stands a chance of winning the general election, but also that he could get his economic policies through Congress.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'd hate to rail against Beet, since he's generally well meaning, but yeah, his prediction record now is about on par with that of Harold Camping. But even he's predicting that Paul's not going to win the general election, making me wonder why he's freaking out over the possibility. Paul's also not the type to run to the center after locking up the nomination or back down over his fringe views, sure he might de-emphasize them and just run on "lower taxes, less government, blah blah blah", but the guy's easier to hit than Mitt Romney's record.

Paul being nominated as quite a few advantages besides the lulz. For one, Democrats won't be able to rely on Republicans not being even worse on civil liberties and the drug war, if Paul endorses the vote to legalize marijuana in Washington for example, it's not likely state Democrats will rail against it heavily, more than likely the most prominent ones will just nominally endorse a no vote at most, which is quite a bit less than Feinstein co-chairing the No on 19 campaign, despite the prop helping Democrats with boosted turnout and receiving a hardly non-fringe 46% of the vote (Higher than Whitman's percentage.) Now Beet will say that's not as important as economic policy. But even he's admitting Paul's not going to get in office to implement that, and really just having someone like Paul promote such fringe views is going to help the Democrats in places that have moved against them in recent years.

Paul will also be a disaster for the GOP downballot, even disregarding the sheer embarrassment factor. Think of upper middle class suburban Republican types who think they benefit from Republican economic policies (basically 25%ers who think they are 1%ers), but would probably think Paul is a kook and would be terrified of his views on drugs and "national security". Hell even Torie, who actually agrees with Paul on these issues thinks he's a nut and won't vote for him. Since many of these types will refuse to vote for Obama, they'd likely just stay home, and that's in lots of swing areas. Plus the Paul cultists who will turn out aren't guaranteed to vote Republican downballot.

There is really no loss for liberals I can view from a Paul nomination at all.