Is a Ron Paul Plan B really so bad?Submitted by sovereignjanice on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 19:39
I want to start off by saying my motto is "President Paul or nothing at all." I'm writing in Ron Paul if I have to unless the doctor comes out to endorse Gary Johnson whom I like as well. I really don't see that happening though.
As for Plan B, which is Ron Paul using his delegates to get something out of the party like an audit of the fed, competing currency (which I'm really pulling for), pulling bases out of Japan, Germany, everywhere but the middle east which is the only realistic anti-militarism that the talking heads would ever even consider, stuff like that. I really don't think we can call something like that a loss for the freedom movement considering the incredible odds we're up against. The very fact that we've changed the conversation and the other candidates are talking like Dr. Paul has been for so long is amazing considering the Goliath the government has become.
Who ever really believed that we'd see the day when one man really did make a difference?
Here's what I've been tinkering around in my head about what I feel is the best plan B. Dr. Paul should demand in exchange for his delegates either 2 or 3 realistic things. Plan B-1: 1) Demand Bernanke's position at the federal reserve and 2) Demand that whoever the president is, that he and the Republican party sign into law Ron Paul's previous competition of currency act. Plan B-2: is just the same as B-1 but I'm not sure if there needs to be some kind of legislation to get a full audit of the fed, but he maybe able to do that at his new position so I wanted to put this option out there just in case.
Like I said earlier, I'm writing in Ron Paul no matter what, but if he publicly makes a 3rd party run or something like that then I think it would hurt Rand Paul's chances at running for President one day and Rand has a much stronger base of status quo Republicans which I feel would make him the favorite. I think all the Paulbots like myself will have no problem giving the same devotion to Rand when his time comes. The front runner talk should be with Rand from the beginning.
His father's position at the fed and other monetary ideas will actually have a real chance of being implemented so the world will see that they work. Ron will no longer be considered a kook in the mainstream and more people will flock to Rand who's foreign policy is the most like his fathers but not as much to alienate the older republicans. The younger republicans will themselves be older now and will be taking the place of those currently scared of Ron. They will all be going to Rand.
This scenario is not my first choice, not at all. But the freedom movement isn't going to die. We're not going to give up. A little structure and planning for the future is what has helped Dr. Paul increase his numbers from 2008 to 2012 to over 100% in Iowa, over 200% in New Hampshire, and over 300% in South Carolina. We do make a difference and I feel a plan like B-1 is something to be encouraged as opposed to not winning the nomination being a deflating defeat.
No, it's not our goal and certainly not mine, but the progress that can be made today for a future where we are the new status quo like the progress made between 2008-2012 means we can win. I've always pictured a presidential picture of Rand Paul in the white house with a portrait of his father in the background. I know we'd all come together again and petition who ever the artist is to do it. I can't think of a better thank you we could give the doctor who cured our apathy than that.