My boy, Ron Paul, is making huge amounts of progress in the midst of near total media blackout. He has surpassed John McCain in cash on hand, and in an interview with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, he will announce that he has $2.4 million in the bank, ahead of John McCain's $2 million.

Perhaps he isn't such a long-shot candidate after all...

Ron Paul Vaulting towards 1st Tier - has more Cash on Hand than John McCain

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Well the massive internet presence has helped him, I don't have time to read the article but I'm assuming he's made a lot off of small net donations like Obama.

McCain's in freefall. Perhaps it's that he ran before and got steamrolled by Bush's goonies, or maybe it's just Iraq's going to drag him to a watery grave. In any case, Romney seems to have easily overtaken McCain as of now.

Ron Paul still doesn't have a chance. John McCain is running short of cash because he spent huge amounts of it trying to gain up to Rudy Guliani, and now Fred Thompson, and gain additional cash (which never arrived because the GOP base dislikes him, although they dislike Ron Paul more).

John McCain is no longer first tier. Mitt Romney represents the outer edge of that subjective group, and that is because he leads in Iowa, and New Hampshire. He remains well behinds Rudy and Fred.

Ron Paul is the only person running for President with broad appeal who is honest and makes sense. I hope the internet will propell him to victory since the party bosses and the media don't want someone who tells the truth.

Well we can all hold our breath and wait for the 08 election Paul v. Kucinich if we want... but that day still ain't never gonna come.

McCain will be dropping out soon but that doesn't mean anything... and $2.4 million dollars in the bank in an presidential election campaign has the same value as trying to by a brand new car for $1000. All the leaders have 20 to 30 times that much already.

I don't expect him to win the election, but everyone who votes for him through the general election will make a difference by registering their demand for candidates who hold Paul's positions. In future elections, those will be votes that major party candidates want to earn, and they'll adjust their positions to match.

It's clear that even Ron Paul himself recognizes the massive odds and forces working against his candidacy, but he knows that the explosion of support for a Ron Paul presidency will affect future elections at the local, state, and national levels, which might mean the appearance of a stronger constitutionalist/libertarian candidate in 2012 or 2016.

Libertarians have been cynical for a very long time. It's the normal state of mind for rational people trying to live in the current political environment. After the results of previous elections, even Paul's current limited success seemed impossible. News like this shows that at least a small bit of hope is justified, because it's not Ron Paul's stage presence that's making the idea of liberty popular. It's the idea of liberty that's making Ron Paul popular.

Well said. Here's another good article on Ron Paul:

The Honor of Ron Paul

By Joseph Sobran

I guess I’ve known Ron Paul for a quarter of a century now, and I don’t remember how we met. My first memory of him is a quiet dinner on Capitol Hill, during the Reagan years. He told me with dry humor of being the only member of Congress to vote against some bill Reagan wanted passed. For Ron it was a matter of principle, and he was under heavy pressure to change his vote.

What amused him was that the Democrats didn’t mind his voting against it; all the pressure came from his fellow Republicans, professed conservatives, who were embarrassed that anyone should actually stand up for their avowed principles when it was unpopular to do so.

That was Ron Paul for you. Still is. The whole country is getting to know him now, and the Republicans still want to get rid of him. The party’s hacks, led by Newt Gingrich, have even tried in vain to destroy him in his own Texas district.

They’re right, in a way. He doesn’t belong in a party that has made conservative a synonym for destructive. George Will calls him a “useful anachronism” because he actually believes, as literally as circumstances permit, in the U.S. Constitution. In his unassuming way, without priggery or histrionics, he stands alone.

He may have become at last what he has always deserved to be: the most respected member of the U.S. Congress. He is also the only Republican candidate for president who is truly what all the others pretend to be, namely, a conservative. His career shows that a patriotic, pacific conservatism isn’t a paradox.

If they can’t expel Ron Paul from the party, they can at least deny him the nomination. The GOP front-runner, Rudy Giuliani, who says he hates abortion more than any other constitutional right (or words to that effect), went into raptures of phony indignation during the first “debate” when Paul said simply that the 9/11 attacks were a natural result of U.S. foreign policy. The pundits applauded the demagogue, but millions of viewers were thrilled to find one honest man on that crowded stage. (By the way, Paul is a doctor who has delivered thousands of babies and never killed one.)

Ron — I’m very proud to call him my friend — fares well not only in comparison with the party’s sorry current candidates, but also with its legendary conservative giants, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. He lacks their charisma and of course Reagan’s matchless charm, but he excels them both in consistency, depth, historical awareness, courage, and honor. Heaven grant him some of Reagan’s luck!

Which brings us to the big question: does Ron Paul have a prayer? Well, he may have a prayer, but that’s about it. He doesn’t have a billion dollars; delivering babies, often free of charge, is not the way to amass a staggering fortune. He has nothing to offer the special and foreign interests who pour millions into Rudy’s and Hillary’s coffers. Sorry, this isn’t a Frank Capra movie.

But virtue — honor — is rare enough to be an asset, especially when the two big parties don’t have much of it. If both offer pro-war, pro-abortion New York liberals next year, there could be an urgent demand for a third option, especially since Giuliani could smash what’s left of the Bush-riddled GOP coalition while Hillary remains, well, Hillary.

What if Ron Paul runs for president on, say, the Constitution Party ticket? Who knows? I can only attest that to know him is to love him, and knowing him for many years has only deepened the esteem I felt for him when we were both much younger men. This is a man who strikes deep chords in people’s hearts.

Every attempt to portray him as an extremist, or even eccentric, founders on his palpable probity and wisdom. His words are the carefully measured words of one given to meditation. Ron Paul is a man you listen closely to.

The odds are heavily against his being elected president next year. But if he is on the ballot in November, the odds are far heavier against his candidacy’s being forgotten. He will say things worth pondering long after the votes are cast.

Until now, the GOP has been able to contain Paul by pretending he wasn’t there. But the silent treatment can no longer stifle this soft-spoken man. He has been proved right too often.

I would agree with you.

Much like Nader trying to push the Democrats in the "Green Party" direction Ron Paul with a noticeable showing in the Republican primary might put more pressure on the Republicans in the future to more consider some of his Libertarian positions.

Ron Paul will have zero effect in the Republican primary. I think many of his "people" will then suspect some conspiracy.

WASHINGTON, DC - Following through with his perfect record of having never voted for a congressional pay raise, US Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) on Thursday once again voted against an increase in the salary of Members of Congress.

"I have never and will never vote to increase Congress' pay; it's shameful that Congress seems to think that they should be raising their own pay at the same time the American people see their taxes increasing, federal spending going up, and the national debt getting larger," said Rep. Paul. "Many Members of Congress say they spend so much time in D.C. that they need more money. I say that not only does Congress not need a pay raise, we need to return to the Constitution, limit what the federal government has its fingers in, cut the time Congress spends in session, and cut the pay congressmen receive."

It is sad, said Paul, that at the same time Congress is attempting to increase its own pay, it has been examining ways to reduce the benefits paid to veterans and senior citizens.

Not only has Rep. Paul refused to ever vote for a congressional pay raise, but he is also one of the few representatives to turn down the lucrative pension Congress gives itself.

"Between the ability to increase pay at their whim and the juicy pension package they give themselves, it is no wonder so few Members of Congress ever leave their office and return to the private sector," said Rep. Paul. "How many Americans can, without thought, grant themselves a pay raise? How many Americans can take part in a pension which pays out the huge sums the congressional pension does? None, because Congress can simply increase taxes to pay the bill. Even the wealthiest of business owners have to answer to the bottom-line profitability of their company; Congress has no such accountability."

http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press98/pr071798.htm