Cato: Ron Paul could = Hillary

[Matt Collins]

Google for a quick piece by Michael Tanner of The Cato institute and what he said yesterday:

"Ron Paul has clearly mined that vein of Republican discontent which caused so many limited-government conservatives and libertarians to stay home or vote for third party candidates last November, resulting in Democrats regaining control of Congress. His support is real, significant...and growing.

And here's the very real danger for Republicans: If Paul, as expected, fails to obtain the GOP presidential nomination - and should the eventual GOP nominee fail to woo and attract Paul's growing legions of supporters with a believable pro-Constitution platform - don't be surprised to see enough Ron Paul voter support swing over to the Libertarian Party nominee on the general election ballot a year from now and throw the race into the Democrats' column.

All the press attention over the past few weeks has been on the possibility of Christian conservatives rallying behind a third-party candidate should the GOP nominate Rudy Giuliani. But the party's growing libertarian-leaning wing could have the same effect. For the GOP to have a chance of beating Hillary next November, its nominee is going to have to find a way to appeal to both its pro-life wing AND its constitutionalist wing. A pretty tall order."

 

[rockwell]

Well then if the Republicans wish to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office the only smart move would be to throw in with Ron Paul.

That's called logic.

Git you some.

 

[Naraku]

My response would be, "He's going to take the anti-war vote from those peacenik Republican hippies?"

 

[freelance]

Well then if the Republicans wish to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office the only smart move would be to throw in with Ron Paul.

That's called logic.

Git you some.

LOL! Sounds right to me.

 

[Elwar]

Title should be: No Ron Paul = Hillary

 

[jacmicwag]

I'd have to hold my nose to vote for anyone Fox, Townhall or Redstate endorsed which of course will not be Dr. Paul. The mainstream GOP does not have a clue how their RP insults will result in "unintended consequences." But from out of the old GOP ashes, better things will grow.

 

[Taco John]

In my bush imitation voice:

"Heh. I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding a Hillary presidency, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing anyone but Ron Paul from getting the Republican nomination. heh."

 

[Brinck Slattery]

What's the deal with Cato? I know they can't endorse anyone, but I thought that having a more or less libertarian candidate would be kinda exciting for them.

Of course, I know the Lew Rockwell folks call them "State-o," which makes me laugh and shoot milk out of my nose.

 

[rockwell]

"For the GOP to have a chance of beating Hillary next November, its nominee is going to have to find a way to appeal to both its pro-life wing AND its constitutionalist wing. A pretty tall order."

It makes you wonder if they even read what they write.

They just described Ron Paul to a Tee.

 

[Highmesa]

What's the deal with Cato? I know they can't endorse anyone, but I thought that having a more or less libertarian candidate would be kinda exciting for them.

Of course, I know the Lew Rockwell folks call them "State-o," which makes me laugh and shoot milk out of my nose.

Here's an article from FMNN explaining CATO's stance:
Tanner on Paul

 

[Brinck Slattery]

thanks, Highmesa. That's about what I figured.

 

[Highmesa]

Google for a quick piece by Michael Tanner of The Cato institute and what he said yesterday:

I'm not seeing this article. Whre is it?

 

[ItsTime]

easy to solve that problem. Reps should back Ron Paul and take out Hillary.

 

[Zydeco]

cato's true colors shine through -- it's a statist organization masquerading as a libertarian sentinel.

no surprise, since it was founded by bush family friend charles koch. its role is to co-opt the libertarian movement.

 

[Matt Collins]

cato's true colors shine through -- it's a statist organization masquerading as a libertarian sentinel.

no surprise, since it was founded by bush family friend charles koch. its role is to co-opt the libertarian movement.

Proof?

 

[Ron Paul Fan]

Paul > Hillary

 

[KingTheoden]

STATO is well known for being false opposition. There are so many other great grass roots libertarian and paleo conservative groups that CATO should not even be on of docket of groups to support.

 

[Brinck Slattery]

I like Cato, they're the guys that got me involved in libertarian thought in the first place.

Well, it really started with Ayn Rand...

 

[Matt Collins]

Here's an article from FMNN explaining CATO's stance:
Tanner on Paul

I don't trust FMNN.. I've been burned by them in the past.

 

[Matt Collins]

I like Cato, they're the guys that got me involved in libertarian thought in the first place

Yeah, most of what I've seen from them have been good. I am not an economist so I don't really understand the differences between their flavor and the flavor of Mises Institute.