Will the Libertarian Party Field A Candidate Against Presidential Candidate Rand Paul?

[AuH20]

time for a group hug

The an cap voice of reason. What would we do without you? They must love you at DP. heh.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

The an cap voice of reason. What would we do without you? They must love you at DP. heh.

Yeah right, most of that bunch can't stand Rand in the slightest. And because of that I rarely check in over there. It used to be such a helpful and upstanding site, not so much any more. It's still a money maker tho.

 

[PatriotOne]

time for a group hug

 

[Deborah K]

That devotion is called hero worship.

I disagree. Hero worship infers that there's been undying veneration, with no criticism. Most RP supporters (even the devoted ones) have vented their concerns and criticisms at one point or another.

 

[jllundqu]

 

[jtstellar]

Yeah right, most of that bunch can't stand Rand in the slightest. And because of that I rarely check in over there. It used to be such a helpful and upstanding site, not so much any more. It's still a money maker tho.

i got banned from dp once

then as i attempted to restart an account, the site asked me for $5 a month, and then i realized a new subscription policy was instituted shortly before the account 'cleansing'. but nystrom disguised it as purely having disagreements and just not liking some people.

and of course, i got banned by hitting nystrom over the back side of his head by reminding him in front of everyone of his past comment "rand paul is a one-man soap machine" as, i can't remember what occasion exactly, nystrom was attempting to praise rand on the heel of a major legislative vote or some achievement of sorts by rand.. think twice if you want to embarrass mr. nystrom if you plan to keep an account there free of charge, lol.

"you pissed me off! now pay me five dollars!"

was it a surprise nystrom hated ron paul so hard after ron's quarrel with the fake australian site hosts masquerading as supporters? nystrom just plain despised the possibility that ron could have any control of the slightest degree over how nystrom makes money when it pertains to using ron's name. well, nystrom does take the phrase 'when they came for the jews' to his heart down to a T, even if it meant supporting two charlatans from australia. i think nystrom is truly starving over there.. someone really needs to serve him a meal

 

[Carlybee]

You and Cajun are easily in the top ten emotionally driven active members on this board.

Nope..just have conviction and won't apologize for that either.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

ihope they run someone libertarian against him. the more the better. did anyone watch the 4 person debate that johnson was in on the internet? it was so good. you had 4 people saying almost the same thing. it would have made any rino look foolish to have been there. so i say the more of the same stance on stage, the better for us.

 

[Matt Collins]

But the LP is irrelevant on the national stage so it hardly matters.

The LP can probably decide the outcome of a lot of Presidential elections if they simply get their candidate to only campaign in the swing states.

 

[Christian Liberty]

When I joined here, I agreed with Ron Paul. I no longer do. Like Ron does, I recognize Rand is a better political leader than he is.

Rand has successfully brought me over to agreeing with him on every issue through his strong arguments.

LOL! And therefore... Rand is completely failing at what he's trying to do.

I don't think Rand is trying to convince libertarians to be more moderate. I think he's trying to convince moderates to be more libertarian.

I think that Rubio would clearly be better than Hillary on domestic issues; on foreign policy issues he would be just as bad or even worse. Jeb would probably be about like his brother, and I don't think that George W. Bush was any better as President than Obama.

Probably true.

Would you vote for someone like Rubio? I wouldn't.

My feelings don't enter into my voting decision honestly. I am in SC, whomever the GOP nominee is will win the state. I'll either vote for them or abstain. I won't vote for the LP candidate because it "feels better" to do so. If it is someone particularly good, I may cast a vote as a "protest vote", but that's unlikely. There is no emotion involved in my decision whatsoever.

Why not just cast a protest vote? What good reason is there not to?

I disagree with your analysis. For example, #15...the fact that he's friends with Penn Jillette doesn't mean he doesn't hate libertarianism. I have friends who are progressives; I have friends who still adore Dick Cheney. I despise what they believe, but we're still friends. I disagree with your analysis on #3. Ben Swann recently wrote about Beck calling for a war in Syria and Iran. I stopped listening to Beck regularly after the Debra Medina sabotage. If he's changed about other things on the list, good for him. But I suspect that's only because a Dem is in the White House right now.

That's the thing, we don't know but that's possible. That said, right now, Glenn Beck is the one I genuinely see some hope for. I'm not saying he actually is a libertarian (He's not) but I feel like he might be coming around. We'll need another Republican President and a year of that to know for sure, but Beck somehow seems a little more sincere than Hannity, Levin, or Limbaugh.

That said, he still defends his refusal to support Ron Paul IIRC, which does make me question his sincerity.

 

[Brett85]

Would you vote for someone like Rubio? I wouldn't.

I don't know. I've basically decided that it's not necessarily good to make a committment one way or the other, that it's better to just take the approach that Ron always took. Ron never pledged to support the GOP nominee regardless of who it was, but he also never pledged to not support the GOP nominee. He just said that he would have to think about it and see what platform the GOP nominee ended up running on. So whenever someone asks me whether I'll support the GOP nominee in 2016 if it isn't Rand, I just say "I don't know." I just think it's better to keep your options open and not commit one way or the other.

Except, I guess there probably are some GOP candidates that are so bad that I couldn't vote for under any circumstances. I certainly couldn't vote for another Bush, or for Santorum or Bolton.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't know. I've basically decided that it's not necessarily good to make a committment one way or the other, that it's better to just take the approach that Ron always took. Ron never pledged to support the GOP nominee regardless of who it was, but he also never pledged to not support the GOP nominee. He just said that he would have to think about it and see what platform the GOP nominee ended up running on. So whenever someone asks me whether I'll support the GOP nominee in 2016 if it isn't Rand, I just say "I don't know." I just think it's better to keep your options open and not commit one way or the other.

Except, I guess there probably are some GOP candidates that are so bad that I couldn't vote for under any circumstances. I certainly couldn't vote for another Bush, or for Santorum or Bolton.

Do you believe Rubio is any better?

The obvious assumption being that the platform is similar to what the candidate in question supports now. I know its hypothetically possible that God gets ahold of Rubio tomorrow and he starts voting like a Rand Paul or Justin Amash. That's not the kind of thing I'm talking about when I ask you if you'd vote for Rubio.

 

[Brett85]

Do you believe Rubio is any better?

He's better domestically than the likes of Santorum or Bush. Rubio actually has a fairly decent voting record when it comes to domestic spending and things of that nature. His foreign policy is obviously pretty bad from our perspective. It might be possible that he would change or moderate some of his foreign policy views if he realized what direction the political winds were blowing. It just seems like these guys have to realize sooner or later that their foreign policy makes them virtually unelectable. Romney's poll numbers went down significantly after the foreign policy debate last year.

 

[Christian Liberty]

He's better domestically than the likes of Santorum or Bush. Rubio actually has a fairly decent voting record when it comes to domestic spending and things of that nature. His foreign policy is obviously pretty bad from our perspective. It might be possible that he would change or moderate some of his foreign policy views if he realized what direction the political winds were blowing. It just seems like these guys have to realize sooner or later that their foreign policy makes them virtually unelectable. Romney's poll numbers went down significantly after the foreign policy debate last year.

From what I've heard from some people..gay marriage is apparently more important to the average voter than foreign policy. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case...

And then they'll have "libertarian Republicans" supporting gay marriage... and carpet bombing the Middle East.

I hope people care as much as you think they care: I don't think you do.

 

[Brett85]

And then they'll have "libertarian Republicans" supporting gay marriage... and carpet bombing the Middle East.

Yeah, like Dick Cheney, Liz Cheney, John Bolton, Rudy Guliani, Jennifer Rubin, Laura Bush, Meghan McCain, Steve Schmidt, etc. They're all "libertarian Republicans" since they support gay marriage.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, like Dick Cheney, Liz Cheney, John Bolton, Rudy Guliani, Jennifer Rubin, Laura Bush, Meghan McCain, Steve Schmidt, etc. They're all "libertarian Republicans" since they support gay marriage.

Just making sure, but you are aware I was being sarcastic, right? You know I don't define libertarianism that way...

Just making sure you're rolling my eyes at the establishment idiots and not at me

 

[cajuncocoa]

From what I've heard from some people..gay marriage is apparently more important to the average voter than foreign policy. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case...

It most certainly is. Ask around at your church if you want proof of that. I know it's true at mine.

 

[speciallyblend]

Libertarians and Liberty Voters make and break elections. I am tired of hearing people saying lp or voting lp is a waste of time(that is total nonsense). bottom line the gop cannot win without us and will lose without us. The libertarian voter block is very powerful and makes or breaks every election! The only waste of time is folks bashing the lp or the voter block in general. Your mistake and ignorance. Who spearheaded the recalls in colorado and challeged the status quo and won? THE COLORADO LP along with Conservative Libertarian Republicans such as myself. Libertarians, if they are lp or in the gop/dnc or not affilated is what can win or lose you an election.
That is the bottom line. You cannot win with out US and THE gop will not win without us. keep trying to alienate or marginalize the lp and libertarians and you will find yourself on the losing end.

Yes the lp will run a candidate and win some local seats and make or break elections at the local,state and federal level. anyone denying this has their head in the sand or are in DENIAL. sincerely conservative libertarian republican for now.

 

[FrankRep]

Libertarians and Liberty Voters make and break elections. I am tired of hearing peole saying lp or voting lp is a waste of time. bottom line the gop cannot win without us and will lose without us. The libertarian voter block is very powerful and makes or breaks every election! The only waste of time is folks bashing the lp or the voter block in general.

It appears that even Rand Paul is "too Big Government" by Libertarian standards so the GOP has no incentive to win over the Libertarians because they'll get "punished" by the LP no matter what. They view the LP as a vote stealing engine that allows left-progressive Democrats to win.

 

[speciallyblend]

It appears that even Rand Paul is "too Big Government" by Libertarian standards so the GOP has no incentive to win over the Libertarians because they'll get "punished" by the LP no matter what. They view the LP as a vote stealing engine that allows left-progressive Democrats to win.

good try but no rand paul fails on the failed drug war by his pandering. He basically endorses state rights over individual rights when it comes to the failed drug war. That is rands problem not mine. I will not stand with rand on that position which he clearly has taken and made sure he reinforced in his gop speeches. rand paul will not win if they cannot get the libertarian vote. Does it mean he will not win because i will not vote for him in the general or primary? no but he is less lilely to win since i am the voter he is trying to get and lost. Rand thinks he can win with pro drug war and right wingers then that is his plan. either way the gop cannot win without the libertarian vote inside the lp or outside the lp.

if you beleive what you say ? Then the gop has to court libertarians or go back to the lame argument if you don't vote gop you make the dnc win BS. Give us a reason to vote republican and stop the BS fence sitting.

Can rand paul win my vote and support? not sure unless he flip flops like romney, then trust is the issue and no i do not trust a republican who sucks up to pro-drug war and war mongering. Rand made his bed on his positions on the drug war. He clearly stated that states have a right to incarcerate,fine and remove kids from their parents for using a safer substance then aspirin or alcohol and many common foods. Rand clearly doesn't want my vote or need my vote, NOT MY PROBLEM if he loses because of his stances on the failed drug war. even if you are in denial. The libertraina vote outside/inside the lp will make or break the gop. If the gop wantsto ignore the libertarian vote. Then expect the gop to become fossils in the future. The final percentages in any electiondo not even come close to showing you the actual number of libertarians voters inside the gop/dnc/lp. I can tell you gop zombies and dnc zombies will vote for their estblisment candidate which makes the 1% to 10% depending on state and local voters for lp which is just a lp number not an exact % of libertarian voters. If you want the gop to lose keep ignoring the lp and libertarian voter blocks. I have no problem making oil out of the gop if they fail to understand. Libertarians make or break every election now.

rand has alot of flip flopping to do if he wants to win the swing state of colorado. Ignore the majority voter block in colorado see what happens ask romney. sorry for any typos/grammar got no time to fix them i suck at typing.

there is no if. if the gop doesn't win over libertarians the gop will lose. The gop lost the last election because they couldn't get republicans like me or libertarians to vote for them.