The republican party is an excellent recent example for this actually. The teabaggers rebellion didn't run third party candidates, they ran in party primaries and started knocking out incumbents. The remainder of the party saw this in action and moved fairly quickly to align with the insurgent faction out of simple self-interest. The result was that the party shifted rather significantly to the right to accommodate them which meant that they ended up getting much of what they wanted.
The grassroots, "teabaggers", and Ron Paul libertarians, did not get what they wanted. They were exiled from the party. The party rules were changed so that any sort of grassroots rebellion could be extinguished.
I understand the theory you're suggesting. It isn't working though. We aren't getting the liberty, peace, and prosperity we deserve. We're getting more of the same.
What we need to do is to choke that stubborn senile elephant, and replace it with what it use to stand for, libertarianism.
As far as the Democrats are concerned, well... keep it classy.
What the hell are you talking about? If Ron Paul won and got his agenda, the future would be destroyed for well over 99% of the country. Most people for generations would not even finish high school, let alone college; because they wouldn't be able to afford it. Workers would become the property of the companies they work for, bought and sold like furniture. Voting would be meaningless, as corporations would have all the power to rig elections their preferred way - not that it would matter since most people would be working 80 hour weeks with no time off to go and vote regardless. Our water, air, and land would all be polluted for profit and people would have no recourse as the courts would be owned by the corporations as well.
I don't think you understand how free markets and private property rights work. The big corporations are using the government regulations as leverage against small businesses and/or other competition. It's the government that unconstitutionally takes from the people, and gives to the corporations. It's the cronyism that's the problem.
Even if you don't think Ron Paul is perfect, he's way better than either of these crony-capitalist/corporatist scumbags that aren't any different from one another.
For the fraction of 1% of the US that would benefit from that, sure, a vote for Ron Paul would be great. For the rest of us it would be terrible. Thankfully even if he somehow did win, he has nowhere near enough support in congress to accomplish his ultra-right-wing agenda. That means, of course, that a vote for Ron Paul would be a vote for gridlock and the status quo.
Wouldn't it be nice not to have a president working for the propaganda machine? For thirty years Ron Paul has been speaking the truth. He's predicted so many things that have come true. He's been using the facts, and not just telling the people what they want to hear.