Iowa, 2008:
Huckabee comes out of nowhere to grab 40,954 votes in the Iowa Caucus. He goes on to host a television show. Ron Paul's supporters feel crushed when he takes in only 11,841 votes, though that number, in fact, is only a couple thousand less than eventual nominee John McCain's 15,536... who was crushed in Iowa not only by Huckabee, but a certain Mitt Romney, who got 30,021 votes.

Wait. Maybe I have my numbers mixed up... where did I hear 30k before? Oh.. that's right. Helloooo, 2012, where Mitt Romney won with 30,015 votes. Yep. That's right. Over the past 4 years, Mitt actually found a way to lose 6 supporters. To put it another way, he is the flatline of flatlines, the very definition of having a support 'ceiling'.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul crushed his own previous showing, up from 11,841 to a whopping 26,219. To keep this in the media vernacular, we might say his votes went 'through the roof'. And before we buy into this idea that Ron Paul shipped in young supporters, or any of that malarkey, lets look at total votes -- approximately 121k in 2012 vs approximately 118k in 2008 (these numbers are sourced from summing all notable Republican candidate votes, not from some misleading totals I've seen). Even if we give credit to Ron Paul for bringing all 3k new voters into the fold and simply took those votes out... Ron Paul still would have 23k votes, which is over double his 2008 results and still a very strong 3rd.

So, what do we have here? Ron Paul, the candidate who never loses a voter, only gains them, verses Mitt 'Mr. Plastic Ceiling' Romney, verses Rick 'Please, please, don't vet me' Santorum.

If we had an objective media, Ron Paul wouldn't just be a story, he'd be the story. His rise, his supporters' enthusiasm, would be the Rocky of a generation. Instead? He's done this in spite of a tremendous media campaign against him - first to ignore and/or mock him, then to discount him, and then to smear him. Their lie is in the numbers, as plain as day for anyone paying attention.

The other candidates recognize this. In 2008, all the other candidates famously mocked Ron Paul... and now they parrot him on major issues like liberty, bailouts, the economy, and the Fed -- possibly trying to grab some of Ron Paul's support (impossible) but more likely trying to dilute Ron Paul's message by muddying the waters for those who don't pay as strict attention to the proceedings. Why? In part because Ron Paul's ideas simply dominate this election cycle - common sense has finally started to become common sense. And in part because most of them learned a lesson from Rudy Giuliani who paid for his mocking of Ron Paul in 2008 by going from front runner to getting several thousand less votes than our last place finisher this year - Michelle Bachman, who didn't learn Rudy's lesson, went up against Paul in a recent debate, and paid for it with the demise of her campaign.

The moral of the story? We're winning. We're winning big.

The media knows it but will do everything they can to keep it secret, touting Romney's 8 vote win as something important... when in fact, it only represents his ceiling.

Make no mistake: this election cycle is Ron Paul vs. Obama. Ron Paul has We The People and Lady Liberty in his corner. Obama has the establishment, the media, and Romney.

I wish those establishment hacks some luck; they're going to need it. We're going the distance, and the Doctor has a stone jaw that he's proven can take a punch. The Revolution is on.