2016: If not Rand, then who?

[Bastiat's The Law]

I'm behind Rand, and he would be my choice. I think he is the most viable option, since he appears to be already laying early groundwork and building support, so if he decides to do it, he will be in a better position going forward. I'm conflicted about it though (his senate seat, etc). But the best way to help any future candidate is keep doing exactly what we are doing right now, which is focusing on the smaller and local races that we can win....and defending the seats we already have won.

We can run Massie for Rand's Senate seat.

 

[Aratus]

^this is the idea!^

 

[Krugerrand]

If I may re-post my 10/2009 post:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?213062-John-Mackey-for-President-2012
I won't put it in quotes to make it easier for those interested in replying to do so.

= = = = = = = = = =

I was motivated to start this thread by a recent thread on potential 2012 candidates. While I want to encourage continued discussion of the pool of candidates there, I'd like to use this thread to pitch drafting John Mackey to run for president in 2012 and focus solely on that.

The GOP has been hurt by the neocons - the wars have confused what had been a unified opposition to being the world's policeman, government expansion became the reality over smaller government. TARP 1.

Most existing politicians now have stained hands from the past. Many were wrong in supporting the war or supporting things like NCLB or prescription drugs for seniors - and it leaves those who were right wondering if a recent conversion is a matter of political convenience. Others were right on the above ... but many otherwise reliable conservative voters are still blinded by the neocon punchlines.

Many of our reliable candidates bring their credentials from outside of politics - Rand Paul and Peter Schiff come to mind. We don't have time to get another 'Ron Paul' credentialed with political experience by the 2012 election. We need to find somebody outside of politics.

John Mackey is a nationally recognized successful businessman.

John Mackey wrote a letter in 2006 to all of his staff announcing that he would reduce his own salary to $1 a year, donate his stock portfolio to charity and set up a $100,000 emergency fund for staff facing personal problems. [....] "I am now 53 years old and I have reached a place in my life where I no longer want to work for money, but simply for the joy of the work itself and to better answer the call to service that I feel so clearly in my own heart."

John Mackey has said that he used to be a "democratic socialist" in college, but when he began a business and barely made money while being accused by workers of not paying them enough and customers of charging too high prices, he began to take a more capitalistic worldview and discovered the works of Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Friedman. [... and] is an admirer of author Ayn Rand.

^^^swiped from wikipedia :o​

While the Democrats have been attacking the GOP for not having a health carae plan, John Mackey put one out in August:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs).
•  Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.
•  Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.
• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover
• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
•  Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.
• Enact Medicare reform.
• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

I think I'm onto something here. Tell me why I'm wrong or what we need to do to make it happen.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Hey I support the Ron Paul Republicans.

I'm just saying right now the libertarian party has most of them.

I won't vote for a Republican just because they are in the Republican party is all I'm saying.

No more voting for the lesser of 2 evils is what I'm saying.NO MORE!!!

Oh of course not. I'd never try to get someone to do that. Lol nobody here is going to vote for Romney just because he's a republican.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Tell me more about Tom Davis. I don't think I've heard of him.

 

[Krugerrand]

Of course, I should point out that we should simply let Ron Paul run for re-election in 2016 if he so chooses.

 

[row333au]

Ok going to jump on the weird and food for thought kinda thing.... tooo dooo duuuuu dooo, tuuuu doooo tooo nananan

On Sept. 22 2011 Rand took an Air Force One ride with Obama (he was pressured to create a bill to fund his ailing Kentucky state government fund from Pres. B O).... after that long ride, he suddenly left the living arrangement with his father Ron Paul (in making him pure to Ron Paul's movement) and what people (even those close to him) observed that he became more and more compromising with his views and his establishment leaning while maintaining the grassroot as his political base in reference to his libertarian and father's legacy..... Rand is closely becoming more kinda like a mainstream politician after that.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/09/odd-air-force-one-couple-obama-rand-paul/1#.T8ayaVKulkM


This kind of scenario have happened before in Air force One.... Note: Dennis Kucinich's oddness after the plane ride with his sudden dramatic 180 degree turn of his views in favor of Pres. B O ......

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589590,00.html









As for other options....

 

[Pauls' Revere]

Gary Johnson

^^this^^

GARY JOHNSON

 

[progressiveforpaul]

Rand as VP and Marcy Kaptur as president. There is a winning combination. Along with some good ideas like this: http://progressivesforronpaul.blogspot.com/2012/02/11-coalition-agreements-to-woo-way-more.html

 

[July]

Rand Paul, then Tom Davis (who needs to unseat Graham first though)

First things first, Davis has filed for his second (4 year) term, which is up for election in Nov. for SC district 42. It doesn't seem anyone has filed to challenge him. Graham's term is up in 2014. DeMint in 2016. If not Graham, Davis could run to replace DeMint in 2016, if DeMint does not seek reelection...which he has been hinting that he won't. In any case, I hope to see Davis run for Senate.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Of course, I should point out that we should simply let Ron Paul run for re-election in 2016 if he so chooses.

He'll be over 80. We need someone that's a great campaigner, someone willing to visit all 99 counties in Iowa as Santorum did. If Ron was 50 or 60 absolutely, but he isn't. It' time to pass the torch.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

First things first, Davis has filed for his second (4 year) term, which is up for election in Nov. for SC district 42. It doesn't seem anyone has filed to challenge him. Graham's term is up in 2014. DeMint in 2016. If not Graham, Davis could run to replace DeMint in 2016, if DeMint does not seek reelection...which he has been hinting that he won't. In any case, I hope to see Davis run for Senate.

I'm on board this idea. Davis should climb the ladder in South Carolina, replacing Graham or Demint would be great!

 

[Aratus]

^this^ demint as veep or being tapped by mitt's cabinet search is being openly taked about at mittromneycentral as well as WHEN rather than if scott walkerbecomes a nationwide household name. if lindsey or jim are pulled into mitt's hypotheical administration, and he is getting very good poll numbers over barack obama out of michigan and other border or battleground or swingstates, LETS GET OUR PEOPLE INTO THOSE POSITIONs WHEN GOP PARTY REGULARs GET TAPPED FOR THEIR ABILITIES. THIS INCLUDES GOVERNOR HALEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA TOO! lets keep an eye on what the landscape does in november as well as the "what if" of 2016!!!!!!!! when we have an openning or create one, exploit it by getting our people places! our own "Gunny" is our "secret weapon" in north carolina!!!! many of us need to get off of our bloody bloomin arses and get into "can do" mode!

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

^this^ demint as veep or being tapped by mitt's cabinet search is being openly taked about at mittromneycentral as well as WHEN rather than if scott walkerbecomes a nationwide household name. if lindsey or jim are pulled into mitt's hypotheical administration, and he is getting very good poll numbers over barack obama out of michigan and other border or battleground or swingstates, LETS GET OUR PEOPLE INTO THOSE POSITIONs WHEN GOP PARTY REGULARs GET TAPPED FOR THEIR ABILITIES. THIS INCLUDES GOVERNOR HALEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA TOO! lets keep an eye on what the landscape does in november as well as the "what if" of 2016!!!!!!!! when we have an openning or create one, exploit it by getting our people places! our own "Gunny" is our "secret weapon" in north carolina!!!! many of us need to get off of our bloody bloomin arses and get into "can do" mode!

Yup, we definitely need to be prepared. I happen to think an Obama victory would be more beneficial to the liberty movement than a Romney victory.

 

[July]

Well in my opinion we do not necessarily need to win the presidency ultimately to accomplish a lot--it would be good if we did. But that is still a top down approach, and there is another direction for power to flow. What we have is a very weak congress, with an executive branch that has become too powerful, and seems to now defer to the UN instead of congress on matters of foriegn policy, etc. Congress refuses to assert itself and claim its Constitutional powers. But what if congress could be built up, it could push back and demand the authority that has been usurped (in theory).

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Well in my opinion we do not necessarily need to win the presidency ultimately to accomplish a lot--it would be good if we did. But that is still a top down approach, and there is another direction for power to flow. What we have is a very weak congress, with an executive branch that has become too powerful, and seems to now defer to the UN instead of congress on matters of foriegn policy, etc. Congress refuses to assert itself and claim its Constitutional powers. But what if congress could be built up, it could push back and demand the authority that has been usurped (in theory).

I totally agree. Winning the Presidency is like a hail mary pass, it's still worth doing in certain circumstances. With Rand Paul, do I dare say we would be considered a front-runner? I think we might be #1 right out of the gate.

That being said, I'd love if we focused on some winnable House/Senate seats and further down the line at some state elections. We got a great candidate in Massie for the cost of 700k, he could theoretically hold onto that seat for as long as he desired. I wish we used our considerable fund raising ability more prudently.

 

[Aratus]

NC's glen bradley may have a comeback election that lets him go places.
we have talented people who are honest and focused. this is our future.

 

[July]

Oh yeah I think it is still worth it too, especially in terms of motivating new people and building a base. Look at how much ground we have covered with Ron's campaign. People who have never been involved in politics before don't tend to get excited over local/state races. And even many RP supporters don't, but if we manage to get a percentage each time that goes on to get more involved, that is important. I think Rand could build on what we have accomplished, absolutely. Rand is busting his a** working hard to build up a coalition and encourage people to run.

That being said, I'd love if we focused on some winnable House/Senate seats and further down the line at some state elections. We got a great candidate in Massie for the cost of 700k, he could theoretically hold onto that seat for as long as he desired. I wish we used our considerable fund raising ability more prudently.

I think it is a matter of better coordination and getting the word out. Massie benefited from having good name recognition with Ron Paul supporters, who knew to watch for him and his fundraising events.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

We need to get as many Ron Paul supporters/Liberty Movement members as we can to run for local/state office in 2014 as we can. And if they don't want to run we need to get them to at least volunteer time promoting someone who is running. With enough people helping out we can make huge gains in 2014. The worst thing we could do is sit around and wait for 2016 and only focus on the presidency.

 

[Krugerrand]

He'll be over 80. We need someone that's a great campaigner, someone willing to visit all 99 counties in Iowa as Santorum did. If Ron was 50 or 60 absolutely, but he isn't. It' time to pass the torch.

Notice, I said let Ron run for re-election if he so chooses. I suspect after 4 years as president, he won't have to do too much campaigning to win re-election.