Seriously? Either you didn't really think about this and where just angry, or you really are NOT a Paul supporter
I have no idea what a Ron Paul supporter would see in Obama and how such a person couldn't see at least SOME redeeming qualities in Romney who was *much* closer to Ron Paul than who was elected. I didn't much like Romney myself, but even if I didn't agree with everything he was head and shoulders above the alternative. So you just sat home on your hands because Romney didn't hold the extreme positions of the likes of Ron Paul? Shame on you.
Folks need to stop this "all or nothing" set of litmus tests for political campaigns when it comes to the general election, it's not healthy thinking. Yea, sure, during the primary fight it out, root for your choice of candidates, but once the nominee is named and confirmed, you stop the bickering and support the winner, or the other party will win, every time.
Don't you see? The Democrats are, right now, out stirring the pot about the Republican party's "break up". Just last week I got more than one "So, you cannot pick a speaker? How can you pick a candidate in the Republican party?" comments from my friends who are left of me. It's in all the media, it's a calculated play to keep disenchanted folks who's candidate didn't win from voting, to drive a wedge between the Ron Paul zealots and the eventual nominee (who will not be Ron Paul). So they LOVE folks like you, who are easily persuaded to sit at home on their hands while they are sending busses to pick up THEIR voters and bring them to the polls.
On Ron Paul directly.... Where I appreciate much of what he says, and I really like his constitutional stance on a lot of things, his foreign policy and stance on privacy lack practical understanding of reality. Christy's "instruction" of Paul on the use of NSA monitoring data is a prime example of where he looses touch with reality and refuses to allow even reasoned discussion of ways this can be done within constitutional bounds. Where I get his position, and I see the principle he's trying to uphold, there ARE reasonable ways to justify some of what the NSA has done but Ron can not or will not engage in that discussion. His foreign policy positions are also inflexible and brittle in a world where to be effective requires a bit more nuance than rigid ideology, more taking steps in the right direction and less forcing ones ideology.