Poll: Would you vote for Rand Paul/Andrew Napolitano 2012?

[tjeffersonsghost]

Sorry Kramer....

 

[doctor jones]

No brainer, yessssssss

 

[tjeffersonsghost]

If Ron or Rand didnt run Id gladly settle for a Napolitano Run for president.....

 

[Son of Detroit]

Anyone who votes no needs to have their liberty card revoked.

 

[silverhandorder]

Hell No. Common guys don't make this ridiculous. Rand would be looked upon as an opportunist. I will vote for Rand after at least one term in senate.

 

[00_Pete]

Hell No. Common guys don't make this ridiculous. Rand would be looked upon as an opportunist. I will vote for Rand after at least one term in senate.

a) Lack of political experience and "outsider" status is a bonus nowadays.
b) In 2012 people will be even more angry...much more, making "a" even more important.

 

[Justinjj1]

I wouldn't vote for a Rand Paul/Jesus Christ ticket in 2012.

 

[jake]

Ron Paul/Andrew Napolitano

 

[Fr3shjive]

Rand Paul with Judge Nap in his ear would be a great combo. Even with zero experience and no voting record he would be better than any of the alternatives. I would definitely vote for him.

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

a) Lack of political experience and "outsider" status is a bonus nowadays.
b) In 2012 people will be even more angry...much more, making "a" even more important.

i don't think thats necessarily as true as you'd like to believe it is. if it was, the harry reid race wouldn't be nearly as close as it is now. you can't get more "insider" than that.

 

[jmdrake]

i don't think thats necessarily as true as you'd like to believe it is. if it was, the harry reid race wouldn't be nearly as close as it is now. you can't get more "insider" than that.

Are you going out of your way to see the glass half empty? Harry Reid would be trouncing Sharon Angle in a normal year.

 

[jmdrake]

Hell No. Common guys don't make this ridiculous. Rand would be looked upon as an opportunist. I will vote for Rand after at least one term in senate.

Yeah. But how many full terms in the senate did Obama have? Anyway, I agree that 2012 is too early for Rand to run for president, but voting for him in 2012 isn't unthinkable to me.

 

[00_Pete]

i don't think thats necessarily as true as you'd like to believe it is. if it was, the harry reid race wouldn't be nearly as close as it is now. you can't get more "insider" than that.

That is good point...let me adjust "The RIGHT KIND of people will be even more angry..."

Rand Paul was a huge hit among the "regular" conservatives, the attacks against him made him even more popular, people must take this into account.

Are you going out of your way to see the glass half empty? Harry Reid would be trouncing Sharon Angle in a normal year.

Good point too...

 

[Ekrub]

I don't understand this obsession with Napolitano being a VP. I love his views and his agressiveness, but he is too "radical" to be a VP. I've seen him say waaay too many things that would damage a liberty candidates chances to be President. He would make a great AG or SCOTUS nominee, not a great VP.

 

[pcosmar]

I am looking forward to Ron announcing his run.

/straws
/grasp
/thread

 

[susano]

I prefer a Napolitano/Rand Paul ticket.

 

[Slutter McGee]

I wouldn't vote for a Rand Paul/Jesus Christ ticket in 2012.

I realize that we are fellow "trolls" and all. But you really wouldn't vote for Jesus as Vice President? I don't even believe in the divinity of Christ and I would vote him in.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

 

[susano]

I don't understand this obsession with Napolitano being a VP. I love his views and his agressiveness, but he is too "radical" to be a VP. I've seen him say waaay too many things that would damage a liberty candidates chances to be President. He would make a great AG or SCOTUS nominee, not a great VP.

"Radical"? Are you kidding? You think the principals of real freedom are radical?

I agree he would be wasted in the position of VP. He would make a great president, though. However, in this reality, it ain't gonna happen. Government must be abolished if we are to ever to be free. While we live in the matrix, I agree he would be best on the Supreme Court (better than AG because it's for life).

 

[Ekrub]

"Radical"? Are you kidding? You think the principals of real freedom are radical?

I agree he would be wasted in the position of VP. He would make a great president, though. However, in this reality, it ain't gonna happen. Government must be abolished if we are to ever to be free. While we live in the matrix, I agree he would be best on the Supreme Court (better than AG because it's for life).

I wasn't saying that I think he is radical or that the principals of real freedom are radical, but rather that the mainstream media would have an almost too easy of a time painting him in that light. I said that I love his positions.

You have to play the game a little, like it or not. And Napolitano wouldn't be a good VP. Waste of a good libertarian anyways, I would be more inclined to support a Rand or Ron POTUS with a Gary Johnson/Jim Demint VPOTUS

(Jim Demint because I think he could bring in some neocon votes, and Gary Johnson so he could get experience and name recognition)

 

[NewFederalist]

I prefer a Napolitano/Rand Paul ticket.

I was thinking the same thing.