In a word?  NOTHING.

I hear all the time from Ron Paul cultists that Ron Paul will do this or he will do that.  They are constantly saying to look at what Ron Paul stands for.

Well... by now most people actually following the election will have heard about Ron Paul's debacle with his newsletter(s) of +20 years.  Either he is a lying, bigoted, racist politician with beliefs on par with the David Dukes of the world or he is so far out of touch and detached with what is going on around him in his own name as to call into question his ability to lead anything.

But I went even deper into the murk and looked at his actual record of recent accomplishments.

To whit:

The simple answer is that he would be President and not King.  As President he has to play with others.  He has shown through his entire legislative career that he is incapable of doing that.  In one regard that could be viewed as a positive as he has stood for his principles. On the other hand since the world does not walk in lock step with him he has actually done very little.

Facts: Let's look at his record in Congress and take the 107 Congress as a snap shot.  Note the Republicans (Ron Paul's Party") were in control then.

Click on his House Website. http://www.house.gov/paul/legis/welcome.htm then click on the Sponsored legislation for the 107th Congress.  He sponsored 68 pieces of Legislation.  64 were "referred to committee" that means they went nowhere.  3 were overwhelming voted against: 62-364, 71-359 and 47-375.  The single piece of legislation that was passed was an amendment to not fund the ICC 264-152.  That was a great amendment to offer and to have won but it shows how ineffective he has been working with others.  Being President is all about working with others.  You are not King.

On his Co-sponsored legislation from the 107 Congress: He cosponsored 323 pieces of legislation.  Of those...
1. Passed a resolution proclaiming Mexico's importance to the US
2. Passed a resolution in support of the War on Terror
3. Recognize Ronald Reagan's birthday
4. Reduce Marriage Penalty
5. Phase out Estate Tax
6. Increase benefits for Railroad Workers
7. Permit private schools to have tuition programs not be taxed
8. Expand Child tax credit
9. Tax Relief Act
10. Expand Adoption tax credit
11. expand education IRA
12. Deduction of Interest
13. Employer provided education assistance

The other 310 pieces of legislation were either "referred" or defeated.

He might be "right" on many issues but if he can't get even a reasonable portion of what he want's passed what good is he other then to offer platitudes and rhetoric to his followers while nothing is really accomplished.

The measure of a man is what he can accomplish not just what he says he wants to accomplish.

An Election is too important a thing to be squadered away with a protest vote.

Let's look at it from the Primary Election standpoint. For the sake of argument let's limit it to three candidates.

Candidate 1 = You are totally against him winning your "Parties" nomination
Candidate 2 = You agree with some positions and disagree with others.
Candidate 3 = You LOVE everything he stands for but he is polling at 2-5% and has no hope of actually winning.

You vote for Candidate 3.  Other friends of yours also vote for Candidate 3 splitting off votes that could have gone to Candidate 2 resulting in Candidate 1 winning.

Now we move to the General Election

Party 1 = Hillary
Party 2 = Candidate 1

You had already decided that Candidate 1 would not get your vote.  There is no way that you will vote for the other Party so with an Electorate split almost 50/50 your sitting on your hands and throwing a temper tantrum results in Hillary winning.

Same thing applies if Candidate 3 runs as an "Independent" and splits off votes from Candidate 1.  Hillary wins.

That is the definition of Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I see him locking the status quo in even tighter.  As an "outsider" that earned the name Dr. No by his own "colleagues" they will have little interest in working with him since he will be unwilling (and has always legislated that way) to settle issues in a win/win fashion.  Again, legislation (just like marriage) is a give and take.

Paul's track record is to not get along and to therefore not get anything done.  That is not to say that one should rush out and abandon all principle.  It is to say that you take your victories where you can find them and work to advance your agenda.  To be plain obstinate get's you no where.

Like Ron Paul, I think that we are not fully following the Constitution?  However, the President does not rule by fiat because we live in a representative democracy.  That means we have to play with others and negotiate with them to get anything done.  Think Congress would give Ron Paul the time of day?  Nope.  If he were to go third party and somehow pull off an upset do you think the Democrats and Republicans controlling Congress would pass legislation he wants?  Nope.  Think they would override any of his vetos just for the sport of it?  Yep.  He would be a lame duck before he even took the oath of office.  Think the entrenched bureaucrats that any president has to deal with would do anything he wanted?  Not hardly.