Ron Paul got the nod from Montana's Constitution Party.

He beat Mccain in the Montana caucus, and then got ~20% of the Republican Primary vote.

Perot got 26% of the vote in Montana in 1992...

Paul could probably get 5-8% of the vote in Montana if he organizes. Thats dangerous for Mccain.

So: Will Ron Paul give Montana to the Dems like Perot did in 92'?

In 1992 it was like 38-35-26 Clinton-Bush-Perot.

I think something like 45-42-11 Obama-Mccain-Paul could happen in this election

I'm not hot on how the American elections work... but I thought Ron Paul stepped out of the presidential run.

You can still run as independants I thought.

Technically, state parties are supposed to fall in line with the national parties. But they are not really bound, so they can do what they want so long as they meet ballot requriements and don't fear the reprimands.

Alot of third parties aren't national, and they can appoint whoever they want to.

I liked Ron Paul, lots of radical ideas.

 I'm reading this as: Ron Paul could get presidential-type powers in Montana, if elected. Yet, someone else would have presidential power over the rest of the US?

I'm assumimg that I'm reading this wrong...

i think ron paul will give montana to the republicans

Presidential type powers?

President is a national position...so only if he won in the majority of states through our filter (the electoral college).

What I'm saying is he is on the ballot even though he has suspended his bid to be president officially. He has alot of ardent supporters in the interior west, where Montana is. So he could cost Mccain or Obama if he gets 2%, 5%, 10% of the vote in Montana.

 If he's suspended his bid officially, then why is he still on the ballot? Sorry, I'm an American-electrion-system n00b.

running for a different party.