Ron Paul 2012 vs. Rand Paul 2012

[Spider-Man]

Which would you rather see and why?

 

[RM918]

Ron, because Rand would have to announce his candidacy after a month in office and it'd be absurd. We'd have a far better bet with him in the Senate for a while.

 

[Linus]

I'd really like to see someone else galvanize the movement aside from a member of the Paul family, lest we all find ourselves Naderized in the minds of the few suburbanites we've managed to lure to "the dark side" after the big game here in '12.

Personally I've long been a Napolitano booster, his Constitution in Exile is a great book, but who knows if he's even willing to take a pay cut for government work at this point. Beside, I don't think we would ever elect an American of Italian descent as President.

 

[Mini-Me]

Ron, because Rand would have to announce his candidacy after a month in office and it'd be absurd. We'd have a far better bet with him in the Senate for a while.

This. Plus, the best use of a Presidential run at this point is still to use the debates as a soapbox for voter education, and while Rand is a better speaker, Ron is far more hard-hitting on foreign policy and the police state.

I'd like to see other people outside the Paul family become torchbearers as well, but as of this point our only option is probably Gary Johnson (although Napolitano would also be very interesting too, especially considering only a libertarian President would pick him as a Supreme Court justice - where he REALLY should be). When it comes to Presidential elections, you pretty much have to pick candidates who have experience in government office or strong voter recognition, and there aren't very many such people who are also pro-liberty.

 

[tremendoustie]

Ron is more principled

 

[leonster]

Ron. He's said himself, he's afraid this time there might be a chance of him winning. Uphill climb, yes, but within the realm of possibility. With his age, though, he'd be best as a one-termer, then passing the torch to Rand in 2016.

Or, if Ron were to make a big impact but fail to get the nomination in 2012, again Rand would be a great candidate for 2016. Seems the pattern lately is that people get annoyed at whatever President is in office and vote the other party afterwards. Bush's election in 2000 had a lot to do with people fed up with Clinton scandals and wanting a clean break from that crowd. Same with Obama a couple years ago--people were fed up with Bush and the neo-cons. People are getting sick of Obama now--the question is will they be sick enough of him in 2012, or will it take a second term of lame-duckedness from him to get people sick of Democrats?

 

[leonster]

This. Plus, the best use of a Presidential run at this point is still to use the debates as a soapbox for voter education, and while Rand is a better speaker, Ron is far more hard-hitting on foreign policy and the police state.

I'd like to see other people outside the Paul family become torchbearers as well, but as of this point our only option is probably Gary Johnson (although Napolitano would also be very interesting too, especially considering only a libertarian President would pick him as a Supreme Court justice - where he REALLY should be). When it comes to Presidential elections, you pretty much have to pick candidates who have experience in government office or strong voter recognition, and there aren't very many such people who are also pro-liberty.

How old is Napolitano? Just thinking of the future, if one of the Pauls were in the White House and could nominate him... his age (and health of course) would affect how long he could fight the good fight in the SC.

 

[Mini-Me]

How old is Napolitano? Just thinking of the future, if one of the Pauls were in the White House and could nominate him... his age (and health of course) would affect how long he could fight the good fight in the SC.

He's only 59! He's not in the greatest shape though, so there's really no telling whether he's more likely to live for another 50 years or 50 days. :-/

 

[BuddyRey]

I like Rand, but he hasn't proven himself yet. I want to see a term or two in the Senate so I can know he's the genuine article like his dad.

 

[AuH20]

Rand. Rand is on the precipice of being a U.S. Senator after being relegated to a significant underdog. He simply articulates his positions better than father and thanks to his youth he brings more vivacity & quick thinking to the table. Moreover, Ron simply comes off too nice sometimes.

 

[Southron]

In 2012 I prefer Ron. No sense in wasting Rand's chance against an incumbent President. Rand needs time to build a power base anyway.

 

[ctiger2]

Easily Ron. Rand hasn't won anything yet and even if he did he'd have to announce he's running for president almost immediately after the elections. Not gonna happen. Ron is the one.

 

[leonster]

In 2012 I prefer Ron. No sense in wasting Rand's chance against an incumbent President. Rand needs time to build a power base anyway.

There's this too. With few exceptions (Nixon is the only one I can think of), IF you're the party's nominee you only get one chance at the Presidency.

 

[RonPaulwillWin]

I would choose Peter Schiff over Rand Paul....Peter is the alpha dog.

 

[Fozz]

This Rand Paul 2012 talk is pretty stupid. He has no experience of being an elected official, and if he were to run in 2012, he would have to start his campaign one month after entering office.

2016 would be a good year for Rand if he becomes a major leader in the Senate.

 

[Imaginos]

Ron Paul.
Some people say Ron Paul is too old but I believe just like many Austrian economists, Ron Paul will live very long.
And regarding Rand Paul, sorry but I don't think there's any proven track record of him yet.
I really hope Rand is going to follow his father's direction and only time will tell.
However, at this point, comparing Rand with Ron Paul does not make sense to me.
Rand Paul is no way in the same league with Ron Paul.
He has to prove himself first.

 

[AuH20]

I thought this poll was a hypothetical. In a debate setting, I have full confidence Rand would kick Obama's ass and cut through the semantics. Son of Paul is the new and improved version, thanks to his age.

 

[Imaginos]

@AuH20-->

I have full confidence Rand would kick Obama's ass and cut through the semantics.

I'd love to see that!
If Rand turns out to be a great defender of liberty and constitution just like his father, then he will have my full support.

 

[anaconda]

They both should run. We should get as many liberty candidates into the debates as possible.

 

[Brian Defferding]

Rand still needs to win the Senate seat first, for the love of all that is holy!