Bob Barr for VP? Why not?

[Meatwasp]

Chuck Baldwin is the man.

 

[freedom-maniac]

I don't think it's productive to continue these conversations about Dr. Paul's potential VP, when he has not even come close to securing the nomination yet. Let's spend our time working on assuring that first, and then think Veeps.

 

[R3volutionJedi]

Chuck Baldwin/Andrew Napolitano/Jessue Ventura

 

[Austin]

I don't think it's productive to continue these conversations about Dr. Paul's potential VP, when he has not even come close to securing the nomination yet. Let's spend our time working on assuring that first, and then think Veeps.

+rep

Chuck Baldwin/Andrew Napolitano/Jessue Ventura

I don't think Baldwin would really help the ticket, and I'd rather see Napolitano on the SCOTUS. I don't want Ventura anywhere near Ron's campaign.

EDIT: I like how I commend freedom-maniac, but then go on to continue the discussion.. haha

 

[Eric21ND]

Lol @ Bob Barr...dude is a joke and johnny-come-lately to libertarian values. He had his shot in congress and blew it pretty disastrously. Serious contenders for VP are: Walter Williams, Judge Napolitano, Jim Demint, and Tom McClintock.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Why not? How about you make a case for VP Barr that's more than 1 sentence long

 

[sailingaway]

We don't know who his VP would be. Who do you think it should be? But not Bob Barr.

 

[libertybrewcity]

This guy is a Libertarian, not a Republican. Ron Paul is running as a Republican, remember?

 

[trey4sports]

Chuck Baldwin/Andrew Napolitano/Jessue Ventura

Ok/too old/too kooky

 

[trey4sports]

I like Mike Lee.

 

[jake]

Napolitano too old?? what

 

[trey4sports]

Napolitano too old?? what

Yes, he's 61. He brings nothing new to the ticket, and hes not even a FNC regular.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

I don't think it's productive to continue these conversations about Dr. Paul's potential VP, when he has not even come close to securing the nomination yet. Let's spend our time working on assuring that first, and then think Veeps.

You're missing the obvious. We just can't hope to get the GOP nomination WITHOUT the neo-con vote which forms a pretty big chunk of the GOP; it's nearly impossible, we just can't turn so many pro-war people into anti-war people, most just aren't going to listen, it's not going to happen in such a short time till the primaries [continued]

Napolitano too old?? what

Yes, he's 61; with Ron being so old he needs to choose a much younger candidate for VP as a lot of voters might fear Ron might die before completing his term, not to mention we need someone who's not only libertarian-leaning but also can establish himself as strong presidential candidate for 2016

Please care to read this little exposition on WHY VP is so important to a candidate like Ron (not so much to Romneys & Obamas of the world) to even secure the GOP nomination - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...on-Paul-s-VP&p=3330465&viewfull=1#post3330465

 

[Billay]

This thread sucks

 

[LibertyEagle]

You're missing the obvious. We just can't hope to get the GOP nomination WITHOUT the neo-con vote which forms a pretty big chunk of the GOP; it's nearly impossible, we just can't turn so many pro-war people into anti-war people, most just aren't going to listen, it's not going to happen in such a short time till the primaries [continued]

Here's what you are not getting. VPs are not chosen until AFTER the primary. If we don't win that, we are dead in the water.

Secondly, to say that the majority of Republicans are neocons is completely false. Sure, there are some big government folks. Both the old "Rockefeller Republican" types and some neocons. These people aren't going to vote for Ron Paul anyway. They are leftists.

The others, the ones who think of themselves as small government conservatives, we have a real chance with. Especially since Dr. Paul is finally talking about God; that may open their ears to hear the other things he is saying. You're right that some of them were led astray about our foreign policy, but that does not a neocon make.

 

[sailingaway]

You're missing the obvious. We just can't hope to get the GOP nomination WITHOUT the neo-con vote which forms a pretty big chunk of the GOP; it's nearly impossible, we just can't turn so many pro-war people into anti-war people, most just aren't going to listen, it's not going to happen in such a short time till the primaries [continued]


Yes, he's 61; with Ron being so old he needs to choose a much younger candidate for VP as a lot of voters might fear Ron might die before completing his term, not to mention we need someone who's not only libertarian-leaning but also can establish himself as strong presidential candidate for 2016

Please care to read this little exposition on WHY VP is so important to a candidate like Ron (not so much to Romneys & Obamas of the world) to even secure the GOP nomination - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...on-Paul-s-VP&p=3330465&viewfull=1#post3330465

A neocon VP? No. There are other kinds of conservatives to reach out to. Neocons belong in the big government party.

61 is not too old, but spreading beyond what is viewed as libertarian is probably a good idea.

Rand works for me.

Someone along De Mint's line might work but the patriot act vote is a real issue to me. I think that should be anathema to any Constitutionalist.

 

[Jonathon]

Deleted.

 

[Jonathon]

Deleted.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Here's what you are not getting. VPs are not chosen until AFTER the primary. If we don't win that, we are dead in the water.

You should've read the given link then you'd've realized that others don't need to declare their VPs early for one reason or another but because Ron's blocks are so small that he needs someone else who can attract GOP-votes that he himself can't; if he can't do that then we're in dead water too, that's why he needs a VP that can bring in as much of the GOP vote as he can & Rand seems like the best possible choice for that purpose.

We'd be kidding ourselves if we think that Ron's going to win the nomination ON HIS OWN without the support of the media & the GOP-machine; we need help to broaden the appeal to GOP masses in order to secure the nomination.

Secondly, to say that the majority of Republicans are neocons is completely false. Sure, there are some big government folks. Both the old "Rockefeller Republican" types and some neocons. These people aren't going to vote for Ron Paul anyway. They are leftists.

The others, the ones who think of themselves as small government conservatives, we have a real chance with. Especially since Dr. Paul is finally talking about God; that may open their ears to hear the other things he is saying. You're right that some of them were led astray about our foreign policy, but that does not a neocon make.

A neocon VP? No. There are other kinds of conservatives to reach out to. Neocons belong in the big government party.

61 is not too old, but spreading beyond what is viewed as libertarian is probably a good idea.

Rand works for me.

Someone along De Mint's line might work but the patriot act vote is a real issue to me. I think that should be anathema to any Constitutionalist.

Look, maybe I've a much broader definition of "neo-con" than you guys; to me, "neo-con" is anyone who's NOT close to "libertarian", "old conservative/right", "paleo-con" or whatever you'd want to call it; these labels are approximations anyway. So by that definition, neo-cons would be a pretty big chunk of the GOP.

Now, it's likely that you guys have a definition of "neo-con" which is less encompassing than mine but that's not the point; THE POINT IS that Ron's main support-blocks are pretty small & that's why he needs a VP who has enough GOP appeal on the national stage to broaden his appeal otherwise Ron's chances of getting the GOP-nomination are pretty much non-existent (considering he's still polling ~10% & it took him years to get there) & in that sense, I think Rand fits the bill better than most as he's not GOP-establishment but still appeals to segments of GOP that wouldn't go for Ron; on the other hand, Rand is "conservative" enough to not turn off Ron's own support-blocks as might be the case with Palin, DeMint, Cain, etc

 

[acptulsa]

Well, I figure the odds are roughly zero that the man will announce a running mate without having the nomination in hand. And, I figure the odds are roughly zero that he'll be as obnoxious as McCain and stand up on the stage of the RNC hand-in-hand with a non-Republican.

So, I guess we're free to speculate all we want. And this is good, as it means those concentrating on coverting Republicans to the cause can speculate about DeMint and those trying to get liberals re-registered so they can vote for a peace candidate can speculate about Kucinich...