Can Ron Paul win the WH if Rand Paul loses?

[Fozz]

Ron Paul has zero 'baggage', just what media has created, as they did and are doing for Rand.

What he didn't have was sufficient partisan defenders at the time the media first started spreading its slime so it entered the public consciousness. I hope Rand has enough defenders, now.

Ron Paul has the newsletters, the picture with Don Black, his politically incorrect views that liberals would exploit (opposition to departments, entitlements, CRA, among many other things). So yes, he does have baggage.

 

[low preference guy]

Ron Paul has the newsletters, the picture with Don Black, his politically incorrect views that liberals would exploit (opposition to departments, entitlements, CRA, among many other things). So yes, he does have baggage.

Only the newsletters are baggage.

You have to be an idiot to think that a picture with someone he doesn't even know is baggage.

 

[erowe1]

Yes, if Rand Paul loses, Ron still can win the WH. His odds of winning in that scenario are 1 in 1,000,000.

However, if Rand wins, then Ron's odds of winning the WH skyrocket up to 1 in 500,000.

 

[Fozz]

Only the newsletters are baggage.

You have to be an idiot to think that a picture with someone he doesn't even know is baggage.

If liberals are trying to prove that he's a racist, then the newsletters, his views on the Civil rights act, his picture with Don Black, and acceptance of money from Stormfront's leader will be enough proof for much of the PC crowd.

If Ron ever supported David Duke in the early 90s, that will also be used against him.

 

[low preference guy]

If liberals are trying to prove that he's a racist, then the newsletters, his views on the Civil rights act, his picture with Don Black, and acceptance of money from Stormfront's leader will be enough proof for much of the PC crowd.

If Ron ever supported David Duke in the early 90s, that will also be used against him.

The newsletters are enough to make him unelectable, and the other things don't add anything to it.

When I say unelectable, I mean as President. He could be the V.P. of Walter Williams with no problem.

 

[sailingaway]

Ron Paul has the newsletters, the picture with Don Black, his politically incorrect views that liberals would exploit (opposition to departments, entitlements, CRA, among many other things). So yes, he does have baggage.

The newsletters statements weren't his and were under independent editorial staff when he was back practicing medicine; against that you have 30 years of public record and one of the most extensive youtube histories on the planet showing he hasn't a racist bone in his body. I can't believe people on THIS FORUM give them any weight at all; people are already saying supremacists support Rand (just because liberty means people being free to say bad OR good things); and he has 'politically incorrect views' liberals are already exploiting, and new nonsense (that idiot license junk).

What people make up about you isn't 'baggage' it is contrived, and they are doing that overtime with Rand, as well.

 

[Fozz]

The newsletters are enough to make him unelectable, and the other things don't add anything to it.

When I say unelectable, I mean as President. He could be the V.P. of Walter Williams with no problem.

I don't understand how Walter Williams would be able to get elected president.

 

[Kludge]

The newsletters are enough to make him unelectable, and the other things don't add anything to it.

The Black picture & Stormfront donation "scandal" were both used fairly frequently against Paul in 07/08, esp. on the socialist sections of the Internet.



... Though, I think that old troll going on about not commissioning a Rosa Parks coin while being okay with others was probably the most damning.

 

[low preference guy]

I don't understand how Walter Williams would be able to get elected president.

He doesn't have the newsletters baggage, and if he runs when Ron doesn't, I'm pretty sure the liberty movement will support him. And the media won't be able to use the race card against him.

 

[AlexMerced]

No movement, no cause, hinges on one event, no one cause should ever cause you to give, we'll have our setbacks, we'll have victories, but in the end, we'll win this war, just focus on the goal which is promote liberty, getting elected official is just one means and trust me there are many other avenues and we are succeeding.

 

[AlexMerced]

People are really overstating the important of Rand Pauls ron, most of the country could care less about the kentucky race, and won't even be aware of it if Ron Paul runs 2012, now would it give us some credibility for media coverage... sure

but the country in a whole doesn't pay that much attention to these things, I mean I bet most people in kentucky don't either, just the voters and political junkies like us.

 

[klamath]

Ron paul cannot be elected in the current state of the country, however if the economy gets worse stupid shit like the news letters and the race baiting frome the left will be the last thing on peoples minds. The people hurting will turn to someone that has what is now considered radical ideas. All the conventional economic stimulus ideas will have been tried and voters will be looking for someone who HAS a plan that is not more of the same.

 

[low preference guy]

Ron paul cannot be elected in the current state of the country, however if the economy gets worse stupid shit like the news letters and the race baiting frome the left will be the last thing on peoples minds. The people hurting will turn to someone that has what is now considered radical ideas. All the conventional economic stimulus ideas will have been tried and voters will be looking for someone who HAS a plan that is not more of the same.

Sure, if things get bad enough Ron can be elected as President. But only if they get really bad. Nothing short of ongoing hyperinflation throughout the Republican Primary will do it.

 

[klamath]

People are really overstating the important of Rand Pauls ron, most of the country could care less about the kentucky race, and won't even be aware of it if Ron Paul runs 2012, now would it give us some credibility for media coverage... sure

but the country in a whole doesn't pay that much attention to these things, I mean I bet most people in kentucky don't either, just the voters and political junkies like us.

Political junkies determine the state of the country for those that never get involved in politics.

 

[PermanentSleep]

+1
If people reject Ron Paul after all these years of horseshit phony two party system, endless big government, endless welfare state and endless warfare state, then America deserves the oligarchy system run by bankers and Military Industrial Complex.
People better wake the fuck up because upcoming dollar crisis is not going to be pretty.

It truly sucks how true everything you just said really is.... :/

 

[klamath]

Sure, if things get bad enough Ron can be elected as President. But only if they get really bad. Nothing short of ongoing hyperinflation throughout the Republican Primary will do it.

Probably true, however anything less will probably see Obama reelected.

 

[Kludge]

Political junkies determine the state of the country for those that never get involved in politics.

All voters are involved in politics.

It would seem a great many watch Corporate Media without worthwhile supplement.

Corporate Media knows ratings come from scandals, disasters, Olbermann-like ego bullshit, and gay pandas, not debates "on the issues."

Voters watching Corporate Mediate without worthwhile supplement will likely not take "the issues" into account, knowing by air-time they aren't as important as Ron Paul's bigoted worldview (... allegedly),

 

[sailingaway]

Sure, if things get bad enough Ron can be elected as President. But only if they get really bad. Nothing short of ongoing hyperinflation throughout the Republican Primary will do it.

I disagree. I started supporting Ron Paul after looking into him simply because I wasn't going to vote for McCain and needed someone else to vote for. I looked into Huckabee enough to pull a 'meh', but stuck a pin in him in case I didn't find someone better. I then looked into Ron. My sole 'motivation' was that no way in hell was I voting for McCain. But the newsletter 'issue' pops like a soap bubble when you look into it. First, the statements themselves aren't what you expect from all the furor, no call for reemergence of white supremacy or any such nonsense, just sort of Archie Bunkerist snark like you find all over the internet, and not many examples for a newsletter that ran so many years. Then, there was the independent editorial staff, and I know I sure wouldn't be overseeing a newsletter if I had independent staff, especially with a full time medical practice, no 'PR' officer of a politician to oversee things, etc. THEN there is his record, the interview of the NAACP district chief on youtube who while not endorsing RPs politics clearly didn't think he was racist, etc etc etc. On top of that is that everyone knows the left blows race up as a huge issue at every possible opportunity. It is deadening to real race issues even, much less to something like this.

I saw an article yesterday wondering why Rand's poll numbers hadn't dropped from the last Daily Kos poll. My personal feeling is that people don't believe media, and when it starts a huge feeding frenzy, most feel there might be 'something else' behind it. When people are comfortable, they take the easy PC road, but when they are really hurting and being PC means not tending what they need, they are much more hard headed -- or sensible, if you like.

The left will still believe because it isnt' their guys getting creamed by media in this time when people are looking behind the spin. But I'm wondering if the right will ever be the same.

I hope not.

 

[erowe1]

I'm pretty sure the liberty movement will support him.

Except for people who make noninterventionism a litmus test.

And the media won't be able to use the race card against him.

Wanna bet? Ask Clarence Thomas.

 

[low preference guy]

I disagree. I started supporting Ron Paul after looking into him simply because I wasn't going to vote for McCain and needed someone else to vote for. I looked into Huckabee enough to pull a 'meh', but stuck a pin in him in case I didn't find someone better. I then looked into Ron. My sole 'motivation' was that no way in hell was I voting for McCain. But the newsletter 'issue' pops like a soap bubble when you look into it. First, the statements themselves aren't what you expect from all the furor, no call for reemergence of white supremacy or any such nonsense, just sort of Archie Bunkerist snark like you find all over the internet, and not many examples for a newsletter that ran so many years. Then, there was the independent editorial staff, and I know I sure wouldn't be overseeing a newsletter if I had independent staff, especially with a full time medical practice, no 'PR' officer of a politician to oversee things, etc. THEN there is his record, the interview of the NAACP district chief on youtube who while not endorsing RPs politics clearly didn't think he was racist, etc etc etc. On top of that is that everyone knows the left blows race up as a huge issue at every possible opportunity. It is deadening to real race issues even, much less to something like this.

I saw an article yesterday wondering why Rand's poll numbers hadn't dropped from the last Daily Kos poll. My personal feeling is that people don't believe media, and when it starts a huge feeding frenzy, most feel there might be 'something else' behind it. When people are comfortable, they take the easy PC road, but when they are really hurting and being PC means not tending what they need, they are much more hard headed -- or sensible, if you like.

The left will still believe because it isnt' their guys getting creamed by media in this time when people are looking behind the spin. But I'm wondering if the right will ever be the same.

I hope not.

I can see where this might have had some weight w

I agree that the statements on the newsletter aren't really that bad.

But this is what the media will do: It will repeat the following statement 24/7:

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went to pick up their welfare checks

That's the exact quote CNN used in '07. I don't think Ron will politically survive that if it's repeated all day every day for a week. The statement is much more damaging than Rand's nuanced statements on property rights.

Well, that's what I believe. I might be wrong and Ron might be elected without hyperinflation, but I think things will definitely have to get worse.

Another wild card is Rand improving his image substantially within a year, and that image improvement translating to Ron.