Who will be on Rand's ticket for VP?

[TaftFan]

1. Goldwater ran as Ron's VP in 2008, so he has experience.

2. It's not necessarily "Rand's choice." Rand might nominate Jeb Bush from the dais if Rockefeller threatens him; but grassroots delegates on the floor could nominate anyone they want.

What?

Ron didn't have a VP in 2008. You only have VP's if you are on the ticket.

 

[eduardo89]

What?

Ron didn't have a VP in 2008. You only have VP's if you are on the ticket.

Ron Paul was on the ballot in Louisiana with Barry Goldwater, Jr. on the Louisiana Taxpayers Party ticket and in Montana with Michael Peroutka on the Constitution Party of Montana ticket.

He didn't choose to be on the ballot nor did he choose his running mate. It doesn't count as "experience" for Goldwater Jr. either since I don't think he even asked to be on the ballot with Ron nor did he campaign.

 

[Carlybee]

She allowed Obamacare in her state.

We have lost the Obamacare battle in the Supreme Court and it doesn't seem likely we'll succeed in Congress. The state governments are the last defense against Obamacare.

If Governors permit Obamacare exchanges in their states, they cannot be true believers in liberty & li
mited government.

Not necessarily..Perry wont allow it in Texas but that doesnt make him pro Liberty. He also wanted to force girls to take Gardasil.

 

[krugminator]

Ron Paul was on the ballot in Louisiana with Barry Goldwater, Jr. on the Louisiana Taxpayers Party ticket and in Montana with Michael Peroutka on the Constitution Party of Montana ticket.

He didn't choose to be on the ballot nor did he choose his running mate. It doesn't count as "experience" for Goldwater Jr. either since I don't think he even asked to be on the ballot with Ron nor did he campaign.

I see the idea of putting Barry Goldwater Jr. is starting to pick up traction. Good idea to shore up those Goldwater voters who otherwise might be on the fence.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

I could see Rand grabbing Cruz for the Hispanic vote or Palin for the female vote, which he needs desperately.

 

[compromise]

Not necessarily..Perry wont allow it in Texas but that doesnt make him pro Liberty. He also wanted to force girls to take Gardasil.

It makes him a whole lot more pro liberty than Martinez.

I'm just saying that permitting Obamacare in your state is letting the progressives win and making that decision is anti-liberty.

 

[ManOfSteel]

I see the idea of putting Barry Goldwater Jr. is starting to pick up traction. Good idea to shore up those Goldwater voters who otherwise might be on the fence.

 

[ManOfSteel]

I could see Rand grabbing Cruz for the Hispanic vote or Palin for the female vote, which he needs desperately.

 

[ManOfSteel]

I'm just saying that permitting Obamacare in your state is letting the progressives win and making that decision is anti-liberty.

I disagree, I think it's irresponsible for a governor to turn down what basically amounts to free money for his or her constituents. Is making the decision to cash a social security check anti-liberty?

 

[eduardo89]

I disagree, I think it's irresponsible for a governor to turn down what basically amounts to free money for his or her constituents.

Free money? You mean money that was either stolen from them in the first place through taxation or taken from them by inflation? And then putting them on the hook for trillions over the next few decades? Or the millions it will take each year to run an exchange?

Is making the decision to cash a social security check anti-liberty?

No, getting money back which was stolen from you your entire working life is not anti-liberty.

 

[ManOfSteel]

Free money? You mean money that was either stolen from them in the first place through taxation or taken from them by inflation? And then putting them on the hook for trillions over the next few decades?

Yes, that is the free money I am talking about. Having one state refuse to take it just means there's more left for those who will. It's not like refusing to implement Obamacare allows the citizens of those states to avoid paying the taxes that will be used to fund it. Sort of like how refusing to cash SS checks does not allow you to avoid paying SS taxes all your life.

Or the millions it will take each year to run an exchange?

They'll be getting more than that in subsidies, so on net it's still beneficial for the states to take it.

No, getting money back which was stolen from you your entire working life is not anti-liberty.

I agree, that's why I don't think there's anything wrong with a governor electing to let Obamacare go forward in his or her state. The whole thing should be repealed or defunded at the federal level, of course, but I disagree that fighting it at the state level is appropriate.

 

[krugminator]

I'm no political expert. But it does seem like a good idea for a VP choice to be someone who fills in gaps on perceived weaknesses and makes it easier to get elected.

Jeb Bush helped fundraise for Rand and has been complimentary of Rand. He has access to money. He is not a full blown neocon as far as I can tell, but he will calm some of the Republicans like McCain and Kristol. He was popular governor of a swing state and successfully appealed to Hispanics.

Or he could pick Justin Amash and try to set the record for biggest percentage loss of the popular vote in presidential history.

 

[ManOfSteel]

Basically, the situation is a prisoner's dilemma. Every state would be better off if they could all agree not to set up the exchanges or allow Obamacare to be implemented, but every individual state is better off defecting and letting it go forward, regardless of what the other states do.

 

[ManOfSteel]

I'm no political expert. But it does seem like a good idea for a VP choice to be someone who fills in gaps on perceived weaknesses and makes it easier to get elected.

Jeb Bush helped fundraise for Rand and has been complimentary of Rand. He has access to money. He is not a full blown neocon as far as I can tell, but he will calm some of the Republicans like McCain and Kristol. He was popular governor of a swing state and successfully appealed to Hispanics.

Bush may not be a full blown neocon, but he's still pretty damned bad. Rubio is his protege, and you know how we feel about him around here. Also, I just don't think it's a good idea to have a Bush on the ticket in the same election as Clinton. People still like Bill way more than they like George, and the comparison will not be favorable.

Martinez seems to me a much better pick. Also, the fact that she's currently governing is not insignificant. I'm semi-sure that Jeb is just plain done with politics, at least personally. Allying with him/Rubio behind the scenes could pay dividends in terms of fund-raising for the general, but I wouldn't want either of them on the ticket.

Or he could pick Justin Amash and try to set the record for biggest percentage loss of the popular vote in presidential history.

No way he comes close to James Cox in 1920. If he lost by more than 15 I'd be shocked.

 

[Carlybee]

I'm no political expert. But it does seem like a good idea for a VP choice to be someone who fills in gaps on perceived weaknesses and makes it easier to get elected.

Jeb Bush helped fundraise for Rand and has been complimentary of Rand. He has access to money. He is not a full blown neocon as far as I can tell, but he will calm some of the Republicans like McCain and Kristol. He was popular governor of a swing state and successfully appealed to Hispanics.

Or he could pick Justin Amash and try to set the record for biggest percentage loss of the popular vote in presidential history.

Jeb Bush is a Bush and a PNAC mission stmt signer. That is taking two steps backward, but keep acquiescing and pandering and you will see a big loss with liberty and constitutionalist voters.

 

[ManOfSteel]

keep acquiescing and pandering and you will see a big loss with liberty and constitutionalist voters.

This is impossible, there aren't enough liberty voters and constitutionalists to constitute a "big" loss. We found that out in 2008 and 2012 when Ron Paul got his ass kicked at the polls.

It'd be nice if liberty voters and constitutionalists supported Rand, of course, but we can do without them. We cannot do without moderates/independents who support people like Jeb Bush, Susana Martinez, and even Barack Obama. Winning over these people requires tactics and taking positions that LV/Cs don't like, but doing so is an absolute necessity if we are to take power.

 

[Rudeman]

I would not trust Jeb Bush to be Rand's VP, that's just asking for an assassination attempt against him (Reagan).

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

I could see Rand grabbing Cruz for the Hispanic vote or Palin for the female vote, which he needs desperately.

It won't be Palin. I can assure you of that.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

It will either be Cruz or Dr. Ben Carson.....or maybe a governor. It's a rather short list of viable VPs.

 

[Carlybee]

This is impossible, there aren't enough liberty voters and constitutionalists to constitute a "big" loss. We found that out in 2008 and 2012 when Ron Paul got his ass kicked at the polls.

It'd be nice if liberty voters and constitutionalists supported Rand, of course, but we can do without them. We cannot do without moderates/independents who support people like Jeb Bush, Susana Martinez, and even Barack Obama. Winning over these people requires tactics and taking positions that LV/Cs don't like, but doing so is an absolute necessity if we are to take power.

Interesting you just signed up this month. Sock puppet? That's fine and dandy if you think you can do without our support and wish to pander to the likes of people who would support Jeb Bush....I do not see that as any kind of move toward liberty so you might as well stop using the liberty movement moniker if that is to be the case.