Comment: Ron Paul is the idealist and Rand Paul is the realist.

(See in situ)


Ron Paul is the idealist and Rand Paul is the realist.

What Rand is doing is working. He is gaining broad appeal, something Ron Paul could never do because of media bias.
Yea, some of you dont trust him, but like it or not, Rand Paul is practically the only realistic chance to change things now(in a major and sudden way). Ron Paul tried for 30 some years to change things and was only able to just get things off to a start, probably just in the nick of time too if we are lucky. Because of that start, Rand Paul now has a very good chance at succeeding where his father just couldnt quite make it. We shouldnt squander that chance by saying he isnt good enough.

Yes, I would love to have had Ron Paul as president, but that didnt happen. Gary Johnson is nice, but he just doesnt have the name exposure. This makes Rand Paul the best choice. Whether you accept that or not doesnt make it any less true. Will this change? Maybe, but unless you can find someone and give him MSM coverage like Rand is getting, its unlikely.
If it somehow turns out that Rand Paul, for whatever reason, is opposite of Libertarian, than he isnt going to be any worse than anyone else who will likely take his place. No, I am not argueing for the lesser of two evils here. This would be like comparing Hitler, the Devil, and Rand Paul; one of them just isnt evil compared to the others.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.