Stop the Romney/Paul Speculation . . .

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

True, but some people here act like it is meant for them to go 1 v 1. Which neither campaign is aiming for necessarily (especially Paul because that is too much money and organization go go up against 1 v 1). However, people are either saying it is meant to do that 1v1 or it doesn't exist at all. It isn't true. Sometimes though, it is in the best interests for many reasons not to start a sh*t war with certain candidates. From the campaigns I worked with (especially in primaries or non-partisan races) it happens all the time. People need to stop acting offended by the idea.

I could tolerate the idea, if Paul had the reigns. But I don't trust Romney with the reigns, even if RP is by his side.

 

[mport1]

Enough Paul supporters would vote Romney/Paul make a meaningful difference in the national election in this scenario. And enough independents would too. Obama would get mopped with regards to the economic argument. And Paul would have the largest platform to push liberty than Liberty has had in over a century. People would be foolish not to support this.

Personally I could never vote for somebody who is pro-war, and in favor of the war on drugs and the Fed. I do not want blood on my hands from voting for somebody like that.

 

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

Personally I could never vote for somebody who is pro-war, and in favor of the war on drugs and the Fed. I do not want blood on my hands from voting for somebody like that.

This.

I do not want to walk away from this election, and lose my dignity in the process.

 

[SCOTUSman]

I could tolerate the idea, if Paul had the reigns. But I don't trust Romney with the reigns, even if RP is by his side.

Agreed.

 

[dillo]

Its much easier to attack Santorum and Gingrich, save Mittens for last

 

[SCOTUSman]

Jefferson and Adams did not agree on much but that didn't stop them from serving together. Adams supported the Alien and sedition acts (A soft version of NDAA) but Adams and Jefferson respected each other. Its somewhat like Romney and Paul. though it might be a slap in the face to Adams to compare him to Romney. Point of the story is that Jefferson understood politics. I actually think Rand is more likely than Ron to be VP but lets keep talking about it because it puts the idea in people's mind that Ron Paul is a Leader either as VP or President.

True. You are right on this +rep.

Only thing I would say is, they really didn't serve together that well. There was constant, extreme tension. In fact, Adams was tempted to jail Jefferson under the Alien and Sedition Acts.

 

[Phyxrgon]

i still say no to mittens on the ticket. mittens capitalized off of ron's-- and a little bit of his "own", I guess --schooling and pigeonholing of frothy and went for the kill himself. there is no partnership or anything.

this such a pointless topic.

 

[anaconda]

I think what we're seeing with this is a main stream media trolling phase. They are trying to get a handle on whether the Paul supporters would vote for the RINO and under what circumstances. The reality that none or the RINOS can win the general election is finally settling in and they are seeing if the situation is salvageable. Hopefully they will soon realize that it is not, short of nominating Rand or Ron as the Presidential candidate at a brokered convention.

 

[affa]

this debate is endless divide and conquer nonsense, getting us arguing among ourselves discussing us LOSING, rather than being on point and discussing us WINNING.

Who the hell cares who Romney wants as Veep? He's NOT our nominee. Ron Paul is.

As for this stupid discussion? Romney couldn't pry my vote out of my cold dead hands. If some of you want to vote for more war, more NDAA, more bailouts, etc... be my guest. But don't ever expect me to.