Will Tom Davis be Ron Paul's successor?

[AuH20]

Do you think Rand could've won in KY if he had done that?

Remember that post-election Trey Grayson admitted point-blank that he was disappointed that Rand didn't fully adopt all of Ron's stances publicly. He basically admitted that he and his establishment buddies would have clobbered Rand over the head repeatedly with the real toxic stuff. Once again Rand emerged from the conflict as the wiser and the critics can retreat to their holes. The younger Paul is literally 3 to 4 steps ahead of his enemies.

 

[Occam's Banana]

About Tom Davis...I don't know how good of a gauge his voting record is. He seems to have only recently come to adopt a lot of Ron Paul's positions. It may be that his past voting record is not one he would support anymore, and that in the future he will be far more libertarian.

THIS ^^^ is a very important point. Whatever his previous voting record, we should IMO adopt a "clean slate" attitude towards it. If his previous record is positive, so much the better. If it (or part of it) is negative, people can change. With his endorsement of Ron Paul and his publicly announced participation in the Mises Academy - and until/unless he does something that proves otherwise - Davis has established that he deserves the benefit of the doubt (unlike, say, Bob Barr, who had a *terrible* record & did nothing but talk).

 

[kylejack]

I kinda feel like Tom Davis is using the movement. But hey, if he supports the right policies I will be happy to support him.

 

[ZanZibar]

THIS ^^^ is a very important point. Whatever his previous voting record, we should IMO adopt a "clean slate" attitude towards it. If his previous record is positive, so much the better. If it (or part of it) is negative, people can change. With his endorsement of Ron Paul and his publicly announced participation in the Mises Academy - and until/unless he does something that proves otherwise - Davis has established that he deserves the benefit of the doubt (unlike, say, Bob Barr, who had a *terrible* record & did nothing but talk).

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

I don't know anything about the guy, but the only thing we can judge him on are his actions, not his words (as with any politician).

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

I don't know anything about the guy, but the only thing we can judge him on are his actions, not his words (as with any politician).

Well, he's apparently enrolled in Mises Institute courses. I can't imagine too many non-libertarians would decide to publicly announce they've thrown in with ancaps/hard libertarians with the hopes of furthering their political career. If that's his motivation, he's incredibly stupid. I'm not going to name him the new torchbearer for the movement or anything, but that revelation, along with defending Ron Paul's foreign policy, is very good news.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

I don't know anything about the guy, but the only thing we can judge him on are his actions, not his words (as with any politician).

Which is exactly what I said my earlier post.

Action: endorsed Ron Paul
Action: enrolled in Mises Academy (& publicly advertised the fact)

Result: deserves benefit of the doubt

By all means, give him the gimlet eye. I, too, am interested in his prior voting record. If nothing else, any negatives in that record will give us an indication of what to watch out for in the future.

Well, he's apparently enrolled in Mises Institute courses. I can't imagine too many non-libertarians would decide to publicly announce they've thrown in with ancaps/hard libertarians with the hopes of furthering their political career. If that's his motivation, he's incredibly stupid. I'm not going to name him the new torchbearer for the movement or anything, but that revelation, along with defending Ron Paul's foreign policy, is very good news.

What FtA said.