Comment: To me, this division seems

(See in situ)

To me, this division seems

To me, this division seems far more like those who have given up and feel betrayed/beatin, vs. those who believe we've still got a chance and have faith in the campaign/Dr. Paul.

Side 1 is offering up alternatives because they don't feel Dr. Paul's campaign has a chance and we've already lost. Many are angry and see things that have occured as a sure sign of betrayal/incompetance. They have no proof, but feel its not wise or safe to cut the Paul's and their team the benifit of the doubt. Problem is, their alternatives, like Gary Johnson, 3rd party runs etc are offering no better odds than sticking with Dr. Paul.

Side 2 either believe's or hopes that Dr. Paul's got something up his sleeves and that a convention win isn't impossible. We choose to see certain events as part of a strategy to help thin our competition. We have no proof, but cut the Paul's the benifit of the doubt in return for 30 years of faithful service. Even if its wistful thinking, we are certainly no worse off for trying.

I see no reason not to throw in with the crowd still trying to win, even if you believe they are delusional. If they are wrong and we loose, well, we'd have lost anyway no matter if you went to support GJ or 3rd party, or stuck with Paul to the bitter end. But if they are right, the extra support from those who had given up on the campaign might be the differance between a win and a loss.

The division is harmful to the cause, and I can't see any logical benifit to siding with Side 1, at least not until after the convention.