Can I make an unwelcome point

You have made some valid points in your  in your post. I grant that we have not convinced even a plurality that Rand is the best candidate, and the desire for someone who is flamboyant, showy, and speaks his mind bluntly is a strong factor. The soft - spoken (voice wise, not rhetorically) Obama has turned folks off to that type of personality, and Rand is what he is. But Trump is as big a part of the corporatism/welfare block as anyone else. Case in point: Democrats are switching parties to vote for him! Sanders is likely to get the DNC nomination, as Hillary's man-stand has turned off women and others. (not to mention her corruption!). So once again, I will focus on local issues, but will likely vote third party again for president. (as I have done for two election cycles, and my best friend has for three.)

They are as dumb as a box of rocks when it comes to politics and government, would not consider them anti-establishment, just basically causal voters who get their info from what they see on TV.  Duck Dynasty types -I doubt any of them vote in our primary.

They will vote in the general election, and then they will ask "where is Trump, how do I vote for Trump" and the old lady working the polls is going to say he lost in the primaries.

A though out post. Where'd that come from?

Kudos for a not troll post

You have a point, to a point.  Ron Paul grew the Liberty movement exponentially in 08 and especially 2012, but it's clear now that a good portion of his surprisingly large support came not from new libertarians but from those just looking for someone, anyone, with a message that differed from the status quo.

I call 'em the "just fix it" voters.  They know something's not right but don't have a clue about how to fix it because  they haven't bothered to attempt to understand the causes of the problems.  They just want it fixed and they'll jump in bed with the shiniest non-establishment mouthpiece that comes along, even though there is no depth to his policy prescriptions. This is YOUR base, oh coiffured one - the ignorant, "just fix it" guys and gals. Enjoy 'em while you have 'em 'cause they'll drop you quicker than you drop wives as soon as a shinier mouthpiece shows up on the scene.

That we may have presumed with little, if any, justification that the disenfranchised components that form  our particular segment of society are all libertarian.  We may have an altered perception of reality because we get our news from alternative media, not that dissimilar how people have a particular set of beliefs, or lack of any sense of what going on in the world, with respect to main media outlets. 

While alternative media is obviously infinitesimally better in all matters of substance and facts and  conform closer to reality; we should take great care to not repeat the same mistake that we all once held: that we once thought that main stream media conformed to reality and represented the truth-- that our sense of the world is still distorted even though alternative media is superior, it still isn't representative of actual reality... it's still to far from the truth. 

I always will appreciate well thought out posts and comments and I do agree with most of what you have clearly stated. 

However, don't presume to take crowded stadium as evidence to suggest anything. Even Ron had large crows and it didn't translate into victory, or to make a claim from a lack of evidence: crowded stadiums to suggest anything.

Moreover, don' under any circumstance use polling data as grounds to suggests who is winning right now.

Furthermore, It is much easier to manipulate the populace by resorting to fear, raw emotion and volumes of misinformation.  You can say that we lack the the immorality to archive our ends by those means. Those means don't change hearts at all. Hence, to charges hearts requires perseverance and putting forth strong valid arguments, not positive hyperbole. .