90 votes

Peter Schiff Speaks With Rand Paul About Romney Endorsement


I think Rand does a great job explaining why he chose to endorse Romney and I support his decision. But I want to hear from you. Vote up or down or comment on how you feel about his explanation.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

There are

lawsuits being filed. The GOP cheated, lied, flipped votes, and didn't count votes. This fight is far from over. If RP doesn't get nomination, then go third party. Getting Romney elected is not winning, that's losing. Anyone but Romney, there has to be consequences for the GOP actions against Ron Paul. Losing the General election is a start.

That has

nothing to do with plurality rule. Many "at large" delegates we won are not counted into "plurality" if they do not satisfy a beauty contest.

It is a shame our supporters are not educated in basics.

Sure, nobody asks us to vote for Romney. You have missed the point. And yes, without relinquishing our gains in GOP, boosting LP is a right choice.

I do understand

there are lawsuits about vote flipping "on the beauty contests". We will never win if we don't challenge the electronic voting machine. Romney does not have 1144 yet. When Romney gets 1144 then its over for the GOP nomination. In all your replies you still know Romney doesn't have 1144, he hasn't won. Lawsuits haven't been lost yet so why are you admitting defeat?


It is not Rand's fault

that we have so many former socialist-progressives, populists, intellectual children and simply people who are in this movement temporary or by mistake.

I hope they are frustrated to the point they join Blue Republicans who are going back to Obama.

Hey Rand, you are a liar and a fraud...

you can slice it & dice it anyway you want to. You DON'T compromise with evil. You could have all that you say you wanted to get accomplished WITHOUT endorsing Romney. You would have had an army of Ron Paul supporters willing to fight for you. Not any more, pal.

Supporting the Party you say? That's what the Nazis and Communists said.

And how dare you blame me, that I don't care, that I don't understand, that I should be a good little soldier in the Republican army. Screw you.

And Peter? Screw you too. It's about the principle, not the person.


Please tell me what principle Rand has violated? I can't find the one that says, only endorse those you agree with 100%. So what principle has rand Paul violated?

Sales and Marketing 101

Public Reltions 101


Well, true - you can't violate your principles... when you don't

have any to begin with! Just ask Romney. Or did Rand not ask? I guess not. BTW, what ARE Rand's principles? Damned if I know.

Rands principles

Are the same as the libert movement and Ron Paul's. Now answer my question, what principle of the movement did Rand violate?

Watch this video and see...


Compare Rand to Ron. No Contest. Ron stays true, Rand equivocates.

Principles, not Compromise. Rand fails the test big time. I hope he and Sarah and John McC and Romney and all the other neocons are very happy together.

I have seen it

Now for the final time, answer my question. What principle of the liberty movement specifically did Rand Paul violate?

None are so blind as those that do not see...

Two words for you: Grow. Up.
Nice try though, Romboid.

Jerk face

Was I rude to you? Why can't you answer my specific question? Is it because you don't have an answer? What specific principle did Rand Paul violate?

Just list the principle you feel was violated.

Quitting when its not over.

That rule.

Quitting when it is not over

Thank you for that post and I want to add stab us all in the back when we were gaining momentum. We still may show the world what we are about. Never give up. Jack Ramsey of the Portland Trailblazers said it ain't over til its over.

Who's an angrey girl then?

Rand only had to endorse Mitt, not vote for him. Sheeesh!

Mitt Romney / Dr. Ron Paul

Best way to use the delegates.

It's all or nothing with many

Sadly, It's all or nothing with many. The operative word is "Nothing". I'll make my own response on Wednesday. Bottom line, you either trust Ron Paul or not. Many will ignore the fact that he says his father was in agreement. Many will ignore the Bills that he says he, (sorry, WE) will be bringing to the floor or that he won't sign an unbalanced budget. Could it be because it doesn't pander to group think? (Libertarian Group Think that is). Stayed Tuned.


Don't Agree

I don't possess group thinking. It is rather that my confidence has been damaged and I can no longer feel sure that I will not be let down again. Once trust has been lost then it really does not matter what benefits might be promised – I no longer believe what I am told. That's the way all this has effected me. I don't say others should feel like me. But I have seen this sort of thing many times before. There is no such thing as a half rotten apple. Once the rot set in then you have a rotten apple.


Liberty not Served

Rand's stance will obviously divide people. Others can decide for themselves, but my own mind is clear. For me there is no place for back room deals. The whole point of Ron Paul was that he does not represent business as usual. There are any number of politician who will cut sordid deals. I admire Ron Paul because he is not one of them. If the future of this movement is represented by Rand then I will be taking no part in it. Other I know will feel differently but I could not be convinced that it would be worth the effort. I think there are a lot of disappointed people who will share my reaction.

I don't believe Rand will in the end get any benefit form all this. Even if I am wrong there will for sure be no benefit to Liberty.


all i will say is this: RP

all i will say is this:

RP spent 30 years in politics voting for ideals, and never had a bill get passed into law.

Ron Paul's message is clear

Or there wouldn't be millions of us here now. It took me 30 years to realize the importantance of what he has been saying for those 30 years. 30 years ago I gave my pledge to defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic I still honor that pledge and will die defending it. Many of my friends already have. Those of you who have never given that pledge don't have any idea what it means personally. I am proud to be an Oath Keeper.

Ron Paul

endorsed Gingrich numerous times as Speaker. An endorsement is not a vote it's party politics. In order to be part of the party there are certain things that must be agreed upon, like endorsing the incumbent republican. Ron Paul gets this, so let's not be to idealistic.

"The world is a dynamic mess of jiggling things, if you look at it right." - Richard Feynman

After listening to his interview,

I applaud Sen. Rand Paul on his action. I believe that in an ideal world it would have been Rep. Ron Paul that Rand endorsed, but reality as it is now is unkind.

However, what we CAN do is drive reality TOWARDS that ideal, and as things look now Rand Paul is in the best position to drive that change. If not for Rand Paul, our Liberty movement would be severely lacking in someone who has the area of influence that Rand has on the establishment.

Remember also that this movement must have a multi-pronged approach. If we are to change the hearts and minds of everyone and to create a liberty-minded future, we need people like Rand Paul as much as we need people like Ron Paul to advance this.

And just because you support Ron Paul doesn't mean you shouldn't support Rand Paul. If you supported ONLY Ron Paul, it would almost be like caring for the shoot and not its roots, or using only one hand and neglecting the other. Each part of our movement is just as important as another part, whether that be Ron Paul, Rand Paul, the delegates, the bloggers and youtubers and US the people.

I for one support BOTH Rand Paul AND Ron Paul! And all of you guys!

I believe in the freedom to be what we choose to be.

Sheldon - get your head out from Down Under....

If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...duh, it's a duck. It's about more than supporting Ron Paul or any one man - it's about the message and supporting a set of principles.

No compromises, no deals, no way. Not for me.

*We* don't have to compromise,

but Rand Paul is surrounded by very different circumstances than we are. For one thing, he has the burden of being part of the political game, while the great majority of us here aren't bound by those same rules that are applied to politicians.

But being part of the political game means that Rand is in the unique position of reaching into the heart of the establishment. For him perhaps, the best way he could effect change for Liberty is use the rules to his advantage in a really intense game of political chess. It takes guts to do exactly what he did, endorsing Romney, knowing that the people he wants to aid will crucify him for treachery, hatred and enmity. And Rand Paul has the courage to do just that - and thus I applaud him.

Of course, there's the issue of principle. We could NEVER ask Ron Paul to do what Rand Paul has done - that would kill Liberty as a movement and destroy the entirety of Ron Paul's integrity. Everything he has stood for would be shattered for naught. But Rand Paul could do what he did because of three things:

- He KNOWS that Ron Paul has already demonstrated the principles in their truest form.
- The generational gap is such that Rand Paul as a young politican is freer to mould his approach, AND
- Rand Paul is NOT Ron Paul, but they both share a common belief in Liberty

and he chose to endorse Romney because it would mean being able to reach where Ron Paul can't. Remember, Ron Paul should never endorse Romney.

For me, as long as the fire that Ron Paul lit within Rand is burning, Rand could walk and talk like a duck, yet be still be a duck that I can trust. And in reply to your most stinging line, sadly, the only thing I can do from Down Under is to cheer you on, and trust in all of you guys (Rand and Ron Paul included) to make this right.

Bring on the LOV3olution!

I believe in the freedom to be what we choose to be.

Sorry, Sheldon, your tortured defense of Rand does

not compute. True, Rand is not Ron but they do NOT share a common belief in Liberty. How does endorsing a statist prove a belief in Liberty? When Ron Paul refused to endorse McManiac in 2008, THAT was principles in action.

You mean well, but as the old saying goes...the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Romney is a faithless, flip-flopping liar.

Romney is a faithless, flip-flopping liar.

He will owe Rand nothing.

Paul ante portas.

I wrote an article about

I wrote an article about Rand's decision http://www.dailypaul.com/239753/principle


There is no excuse - no matter how convoluted the rationalization - for supporting Mitt Romney. To do so would be like a Christian who salutes Emperor Nero because he deludes himself into thinking he might influence Nero while his fellow Christians are fed to the lions.