The Judge on WaPo's Paul/Romney article

[pinkmandy]

I for one don't hate Romney any more like I did in 07. He has come around a lot in giving my hero the respect that he deserves and has also given us a little respect. I don't see Romney as a bad guy or crooked, dishonest or a liar. I do still see him as a big government corporatist war mongerer though who also supports all the authoritarian police state measures that scare the crap out of me so I don't know if I could vote for him even if Ron Paul was his VP. In fact if Ron Paul ever accepted that position it might be the one thing that could cause me to lose respect for him after all these years of holding him up as a hero and the greatest statesman since this country was formed

I feel the same. I love Dr. Paul because he doesn't compromise on his principles. Accepting a position and endorsing Romney would be beyond compromise imo. Our country is becoming scary, the uptick of police state powers as of late doesn't give me a lot of hope for slowly winning people over. 4 more yrs of Obama or 8 years of Mitt and then *maybe* Rand, eventually, seems too long term for me given the dire situations of today. And I simply do not trust Romney, no matter what he says/how he acts I could never be assured that he isn't merely pandering.

Reagan compromised, too. He took on Bush Sr as VP. Romney is part of the same power structure (he just looks nice), he is a poster boy for corporatism and he wants to be in charge. Any position he gave Paul would be irrelevant if warmongering Romney is the guy calling the shots (or his lawyers or team of Bush advisors).

No thanks. This is a sure way to fracture the movement. Paul is smart and does not have a history of compromise (running against Reagan took major balls) so I'm not too quick to assume he'd do this. I would think that, given his age, if it comes down to a brokered convention then Paul should be Pres and let Romney be VP then Romney could run for Pres later. Paul cannot. I'd hold my nose and deal with that because Paul would have the veto power and the signing power on spending bills. But, if Paul's name isn't first on the ticket then I simply would not vote for it. Compromising with liars and cheats (that's what the GOP has been for a very long time now and that's "the machine" behind Romney) to give Paul a powerless position isn't going to advance freedom, prosperity and peace. Let folks speculate all they want in MSM, I'm not buying it. I just can't imagine Paul accepting that kind of compromise but I can see the speculation benefiting him (elevating his importance) so maybe that alone is part of his strategy.

 

[Gazoo]

If Dr. Paul runs on the Romney ticket, he is not the man I thought he was. Some people have said the most impotent job in the country is the vice presidency. Not the first time I've been fooled by a politician. If my choice in November is Romney or Obama, as it appears, I will vote for neither and will consider moving to another country.

 

[JohnGalt23g]

After all, this IS "politics."

Don't try to take the "politics" out of politics. It will never work.

 

[Sematary]

If Dr. Paul runs on the Romney ticket, he is not the man I thought he was. Some people have said the most impotent job in the country is the vice presidency. Not the first time I've been fooled by a politician. If my choice in November is Romney or Obama, as it appears, I will vote for neither and will consider moving to another country.

I've given this some thought and while I don't actually see Romney offering the Vice Presidency to Dr. Paul, I don't count it out of the realm of possibility and if it were to happen, I would support the ticket because I believe that if Dr. Paul were in that position then he would have a tremendous influence on the process from that position - especially when it comes to matters of economics and foreign policy. It might not take us all the way but it would take us a great deal further than we are now. To ignore the obvious - which is that the position of VP could give a tremendous voice to the Libertarian side of the party - is ignorant, imo. I would rather have him as president, but VP is the next best thing we could all hope for because if he isn't the VP, we know that we will have no influence if Romney were to win the presidency.

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

Put the Kool Aide Down and step away from the glass...................

 

[jmdrake]

Ron Paul working with Mitt Romney ?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDjJliX4ikg

At 3:14 in

Judge: And the turnout for Florida was 14% which is lower than last time. Gotta worry about that.
Juan: Gotta worry big time. That's part of the enthusiasm gap. Remember you had no independents show up. In the other states where there was a bump in turnout, South Carolina and New Hampshire, Independents were a quarter of the vote.

Hmmmm....Ron doesn't spend resources in Florida = low turnout and no independents showing up. GOP are you listening?

 

[gerryb]

How many state ballots allow you to vote for VP separate from Pres.?

Would be interesting to have RP on the ballot for VP separate from the presidential race... 3rd party run compromise? Run as VP as 3rd party =)

 

[wgadget]

At 3:14 in

Judge: And the turnout for Florida was 14% which is lower than last time. Gotta worry about that.
Juan: Gotta worry big time. That's part of the enthusiasm gap. Remember you had no independents show up. In the other states where there was a bump in turnout, South Carolina and New Hampshire, Independents were a quarter of the vote.

Hmmmm....Ron doesn't spend resources in Florida = low turnout and no independents showing up. GOP are you listening?

Why didn't they show up and vote for Ron? He was on the ballot...

 

[wgadget]

How many state ballots allow you to vote for VP separate from Pres.?

Would be interesting to have RP on the ballot for VP separate from the presidential race... 3rd party run compromise? Run as VP as 3rd party =)

That's the thing: If RP runs third party, Romney is screwed.

 

[olsonly]

I don't believe Ron Paul wants to be VP but, Rand might. Sometimes it is best to be pragmatic. Rand as VP would lead him to the White House. It is a movement it takes time to change hearts and minds.

 

[olsonly]

The only position Romeney could give Dr. Paul that he might take is Treasury.

 

[Krugerrand]

I don't believe Ron Paul wants to be VP but, Rand might. Sometimes it is best to be pragmatic. Rand as VP would lead him to the White House. It is a movement it takes time to change hearts and minds.

I don't see Rand taking the spot. Why give up a useful Senator Seat for a useless VP seat that would brand him as part of a terrible Romney administration.

While I'd never vote for Romney - Ron would be fun to watch as his VP:
Interviewer: Tell me about Romney's Plan to do X, Y, Z
RP: It's a terrible idea. This is why .... I'm trying to change his mind on that one, but he won't listen to me.

 

[Root]

At 3:14 in

Judge: And the turnout for Florida was 14% which is lower than last time. Gotta worry about that.
Juan: Gotta worry big time. That's part of the enthusiasm gap. Remember you had no independents show up. In the other states where there was a bump in turnout, South Carolina and New Hampshire, Independents were a quarter of the vote.

Hmmmm....Ron doesn't spend resources in Florida = low turnout and no independents showing up. GOP are you listening?

That's exactly what I thought.

I don't believe Ron Paul wants to be VP but, Rand might. Sometimes it is best to be pragmatic. Rand as VP would lead him to the White House. It is a movement it takes time to change hearts and minds.

If it came down to a Mitt/Rand (with a very strong anti-illegal war message & promise of Sec of Treas. to RP) vs Obombya, I'd have to go with it.

 

[DEGuy]

Whether Paul or Romney gets the nomination, one will need the votes from the others supporters in order to have a realistic chance at the presidency. It will have to be through compromise on some issues. If it's Romney, would he compromise on big government, the Fed, personal liberties, or America as the worlds police? Or all of the above? Frankly, it's obvious he will have to take a more libertarian stance in one of those so he actually has something of substance to campaign on that doesn't make him look like Obama-light. I have my money on him willing to campaign on a smaller government or more personal liberties stance. If he's REALLY desperate for Paul's supporters, perhaps he'll be a strong campaigner for End the Fed. Those topics wouldn't risk alienating Romney's base. I don't see him softening his FP though, unfortunately.

In the hypothetical Romney as nominee scenario, the question is, how much would Romney have to change his tune to win a good chunk of Paul's support? I'd probably vote for him if he took on Paul's strong personal liberty viewpoint (Roll back Patriot act, NDAA, TSA, etc) and serious plan for eliminating government agencies. Anything is better than nothing, in my viewpoint. Of course, Romney would have to convince the crowd that he won't just turn around and do whatever he really wants while in the White House.

If Paul wins the nomination, he'll have to compromise something in order to win support from Romney's base, like it or not. The common complaint tends to be FP, and Paul could work on his spin to make himself appear tougher on Iran and defense. I think this can be done without a compromise of core values

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

What's going on with so many of you? Do you listen to yourselves?

The Judge, which never forget, gets his paycheck from FOX, spread a rumor from The Washington Post *cough full of BS cough* rumor, that the campaigns were co-ordinating speech times.

Speech times!!!

Off that rumor, look at how many of you now have turned it into, Paul has teamed up with Romney to get himself or Rand in as VP yada yada. And look at how many of you so quickly are now star gazed by "can't wait to go bomb the crap out of the middle east and give more bail outs to my banker friends Romney" and would vote for him all of a sudden. It's also a lie that Paul has not attacked him. He did in his serial flip flopper ad. He also said he would never endorse a candidate with a Romney foriegn policy- including Romney.

This koolaide some of you have ingested is in deed powerful.


I caution the rest of you to stay away from entertaining this grand illusion the MSM has put before you about Paul coalesing with Romney for anything more then maybe speech times.


We need a vaccination for this STAT.

Look, if you help perpetuate this illusion, a lot of Pauls support will drop as they want nothing to do with a Paul in bed with Neocons. The MSM knows this too. They also know others drawn in by Romneys charisma, politeness white smile,and hair will easily buy into Paul being gooey over Romney and will vote for Romney.

You're being played by Masters.

 

[TER]

Rand for VP and Ron for Treasurer then maybe Romney gets my vote.

 

[Captain Shays]

This pretty much sums up what I think. Honestly I think even if Paul were able, as I hope, to pull off a delegate win at the RNC, that there is a place in an administration for Romney should be want it, but I doubt he will want it, he isn't spending 15+ million of his own money in the last 8 years for something like a Labor Secretary position

We could offer him embassidor to Mexico

 

[Captain Shays]

I feel the same. I love Dr. Paul because he doesn't compromise on his principles. Accepting a position and endorsing Romney would be beyond compromise imo. Our country is becoming scary, the uptick of police state powers as of late doesn't give me a lot of hope for slowly winning people over. 4 more yrs of Obama or 8 years of Mitt and then *maybe* Rand, eventually, seems too long term for me given the dire situations of today. And I simply do not trust Romney, no matter what he says/how he acts I could never be assured that he isn't merely pandering.

Reagan compromised, too. He took on Bush Sr as VP. Romney is part of the same power structure (he just looks nice), he is a poster boy for corporatism and he wants to be in charge. Any position he gave Paul would be irrelevant if warmongering Romney is the guy calling the shots (or his lawyers or team of Bush advisors).

No thanks. This is a sure way to fracture the movement. Paul is smart and does not have a history of compromise (running against Reagan took major balls) so I'm not too quick to assume he'd do this. I would think that, given his age, if it comes down to a brokered convention then Paul should be Pres and let Romney be VP then Romney could run for Pres later. Paul cannot. I'd hold my nose and deal with that because Paul would have the veto power and the signing power on spending bills. But, if Paul's name isn't first on the ticket then I simply would not vote for it. Compromising with liars and cheats (that's what the GOP has been for a very long time now and that's "the machine" behind Romney) to give Paul a powerless position isn't going to advance freedom, prosperity and peace. Let folks speculate all they want in MSM, I'm not buying it. I just can't imagine Paul accepting that kind of compromise but I can see the speculation benefiting him (elevating his importance) so maybe that alone is part of his strategy.

I agree with everyhting you said except that we should acknowledge that if ANY member of the CFR is Ron Paul's running mate it's a death sentence for Ron including Romney

 

[asurfaholic]

Garner too.

Was it garned already?

 

[amonasro]

I don't see Rand taking the spot. Why give up a useful Senator Seat for a useless VP seat that would brand him as part of a terrible Romney administration.

I think we underestimate the value of the VP seat. Hypothetically, Ron would be a very influential one. Veeps nowadays use the seat to gain power and money-Ron wouldn't. It would be instant credibility for the message.

I hear this talk about the Establishment co-opting the movement by drawing us in. What if we can co-opt them by using Romney? He's smart, handsome, and the women love him.