One of the problems with mass movements is they are made up of the masses.

And the masses just aren't that smart.

We saw that with the tea parties. They started with a good premise - that the government was borrowing too much money. But they seen ended up protesting proposals like cutting Medicare, a program run on borrowed money, and borrowed time for that matter.

We're seeing something similar with the followers of Ron Paul.

As I have noted, I used to chat with Ron on his home phone long before 99.9 percent of his followers knew he existed. In fact here's a reprint of a column of mine from 2007 in which he becomes one of the first politicians on the national scene to protest the individual mandate.

I know Ron Paul. But I also know politics. In case you haven't heard, politics is the art of the possible. It's not the art of the impossible.

That explains Rand Paul's endorsement of Mitt Romney. It's impossible for Ron Paul to win the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. So Rand is supporting Mitt.

The alternative would be to help Barack Obama get re-elected.

What about a third-party run?

As I've noted, there are two kinds of people who support third-party runs: Real smart people. And real stupid people.

The stupid people think a third-party candidate could actually win the presidency.

The smart people know that such a candidate is a spoiler.

When it comes to this endorsement, the stupid people think it's some sort of betrayal.

The smart people know it's good positioning for 2016.

Watch Jack Hunter and he will explain it to you in detail.

Please watch the entire video before commenting. You will be tested. Comments evincing the Moron Perspective will not be published.