Poll: As of now, would you support Rand for President in 2016 if he were the only liberty candidate running in the GOP Primary?
Submitted by A Real Conservative on Sun, 12/09/2012 - 16:31There was another poll created which asked whether people here would support Rand for President in 2016. I came to the conclusion that perhaps there were so many "no" votes because many people are still hoping that someone like Amash or the Judge runs for the GOP nomination in 2016. So, I decided to create a different poll to see whether people here will support Rand if he's the only liberty candidate running for the GOP nomination in 2016. This poll assumes that Rand is running for the GOP nomination in 2016 and people like Amash, the Judge, and Schiff are not running. I just want to see if the results in this poll will be any different. I would appreciate your participation in this poll. Thanks!
»
- Login to post comments
please stop
Being so fixated on winning the presidential race and focus on using congress to put all presidents in their proper constitutional place.
thank you how about
...this whole deal is getting beyond silly.
support for Rand Paul in 2016???
It is becoming increasingly hard to see Rand Paul as any sort of a "liberty" candidate in 2016. In the past two years, he has sometimes moved "freedomward" in his votes in the Senate, and he has also held up especially noxious and vile bills under consideration, but he has folded most pathetically quite a few times during merely his first two years!
He hasn't been anywhere nearly as strong demanding an END to sanctions and embargoes by the US government around the world, renormalizing relations with, and closing military bases (and CIA outposts)in other countries overseas, demanding the abolition of the hideous Homeland Security apparatus with its TSA spawn from hell, the complete and undeniable right of State or local interposition and/or secession against Federal/NWO tyranny, ending the horrid Income Tax and replacing it with NOTHING (The Federal government spends far too much money anyhow, whether it is raised from an income tax OR a consumption tax!), his weird flip-flopping on NDAA, one day denouncing it, and the next day voting for it, and so on.
While I hope that Rand Paul will regain his libertarian bearings, and begin to do his father proud in the US Senate, I stand by my statement made elsewhere in the DP that we have to begin the search, and the grooming of someone better.
If he, or anybody, is such a spineless jellyfish when confronted by the criminal elements of our society in the US Senate, could you imagine how passive and surrendering he would be in the Oval Office, where he is much MORE isolated from the American people?
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be attacked successfully, it is to be defended badly". F. Bastiat
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, finally they attack you, and then you win"! Mohandas Gandhi
Stop bumping your own thread
And maybe you'll get more response if you ask at a more appropriate time...idk maybe when Rand is actually running and the next presidential election isn't 4 years away?
Apparently you're not a big
Apparently you're not a big fan of polls.
Read the rules. awl19 is right.
6. Do not bump your own thread to keep it on the front page, or post the same non-related comment on multiple threads to promote your website or event.
http://www.dailypaul.com/guide
Bump.
Bump.
What is support?
How many people would support (INSERT ANY NAME IN THE WORLD HERE, OR EVEN MAKE A NAME UP) if he/she was the only liberty candidate running in (INSERT ANY POLITICAL RACE IMAGINABLE HERE)?
Uh, yeah. Depending on how broadly one interpets the word "support", just about anybody would get the support of a majority of people around here under the circumstances laid out in the question.
Not only would I not do all the things I did for Ron, like phone-banking and donating a fair amount of my small income, I probably wouldn't even have voted for him in the primaries, because I had to take Saturdays off from work this year to do that for Ron, costing me even more money. We ended up in a close battle with the Santorum peeps at the county primaries, with about 25 solid votes on either side. With every recount into the night, it was more clear that everything would be decided by 1 or 2 voters. If it were Rand, I wouldn't have been there. Partly because of work, and partly because of other reasons. I kind of had to move some heaven and earth to get there. Now THAT is what I think of when I think of the word "support".
So what happened? Ron won the district, with I believe 11 of 15 delegates.
So maybe I should make
So maybe I should make another poll in a few days or so that uses the term "vote for" rather than "support."
But does that say much about ones contribution to the effort?
I would probably vote no, since under the circumstances of 2012, that would have been my answer, but I'm a registered Republican and obviously, under the circumstances laid out, I wouldn't vote for any other Republican candidates, so I might vote for him if I didn't have anything else to do that day, but even then I wouldn't have put my name up to be a precinct delegate.
Also, some people have unregistered as Republicans, and no under-18 people have reigstered Republican yet. These are the people that made SURE to do that for Ron, but would they do it for Rand? Also, I got some of my less political friends to vote for Ron in both 2008 AND 2012. I wouldn't have bothered to do that for Rand, so he likely wouldn't have gotten those votes at all.
Maybe the question you really want the answer to is "Of those people critical of Rand, how many might consider voting for him in the 2016 primaries/caucus under the most favorable circumstances imaginable and if you're properly registered at the time?"
Which doesn't answer much, I think. Again, how supportive is that? Contribution isn't voting for someone. Voting was only a fraction of my contribution to Ron's 2012 campaign, as I explain above.
If you want to make a poll that has a better chance of showing where people are at in their thinking, how about something like this (if you can do checkbox voting):
Of the names below, check off the names of ALL people you might consider supporting in a theoretical 2016 Presidential run:
* Justin Amash
* Rand Paul
* Andrew Napolitano
* Jesse Ventura
* Gary Johnson
* Ron Paul
Or something like that. That way, people can click multiple names, so they can say who they might support, even if it isn't their first choice.
You make a good point.
You make a good point. Getting the "support" of people here is more important than simply getting votes, particularly since the hardcore liberty activists make up a pretty small number of voters, but donate a lot of money.
Lol. It looks like changing
Lol. It looks like changing the wording didn't make any difference.
Well it's like this
You can coat shit with honey but it's still shit underneath~
November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul
I just thought some of the
I just thought some of the "no" votes might have been coming from people who would support Rand if he were the best option, but would rather see someone like the Judge or Amash run for the GOP nomination.
All right, voted again.
Question: Is a wolf in sheep's clothing worse than just a wolf?
Answer: ?
Any comments? Is the wording
Any comments? Is the wording in this poll better than the other poll?
Oh Lookie
It's a Frank Lund disciple.
"If Satan was the only Liberty candidate in 2016 would you vote for him?"
November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul
The results are worse for
The results are worse for Rand so far.
Things will get better for Rand with time.
Remember that Rand hasn't been on the scene all that long compared to his father. With a good chunk of the DP being pure Libertarians and/or Anarchists etc supporting Ron was already a compromise for them. These folks have learned with good reason to be skeptical and their trust is not easily gained. With Rand coming out of the gate in stealth libertarian mode (hopefully) he has not demonstrated to them the steadfastness of conviction that initially led them to the Paul camp.
I believe as Rand starts to amass some victories (NDAA for example) the movement, or at least the more pragmatic amongst us, will start to re-evaluate the merits of his approach. That is assuming that he does get those victories prior to '16. A lot of things have to go the right way prior, and it starts with him stumping for liberty candidates in the next cycle and really doing the work in the trenches to rally and organize the roots.
Use things not People. Love People not things.