Paul/Obama Ticket?!

[DealzOnWheelz]

Ok my thoughts are as follows

I do not agree with Barrack on alot of issues, ALOT
And I also don't think it would ever happen

But the question was not should they run? or even would they run together?

The question was If they ran together could they win


And I truly think yes

Reason, INDEPENDANTS both Ron Paul and Barrack Obama Decimated the Independat vote in IOWA

They both have the best Grassroots campaigns

And honestly I believe Barrack Obama is moldable

I think being around Dr. Paul for a long period of time will open his eyes to alot of what is going on in washington

 

[Eponym_mi]

Dr. Paul would have to perform brain surgery on Obama for such a ticket to work.

 

[MadViking10]

I voted yes. HELL YES !! Any ticket that has Ron Paul as the next President of the United States, IM IN !!

 

[Created4]

Dr. Paul would have to perform brain surgery on Obama for such a ticket to work.

Too true!

So who would run with Paul if he got the nomination?

 

[Johncjackson]

No, but Obama is preferable to every Republican candidate except Ron Paul..and I have never voted for a Democrat. That doesnt mean I support him. It may just be a commentary on the sad state of the major parties.

 

[mbn71]

Considering he's AIPAC's #2 guy on the democratic side (behind Hillary) no, there's no way I'd support him.

http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13849&Itemid=86

 

[Todd McGreevy]

Foreign Aid Probably Divides Them

http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13849&Itemid=86

Based on Obama's Council on Foreign Relations participation and the evidence that this article above shows for his support of Israel... looks like Obama would have to come over to Ron Paul's policy of eliminating foreign aid to Israel and every other country.

Probably tough to do for Obama since he is beholden to the folks cited in this article.

 

[RonPaulblican]

OK, i have had this thought long before tonight's ABC/NH debate... where Ron Paul waxed complimentary about Obama.

What would the chances of a third party effort by a combo ticket of Ron Paul with VP Barrack Obama look like?

Let's face it, the establishment elite in both the Red and Blue parties do not want to see either Paul or Obama get the nod.
(I have not given up yet on Paul via the Republicans).

But what if the voices of the people are eventually drowned out by both the media (did you notice that there was no reporter reporting on Paul's camp's thoughts afterwards? they had 6 reporters before the debate in the spin room, then only 4 after)
and by the elite party leaders??

Seems to me that RP and BO have the interest of their constituents at heart and are the least likely to play the fear card to continue to erode our civil liberties...
I have a lot of friends who support Obama and are Dems but would support Paul if BO was not in the race.

Ron Paul would be the mentor to Barrack Obama and while Ron works on monetary policy Barrack works on foreign relations and reestablishing United States' respect in the world....

Do you think that a third party with Paul/Obama could beat both a Dem and a Republican -- and preempt a Bloomberg spoiler candidacy??

(btw: Ron Paul beat Huckabee and Guiliani and Hunter in my precinct in Bettendorf, IA)

www.ronpaulringtones.org

Please renew your prescription and start taking your meds again.

 

[Ball]

Screw that AIPAC sycophant!

Omaba's an empty suit who's campaign basically boils down to "Vote for me! I'm not Hillary!"

 

[Cali4RonPaul]

All we need is Sarah Palin for VP!!

 

[bolidew]

While you are discussing such a meaningless topic, Obama is trying to take away more independent voters in NH from Dr. Paul.
Stop Obama!

 

[DrNoZone]

Wow, I'm glad someone started this debate up! I actually watched the entire debate last night, both the R's and D's. I have always been impressed with Obama, even if I don't agree with him on some things (vehemently so in some cases). But, I came away thinking to myself "boy, I would LOVE to see an Obama/Paul ticket, I don't even care which one was P and which was VP, as long as they both agreed to work with one another on things." I think that's the only way we'll see RP in the White House, to be frank, and I would support it 110%.

Ok, you can call me a troll now.

 

[VoteRonPaul2008]

No Obama is a phony
he WON'T commit to pulling out troops from Iraq, and he wasn't in Congress when they voted to invade, so it makes it very easy for him to say he wouldn't have voted for it.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/d...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2...

He did, however, vote to renew the Patriot Act:

http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php...

( you can also see his horrendous record of missing votes)

he's hinted at invading pakistan, and he co-sponsored a bill designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a global terrorist group back in April.

so what's all this 'CHANGE' that he's spouting and american politics amatuers are easting up?

 

[DrNoZone]

Reason, INDEPENDANTS both Ron Paul and Barrack Obama Decimated the Independat vote in IOWA

They both have the best Grassroots campaigns

And honestly I believe Barrack Obama is moldable

I think being around Dr. Paul for a long period of time will open his eyes to alot of what is going on in washington

You're right on about all of these things. Especially about Obama being "moldable", though I would call it "intelligent and thoughtful and willing to listen to reason".

 

[Todd McGreevy]

Only if Obama cedes to Dr. Paul's policies

No Obama is a phony
he WON'T commit to pulling out troops from Iraq, and he wasn't in Congress when they voted to invade, so it makes it very easy for him to say he wouldn't have voted for it.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/d...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2...

He did, however, vote to renew the Patriot Act:

http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php...

( you can also see his horrendous record of missing votes)

he's hinted at invading pakistan, and he co-sponsored a bill designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a global terrorist group back in April.

so what's all this 'CHANGE' that he's spouting and american politics amatuers are easting up?

Okay, great points... he did vote AGAINST reauthorization of the PATRIOT ACT, before he voted FOR it according to this link: (the VoteSmart link above is broken)
http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490&type=category&category=61&go.x=9&go.y=11

I can't imagine there are many Dems who support the PATRIOT act, so I wonder if they are aware of his new found support of FEAR with March 2006 vote to support Patriot act?

Keep in mind, the origins of this hypothetical exercise (posting) is IF the Dems spurn Obama at the top level, despite the people's wishes and they are forced to support Hillary (a very real possibility)...and that despite the people's wishes the GOP spurns Dr. Paul (do i really need to explain that?)

[i also said in my original post that i have not given up on Dr. Paul within the GOP machine]

And i will admit that upon further research i may have been too hopeful that an Obama VP spot made sense... too hopeful that Dr. Paul CAN mold the younger junior senator...

I can't imagine why my Dem friends would support an invasion of Pakistan that is mentioned above... the more I hear within this post, the more it feels like he's a neocon wolf in democrat sheep's clothing... perhaps a head to head comparison of voting records would help.

 

[DrNoZone]

I can't imagine why my Dem friends would support an invasion of Pakistan that is mentioned above... the more I hear within this post, the more it feels like he's a neocon wolf in democrat sheep's clothing... perhaps a head to head comparison of voting records would help.

Last night in the debate he said he would first go the diplomatic route and try to get Pakistan's assistance. If that failed, he would make it clear that we would go into West Pakistan and go after the terrorist elements that had threatened us, but ONLY if there was actionable intelligence that supported this action. It wouldn't be a full scale war, just an operation to go after a specific group. That's an action I might be able to support.

 

[Todd McGreevy]

Last night in the debate he said he would first go the diplomatic route and try to get Pakistan's assistance. If that failed, he would make it clear that we would go into West Pakistan and go after the terrorist elements that had threatened us, but ONLY if there was actionable intelligence that supported this action. It wouldn't be a full scale war, just an operation to go after a specific group. That's an action I might be able to support.

Maybe someone can bring this up with Dr. Paul in the town hall meeting... helping define the difference between him and Obama?

I understand that Dr. Paul supported, via powers granted in the constitution, a bill to track down and capture/kill Osama bin Laden... i wish he would bring that up more often, and then call out how neither Clinton or Bush admins have been able to take care of business... but with the power of the Constitution he would deliver.

 

[han_solo]

WHY would Ron Paul want to join with a pro-MASSIVE GOVERNMENT SOCIALIST ???!!

Some of you people just don't get it...

 

[Todd McGreevy]

WHY would Ron Paul want to join with a pro-MASSIVE GOVERNMENT SOCIALIST ???!!

Some of you people just don't get it...

It was a HYPOTHETICAL question, inspired by Dr. Paul waxing poetically about Obama and his supporters last night on the ABC/Facebook debate. And if we can't exercise the arts of dialog, research, compromise and innovation, you are just going to get more of the same dynasty leadership that erodes our liberty and puts our children in debt.

Let's face it, Obama turned out the vote. Democrats turned out the vote TWO TO ONE, in Iowa.
He has a better machine to engage the college kids than Ron Paul does. He has as good a shot at recruiting indies as Ron Paul does.
(here's a refresher on this that i posted at the very beginning: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/20969)

So wake up and start having a discussion. I have learned alot about Obama just from reading everyone's input here. Ron Paul supporters BETTER know more about Obama in case by some miracle he does get the nod.

I have stated several times that I am not giving up the ghost on the GOP to nominate Ron Paul yet (he IS a long distance runner!)... but (i hope i am wrong), the establishment and elites within the GOP and the Dems are not going to let upstarts like Obama or Paul get the nod, certainly not the way the mainstream press is running things, and with so much war profiteering at stake.

This was simply a suggestion at evaluating a truly alternative ticket.. a hybrid that would really bring folks together... Dr. Paul himself has stated he has many friends on the other side of the aisle... he gets that there are as many issues that join us as divide us... you are just falling into the trap of the duopoly that the power brokers in the two parties want to maintain.. pit one against the other and split the loot every 4 years.

i am not saying i agree with all of Obama's stances and as stated earlier in this thread, he would have to cede to Dr. Paul on many many issues... because guess what? If Bloomberg gets in as a 3rd party spoiler, how do you think that will go down.. .then we can really expect Hillarycare.

I am willing to be proven wrong and that is why I posted this.
thanks, TM

 

[Xonox]

Well, if you could get both of them on the ticket, yes. Would it be functional at all? No.