16 votes

Tom Woods for President in 2016?

DP family, I hope this is not too soon...

I know we are in the midst of a heated convention process, but if Ron Paul does not walk away from it as the nominee, then who can we rally around that can appropriately articulate the message to the masses?

Who is the legacy candidate?

I've been listening to many of his lectures lately. I think he is exactly the type of person who could carry the banner of liberty into the whitehouse.

Can you imagine the performance he could render during a debate!

Thoughts?

Comment viewing options

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

Academics don't have enough

Academics don't have enough practical experience to govern a country properly. They can write very intelligently (or very stupidly) and have very good (or very bad) ideas but experience is key in politics. Regardless of what one thinks of Tom Woods (I am not a fan, go ahead and downvote me) we need someone with actual political experience. You know who else was an academic you jumped into politics? Woodrow Wilson.

Please God, yes. Tom Woods

Please God, yes.

Tom Woods would rock. Him and Schiff would change the political landscape, IF, they could get in debates.

Napolitano/Woods 2016

Napolitano/Woods 2016

Just about anything

I could add has already been posted. The ONLY person Tom couldn't annihilate via debate this election season, republican or democrat, is Ron Paul. Mainly because they agree on almost everything.

I, too, love Tom Woods.

I think Tom Woods is my

I think Tom Woods is my favorite individual in the Liberty Movement these days. He'd do a fantastic job as president. But I'm about 95% sure he couldn't be pursuaded to do that. He values his family too much (not saying "too much" as in "beyond reason" but as in "doesn't want them to be dragged through the mud of politics"). And ya, the MSM would have to be a non-factor. they'd latch on to some of his anarcho, pro-secession, etc statements like bulldogs. Maybe in another decade or so when his kids are grown up.

"You must be frank with the world; frankness is the child of honesty and courage...Never do anything wrong to make a friend or keep one...Above all do not appear to others what you are not" - Robert E. Lee, CSA

I love Tom Woods

And would LOVE to have him on the debates...

But I'm honestly wondering if by 2016 will us liberty folks try to get our freedoms back through the rigged game of politics or through education and peaceful civil disobedience/non-compliance?

We're going to have to ask ourselves in a few years what is more effective.

Cyril's picture

I'm like you, it's still much

I'm like you, it's still much speculative at this point.

All we can do best is continue to show our indefective support to Ron Paul. But even if we find someone as great (or, okay, nearly as great...) as he is... one thing is FOR SURE :

WE MUST KEEP BUILDING UP OUR RANKS. Everywhere, thru all States, in all layers of the society.

DIG, SPREAD THE MESSAGE, EMBRACE, EDUCATE SOME MORE, and on, and on.

Eventually, our appeal to Liberty must be OVERWHELMING against the corrupt. Medias or politicians or accomplice crony corporate crooks.

The People Be Back. IN MASS. All ages. All domains. All faiths.

For Liberty !

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

I just had that very thought

...about an hour ago I watched a documentary called "Nullification The Rightful Remedy" that featured Tom Woods and I swear I thought to myself, "Man, this guy would make an awesome President"...too funny

here's the link if you want to watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwqluxtql3c

Coincidence! I watched that one earlier tonight too.

He does a two part on the same topic of nullification called "the principles of '98" that are even more explanatory. In my opinion, the longer 2 part version is even better.

Tom woods is gold, and there is not a shadow of a doubt as to whether or not he would get the nod from Dr. No.

Great To See This Book Turned Into A Documentary

Thanks for posting it.

___________________________________________________________________________
"Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."-Rothbard

I would be lying

if I said that i hadn't considered this. He WOULD MOP THE FLOOR with the Fabians/Marxists.

But, because they own the media, they would demonize him to no end regarding his past associations.

That said, He's one person I could see myself PROUDLY supporting. After Rons run, there's nobody left. Tom could pick up the mantle.

If things don't go our way in Tampa, I'm in 100%.

"If this mischievous financial policy [greenbacks], which has its origin in North America, should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debts. It will hav

Woods is an absolutely

Woods is an absolutely brilliant speaker. He might have to ditch a bit of the sarcasm...but just a tad. He is very persuasive and likable. Would I ever love to see him in debates against those dummies that try to pass off as knowledgeable about any subject they are entrusted to understand and maybe even protect. I'm not sure though that he would be considered 'vetted' since he hasn't held any office yet. Unfortunately, you've got to have one of those stepping stone positions in the Senate or Governorships to be considered experienced for the office of president. Kooky - but that is the stuff they make up to keep honest people out.

Jesus would be a good pick too; and has the same # of creds

Jesus would be a good pick too; and meets the same number of criteria for the office of the president that Tom Woods does. Why not pick him?

Or Luke Skywalker? All good men. All never held an office in the USA though. Sorry.

HONEST RON 2012!
LEGALIZE LIBERTY!

No way. Jesus couldn't even

No way. Jesus couldn't even make it past our crowd based on his clothes. He would be nitpicked to death telling him to get a better fitting suit and to get rid of the Jesus sandals and get some real shoes. Some might even say he needs to change the way he delivers his message and perhaps even - gasp - tone down his message so that it would sound like what people want to hear, not so controversial and be more widely accepted. His hair might be a problem with some people too. I'm not sure many people would be capable of looking past superficialities to hear his god-given ideas.

He's from Israel though...not sure if that would count for or against him - even if he could produce a birth certificate.

OMG

You guys are seriously going to try all of this again (after RP)?

In all of human history show me one time, after voting in a ballot box, we EVER came close to a free-market?

Voting and Lobbying is (and perfectly so) a War of Circumvention.

The Circumvention of Consumer-Will.

Voting and Lobbying is (and perfectly so) Abdication of Self-Rule and Bribery -- respectively.

Side-Taking where "theft" occurs down stream IS WAR and it is the outcome of voting and lobbying.

How am I the only one that sees this -- sure I get a few thumbs up but I don't see anyone making a similar argument in their own words (hittin' folks from a different angle).

yeah, lets just give up and

yeah, lets just give up and go live in caves somewhere and hope this nightmare just disappears.

No (better yet) -- Let's keep doing the same thing over-and-over

again hoping for different results.

My argument is Mises argument -- Mises is RP's Mentor

RP argued that war does not lead to free-markets

Voting and Lobbying is Intellectual and Ideological Warfare
---Plain and Simple
---RP made that statement

Every year we've had voting and lobbying have we come closer to free-markets are further from them.

I'm not saying do nothing -- I'm saying let's play a new record.

Let's try what Mises suggested -- become conscious-consumers.

I'm a little confused as to what you are suggesting.

Are you suggesting what JFK inferred in his quote "those that make peaceful revolution impossible, make bloody revolution inevitable"?

As an addendum, I would like to point out that this intellectual revolution is still in the midst of building momentum, and perhaps in four years time the country will be ready for a man like Tom Woods.

Here's what I'm trying to say (and have been saying)

for years now.

Consumer-Sovereignty (as Mises - RP's Mentor - has pointed out) is when you rule via the POS (point of sale) -- your "daily dollar vote"

Only then, when no one can interfere wit the daily dollar vote, can you maintain a free-society.

What is interference?
---As RP and Mises point out:

1) War
2) Theft
3) Laws or Regulation that circumvent consumer-will

Individualism is when everyone rules.

Totalitarianism is when one or a few rule
---Monarch
---Dictator
---Pharoah
---Noblemen
---Caste System

Corporatism is when everyone "thinks" they rule via electorate

Voting and Lobbying is Perpetual War
1) It is an abdication of consumer-rule
---to rule via ballot box rather than POS)
2) The decisions the elected candidate will
---to disrupt the consumptive decisions of

Voting and Lobbying are "false" economic-goods
1) They do not exist (ballot box wise) in a free-society
---A free-society being a place where gov't cannot circumvent consumer will
2) Wars are only EVER fought over false-market-demand goods
---The demand for drugs, fuel, metals, agriculture are not played out in free-market demand; we fight wars to fulfill false-demand-curves and to drive controlled profitability for the entitled-rich.

Voting and Lobbying (the very act) grows gov't power
1) The profits made by elections alone
2) Increase in political war chests
---which increases the sell-out potential value

Ron Paul said (paraphrase) "you cannot produce a free-society at the barrel of a gun -- free-trade is the vehicle to ensure a libertarian outcome"

Lobbying is Bribery -- Quite literally. The vote is to get the guy in office but the lobbying is to ensure his future voting trends. It's a pay-off, hahaha.

War is simply consumptive-control -- either to increase ones consumptive choices or to control or decrease another's.

We must "trade" (as RP implies) and not "war" if we want a free-society.

Therefore voting and lobbying (being an act of war) is the OPPOSITE activity to foster free-trade.

Simple deduction my dear Watson *wink*

Tom Woods and Ben Swann

Tom Woods and Ben Swann ticket.

Immoral funding of Military Industrial Complex by Federal Reserve and US taxation system must stop!!!! End illegal/unconstitutional wars! Preserve US currency!
http://facebook.com/NoPropagandaZone
http://twitter.com/the_chiefe71

I like Tom

and will Amash be old enough in 2016?

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

Let's Hope There Is

a 2016 election. If there is, Tom would be an excellent choice, as would Justin Amash or the Judge. Of these I think Tom is the most radical, as he is a self described anarcho-capitalist. In my book, that is a good thing, as there would finally be a clear cut choice between statism and liberty. We would actually have a candidate who would never, never bow down and worship the state.

Has Tom expressed an interest?

MSM influence must be long gone by then. If there's no strategy to accomplish that, and people are still naively begging for the satanic media to "play fair," then there's no point.

You make an excellent point.

You make an excellent point.

Perhaps we ought to be brainstorming the means to dismantle the media grip on information. They are actually doing a fairly good job of discrediting themselves as most people are disenchanted and suspicious. But they have the older generation still mesmerized. Still, they control the propaganda machine and we have got to circumvent that. Perhaps it is a matter of focusing on changing laws with regard to parties, elections, debates, public funds for all those things, etc.

As far as I know, he hasn't expressed any interest.

This is my own idea. I want him as MY president in 2016. I personally nominate him. The MSM be damned!

I wonder...

I wonder how the media would react to a self described anarcho-capitalist running for president.

Would they ridicule him, or would they try to ignore this fact as to not bring attention to the idea?

I've always wondered how the media would react if they actually did the math and discovered Ron Paul is a voluntarist, maybe they know and they choose not to bring attention to it, for fear that they would popularize voluntarism.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Cyril's picture

I like Tom Woods.

I like Tom Woods.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Does he have any political experience?

If not, maybe Justin Amash or Rand (depending on if Rand changes to be more like his dad by then).

“It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till." -J.R.R. Tolkien

He's never held an official office, which may be a godsend,

but to say he doesn't have any political experience wouldn't be accurate. To his credit, he is very well academically credentialed. He is involved with the mises institute.

Really, I just think he has a great talent of explaining complex things that draw people in, and makes them understand the issue on a deeper level. He is very likeable, as well.

Whether it be Napolitano, Rand, Amash, or Woods(who I personally nominate, although he doesn't know it yet), I could get behind any of them.

Look up some of his lectures, and tell me what you think...