Who will be on Rand's ticket for VP?

[fr33]

I think Carson would be an excellent choice, politically speaking. He's a great speech giver even though he's not a libertarian. From a marketing standpoint I can't think of anyone better.

 

[mosquitobite]

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

Hinckley is out of prison these days! Wonder if the Hinckleys still have dinner with the Bushes?

 

[Brett85]

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

Are you kidding me? Why would Amash as VP hurt Rand's chances to win? He has everything going for him; he's young, he's a minority, he's from a swing state, he's a fresh face in the GOP, he's good looking and would be popular with women and young people, etc. But yeah, picking the brother of a guy who left office with a 25% approval rating would be a brilliant move.

 

[MelissaWV]

Who will be on Rand's ticket for VP?

No one. He will lose the primary by a landslide as so few of his supporters appear to remember it actually has to be worked on and won before talking about who's going to be VP, what tie he's going to wear to the inauguration, and whether he'll win a second term.

 

[Brett85]

No one. He will lose the primary by a landslide as so few of his supporters appear to remember it actually has to be worked on and won before talking about who's going to be VP, what tie he's going to wear to the inauguration, and whether he'll win a second term.

This is a thread that's just for fun. No one assumes that Rand is going to have an easy path to win the GOP nomination.

 

[krugminator]

Are you kidding me? Why would Amash as VP hurt Rand's chances to win? He has everything going for him; he's young, he's a minority, he's from a swing state, he's a fresh face in the GOP, he's good looking and would be popular with women and young people, etc. But yeah, picking the brother of a guy who left office with a 25% approval rating would be a brilliant move.

Amash wouldn't be helpful at all raising money, which is going to be a huge weakness for Rand. There is basically no voting constituency that Amash would help with.

And I don't think anyone is getting ahead of themselves. I think most people get that Rand is a big underdog to get the nomination. But so what? He still has a real chance to win, which is pretty exciting.

 

[eduardo89]

Amash wouldn't be helpful at all raising money, which is going to be a huge weakness for Rand. There is basically no voting constituency that Amash would help with.

And I don't think anyone is getting ahead of themselves. I think most people get that Rand is a big underdog to get the nomination. But so what? He still has a real chance to win, which is pretty exciting.

I agree with this. Picking Amash is just "preaching to the choir." He brings in no new demographic that Rand doesn't already have in the bag nor does he bring executive experience or large donors.

 

[Brett85]

Amash wouldn't be helpful at all raising money, which is going to be a huge weakness for Rand. There is basically no voting constituency that Amash would help with.

And I don't think anyone is getting ahead of themselves. I think most people get that Rand is a big underdog to get the nomination. But so what? He still has a real chance to win, which is pretty exciting.

1) He would help raise all kinds of money, as a lot of conservatives would finally be excited about the Republican ticket for once. There would be a surge of donations to Rand's campaign.

2) Amash would help with women, young people, Muslims, other minorities, people who previously had given up on politics, etc. There probably wouldn't be a voting constituency that Amash wouldn't help with.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't really care about political pragmatism. Heck, I'd be fine with picking Napolitano. It doesn't matter.

I don't agree with Sola_Fide on everything, but his signature is absolutely excellent. To stick to principle, educate, and lose should be the goal. If we win, great.

 

[Uriah]

After the 2014 elections we will have a much clearer view of who will be a strong pick. And also who will be running for president. We will surely see some presidential contenders campaigning for candidates in places like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina etc.

 

[Brett85]

I don't really care about political pragmatism. Heck, I'd be fine with picking Napolitano. It doesn't matter.

I don't agree with Sola_Fide on everything, but his signature is absolutely excellent. To stick to principle, educate, and lose should be the goal. If we win, great.

"Lose" should be the goal? You can't implement your policies and your ideals if you never gain the power that's necessary to do so.

 

[Christian Liberty]

"Lose" should be the goal? You can't implement your policies and your ideals if you never gain the power that's necessary to do so.

The point is to stick to principle and educate, regardless of if you actually win.

I fail to see the point in fighting for half-baked solutions, IMO.

I'm not sure if a Paul/Amash ticket would be as politically successful as a Paul/Christie ticket, but at the end of the day, I'd rather fight for something actually worthwhile rather than more of the same.

 

[Brett85]

The point is to stick to principle and educate, regardless of if you actually win.

I fail to see the point in fighting for half-baked solutions, IMO.

I'm not sure if a Paul/Amash ticket would be as politically successful as a Paul/Christie ticket, but at the end of the day, I'd rather fight for something actually worthwhile rather than more of the same.

Well, personally I believe that a Paul/Amash ticket would be more successful than a Paul/establishment Republican ticket. If Rand picked an establishment Republican, it would just kill his fundraising and kill any excitement that there had once been for his campaign.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Well, personally I believe that a Paul/Amash ticket would be more successful than a Paul/establishment Republican ticket. If Rand picked an establishment Republican, it would just kill his fundraising and kill any excitement that there had once been for his campaign.

I honestly think God would be more likely to bless a Paul/Amash ticket than a Paul/establishment ticket. Call that stupid or naive, but I honestly do believe that.

I don't think God is going to bless our movement if we compromise on our principles.

 

[fr33]

I honestly think God would be more likely to bless a Paul/Amash ticket than a Paul/establishment ticket. Call that stupid or naive, but I honestly do believe that.

I don't think God is going to bless our movement if we compromise on our principles.

LOL if god were blessing anything that has to do with liberty we wouldn't be in the state we are in. Manifest Destiny much?

 

[ManOfSteel]

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.

If people who would support Jeb Bush won't support Rand Paul, then we are 100% dead in the water, and I don't believe the liberty movement moniker should be reserved for candidates who are guaranteed to lose. Why are you such a masochist?

 

[ManOfSteel]

To stick to principle, educate, and lose should be the goal. If we win, great.

If losing is the goal, then how can winning be great? Winning would mean failing at your goal. Isn't failing at your goal kind of bad by definition?

 

[Carlybee]

If people who would support Jeb Bush won't support Rand Paul, then we are 100% dead in the water, and I don't believe the liberty movement moniker should be reserved for candidates who are guaranteed to lose. Why are you such a masochist?

I believe the liberty moniker should be reserved for anyone who actually supports the true concepts of liberty not used as a label that means absolutely nothing. The thought of a Bush as a VP makes me throw up in my mouth...and not just a Bush but a neocon who signed the PNAC mission statement that helped form the blueprint for a path of global military intervention. If you don't see a problem with that then you are the masochist because you apparently have learned nothing from history.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Understanding Libertarian Morality: The Psychological Dispositions of Self-Identified Libertarians

Is this your study? I have some comments on flawed methodologies and inherent biases developing predeterminate outcomes, but I don't want to defecate directly into someone's Wheaties.

 

[ManOfSteel]

Is this your study? I have some comments on flawed methodologies and inherent biases developing predeterminate outcomes, but I don't want to defecate directly into someone's Wheaties.

No, I had no direct involvement with it, but even if I did I wouldn't mind constructive criticism. I'd appreciate hearing any comments you care to make. In what ways were their methodologies flawed, and how could they have done better? How did their biases influence the outcome of the study, and how could they have prevented this?