2016: If not Rand, then who?

[Aratus]

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

lets assume mitt wins this fall, that tampa has 900 GOP delegates voting for gold standard and audit and/or end the fed planking, that more states opt

for caucuses or paper and electronic primary ballots, and also that in 2016 rand decides to remain in th e senate but that justin amash and john dennis

must wait to potus run, as president romney has GOP party loyalty keeping the number of hopefuls in iowa or n.h way down, would dr. ron paul run so as

to debate president mitt grandly on his less flipflop inclined record as almost a national progress report even if ron ceases to moneybomb by april or may

and then a call for party unity after perhaps the kentucky derby? could a less vigorous 2016 run bring home to the nation what the GOP has yet to really do?

 

[Aratus]

ECONOMICS 101 = a 2016 Ron Paul "educational" potus run?

 

[Krugerrand]

lets assume mitt wins this fall, that tampa has 900 GOP delegates voting for gold standard and audit and/or end the fed planking, that more states opt

for caucuses or paper and electronic primary ballots, and also that in 2016 rand decides to remain in th e senate but that justin amash and john dennis

must wait to potus run, as president romney has GOP party loyalty keeping the number of hopefuls in iowa or n.h way down, would dr. ron paul run so as

to debate president mitt grandly on his less flipflop inclined record as almost a national progress report even if ron ceases to moneybomb by april or may

and then a call for party unity after perhaps the kentucky derby? could a less vigorous 2016 run bring home to the nation what the GOP has yet to really do?

I guess I just hate to make that assumption ... even if the writing is clearly on the wall. One never knows what may happen between now and Tampa. Perhaps some Romney scandal could break - Mittens eats Kittens or something like that - something so horrendous that the GOP would never give him the nomination.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

There could be a liberty figure that rises after 2012 but before 2016 (think 2014 elections) that could be a game changer.

We're still growing by leaps and bounds so there's got to be some gems that come from it.

 

[Aratus]

scott walker's surprise smucking win has him well thought of by MRC mittster people
as often as rep. paul ryan or governor christie when thinking about the veep choises
and things may be down to 2 or at the most 5 people, and sen. rand may be top 3,
but the kicker is, one of the criteria is the idea that mitt + veep could hand the gop
1600 penn ave for the next 16 years if all goes well. they think BHO is not going good.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

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.

DeMint has self imposed term limits. He is gone in 2016.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

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.



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.

Rand is ten fold a better communicator than Ron is, he can really sell our ideals to the average voter. Ron is the professor, the intellectual, I love this about him, but at the same time you need a 130 IQ and be well-read in history to truly "get" him right off the bat. For most people its a long process for them to come to support Ron, which takes months, even years, to educate themselves in numerous policy and historical areas and then conclude that Ron Paul was right all along. It's a multi-tiered process. Rand on the other hand, can have an audience eating out of his hand within 10 mins.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

There could be a liberty figure that rises after 2012 but before 2016 (think 2014 elections) that could be a game changer.

We're still growing by leaps and bounds so there's got to be some gems that come from it.

Probably for House or maybe even Senate seats. But for President we need someone with name recognition, a support base, and that can raise $50 million dollars.

 

[Aratus]

DeMint has self imposed term limits. He is gone in 2016.

assuming "if..." at tampa we know demint as romney's veep and a fall win opens up his seat for jack hunter.

 

[Aratus]

i'm hoping dr. ron paul ends up with 800 to 1200 delegates at tampa but think we
should look at each binary decision tree scenario and what we can do if we all act

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Rand is the best choice. I trust that Rand is a libertarian. He was all through his years prior to becoming a Senator. I believe he still is, and that he is playing a deep undercover game to appear "mainstream." Now maybe we'll all get burned and it will turn out he really is mainstream. But I don't think so. I trust Rand.

 

[Vanilluxe]

This thread seems like its dividing us and is counterproductive, lets wait and see what happens before each of us runs a dozen liberty candidates in 2016 or 2028 and so on.

 

[July]

Rand is ten fold a better communicator than Ron is, he can really sell our ideals to the average voter. Ron is the professor, the intellectual, I love this about him, but at the same time you need a 130 IQ and be well-read in history to truly "get" him right off the bat.

Oh! You didn't hear about the study!? That Rand is the dumbest Senator ever because he gives speeches at an 8th grade reading level without complex syntax and vocabulary. No, I agree. What Rand does is a lot tougher than it looks. Agreed, I also love that Ron has chosen not to try and alter his communication style, no matter how many people were wishing he would at times during the debates. Ron managed to reach a lot of intellectuals and free thinking types...who maybe just needed a little coaxing, or rather a good slap of reality across the face. But these are the sort of people most likely to go the extra mile, to pick up a book, get involved, teach others, start leading, etc.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Oh! You didn't hear about the study!? That Rand is the dumbest Senator ever because he gives speeches at an 8th grade reading level without complex syntax and vocabulary. No, I agree. What Rand does is a lot tougher than it looks. Agreed, I also love that Ron has chosen not to try and alter his communication style, no matter how many people were wishing he would at times during the debates. Ron managed to reach a lot of intellectuals and free thinking types...who maybe just needed a little coaxing, or rather a good slap of reality across the face. But these are the sort of people most likely to go the extra mile, to pick up a book, get involved, teach others, start leading, etc.

Nope, never seen that study. You could be the most learned person on earth, but if fumble at communicating your ideas, what is really worth? I've had many professors like this, had a supreme command of history or their specialization, but they were absolutely horrible teachers and educators. They lost their audience. Also had a professor that was an amazing communicator and made learning rather dry history so exciting and fun that dozens of students hovered in the classroom discussing things with him and other students well past the time class ended. And these weren't history majors, these were students that absolutely hated history up until his class.

 

[doctor jones]

Rand Paul 2016

 

[Original_Intent]

Gary Johnson

]

as Fred Thompson would say "that dog won't hunt."

 

[doctor jones]

Rand is the best choice. I trust that Rand is a libertarian. He was all through his years prior to becoming a Senator. I believe he still is, and that he is playing a deep undercover game to appear "mainstream." Now maybe we'll all get burned and it will turn out he really is mainstream. But I don't think so. I trust Rand.

+1

Rand is the man... to the haters I say: Look at his voting record

 

[seawolf]

After his Benedict Arnold endorsement of Mitt Romney tonight are any of you seriously still supporting Rand Paul for dogcatcher much less President. Please....

Go over to the Daily Paul and read the thread...the fastest down voted thread in the history of the Daily Paul now approaching 250 votes.

Rand Paul is now dead in the Liberty Movement. He is our Liberty Judas.

 

[Aratus]

rand paul 2016 + rand paul 2020
and if he goes for the senate in '16
rand paul 2020 + rand paul 2024

 

[Tod]

+1

Rand is the man... to the haters I say: Look at his voting record

I'm not sure he is the man, but you are right, his voting record is pretty darn good.

I think Rand could use some good old competition to help keep him honest, especially after tonight's backstabbing. He strikes me as too much of a "pragmatist" if that is really the right word, and while that quality may earn him some votes, it will also put off a lot of people and in my opinion may be his downfall in the fashion of McCain or Romney.