Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?

[Justinjj1]

It's a good thing that Ron Paul will never allow a warmongering chickenhawk as his VP.

 

[LibertyEagle]

It's a good thing that Ron Paul will never allow a warmongering chickenhawk as his VP.

LOL. He certainly beats the heck out of Kucinich or of all people, Bernie Sanders.

DeMint isn't perfect, but he's a long way from being a leftist.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

It has to be someone who shares 99% of his views, since he would be in his mid-seventies, and this country has a long history of the aristocrats assassinating Presidents who go against their interests. So, with that said the best bet would probably be someone like Judge Napolitano.

 

[Meatwasp]

It has to be someone who shares 99% of his views, since he would be in his mid-seventies, and this country has a long history of the aristocrats assassinating Presidents who go against their interests. So, with that said the best bet would probably be someone like Judge Napolitano.

Jeez lets not talk about assassinations. That is putting an ugly negative thought out there.

 

[jake]

Goldwater, strictly for the name recognition

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Jeez lets not talk about assassinations. That is putting an ugly negative thought out there.

I merely go by history dear Watson. Screw the Secret Service we need to have the Ron Paul Militia and Security Personnal guarding him.

 

[nandnor]

nvm

 

[anaconda]

Definitely Bob Dole. The ticket would be unstoppable.

 

[pacelli]

Even though I disagree with nearly every word that comes out of her mouth, the most successful running mate for RP (that is, who would increase his chances of WINNING) would be Palin. How many people did we see say that they were voting for her in 2008 and totally ignored the fact that they actually had to vote for McStain? If he chose Palin, that would lead me to re-consider voting at all, but even if RP lost the 5% of votes he got in 2008, he'd probably gain more from the Palin zombies.

 

[Deft9]

I'm new to the Liberty movement. Names I've noticed are Napolitano, Schiff, Lew Rockwell, and Barry Goldwater. If Rand doesn't win (god forbid), maybe they could do a Paul/Paul ticket.

 

[economics102]

Ron Paul's POTENTIAL is that he can be a candidate whose appeal extends beyond the usual left-right paradigm. To truly do this, though, you need to break past people's pre-conceived idea that it's gotta be liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican.

I think the quickest way to help people make that mental shortcut is for Paul to have a liberal as his running mate. And not just any liberal. A liberal with a similar beyond-politics pedigree.

There aren't too many of those that come to mind. Ralph Nader is one. Maybe Dennis Kucinich.

I might have been foolish enough to say Bernie Sanders prior to his Audit the Fed betrayal.

When Ron Paul and Ralph Nader, two men who are perceived as being on opposite extremes of the political spectrum, when they come together, it immediately makes even the layest of laymen stop and question what's going on. It immediately breaks through the veil of Democrat vs. Republican.

 

[Jandrsn21]

Ron Paul's POTENTIAL is that he can be a candidate whose appeal extends beyond the usual left-right paradigm. To truly do this, though, you need to break past people's pre-conceived idea that it's gotta be liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican.

Agreed, Ron Paul is more appealing to the left over most democrats I've seen. Antiwar, legalizing drugs ( ending the drug war, however you want to look at it ), getting government out of marriage and social issues, support for small farmers ( or pasteurization without representation as he would call it lol ) non collectivist, pro individual rights. I mean if he went head to head with Obama, especially with the two records put side by side, Paul would win, I'm saying with 60-70% of the vote!

As for the right he as decades long record of voting with the constitution 100% of the time! Caught up in the left right or not he is VERY appealing to all groups and party affiliations!

 

[FiannaPaul]

+1

That is if Ron is running to win. If the Paul ticket is to be taken seriously he needs a more 'mainstream' running mate. An effective administration, (i.e. one that implement some of its agenda) will need congress in its pocket. If Ron has proven anything over the years it is that he has no political clout whatsoever on the hill. DeMint, particularly if he has been majority/minority leader for 2 years, would help to square that circle

The judge sounds good but his unashamedly 'crazy' libertarian views might not wash with the masses. Much better to nominate him for the bench... or maybe he is more effective doing what he is doing

 

[Madly_Sane]

Some terrible choices there.. Bob Dole?? Seriously??

Family Guy, "Bob Dole, Bob Dole, Bob Dole, Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob Do-*snore*"

 

[Agorism]

Jim DeMint would be contradictory on all the major issues. It would be a disfunctional campaign.

Napolitano would be someone who could be counted on.

 

[tsetsefly]

Can't really choose. I would be happy with either Peter Schiff, the Judge, or Gary Johnson

edit: why the hell are people choosing chris christie?

agree... wtf with 9 people voting for palin... that neocon c*** shouldn't even be in the poll...

I can't understand how people can buy her bs with how dumb she is...

Actually the more I think about it the choice must be:

1. Politics young

2. Good speaker

3. Strong personality and leadership skills

4. Anti-war(this makes or brakes a candidate, you cant have RP talking about ending the war and cutting back on military spending while his VP is a warhawk)

With this in mind it has to be napolitano or schiff. Napolitato is the pick. The guy is one of the best speakers ive seen. He is coherent and would bitch slap biden in a debate. He has law experience and his strong personality and leadership skills would be something appealing to voters who might see Paul as to old and someone who might eventually be replaced by the VP.
Also the judge is a small l libertarian

 

[pacelli]

agree... wtf with 9 people voting for palin... that neocon c*** shouldn't even be in the poll...

I did. Because I read the title of the poll: "Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?"

How are you defining success? I define success as winning the republican nomination. Out of all of the candidates listed, Palin is the most popular and well-known republican, and therefore most likely to appeal to the mass of voters that worship her every move, but are generally clueless about Ron Paul's policy positions. Not to mention her co-opting of the tea party movement, which would make her appeal to all of the Glen Beck synchophants.

Yes, she is a neo-con. Yes, if Ron Paul chose her as his running mate, I'd seriously think twice about voting for him. If I had to choose one candidate who was most in-line with RP's principles and most likely to garnish grassroots support, I'd choose Napolitano. However, despite my own misgivings, I took the poll question literally, rather than engaging in magical thinking. The voting population has different standards than people on these forums. We learned this when they voted for a guy who parroted the phrase, "Yes We Can".

 

[tsetsefly]

I did. Because I read the title of the poll: "Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?"

How are you defining success? I define success as winning the republican nomination. Out of all of the candidates listed, Palin is the most popular and well-known republican, and therefore most likely to appeal to the mass of voters that worship her every move, but are generally clueless about Ron Paul's policy positions. Not to mention her co-opting of the tea party movement, which would make her appeal to all of the Glen Beck synchophants.

Yes, she is a neo-con. Yes, if Ron Paul chose her as his running mate, I'd seriously think twice about voting for him. If I had to choose one candidate who was most in-line with RP's principles and most likely to garnish grassroots support, I'd choose Napolitano. However, despite my own misgivings, I took the poll question literally, rather than engaging in magical thinking. The voting population has different standards than people on these forums. We learned this when they voted for a guy who parroted the phrase, "Yes We Can".

How would she be the best running mate if on the big issues she clashes in a big way with Paul?
It just wouldn't work...

 

[AParadigmShift]

Agreed, Ron Paul is more appealing to the left over most democrats I've seen. Antiwar, legalizing drugs ( ending the drug war, however you want to look at it ), getting government out of marriage and social issues, support for small farmers ( or pasteurization without representation as he would call it lol ) non collectivist, pro individual rights. I mean if he went head to head with Obama, especially with the two records put side by side, Paul would win, I'm saying with 60-70% of the vote!

Ideologues, whether right or left don't count for beans.

The Establishment Democrats would just as soon see a fire-breathing chicken-hawk Republican - i.e. one of their own win, then see someone who would dare tamper with the machinery of state.

Just as Republicans hem and haw over libertarian talking points and fail over and over again to implement, Democrats abuse the anti-war, civil liberty minded left to their own benefit.

It would be a real test of lefty's courage of conviction to ignore the edicts of the Democratic juggernaut and vote for the likes of Paul.

But, I'm ever hopeful.

 

[Deborah K]

It's about who would bring the most electoral success in the general.

If you're only looking for electoral success, then your only choice on that list is Palin.

Edit: I didn't vote for her. I voted 'other'. I like Jim DeMint as well