Deletion of Ron Paul Revolution

Comment: per nom.  Can someone explain why this candidate essentially has three articles about an open campaign?  If he loses, then all of this will be yesterday's news.  Merge per #NEWS
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per otability (see section #TEMP|Notability is not temporary). This article is ostensibly a dump for the latest Ron Paul grassroots activity that find there way into the papers. It's long-term notability is dubious, except perhaps as a few lines scattered throughout Paul's 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2008|campaign and Ron Paul presidential  campaign developments, 2008|developments. The '''Ron Paul Blimp''' & '''Boston Tea Party Reenactment''' have already been transitioned over to the Ron Paul presidential campaign developments, 2008 page, leaving only the Moneybombs & various minor events (the details of which are largely duplicated
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: 1st choice) or '''merge and redirect''' (2nd choice), but very strongly do not delete. There are plenty of reliable sources using this phrase to describe the grassroots campaign that it ought to be considered notable, but at the very least it is a valid phrase for a redirect. Note that nearly all of the arguments for "delete", including the nominator's, are actually arguments for a merge and redirect: "suggest merge", "the (''appropriately verified'') content from this page could contribute to" the campaign article, "can be contained in the presidential campaign article", "Delete and merge", etc. |Merging articles does not require deletion or AfD at all, and an administrative decision would not have been necessary if the proper process were followed, and merging an article's content to other articles without retaining the edit history of the original article would violate the GFDL. ''Talk:Ron Paul Revolution#Debate: KEEP or MERGE this article?|This'' is the appropriate place for a merge discussion. By the way, the lack of articles about other campaign slogans (though we do have "Tippecanoe and Tyler too") should have no bearing on the existence of this article. If other slogans are notable then they probably ought to have articles too. I'm surprised that there is no separate article for the extremely notable "I Like Ike", though the Draft Eisenhower article to which it redirects is very much analagous to the Ron Paul Revolution article. This article isn't just about a campaign slogan, it is about a grassroots campaign which has attracted notice from the mainstream media
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Merging (WP:MERGE)