POLL: Should Judge Napolitano Run for President in 2016?

[radiofriendly]

There is a movement underway to urge Judge Andrew Napolitano to throw his hat in the ring for the 2016 Republican nomination. There was a surprising amount of applause at the unexpected mentioning of the Judge’s name during the announcement of the results from the 2013 CPAC straw poll–and, it just so happens, there is already a Super PAC pushing for this to happen.

What are your thoughts? What are the benefits and potential drawbacks of having another voice for liberty in the Republican primaries?

Article (videos) and poll: http://iroots.org/2013/03/23/poll-should-judge-napolitano-run-for-president-in-2016/

 

[RickyJ]

No.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

No - he would be a spoiler against our side. VEEP - HELL YES!

-t

 

[Matt Collins]

No, he's not going to, don't waste your breath. Rand looks like will likely run.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

Nap - I want to see him as a supreme court judge or running the justice dept.

-t

 

[fr33]

I've never seen any evidence that he wants to.

 

[supermario21]

Judge Nap said on Special Report the Thursday night of CPAC he had no interest in running after they showed the Draft Judge Nap booth on the screen.

 

[COpatriot]

Supreme

Court

 

[compromise]

No. He would split the vote and he's smart enough to know that. He'll back his friend Rand and probably get a Supreme Court appointment in return.

 

[mhad]

A different perspective is the more Liberty candidates on stage agreeing with Rand the more the general public will accept our view points. If there are two or three other candidates continually saying "Rand Paul is exactly right because....." Then it gives Rand more credability. Plus build name recognition for the judge or other Liberty Candidates......only a thought.

 

[supermario21]

Could you imagine Judge Nap's confirmation hearings????

"Are you a 9/11 truther?"

 

[Uriah]

A different perspective is the more Liberty candidates on stage agreeing with Rand the more the general public will accept our view points. If there are two or three other candidates continually saying "Rand Paul is exactly right because....." Then it gives Rand more credibility. Plus build name recognition for the judge or other Liberty Candidates......only a thought.

I could see this being beneficial but it would take away from Rand's resources--money and volunteers.

 

[lib3rtarian]

No. I love the Judge, but sadly, and this speaks to how superficial the voters are, he does not even look remotely "presidential".

 

[COpatriot]

Could you imagine Judge Nap's confirmation hearings????

"Are you a 9/11 truther?"

Glenn Beck would turn on him in a heartbeat.

 

[compromise]

Could you imagine Judge Nap's confirmation hearings????

"Are you a 9/11 truther?"

The Senate Judiciary committee has Flake, Cruz and Lee on it, so he'll get some praise too. Judge Nap is generally popular among mainstream conservatives.

 

[BuddyRey]

Definitely, yes. The more sane voices get to appear in the debates, the better.

Either of them would be potential powerhouses against anyone the Dems have.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I prefer Nap over Rand but reality is Rand probably has a better (Albiet still near-zero) chance. In the same way Gary Johnson should have endorsed Ron Paul instead of running GOP in 2012, Napolitano would probably be wise to endorse Rand rather than running in 2016. Even so, I agree with full-on libertarians like Nap more often than sort-of-libertarians like Rand. If Rand actually did run against the Judge, I'd have to vote for the Judge, although I would certainly still support Rand if he won the GOP primary.

 

[DamianTV]

I hate to say it but I'll vote for Napolitano before I vote for Rand.

 

[Antischism]

It would split the vote, and I would end up voting for Napolitano over Rand, if you need it as evidence that the votes would split.