Where will Ron Paul’s supporters go for GE

[questionmark]

Ron Paul's rallies this year have yielded quirky and eclectic crowds — bow-tie-wearing libertarians, scruffy anti-establishment types, large religious families and packs of antiwar college students, all drawn with an unusual fervor to the presidential candidate's unique libertarian message.

Many mainstream Republicans have long viewed his supporters as a fringe element.

Read more...

[ohio traveler]

I'll probably look to see who the Libertarian party candidate is.

[Space Commander Travis]

Paul’s campaign staff has tried to erode the perception that his support consists of a cult of personality around the 76-year-old congressman, who has run for president twice before.

[BlindMessiah]

I'm curious to see whether Paul gets an offer for a cabinet position. It was out of the question four years ago, but his movement has grown by leaps and bounds since the financial crisis and Obamacare. I guess we'll find out once and for all whether he's an idealist or a pragmatist.

[Ashotep]

I am a Paul supporter and since it looks like he won't win the nomination I guess I will vote democrat. Can't stand any of the other GOP contenders and if I vote for a third party I'm afraid we will end up with Romney for president.

[+DieChecker]

I'm curious to see whether Paul gets an offer for a cabinet position. It was out of the question four years ago, but his movement has grown by leaps and bounds since the financial crisis and Obamacare. I guess we'll find out once and for all whether he's an idealist or a pragmatist.

I think he has a good shot at a Cabinet position. Secretary of the Treasurey maybe. Or maybe Interior, or Labor? Secretary of Health and Human Services would let him attack the greater amount of spending on entitlements.

[+DieChecker]

I am a Paul supporter and since it looks like he won't win the nomination I guess I will vote democrat. Can't stand any of the other GOP contenders and if I vote for a third party I'm afraid we will end up with Romney for president.

Why is Romney so much worse then Obama? Yet Paul is better? Obama is just going to do what he did in his first term, just he won't have to hold back to try to get re-elected. So he can go nuts if he so chooses. He says he is going to cut spending, and said that he would since day one, but so far we've not seen any of those cuts.

Depends if you think that the Debt and Deficit is the #1 concern or not. If it is Romney clearly will do more to reduce those then Obama will. Romney is not really Pro-military and yet still would try to cut entitlements to please the Republican base. So he's not as good as Paul, who wants to just cut everything by 33%, but he's a sighe better then Obama who wants to reduce the Deficit (not the Debt, just the deficit overspending) by like 3% per year.

What we needed is a fiscal Conservative, and Romney is a fiscal moderate, but Obama is just a Spender. Like one of those people everyone knows (Mine is my Father-in-law) who gets $20 and immediately runs out and spends it on McDonalds, Lottery Tickets and Candy.

[preacherman76]

Im not going to waste my time voting at all. It wont matter who gets in. The results will be exactly the same. This was probably this countries last chance to change direction. Spending will continue to go through the roof. War with Syria and Iran WILL (mark my words) happen in the next term. And that will be the finnal nail in our economic coffin. And the average everyday American will fall further under the lable of AlCIAda terrorists. I will have no part in it. The blood of millions of innocents, and our men and women over seas can be on the hands of idiots who see no problem with the staus quo. Im not even voting in the primary anymore. This ship is just about sunk. And people are so dumb, that they are throwing water INTO the boat.

Edited March 7, 2012 by preacherman76

[preacherman76]

Why is Romney so much worse then Obama? Yet Paul is better? Obama is just going to do what he did in his first term, just he won't have to hold back to try to get re-elected. So he can go nuts if he so chooses. He says he is going to cut spending, and said that he would since day one, but so far we've not seen any of those cuts.

Depends if you think that the Debt and Deficit is the #1 concern or not. If it is Romney clearly will do more to reduce those then Obama will. Romney is not really Pro-military and yet still would try to cut entitlements to please the Republican base. So he's not as good as Paul, who wants to just cut everything by 33%, but he's a sighe better then Obama who wants to reduce the Deficit (not the Debt, just the deficit overspending) by like 3% per year.

What we needed is a fiscal Conservative, and Romney is a fiscal moderate, but Obama is just a Spender. Like one of those people everyone knows (Mine is my Father-in-law) who gets $20 and immediately runs out and spends it on McDonalds, Lottery Tickets and Candy.

What does Paul have to do with the way either of those two globalist idiots would lead? Would it be better to actualy cut spending, and stop unconstitutional pre-emptive wars of aggression? Well yea. I dont see how you can even remotly consider them comparable.

Romney isnt going to slow spending by a single cent. I cant understand how anyone could even come close to thinking otherwise. The man supported all our spending, and freedom stripping legislation. There is only one person in this race with conservative values. This isnt a matter of opinion. Its a fact

[BlindMessiah]

Im not going to waste my time voting at all. It wont matter who gets in. The results will be exactly the same. This was probably this countries last chance to change direction. Spending will continue to go through the roof. War with Syria and Iran WILL (mark my words) happen in the next term. And that will be the finnal nail in our economic coffin. And the average everyday American will fall further under the lable of AlCIAda terrorists. I will have no part in it. The blood of millions of innocents, and our men and women over seas can be on the hands of idiots who see no problem with the staus quo. Im not even voting in the primary anymore. This ship is just about sunk. And people are so dumb, that they are throwing water INTO the boat.

Ron Paul himself clearly disagrees with you. You had to know he wasn't going to win the nomination and so did he. Yet he continues to run and preach his message. If you truly believe in his cause, then I'm surprised you aren't pleased with the results. Paul has catapulted your movement into the mainstream in a matter of months. Unless you truly believe the world is going to end in the next four years, in which case you can't honestly believe Paul could've changed anything, you're being blinded by emotion.

[conspiracybeliever]

Why is Romney so much worse then Obama? Yet Paul is better? Obama is just going to do what he did in his first term, just he won't have to hold back to try to get re-elected. So he can go nuts if he so chooses. He says he is going to cut spending, and said that he would since day one, but so far we've not seen any of those cuts.

Depends if you think that the Debt and Deficit is the #1 concern or not. If it is Romney clearly will do more to reduce those then Obama will. Romney is not really Pro-military and yet still would try to cut entitlements to please the Republican base. So he's not as good as Paul, who wants to just cut everything by 33%, but he's a sighe better then Obama who wants to reduce the Deficit (not the Debt, just the deficit overspending) by like 3% per year.

What we needed is a fiscal Conservative, and Romney is a fiscal moderate, but Obama is just a Spender. Like one of those people everyone knows (Mine is my Father-in-law) who gets $20 and immediately runs out and spends it on McDonalds, Lottery Tickets and Candy.

The bolded is what I was telling everyone about Bush before his second term and I was right.

[Farmer77]

Im barely a Paul supporter. I love his lip service, but alas I fear just like "hope and change" were mere scams to get into office I fear once elected Paul would prove to be no different than the "isolationist" Bush.

Maybe Paul is the real deal, if he got the nomination I would have voted for him. Now I'll be voting green or libertarian party.

[lightly]

I think he has a good shot at a Cabinet position. Secretary of the Treasurey maybe. Or maybe Interior, or Labor? Secretary of Health and Human Services would let him attack the greater amount of spending on entitlements.

hi DieChecker, I think he's too radical to be allowed into a position of authority, and with his views on the FED , i think Sec. of Treasury is definitely out.

Spending cuts are a great talking point.. but we don't see it happen overall do we ? The main topic of cuts, when it comes up , usually centers on cuts in expenditures for the people, the dreaded ENTITLEMENTS!

... which the People pay for. Cut corporate subsidies??.. or defense contract glut !!! Or the thousands of cooperation buying subsidies and giveaways to other countries??? .. are you MAD!???

Those make the FAT a**es richer, and richer and richer .. we can't cut any of those! That would be bad for the konomy. ... Ok rant over,

but that is a good question , where will the RP supporters go? Maybe many will follow Hillander to the Booth. Or ya, Libertarian ... is there one? I know who i'm NOT voting for.. all of the main candidates.

[preacherman76]

Ron Paul himself clearly disagrees with you. You had to know he wasn't going to win the nomination and so did he. Yet he continues to run and preach his message. If you truly believe in his cause, then I'm surprised you aren't pleased with the results. Paul has catapulted your movement into the mainstream in a matter of months. Unless you truly believe the world is going to end in the next four years, in which case you can't honestly believe Paul could've changed anything, you're being blinded by emotion.

I dont believe he wasnt playing to win. At least at first.

No I dont believe the world will end in the next 4 years. At the rate the dollar is losing influance, we will be third world by then though.

[+and-then]

hi DieChecker, I think he's too radical to be allowed into a position of authority, and with his views on the FED , i think Sec. of Treasury is definitely out.

Spending cuts are a great talking point.. but we don't see it happen overall do we ? The main topic of cuts, when it comes up , usually centers on cuts in expenditures for the people, the dreaded ENTITLEMENTS!

... which the People pay for. Cut corporate subsidies??.. or defense contract glut !!! Or the thousands of cooperation buying subsidies and giveaways to other countries??? .. are you MAD!???

Those make the FAT a**es richer, and richer and richer .. we can't cut any of those! That would be bad for the konomy. ... Ok rant over,

but that is a good question , where will the RP supporters go? Maybe many will follow Hillander to the Booth. Or ya, Libertarian ... is there one? I know who i'm NOT voting for.. all of the main candidates.

RP needs to continue the campaign AFTER the election is over. His best shot at making meaningful change will come as the failed status quo is coming to a grinding, shattering halt over the next four years. The financial woes almost certainly will come to a head by then. Especially if Obama is reelected but probably no matter who is elected. The collapse seems unstoppable now. If the Paul supporters keep up the drumbeat while things spin out of control they will have the best chance in generations to actually change politics in this country. JMO...

[keithisco]

I think there is a major disconnect between the People, and the Parties. This is true across all Western Democratic nations. The reason I think is simple, there is no real difference between the major parties, all "toe the line" in pursuit of maintaining the Status Quo of the 2 Party System.

This just leads to a disaffected electorate, removed from the Political process, and a feeling of inability to change anything. IMO

[preacherman76]

Well said Keith

[Space Commander Travis]

I think there is a major disconnect between the People, and the Parties. This is true across all Western Democratic nations. The reason I think is simple, there is no real difference between the major parties, all "toe the line" in pursuit of maintaining the Status Quo of the 2 Party System.

This just leads to a disaffected electorate, removed from the Political process, and a feeling of inability to change anything. IMO

I do agree with you on that, Keith. It does make me laugh when Politicians go on about "Democracy" and how it should be forced on every country on earth. The Voice of the People never makes the slightest difference, does it.

[Q24]

I do agree with you on that, Keith. It does make me laugh when Politicians go on about "Democracy" and how it should be forced on every country on earth. The Voice of the People never makes the slightest difference, does it.

I’m convinced that the right dictatorship can be better than a democracy.

Democracy would be great in its purest form, if it did not put power in hands of the money men. Which, I’d hazzard a guess, is why the money men generally support democracies across the globe. Democracies can be influenced/re-directed more readily than dictatorships.

[WoIverine]

RP needs to continue the campaign AFTER the election is over. His best shot at making meaningful change will come as the failed status quo is coming to a grinding, shattering halt over the next four years. The financial woes almost certainly will come to a head by then. Especially if Obama is reelected but probably no matter who is elected. The collapse seems unstoppable now. If the Paul supporters keep up the drumbeat while things spin out of control they will have the best chance in generations to actually change politics in this country. JMO...

Agreed, if RP isn't the nominee, and there is an economic collapse...I'd bet money on Rand taking the presidency in 2016, if everything goes to hell prior to that.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Spid3rCyd3

[Legaia]

I am a Paul supporter and since it looks like he won't win the nomination I guess I will vote democrat. Can't stand any of the other GOP contenders and if I vote for a third party I'm afraid we will end up with Romney for president.

How can you support Paul and then vote for Obama.. You do realize that is a complete contradiction as Paul's views are the extreme opposite of Obama's.

[Space Commander Travis]

How can you support Paul and then vote for Obama.. You do realize that is a complete contradiction as Paul's views are the extreme opposite of Obama's.

While they tie nicely with Gingrich and Sanatorium and all that crowd?

[Legaia]

While they tie nicely with Gingrich and Sanatorium and all that crowd?

In some respects. The difference is Ron Paul is the real deal, and he's kept his voting where his mouth is for decades. The others are practicing the old method of telling the people what they want to hear, only so they can follow the status quo once they are in office.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Legaia

[+DieChecker]

Paul voted No on more budget issues than anyone else in Congress. Obama in Congress was the very picture of tax and spend.

[questionmark]

Paul voted No on more budget issues than anyone else in Congress. Obama in Congress was the very picture of tax and spend.

Unless it is anti-abortion Paul votes no out of principle.