The real question that the Ron Paul candidacy poses for Democrats

[TheKentuckian]

131. And this has what to do with him having any functional space at all is because Democrats

insist for no good reason to allow him to essentially be the only representation whatsoever for the few positions he is correct on (regardless if he honestly holds the positions or if he arrives at them only because of being broadly insane in pursuit of an ideology that was already unworkable when it was first set out).

Democrats should be the civil liberties party, not just when compared to the opposition but in active pursuit of our ideals.

Democrats should not be partners in the foolish drug war.

Democrats should not be writing indefinte detention bills.

Democrats shouldn't be beating the Pax Americana drums.

Democrats shouldn't be granting immunity for wiretaps.

Democrats should be fighting the Patriot Act tooth and nail rather than rubberstamping it.

The only reason Paul (and by extension the libertarian ideology in general) have almost any air outside of the looniest of the faaaaar Reich is because he is giving some level of representation of deeply held ground that a liberal party of any worth or seriousness of intent would occupy along with a sane broader framework built for the benefit of the many.

Ignoring that on some critical points there is no other representation is not a fix, his schtick only works because he is a voiceless on less than a handful of points and because by trick, accident, or or twisted logic based on a fucked broader framework.
This little space is all that seperates him from Louie Gohmert and part of the larger divide in our party, which is the reason we are having this discussion.

It isn't really about Paul at all and the insistence on making about Paul is a wholesale distraction because some folks don't want to have the debate about these issues. In fact, will do anything to avoid dealing with the why our party is on the wrong side of these issues regardless of if it can be argued that the point occupied on the wrongness scale is less odious than what the opposition is about.

Yes, 8-1 penalties for crack versus coke is far better than 20-1 but it makes neither anything resembling sane and it exemplifies the essential failure in thinking on issue after issue in our leaders and by extension what the rank and file will swallow that which sustains a failed paradigm that makes actual solutions impossible to even propose, much less implement on any human time scale and arguably works to strengthen the status quo and only offers "hope" for actual change in some fine day when the environment changes by magic and electing folks with a particular letter by their name regardless of their policy positions or even their actual votes.

Folks will go to the water even if it is mostly sludge, give the people the water and they will come to your well, don't allow a fuckwit like Paul be the sole source of the water on these occurs.
I see no possible benefit in screaming about sludge when you won't even discuss the water and there is even less point in the asinine pretense that the water isn't there, even if the guy selling water has no intention nor ability to provide it.

Folks will still be thirsty and nothing will paper that over. Certainly not pretending we must have the police state, the drug war, and be quick to get involved in military adventures that tend to be to give multinationals resource control.
Sure, Paul's ideology is unworkable and more so undesirable but not in the areas where he gets traction, which again are the areas where Democrats should be ashamed of not owning.