A Serious Ron Paul VP Poll

[AlexMerced]

Judge Napolitano - I love the judge but I don't consider hima good VP pick why...
- He doesn't really appeal to anyone Ron Paul doesn't already
- His association with Fox News will be demogogued by the left and can hurt the centrist vote
- He lacks experience, he'd be a better supreme court justice

Jesse Ventura - I find Ventura amusing and he does have executive experience, but his association and unabashed endorsement of conspiracy theories will disenfranchise LOTS of voters on both sides, he's political suicide, sorry... this abou serious political strategy.

Pat Buchanan- I should of put him on the list, he slipped my mind, but I don't think he adds much since most of his activist ollowing is already in the Paul camp, and anyone else will vote for Paul in the general anyways. He can leverage his name power with an endorsement and a few emails.


I hate to put it this way, but whoever is the VP candidate should be...

Governor... a lot of people do care about executive experience
Conservative... not extreme, but just enough to get people to the polls
Minority... Ron Pauls newsletters will be an issue, idealism doesn't fix the real world in enough time for the election
Young... because most people will feel that they'll likely be president.

Luis Fortuno and Nikki Haley meet all four of these qualitities in a strong way, and Fortuno can help win Florida, and maybe even make a few blue states like california and New York a little a more purple. He's Hand down the strongest pick in my view.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Pat's views are the closest to Ron's of ANY candidate up there. He is a principled statesman that will bring us the social conservative vote in MASSES.

I'm not questioning Buchanan's credentials as much as his age. The biggest issue people bring up with Ron other than "isolationist" & "he's fringe/unelectable" is that "he's too old" so how does putting up another really old guy help? It just doesn't inspire any confidence among undecided voters who don't really vote based on issues.

Ron needs someone who's young, mainstream & who's NOT seen as "isolationist" by the mainstream but at the same time is a principled libertarian-leaning candidate who can get the mainstream GOP voters to rally & get Ron the GOP nomination ie Rand Paul.

 

[The Binghamton Patriot]

I don't think he's closer than Johnson, Rand, Amash, and Medina. But he's definitely closer than most of them. And he definitely belongs on the list.

Another paleo-con who's not as well-known as Buchanan, but who would line up about the same on positions is John Hostetter.

I also think Walter Jones and Dick Armey should be considered.

How do you logically arrive at the conclusion that Dick Armey, (hi-jacker of the Tea Party via Freedomworks and Sarah Palin) belongs up there? He is a big military neocon in tea party clothing. A Ron/Rand ticket is very awkward imho. Johnson is an israel-firster, and Amash isn't old enough to assume the office. Medina has never held public office in her whole life. We need to pay serious attention to Pat Buchanan, as he has a perfect alignment with Ron on Foreign Policy (non-interventionist foreign policy, opt out of WTO, UN). He is the only one aside from the ones you mentioned, that can re-assure us that these wars will be stopped. A Paul/Buchanan ticket would make the NWO run and hide.

 

[V3n]

I picked Bachmann. The media boost and appeal to female voters would be a valuable grab, and I'm assuming Pres. Paul would be able to complete 2 full terms without her ever doing anything - and I believe that with a few years by his side, she could grow and learn what defending the Constitution really means. So basically, I picked her just for the buzz. I didn't consider the probability that she would run on her own in 4 to 8 years after holding the office, which would be disastrous for the country all things being equal.

Picking your son as VP is just tacky, sorry Rand.

I would have voted for "the Judge" or "the Body" if they were listed. I don't know anything about Nikki Haley, but what I've read in this thread (after voting) I think she would fit the bill I'm looking for in a VP choice for Dr. Paul.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Luis Fortuno and Nikki Haley meet all four of these qualitities in a strong way, and Fortuno can help win Florida, and maybe even make a few blue states like california and New York a little a more purple. He's Hand down the strongest pick in my view.

Again, these people are mostly unknowns & we shouldn't be thinking about General Election right now, you just can't assume that Ron will get the nomination without the mainstream GOP voters during the primaries & these unknowns can't get him that.

Further, as I've said, a lot of people contend that Ron is "too old" so they'll want his VP to be someone who "looks" presidential (in case Ron died or something) & is popular & has a stature within GOP. Even though Rand hasn't been in the GOP for a long time, he's massively grown in stature, it's only because of that many people in the media & outside were wondering whether he'd run for presidency, there were even polls about how well he'd do against Obama, etc. His mainstream support & popularity within GOP along with strong libertarian-leaning as well as principled conduct make him an obvious choice to expand Ron's support base if he's to have any REALISTIC chance of even getting through the primaries.

 

[erowe1]

How do you logically arrive at the conclusion that Dick Armey, (hi-jacker of the Tea Party via Freedomworks and Sarah Palin) belongs up there? He is a big military neocon in tea party clothing.

He has long opposed the Iraq War (which means he's by definition not a neoconservative). He's an Austrian economist. And he's with Freedomworks, which seems to me to be pretty good overall.

I don't think he's perfect. But he's closer to RP than most people on that list. And, as I understood the OP, part of the point of the poll was to find people who weren't already in RP's niche.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

A Ron/Rand ticket is very awkward imho.

There's nothing awkward about it if one looks at it differently. If people can sell "first black president", "first lady president" then we can sell "first father/son" thing? At least it'd get a lot more media & limelight & people might actually start listening what they're saying. Further, it's not like Rand is a nobody; he was touted by many even in the MSM as one of the persons that "might" run for presidency & he was even polled against Obama so obviously he has a stature within GOP & he can help Ron get the mainstream GOP voters & thereby expand his currently stagnant base, not to mention he's a lot more engaging & persuasive than Ron.
Please conside the scenario in this post - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...te-in-2007-8&p=3365860&viewfull=1#post3365860

I picked Bachmann. The media boost and appeal to female voters would be a valuable grab, and I'm assuming Pres. Paul would be able to complete 2 full terms without her ever doing anything - and I believe that with a few years by his side, she could grow and learn what defending the Constitution really means. So basically, I picked her just for the buzz. I didn't consider the probability that she would run on her own in 4 to 8 years after holding the office, which would be disastrous for the country all things being equal.

As I've said in another thread, Ron would like someone who agrees with him (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGZj-LlP40I#t=46m5) & Bachmann with her opposition to gay-marriage, Patriot Act vote, support for Middle-Eastern wars just isn't it. Further, if you'll do some research on her, she's a freaking religious fanatic unlike Ron who's devout but always believes in keeping the Church & the State separate just like the Founders. She just a political panderer & considering that Ron is against the powers-that-be & knowing the history of what happens to those presidents who go against them, I'd rather have someone who's capable of carrying the torch of liberty, not to mention Ron is really getting up there in terms of his age.

 

[JamesButabi]

I havent voted but Jim Demint would certainly garner a large sector of donors which can be vitally important.

However, I think if Ron Paul wins the primary he needs somebody on the outskirts. If enough Republicans support you through a primary the country is ready and you don't need to compromise. You go after independents / anti war dems with a truly principled fellow who is also intelligent, young, and speaks well.

I really am stumped.

 

[Aratus]

i'm most pleased that you have added Glenn Bradley's name!

the veep position either aptly looks to the future or it often is

the actualizing reward for good deeds that are quite past tense.

 

[Echoes]

My pick would be Napolitano.

From those listed, DeMint would solidify the Republican base. I dont trust him, though.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

I havent voted but Jim Demint would certainly garner a large sector of donors which can be vitally important.

However, I think if Ron Paul wins the primary he needs somebody on the outskirts. If enough Republicans support you through a primary the country is ready and you don't need to compromise. You go after independents / anti war dems with a truly principled fellow who is also intelligent, young, and speaks well.

I really am stumped.

Seriously! This guy DeMint voted for Patriot Act. That says it all.

 

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Seriously! This guy DeMint voted for Patriot Act. That says it all.

It doesn't say it all

We are all looking for the perfect candidate and we end up coming up with obscure economists and TV hosts

 

[V3n]

As I've said in another thread, Ron would like someone who agrees with him (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGZj-LlP40I#t=46m5) & Bachmann with her opposition to gay-marriage, Patriot Act vote, support for Middle-Eastern wars just isn't it. Further, if you'll do some research on her, she's a freaking religious fanatic unlike Ron who's devout but always believes in keeping the Church & the State separate just like the Founders. She just a political panderer & considering that Ron is against the powers-that-be & knowing the history of what happens to those presidents who go against them, I'd rather have someone who's capable of carrying the torch of liberty, not to mention Ron is really getting up there in terms of his age.

Like I said..

So basically, I picked her just for the buzz. I didn't consider the probability that she would run on her own in 4 to 8 years after holding the office, which would be disastrous for the country all things being equal.

I've done "some research", I was just looking for the person who would get the most votes assuming they had no real responsibility, and Dr. Paul would complete 2 full terms. Having a Ron Clone as VP would obviously be preferred, but winning is important too.

(edit: I don't want to argue with another Ron Paul fan, Paul or Nothing II. This is all hypothetical, I didn't like the accusation that I hadn't done research and replied defensively. Let's stay focused on the cause of Liberty and all just get along. I appreciate this conversation and all disagreeing voices. I believe iron sharpens iron and arguing in here will leave us better equipped to argue "out there".)

 

[The Binghamton Patriot]

He has long opposed the Iraq War (which means he's by definition not a neoconservative). He's an Austrian economist. And he's with Freedomworks, which seems to me to be pretty good overall.

I don't think he's perfect. But he's closer to RP than most people on that list. And, as I understood the OP, part of the point of the poll was to find people who weren't already in RP's niche.

"On May 1, 2002, on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews", Armey, then the House Republican Majority Leader, called for Palestinians to be expelled from the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Armey repeatedly said that he would be "content" with Israel completely taking over all of the Occupied Palestinian Territories and transfer the native Palestinian population out. He further stated that the Palestinians could then build their state in the "many Arab nations that have many hundreds of thousands of acres of land" -Wikipedia, Dick Armey.


He's not a neoconservative huh?

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

It doesn't say it all

We are all looking for the perfect candidate and we end up coming up with obscure economists and TV hosts

No, it does say it all about him being a neo-con.

And as for the latter, Rand is neither an obscure economist nor a TV host, he's powerful player within the GOP & if he's not used in 2012 then there mightn't be an America come 2016, may be some kind socialist, police-state dictatorship. I'm thinking, this is so ideal that Rand came along at the right time & he's grown so much in stature among the mainstream GOP voters & here we are looking for a perfect candidate but one there is is too perfect

Like I said..



I've done "some research", I was just looking for the person who would get the most votes assuming they had no real responsibility, and Dr. Paul would complete 2 full terms. Having a Ron Clone as VP would obviously be preferred, but winning is important too.

Seriously! Are you a soothsayer or something? Ron Paul is running against the establishment & powers-that-be & considering the history of what happens to presidents who do something like this, do you really believe Ron will be completely safe? Or do you just think he's immortal so in Ron's case, VP is a VERY VERY important position, probably THE most important considering that VP becomes the president if something happens to Ron, naturally or "otherwise".

Further, Rand isn't exactly a clone of Ron's in that he appeals to so many mainstream GOP voters that detest Ron. It's only our luck that Rand is even in a position to cause such massive shift & get mainstream GOP to rally behind Ron & we are looking for other people elsewhere who neither have the credentials nor the integrity that Rand has exhibited

 

[V3n]

Please read my edit.

 

[The Binghamton Patriot]

No, it does say it all about him being a neo-con.

I would genuinely like to know what your definition of a neo-conservative is. If telling the palestinians what they can, or cannot be content with, ISN'T meddling into the affairs of the middle east, I don't know what is. He isn't an austrian schooler, he is a monetarist, Friedman-style academic economist. You know what that means? He's worked a public sector job his ENTIRE LIFE. He's never worked for a consultancy, or an asset management firm. Dick Armey is not even worthy of consideration.

 

[Echoes]

My pick would be Napolitano.

From those listed, DeMint would solidify the Republican base. I dont trust him, though.

Didnt occur to me when i posted this, but Nap vs. Biden in a debate WOW how Biden would get crushed lol

 

[JJonesMBA]

Strategically? In the general election, to likely voters? To handily win the election?

Easy - former businessman, CEO & ex-Fed Chairman Herman Cain or ex-McKinsey consultant Gov. Bobby Jindal, no doubt.

These pragmatic "doers" would be highly complementary to a visionary "thinker" like Ron.

Forget the philosophical element for the moment to answer the question posed - I'm not Cain fan either; but Bobby J. might be a real possibility...

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

(edit: I don't want to argue with another Ron Paul fan, Paul or Nothing II. This is all hypothetical, I didn't like the accusation that I hadn't done research and replied defensively. Let's stay focused on the cause of Liberty and all just get along. I appreciate this conversation and all disagreeing voices. I believe iron sharpens iron and arguing in here will leave us better equipped to argue "out there".)

Well, first you say you don't want to argue & then go on to talk about sharpening irons through conversations & disagreement, isn't that a bit contradictory? It's alright to disagree & argue; people have different opinions I guess.

Anyways, I didn't mean to insult you or anything when I said "if you'll do some research on her", it was just a general statement, we can't go around assuming that everyone who posts here has looked into everything a candidate has ever said or done, we don't all know everything about every candidate & I'm sure I'm unaware of many things & I wouldn't mind it if somebody pointed it out thinking I was unaware of something, it shouldn't be seen as insulting as long as it wasn't MEANT to be insulting but again, I'd never meant it to be derogatory in any way so I'll leave it that.