Jefferson opposed a central bank (Bank of the United States), central planning of money, and paper (fiat) currency; Paul opposes a central bank (Federal Reserve), central planning of money, and paper currency.

Jefferson opposed deficit spending and warned of the dangers of national debts; Paul opposes deficit spending, warns of the dangers of national debts, and never voted for an unbalanced budget.

Jefferson was hostile to restrictions of individual liberty (Alien and Sedition Acts); Paul is hostile to restrictions of individual liberty (Patriot Act, MCA, spying, etc.).

Jefferson was hostile towards federal taxation; Paul has never voted to raise federal taxes and desires the abolishment of the federal income tax.

Jefferson believed in the doctrine of enumerated powers and a strict construction of the Constitution; as does Paul.

Jefferson opposed a consolidated central government; as does Paul.

Jefferson opposed government social engineering and federal redistribution of wealth schemes; as does Paul.

Jefferson opposed imperialism and entangling alliances; as does Paul.

Jefferson supported a non-interventionist foreign policy; as does Paul.

Jefferson opposed the Hamiltonian vision of blending political and financial power (corporatism); as does Paul.

Jefferson supported an armed citizenry (pro firearm); Paul has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.

Jefferson supported a citizen legislature; Paul refuses his congressional pension, supports the abolishment of the congressional pension program, votes against congressional pay raises, and supports a major reduction in congressional salary.

Jefferson wrote patriotism was defending liberty; as does Paul.

I've heard a few Republican and Democratic party loyalists confused by conservative and liberal support for the Ron Paul campaign say, "How is that possible?" How can apparent polar opposites across a broad range of varying issues support the same presidential candidate? I think the answer can be found in early American politics with the Hamiltonian vs Jeffersonian political divide.What is the Hamiltonian vs Jeffersonian divide?Hamiltonians favor interventionism, domestic and international. A strong national government, central planning, flexible limitations on political power, taxation, foreign entanglements, and a penchant for military adventurism - all the hallmarks of collectivism. An aggrandized central government is necessary for a Hamiltonian nation.Jeffersonians favor non-interventionism, domestic and international. A weak federal government, defense of individual liberty and property rights, strict limitations on political power, anti-taxation, and a foreign policy of neutrality and peace - all the hallmarks of individualism. A limited central government is necessary for a Jeffersonian republic.This early American philosophic divide is consistent: interventionism vs non-interventionism. The modern "conservative" vs "liberal" paradigm, which has divided liberty into multiple parts, has evolved into a hod podge of domestic and international interventionism and non-interventionism with conservative Americans frequently supporting economic Jeffersonianism and international Hamiltonianism, and liberal Americans frequently supporting the opposite, economic Hamiltonianism and international Jeffersonianism. Political liberties are divided along these lines as well. Conservatives defend the enumerated 2nd Amendment Right of self-defense against liberal intervention. Liberals defend the enumerated 4th Amendment Right of privacy against conservative intervention.However, in Washington, D.C., both parties are, to a large degree, the two wings of Hamilton. The Bush Administration and congressional Republicans endorse economic intervention, as well as political intervention like the Patriot Act, while their Democratic counterparts favor economic intervention and give halfhearted speeches in favor of civil liberties before voting with the Republicans. Washington Democrats endorse international intervention, albeit a kinder gentler version than the Republicans. The Washington establishment rarely questions if the central government should intervene. The overwhelming majority of debates are over which central plan to implement. A Hamiltonian vision of government.Ron Paul, unlike the Washington establishment and any major party presidential candidate for decades, is a true Jeffersonian.Conservative and liberal support for Ron Paul is based on Jeffersonian issues in both parties. Small government fiscal conservative Republicans may support Paul. The ardent defenders of the Iraq War will not. Liberal Democrats most concerned with civil liberties and foreign military adventurism may support Paul. The ardent defenders of welfarism, social engineering, and redistribution of wealth will not.Paul's candidacy remains a long shot simply because Ron Paul is a Jeffersonian living in a Hamiltonian world.