“LOL! I thought it was Ron Paul and his supporters who were the ‘kooks’ and ‘conspiracy theorists’?”
Remember to read my post carefully—your comments suggest otherwise.
Here’s what I think about conspiracy. They do happen, but because of that fact there will be instances where people erroneously suspect a conspiracy is taking place, more often than there are instances of a true conspiracy. This sort of hyper-vigilance becomes an advantage for those who truly wish to perpetrate a conspiracy (such as getting Hillary elected or overthrowing the United States by means of cultural Marxism) in that they can stifle vigilant citizens with the threat of labeling them as “paranoid.”
I think the most likely scenario regarding Ron Paul is that he is just a lucky break for leftists. He comes around with his kooky ideas just in time for the leftists to attempt to use him as a way to split the conservative vote. But I have no problem admitting that I don’t know for sure what’s really going on in Ron Paul’s mind.
Okay, so you weren’t tongue-in-cheek trying to illustrate the foolishness of conspiracy-paranoia by suggesting a Manchurian-candidate conspiracy explanation for Ron Paul. But just the same, even if you did not intend to, your second explanation for Ron Paul does ironically illustrate how silly conspiracy theories are.
Except, of course, when a deep-cover decades-long conspiracy has been underway. But then, how would anyone ever know? Truely devilishly clever conspiracies are by definition undetectable.
How’s about just sticking with your option no. 1—Ron Paul is the kook, well, sort of a kook, who brings out astonishing levels of kookiness in his followers? (Not all leaders of kooks are themselves as kooky as their followers.)