He respects the political process

Like all serious contenders for the nomination, Ron Paul has positions on many issues. His foreign policy and belief in the need for balanced budget are priorities, and he also has a long history of working on health care, tax reform, and immigration issues. But unlike the other candidates, many of Paul's positions are outside the mainstream political discourse. He disagrees with so many bills presented to Congress he is known by his colleagues as "Dr. No."

Some have argued that a Paul Presidency would bring the federal government to a standstill as he vetoed every bill he disagreed with (probably most of them). A commentor here suggested:

My best guess is that President Paul would use the veto power to force Congress to conform to the Constitutional scope of government.

Any President could force Congress to reconsider the size of the federal government by vetoing spending budgets until lack of funds forced a Dept to stop operation.

However, Paul's record shows that speculation could not be further from the truth. While in a campaign advertisement Paul promised to veto any unbalanced budget, his past actions show a deep respect for the bills passed by Congress. A few specific examples I've come across:

• When Congress debated making flag burning illegal (which Paul opposes), he pointed out that the proposed bill was unconstitutional. To help his colleagues, Paul proposed a Constitutional amendment that would allow their bill. Even on an issue he opposed, he wanted any Congressional bill that passed to hold up to court challenges.
• Ron Paul has stated:

  If we have a healthy economy, I think we could be very generous on work programs. People come in, fulfill their role and go back home.
  
  I’m not worried about legal immigration. I think we would even have more if we had a healthy economy.

  Paul has voted to expand guest worker programs and his campaign website calls current immigration policy "incoherent and unfair." But he opposes amnesty, which retroactively ignores laws Congress has passed. If Congress passes a law, that law should be enforced. If the country disagrees with the law, it should be repealed - not ignored.

More broadly, Paul has worked in Congress for twenty years: introducing and voting on bills, talking to his colleagues, talking to his constituents, and in general using our political system the way it was designed to work. It is important to Paul not to impose his will on the American people, but to talk to them and, as they become convinced on each point, work through Congress to enact legislation. Paul has filed to run for his 11th Congressional term in the 2008 elections, indicating his willingness to continue advancing his positions as a Congressman. While he is a long shot (possible, just not the most likely) to win first place in the Presidential primaries, a strong showing will certainly increase his influence in the House.

Also reflect on Paul's ten terms in Congress: his constituents have elected him ten times. People do not vote for someone to represent them if he gets nothing done. If a final budget bill is unbalanced, Paul will vote against it. But when House committees set budgets, Paul will earmark some of the budgeted money for programs in his district (earmarks do not increase the budget for federal programs - they direct the programs to use some of the already-budgeted money in specific ways.) Paul has been working in Congress for decades. He has proved he believes in working within the system toward his goals, and accepts that the slower pace of this method means he will not live to see many of them realized.

Paul believes in a balance of powers between the three branches of government, and strongly disapproves of the power-grabbing Bush has done. A Paul Presidency would have a domestic policy in line with his foreign policy: engage in diplomacy, make deals, and do not impose your will on the American people by force.