Lately I’ve noticed an uptick in the number of calls, emails and Tweets from people using a similar line: Why should we vote for Mitt Romney, he’ll be no better than Obama!There’s no difference between the two.

Are you kidding me?  The person frying the wings at the Hooters in Hiram, Georgia would make a better president than the current hack in the White House.

So that got me thinking … who ARE these people?  And then I figured it out.  I went back and looked at some of their prior tweets.  If Twitter is an indication, these folks are  Paulistas.  These are people who are upset that their guy isn’t going to be the next president.  So rather than make a decision based on their realistic choices for president – Mitt Romney or Barack Obama – their idea is to take a whiz in everyone’s cheerios, grab their ball and go home.  If we’re not going to play with Ron Paul, then they don’t want to play at all.  So then they come up with this line that Mitt Romney would be no better than Barack Obama so that they don’t feel compelled to explain why they are no longer engaged now that their guy (Ron Paul) is out of the picture.

I’m not slamming Ron Paul here --- were it not for his foreign policy stance I would prefer him in the White House over pretty much all of the candidates we’ve seen.  But he simply is not on the ballot – and even die-hard Libertarians need to face up to this fact.

If these Paulistas cannot dip into the logical side of their brain and come to the realization that Mitt Romney would be a far better leader than Barack Obama, then they will get exactly what they deserve: Four more years of faded Obama posters.