Rejoice.
Leftists utilize newsletters, believing that Ron Paul’s only purpose in a campaign is to “win it”.
Still nice to hear, however.
Hopefully it results in even more people embracing the ideas of liberty.
If the republicans let him run… do you think he can win?
Yes, but they won’t. But that’s OK because it will demonstrate how deeply flawed our 2 party democracy is, and get a lot more people angry at government.
If he gets the GOP nomination, I do think he has a solid chance at winning; otherwise, I don’t see him winning the general election.
I saw him speak over the weekend. Because of him, I am now optimistic for the future.
Me: Why are people so apprehensive towards AE?
Dr. Paul: Don’t look at it as apprehension, look how many people are taking it in now compared to 10-15 years ago. It’s growing, people want to discover freedom.
Love it! Dr. Paul is once again doing liberty a huge favor.
It will be interesting to see what tactic the GOP & MSM uses this time to silence him.
Please tell me, hypothetically, could a President Paul veto any existing unconstitutional law or only the new ones on his desk?
How I understand it today the biggest impact of electing Dr. Paul President would be his platform for spreading the message of liberty as never before.
Please provide evidence that Dr. Paul did all those things for all those reasons, and then get over to your “flaw of capitalism” thread and address all the arguments layed out against your position. Its the academically honest thing to do. Otherwise you’re just a troll :I
The only problem I see if he does run, and assuming he wins, the rest (majority) or one or both houses will not be of a similar mind, leaving him lame-duck and making AE seem flawed, and potentially turning “converts” (yep, making it sound mystical/cultish) against AE and liberty, compared to him losing, or just running a great nomination bid, increasing awareness, without showing how far out-of-wack the gov’t really is, as his attempts to fix the system, and the readjustment pains needed, would be blamed on him.
“Yes, but they won’t. But that’s OK because it will demonstrate how deeply flawed our 2 party democracy is, and get a lot more people angry at government.”
Age. Although the simple retort is that Ronald Reagan was 77 when he left office. That would shut them up. [If you’re on Fox News]
There always has to be some flawed in how the system is structured to excuse the failure of Democracy. Here the scapegoat is the 2 party system. In Europe it is the 30 party system.
What is the right number of parties that will do it?
Europe has a 30 party system?
Whatever… The have many parties sitting in their parliaments. Differs between the various governments. Definitely more then 2.
Can you explain more how that works? I’m totally ignorant. Do they go with plurality vote?
They usually form coalitions.
Do special interests dominate euro politics like American?? What is the de facto method of passing legislation?
You don’t know how many people I know from abroad who have told me that “if only they had a system more like the American system…blah blah blah”
Apparently, coalition governments are infamous for systematic “small party” extortion. That’s when a party of say only 1-2% of the entire government can literally blackmail the whole government since it’s withdrawal from the “coalition” can lead to a collapse of the government.
The point is this: No matter how you organize your Democratic system, it will always result in tyranny.
Sieben, here in Belgium we have 7 (!) parties in Flanders (nothern part of Belgium, Dutch speaking): Greens, social-democrats, christen-democrats, nationalist conservatives (want to secede from Belgium, but not EU), liberal democrats, pseudo-libertarians and extreme nationalists (anti EU, anti Belgium, but also anti foreigners).
In Wallonia, the French speaking Southern part, most of these parties have a sister party: Greens, socialists, christen humanists, right-ish liberals, extreme nationalists, …
The coalition negotiations for the new government are now at 60 days and counting; 7 parties involved to get majority. Our governments don’t work anymore, literally, as each formation they have to combine a pro-Belgium socialist vote in Wallonia with a pro-independence and economically liberal vote in Flanders.
Because of these dynamics, a left Wallonia implies that socialists and greens are always in the government, even though socialism is a small minority in Flanders.
I can’t wait for Flanders to become independent. If then the EU/UN starts bashing us for not having “solidarity” with the much poorer and much more socialist Wallonia, and if EU/NATO leaves Brussels, Flemish people might start to turn against international institutions.
Regarding special interests, we have tax funded elections (which is the lesser evil IMHO), but we also have a “negotiation model” meaning each year the unions and employer special interests meet and propose an economic plan to the government. So special interests are still enormous, albeit less specialized in nature (at least on the surface).