Why some Democrats are beginning to follow Ron Paul

Ron Paul has been considered further from the political space between Democrats and Republicans than the Republicans themselves.  How is it, then, that some Democrats have started siding with him, rather than with Republicans?  One of the reasons is Paul's promotion of the Constitution itself.  It is a sound basis for government and Democrats understand that.  Politicians on both sides of the aisle have been ignoring it for decdes, but Ron Paul has been promoting it and railing against them the whole time.  Finally, people are demanding that our leaders respect this important founding document.

Another reason a Democrat might gravitate toward Ron Paul is that Democrats enjoy a good joint as much as Republicans.  They might not inhale, but they still enjoy it.  This particular enjoyment suffers from stifling and oppressive government control, and Democrats don't like it.  Whether you belong to one of the parties or not, it's pretty easy to recognize that there are some areas of our lives in which government shouldn't interfere.

Welfare and Warfare.  Voters in the Democratic Party traditionally care more about the underprivileged than those in the Republican party.  This has always been used by rulers to justify taking money away from all citizens, regardless of their party afiiliation to be spent on helping these underprivileged.  Democrats, however, have noticed that a great portion of what they give up for this good reason ends up being spent on foreign policy - Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the messing around the US did in the middle east to foment 9/11 in the first place.  While Ron Paul argues that the state shouldn't be taking money from its citizens in the first place, he also argues that Defense Department expenditures are tremendously wasteful.  He promotes the libertarian argument that citizens should decide how their own money should be spent.

Oddly enough, the Bush tax cuts have helped Democrats realize the benefits of keeping their own money and being responsible for using it.  They are able to help the underprivileged on their own.  They find their own decisions, even as a group, are better than those of the government which is as likely or more likely to spend it on foreign wars and CIA black operations than on helping poor people.

Corporatism vs Capitalism.  As Ron Paul's campaign to Audit the Fed and eventually End the Fed goes on and on, everyone is realizing that this country is under the thumb of big business, and there's something wrong with that.  One of the deceits that people are now seeing through is the idea that this trend is a natural result of capitalism.  It has come to light that most of the big banks and insurance companies have friends in high places, and the power of government is what produced the bailouts that have kept them alive throughout the financial crisis.  As awareness of the taxpayer as support-system for corporations that are too-heavy-to-fail and the pain of carrying them spreads, Democrats feel it too.  Capitalism without the big government to support it creates goods and services that allow the underprivileged to prosper, encourages the competition that employs them, and promotes the environment that supports diversity.