Rand Paul will NOT rule out running as Vice President

[Sal Featherstone]

Discussing the “internet chatter” about his becoming Romney's running mate, Sen Paul remarked, "I am interested in trying to shape direction and make our country more fiscally conservative. We'll have to see where it goes."

http://www.louisville.com/content/rand-paul-vice-president-opinion-arena

Before this gets whisked off to Hot Topics, let's stop for just a moment and think about this. Two years ago, Rand was an unknown eye doctor from Kentucky. Now he has a real shot at becoming Vice President of the United States and making a serious impact on this country.

What if part of the deal was a full audit of the Federal Reserve? What if part of the deal was appointing Rand to be in charge of cutting the budget? I mean SERIOUS cuts. It's worth at least discussing here rationally, without screams of "sellout!" or "defeatist!" Can we have a serious discussion about this?

 

[Rincewind]

Honestly?

Good for him. Maybe he catches flak from some people here, but at least he'd be trying to make a difference.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Romney won't get my vote. I'd rather go to hell.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

If Rand were commissioned to cut the budget, he wouldn't be allowed to touch the military. Zero interest in such a scenario.

 

[Sal Featherstone]

If Rand were commissioned to cut the budget, he wouldn't be allowed to touch the military. Zero interest in such a scenario.

How do you know?

 

[ByeByeBernanke]

Don't see it happening.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

How do you know?

Mitt Romney is calling for a larger, more expensive military.

 

[speciallyblend]

will not rule out voting against a rand ticket. Romney is status quo biggovgop so rand accepting a vp =selling out to status quo= I will not vote for status quo.

 

[affa]

Hell no.

We're here to get Ron Paul elected. Stop with this nonsense. We won't accept Ron as VP, let along Rand. Mitt Romney is not an option. Dress him up with any VP you want, and he's still Mitt Romney, and he'll still lead this nation further to ruin.

President Paul 2012. Period.

 

[thoughtomator]

that's fine he doesn't have to rule out anything

if he actually does it, it's another story

 

[misterx]

Let's discuss it if it ever comes up. Right now let's make sure we have a better option. This country needs a Paul presidency now, not 8 years from now.

 

[Marky]

If Rand or Ron end up on the ticket with Romney, I will feel duped. Does Mitt want to continue supporting the Fed, the bailouts, the wars, and the police state? Of course he does, and he will continue to bow to his masters like he has all his life.

If Ron or Rand teamed up with this clown, then I would be convinced that his whole “movement” was a sham. Any discussion of a Romney/Paul alliance makes me physically ill.

 

[JordanL]

Personally, I don't think he'd accept expecting to win or get our votes. He'd be doing it to get the platform for a 2016 run.

 

[Xenophage]

Not a good idea. This is a philosophical battle, first and most importantly. Some temporary improvement economically will be meaningless.

 

[affa]

If Rand or Ron end up on the ticket with Romney, I will feel duped. Does Mitt want to continue supporting the Fed, the bailouts, the wars, and the police state? Of course he does, and he will continue to bow to his masters like he has all his life.

If Ron or Rand teamed up with this clown, then I would be convinced that his whole “movement” was a sham. Any discussion of a Romney/Paul alliance makes me physically ill.

Don't worry, it's not going to happen. The establishment knows we're winning, and they are floating this idea to us on a regular basis, in various versions, to see if any seem acceptable to us. Rand Paul as VP is the latest variant.

Hint: They won't work. President Paul 2012, with his choice of VP. No Ron Paul as VP - the media has a field day ridiculing the VP (think Quayle, Biden, etc). No establishment hack as VP for obvious reasons.

Hint #2: Any non-Paul Republican president in 2012 would prohibit Ron or Rand Paul in 2016, so is a non-starter. At least with Obama in 2012, we'd get a Paul in 2016... assuming the country hasn't crumbled by then, of course.

 

[cindy25]

picking a rival for VP is sort of tradition. most Dems would have preferred Hillary over Biden. and even Biden was a rival

Reagan did it, JFK did it, Dole did it, Clinton did it, Kerry did it.

surely VP Rand is preferable to VP Santorum, or VP Rubio?

and why should he rule out anything?

 

[kfking]

I wouldn't vote for a Romney / Ron ticket let alone Romney / Rand. However, I wouldn't necessarily hold it against Rand if he accepted the position, so long as he holds true to his principles. I personally think it would legitimize 'libertarians' as a force in the GOP.

I have little hope for the LP these days, particularly after the Bob Barr nomination in '08.

 

[kfking]

How do I delete this post? Accidentally posted twice

 

[Beitel]

If it happens, it'll only happen with the blessing of his father. And what could get his father's blessing? A promise from Romney to nominate Jim Grant as head of the Federal Reserve. He'll stop printing money. The government will have to cut the deficit that's financed by printing money. Which means an immediate 800-billion-dollar cut to the government.

Look. When the election's over, and if Ron Paul doesn't win, we'll lose the national stage to talk about our message. But if Rand Paul is Vice President, the message will still be out there.

If Romney doesn't keep his promise, you better believe Rand Paul won't keep silent. Now that'll be REAL DRAMA.

 

[cindy25]

doesn't the president have to appoint the Fed chairman/members from a list supplied by the fed?

the VP could issue pardons anytime he is acting president. surely in 4 years it would happen.