Ron Paul Supporters: Rand Paul May Have Already Started His 2016 Presidential Run
Submitted by Viperscale on Fri, 09/07/2012 - 22:51Some Thoughts On Rand Paul 2016:
The writing is on the wall.
Republicans had a chance to offer up real political change by nominating Ron Paul 2012 as a response to Barack Obama 2008. Disinterested in whatever flaccid alternative is now available, America is destined for another four years of the Obama administration.
Quite aware of how all of this is likely to play out, Senator Rand Paul is waiting patiently. Observers close to Paul see his speaking schedule filling up as the national elections near, his pro-liberty voice is in demand.
Read More: http://www.policymic.com/articles/14376/ron-paul-supporters-...
For Liberty
»
- Login to post comments
That's plan B,
I am sure this was discussed with Ron Paul, possibly months ago when it was clear the GOP was cheating to keep RP out. If the front doors locked, try the back door. Rand had to get inside the party to implement the changes his dad has worked on for decades. It's OK to bash him here, the more grief he gets from us the more the Republicans will trust him. I wonder what position President Rand Paul will appoint his father to? Maybe Chairman of the federal reserve? Rand Paul 2016
Though I'm currently indifferent towards Rand, it does confirm..
his exposure more than ever...Rand is on ABC's This Week right now (as I scan the rarely used MSM's boob tube spectrum).
I couldn't care less. ZERO SUPPORT FROM ME.
I couldn't care less. ZERO SUPPORT FROM ME.
Karma. Well earned.
RON PAUL R[3]VOLUTION.
Wisdom Strategies
By 2016
You won't be able to tell Rand Paul's style from Mitch McConnell or Lindsey Graham. Mark it down.
This is the most sensible solution
to this entire monstrosity of a political mess! We need to work within the two party system, the third party is simply not going to be successful at this point. We actually could make changes in the GOP leadership that might allow Rand, if he wanted, to become President. The issues that would hinder this are one, the electronic and therefore hackable voting machines, lack of oversight of the voting process, not organizing and working towards educating our local GOP, not organizing for a new campaign in a timely manner.
These are the real problems. Fix these problems and Rand might be a plausible presidential candidate for 2016.
betty
Good for him...
I'm sure their will be plenty of tea party and freedom fries types that would love to vote for him, but I don't see many libertarians jumping on board.
I certainly will not be.
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
Congrats,
and just like you many Republicans will not be voting for Johnson either. It's a two way street, both sides bicker back and forth, yet when one side doesn't get their guy they don't budge and the restitution of our constitution is stalled. But hey, keep playing party politics. In my eyes all parties are a scourge to this country, but I digress.
“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James
Non-Aggression Principle
If you cannot accept and adhere to the Non-Aggression Principle, you will not be getting my vote.
End of story.
How did you get the weird idea that I am a Republican playing party politics, I clearly identified myself as a libertarian.
I choose not to support Rand or Johnson, because neither of them adhere to the Non-Aggression Principle.
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
You're selling out the
You're selling out the promotion of liberty and the beginning of the end of the 2 party duopoly via the national debates, and the upper hand we'd get in 2016 with the GOP... for your personal preference and agenda of only candidates that are as good as Ron Paul regarding NAP.
2 principles that conflict
Writing in paul sabotages the potential the liberty movement and the country has for positive change.
You're choosing the easier principle rather than the moral high ground... because you get to still tell yourself that you're sticking to your principles.
You're INTENTIONALLY ignoring that you're sacrificing others.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
Sometimes
It's easy to do the right thing.
It's easy for me not to endorse someone who sees nothing wrong with using initiatory violence to achieve their ends.
Non-Aggression is everything, it is what it means to be a libertarian.
If you can't keep your mitts off other people, then you aren't getting my vote.
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
You're choosing the
You're choosing the simplistic and emotional choice rather than the choice that requires critical thinking.
You're choosing a personal agenda and belief that would get completely lost in your write-in vote, that won't promote anything to anyone but yourself, OVER all the good that would come to the country, the liberty movement, and our takeover of the GOP in 2016 with Johnson.
Are you really saying that "Promoting Liberty TO ITS FULL POTENTIAL" isn't one of your principles?
I've explained how getting behind Johnson and the many positive end results is our full potential... and all you have is "well some people say he might not help us".
Just because you CHOOSE to "see things differently"... doesn't mean you're seeing them clearly.
You're lying to yourself in order to believe you're making an "easy" "right choice".
I already explained how people were doing it in that post you read (in my sig)... and then you proved you were one of them with your responses.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
You must have
comprehended my comment incorrectly. I meant "Just like you (as in how you will not be voting for Rand Paul if he is on the ballot in 2016)Republicans will not be voting for GJ. I gatherd you were not a repub, and my whole comment was about repubs and LP's go at eachother, yet have so much in common. Yes, Rand's Sanctions vote hurt, but I may pull the lever for him in 2016, just like I may pull the lever for GJ in Nov. It all comes down to what is best for the country, not any single party imo. Johnson sounds good, but when he opens his mouth when it comes to FP, he sounds like he is saying what he is told to say, or saying what he thinks the people want to hear. Tough choices to make, and the only way one will see a pure candidate on the ballot is to run themselves.
“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James