I can’t believe what little coverage Ron Paul is getting in the “mainstream press”. Running for political office seems to be a chicken and egg game, where the media ends up deciding who is viable. Think about it:

1. The press only cover “viable” candidates.
2. Viable candidates are those who poll well.
3. Candidates can only poll well if the electorate are aware of the them.
4. The electorate only know about people whom the press cover.
5. When people are polled, they choose a candidate they know about.
6. Lather, rinse, and repeat.

Thankfully, the Ron Paul campaign, like the Howard Dean campaign during the 2004 election, is working as a true grassroots campaign, despite the lack of coverage. Now, the numbers are showing it! According the campaign fundraising disclosures, the Ron Paul campaign has raised more money than the McCain campaign, this puts him at number three amongst the Republican candidates, although he is admittedly well behind the Romney and Giuliani.

I was talking to a friend of mine who made a very interesting comment about the people where he grew up in western Pennsylvania. He said that the people out there tend to want to support the winner. It’s almost like betting on horses… their goal is to go in and vote for the person they think is going to win. I don’t think this thinking is limited to Western PA. Once you wrap your head around the recursiveness of this thinking, you start to see how much influence the media has in who gets elected in this country. If the media projects an idea that a person like Paul can’t win, people will conclude he can’t win, and end up not voting for him.

Kinda sad, really.