I see no evidence supporting your claim that Romney is either more “electable” or a more effective coalition builder than anyone else. I do find it interesting that the LSM and the dimz have already selected Romney while being “afraid” that Paul might win the nomination.

What is clear is that administrative agencies exist at the pleasure of POTUS. Perry would maybe eliminate three of those and I think Paul wants to cut everything from Interior down. Congressionally established order of succession may be part of the inevitable “victim” clamor but parts of the cabinet and many ancillary agencies could still be eliminated by the stroke of a pen. The savings from eliminating those agencies could be around 20% of Obama’s $3.7T 2012 budget, neglecting indirect impact on SHS and Treasury. The regulatory impact on GDP over four years is anyone’s guess but doubtfully insignificant.

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/newsgraphics/2011/0119-budget/

Cutting those agencies would be a courageously patriotic act of a new president and something Paul has promised to do. So it is not an inevitable fact that everything has to get bigger. And it wouldn’t even require an effective bicameral majority for the game to change.

You are right that nothing is going to change by nominating establishment presidential candidates because they will assuredly continue to collude with the left’s socialist agenda and with crony capitalists of every ilk while “being here to help”. So if you want more debt, more wars on both people and Twinkies, more government intrusion, more betrayal, fear and frustration, then go ahead and vote for the establishment; any one of them will give you that.

But if you want to realize a Jeffersonian vision of the republic and its role in your life, a vision that Reagan shared, then you’re only option in this Republican primary is Paul. It’s really just that simple.