Obvious troll is obvious.
Edit: Oh, wait… Retopper Centinel, is that you?
I don’t know who this Centinel fellow is, but hey, how do you guys like the idea of an Economic Bill of Rights?
Ah, so you are Retopper Centinel. Just as I thought.
You’re also a bad liar.
Actually the guy said RON Paul, twice… it was the judge who said “the name Paul”… and I don’t think he was intentionally hinting about Rand, although he might have been. It’s an interesting possibility, although it does feel a little… dynastic.
But Romney and Rand Paul are just as incompatible as Romney and Ron Paul… right? And if it would be compromising principle for Ron to be Romney’s running-mate, then it would be equally compromising to Rand to do the same. And if Rand is the great hope for the future, isn’t his reputation more important than Ron’s at this stage?
Is there a Democrat who could run in 2016 who is anything like Paul, in case that should happen?
Why do you doubt that would be a possibility? Because he wouldn’t be offered it, or he wouldn’t accept it? Does that apply to Rand too?
Doesn’t really provide any detail. What has happened in the past? Presumably Hillary made a deal with Obama to get her job now. Is it common for the top positions to go to those who run but fail to win the nomination? (When was the last time no one had a majority at the national convention of either party, by the way?)
Me too. That sounds very fanciful. (Hosting has been suspended at that link, apparently)
Absolutely.
I just got an email from “Rand Paul” and he said that his father was the only one who could win. I hate going back and forth on this, but I’m going to say it anyway… perhaps Dr. Paul has so many guaranteed delegates.
Best thread evar. 9/10 austrians agree, this thread is objectively valuable.
Seriously? “f-ing piece of paper” is equivalent to personal attacks and name calling? You have an odd gauge.
Touché.
Honestly that depends on who you ask. Everyone from Ron Paul supporters to rank and file Republicans will admit there’s quite a difference between the two.
For Ron Paul supporters they’ll say Rand’s not as “ardent” or as “steadfast” or something to that effect. Essentially that he’s ultimately not as libertarian as his father…or at the very least not as uncompromising and vocal about it. This of course is a good thing in the eyes of the average Repub. They tend to like Rand more because he’s better about not saying things that rub them the wrong way. I think Ron himself would admit that Rand is much more politically adept.
Whether this means Rand is actually less libertarian (read: voluntarist) that his father, or he’s simply a better politician (i.e. he’s able to be a voluntarist and still find a way to not scare off Republicans), I’m not sure.
But either way the bottom line is, Ron and Rand are certainly not the same guy. And in the eyes of many, a Romney/Rand ticket is considerably more compatible than Romney/Ron.
Again you’re assuming Ron and Rand hold the exact same ideology and positions on literally everything. They’ll be the first to tell you they have disagreements and debates at the family table.
I guarantee you Rand Paul running on a Romney ticket will not sacrifice a single Ron Paul supporter. Ron will be retired. Who will be left? If Rand continues on his path, barring unforseen circumstances he’ll be an enormous force, as he’ll inherit all of Ron’s supporters…the whole Campaign for Liberty, whatever’s left of the Tea Party, and quite a few “regular” Republicans including your Hannitys and your Limbaughs. He’ll be too much of a good candidate with too much support.
My guess is the biggest deciding factor is going to be how well he can handle the foreign policy questions. If it weren’t for that, Ron would be a much bigger force in the mainstream GOP.
However, a big difference will be the fact that Ron supporters are going to be taking over the GOP over the next decade or two. The whole party is quite poised to shift, so these “Republican no matter what” folks will get to be a smaller and smaller part of the party, meaning they’ll end up just going along because for one thing, following the party is what they’ve always done, and two, they have nowhere else to go anyway. The difference is it just won’t be their party anymore.
I’m not sure what you mean. You’re asking what the Democrats might do?
Yeah…foreign policy is essentially the main thing they can’t handle. (Listen to the pundits whine about it and essentially lament the fact that Paul would be such a perfect candidate otherwise).
Obviously as Secretary of Defense or State, foreign policy would be at his forefront. The odds that something like that would get offered are basically nill. (But then again, I’m not on the inside. It’s entirely possible the game plan could go so much farther beyond that that it wouldn’t matter. But I seriously doubt it.) There is no way in hell the elites want Ron f-ing Paul being able to run his mouth with the words “Secretary of State” next to his name. Look at how much he gets on the news now. And he’s just a Congressional Representative. A pupit like one of those I mentioned would give him untold exposure, respect, and immunity from being ignored or railroaded. There would be no possible way for the media to attempt to marginalize him without losing all credibility.
They would either end up being extremely obvious about it, or they would have to abandon their whole “whatever the Federal government says is gospel, and the higher ranking the official, the more important it is”. The media worships high ranking officials. If one of them were Ron Paul, they would either have to back away from their government idolization overall, and go back to the more “watchdog” ways the media was always supposed to be, or single out Paul and just his office, which would expose them as completely bias.
As for Rand, I’m not so sure. I don’t think they see as much of a threat from him quite simply because I don’t see as much of a threat from him. Again, he’s largely been able to avoid the foreign policy scruteny so far. I’m not sure how vocal he would be. I’m not exactly sure how he would go about using the power of a post like that.
As for Secretary of the Treasury, again, despite the enormous progress that’s been made in waking people up to the Fed, we’re not anywhere close to having a guy who authored a book called End the Fed become even Tresurer…let alone the Secretary. (Although, can you imagine having Ron Paul’s signature printed on every damn Federal Reserve Note? That might just be the greatest gag in history.)
Yeah that’s one thing I’m not very familiar with. I do know brokered conventions are quite rare. But as for negotiating for positions in cabinets…that’s outside of my area. I would actually even want to defer to someone like Woods to even ask where to look for information on that.
Working now
I was referring more to this:
Oh excuse me.
Seriously? “f-ing piece of paper” "piece of fucking paper" is equivalent to personal attacks and name calling? You have an odd gauge.
Seriously? You think you were being classy there?
You seriously think that’s equivelant?
No, I don’t think that was the case at all. That was just Obama being weird and unconfident, he didn’t actually need to appoint her.
For someone who’s usually logical, you seem determined to throw red herrings my way. You know as well as I do that my point was about the irony of you telling Aristippus to stay classy when you weren’t acting classy yourself. Who was less classy than whom is irrelevant.
You’re taking it too literal. Simply using a curse word for emphasis and textual impact is a stylistic choice. You may argue it’s “classless” to use such colorful language (even in a deliberate, decisive, discretionary way), but I disagree. I don’t think simply including a profanity in your lexicon automatically makes you lack “class”.
Dragging a debate down to personal insults and namecalling does…regardless of the vulgarity of the names used.
I’d just like to note that I hadn’t posted in this thread before now. Aristophanes and Aristippus are two different people, though contemporaries both now and in the Classical Period.
Sorry about that! My mistake.
I don’t know of anyone who would consider dropping the F-bomb to be classy, no matter how deliberately, decisively, or discretionarily it may be done. Furthermore, I can certainly see how Aristophanes could’ve taken your first response to him to contain one or more personal insults against him.
Bob Wenzel:
Will Rand Paul Become Mitt Romney’s Running Mate?
At the start of this month, I stated the below and then asked a question:
Dr. Paul’s delegates will be very important in choosing the Republican nominee. Romney, and the others, will want those delegates desperately. This is why it is more important than ever to keep up the effort to get the Ron Paul votes out. Every additional delegate that Dr. Paul walks into the convention with will make him that much stronger in terms of negotiating power.
The key question than becomes, what does Dr. Paul demand for his delegates?
Could the answer be Rand Paul as a vice-presidential candidate?..