Would you vote for a Romney/Paul ticket?

[sailingaway]

You don't specify WHICH Paul. I'd vote for RON as VP, because I don't see enough difference between Obama and Romney to fuss about, and passing up Ron on the ballot to write him in, is just not going to happen. I'd even campaign for that ticket so long as I could wear my "Ron Paul for VP 2012" shirt (which I would have made).

But I don't see it happening for the same reason I would vote for it -- I have faith Ron Paul will always be Ron Paul, and if he has differences of policy on key issues, we would know about it as soon as someone stuck a mic in front of his face. He would be the loyal opposition. With him retiring from the House, I would see it as a high profile place to put him.

I think Romnney NEEDS Ron as VP to win, but I think he would rather lose.

--

edit, because you didn't specify WHICH Paul, I didn't vote.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

What influence would either Paul have? People act as if a Paul VP would have the same power and influence as Cheney. The only reason why Romney and the establishment would select either of the Pauls (probably Rand because he's not as principled) is to shut them up. But for the sake of this discussion, let's say Ron is selected as the VP. Although Romney has a history of flip flopping, he has never seen things through Ron's perspective so why all of a sudden is he going to "see the light"? Not to mention the fact that Romney has designed a Bush 2.0 cabinet that will override any foreign policy proposal from Ron.

Ron Paul won support by standing his ground and not caving to the establishment. Sure, he may gain more attention from the average Republican but they're going to see/hear Romney's rhetoric. With that in mind, Paul will mostly be associated with Romney's wrongdoings. He will be blamed for either going along with it or not doing enough to stop Romney. That is not the way to grow a principled,enthusiastic, and influential movement. We've come this far without compromising so why all of a sudden should Paul turn his back when he can take a more active role in the grassroots movement (without the help of Benton)?

 

[CaptUSA]

I think Romnney NEEDS Ron as VP to win, but I think he would rather lose.

Absolutely correct. That's why we will know the outcome of November as soon as Romney makes his pick. If it's not Ron Paul, he never really wanted to win.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

If this movement is unable to move, we will end up like a 3rd party. We must move forward, even if by the inch or even sometimes just holding the ground that we have already taken.

While I see a lot of people wanting to jump ship to other parties (ie, Johnson) or sit out wait for "next time", I would have to consider that if Ron Paul were to accept a VP position that he would be looking to help our country from that position. So, for me, "Ron Paul for VP 2012" would be the next best thing to "Ron Paul for president 2012", IF he were to accept such a nomination.

And for those "Rand 2016" people, a Ron Paul VP 2012 would give that a boost, would it not?

edit: and I did not vote since it did not specify which Paul.

 

[kahless]

Unless billionaires suddenly come out in favor of Johnson it is going to be Romney or Obama. So why would anyone not want Ron to be on the inside having some influence instead of none.

Showing that you will not vote for Romney/Paul ticket will only ensure Paul is not picked for VP. Would you rather have Rubio as VP in Romney's ear. I get how bad Romney is but it is going to be far worse with 4 more years of Obama.

 

[Tiso0770]

NO, lesser of two Evil's is still Evil...if the Economy tanks with Romney, he'll drag Paul down with him and the liberty movement.

 

[ZENemy]

Im sorry but Gary Johnson > Romney/Paul

I wouldn't vote for Romney if Jesus himself were his VP.

 

[ZENemy]

NO, lesser of two Evil's is still Evil...if the Economy tanks with Romney, he'll drag Paul down with him and the liberty movement.

This, they would WELCOME the ability to say "see, paul was there and even HE couldn't save the Economy"

I don't get some people, Romney has LIED, CHEATED and overall just been a disgusting person in this primary race, yet, somehow he is going to pick Ron as his VP and NOT block everything Ron does?

 

[asurfaholic]

If I don't get exactly what I want, I wont completely refuse to take a lesser prize. To me, if Ron Paul isn't the nominee, then it is still better than nothing to have him as VP. I feel that as a vice president, dr paul can project his message out from a prominant position and just by being the 2nd in line to the president will lend tremendous amounts of credibility to his overall message.

My problem with 3rd party voting is that whether you can accept it or not, that party isn't going to win. So, our only 2 real choices for president are (assuming nothing drastic happens) Obama/vp and Romney/vp. So if I have the option to put Paul in the white house, im going to take it. Beats the hell out of obama/vp and romney/neocon vp. And obviously beats the hell out of 3rd party which definitely wont win.

 

[romancito]

You don't understand Conventions. Once they mess up badly and elect Romney they will feel guilty as hell and would want to commit mass suicide. Then angels from heaven would appear (invisible but appear) and talk to many to prevent them from taking the red pill. God always provide a way out from hell if what was done was because of stupidity. They will try to relief guilt by nominating and electing Ron Paul for VP. Ron Paul will accept the VP election because we will consider it as a positive trend and as an honor to represent the movement higher up.

The sad thing is that Obama will beat Romney anyway. Ron Paul can't save Romney from his empty skimming snake head. But we will still be the better for it. The only ones that can beat Obama are either Ron Paul / Sarah Palin or Sarah Palin / Rand Paul.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

It's probably not going to happen, but if it were to happen, you'd have to put a little more thought into it.

If the GOP put a liberty candidate like Ron Paul on the ticket, and then lost... The game would indeed be over. We'd never be able to increase our influence.

There is a chance of loss whether Ron Paul is nominated for President or VP. I don't see that a/effecting my point of view.

IF Ron were nominated VP, he would definitely be a better interviewee than Sarah Palin was in 2008, no? Although, he would be demonized as much as possible by the likes of the left M in MSM.

And, Ron could help carry the young and the independent voters.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

You don't understand Conventions. Once they mess up badly and elect Romney they will feel guilty as hell and would want to commit mass suicide. Then angels from heaven would appear (invisible but appear) and talk to many to prevent them from taking the red pill. God always provide a way out from hell if what was done was because of stupidity. They will try to relief guilt by nominating and electing Ron Paul for VP. Ron Paul will accept the VP election because we will consider it as a positive trend and as an honor to represent the movement higher up.

The sad thing is that Obama will beat Romney anyway. Ron Paul can't save Romney from his empty skimming snake head. But we will still be the better for it. The only ones that can beat Obama are either Ron Paul / Sarah Palin or Sarah Palin / Rand Paul.

Are you serious? Sarah Palin could not motivate beyond her fan club. At least Romney has that "You don't know me yet" eire going for the masses.

 

[CaptUSA]

I don't get some people, Romney has LIED, CHEATED and overall just been a disgusting person in this primary race, yet, somehow he is going to pick Ron as his VP and NOT block everything Ron does?

We're not stupid. If, by some miracle, Romney were to make this decision we know it would only be for political expediency. And yeah, Ron Paul wouldn't get much done. But look at the big picture. This kind of move would add a lot of credibility to our ideas - but only if it wins them an election. If they lose with Paul on the ticket, you can forget the movement going anywhere.

And even though nothing would get done in the short term, it would blow open the door for all liberty candidates nationwide. And once these people are in office, changes can begin to occur. Again, I doubt it's going to happen, but if it did, it would be the biggest opportunity we've ever had. I'm not sure what's with all the newer folks saying President or nothing.

 

[Endthefednow]

No One But Ron Paul!!

 

[ZENemy]

Go to bed with Dogs, wake up with Fleas.

 

[AJ Antimony]

I voted yes because I assume that in order for Ron Paul to accept the VP nomination, Romney would have to actually promise serious policy changes. I'm also assuming that if Romney promises Paul these changes and then changes his mind once in office, he knows Ron would be a very vocal critic of the administration. I'm also assuming Vice President Paul would be free to provide as many TV interviews as he wants, and wouldn't have to consult with any advisers. I'm also assuming that Romney would allow Paul to be himself while campaigning for VP and while participating in the VP debate.

 

[AJ Antimony]

If they lose with Paul on the ticket, you can forget the movement going anywhere.

I never thought of this before, but you may be right. This reminds me of Iowa... 'If Paul wins, then Iowa is meaningless. If anyone else wins, it's very important!'
I could see this happening in an election... 'See! Ron Paul as VP cost us the election! His views aren't popular! Oh, but McCain/Palin lost simply because they were outspent'

 

[ZENemy]

Vice presidents seem to have almost no power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States

 

[sailingaway]

What influence would either Paul have? People act as if a Paul VP would have the same power and influence as Cheney. The only reason why Romney and the establishment would select either of the Pauls (probably Rand because he's not as principled) is to shut them up. But for the sake of this discussion, let's say Ron is selected as the VP. Although Romney has a history of flip flopping, he has never seen things through Ron's perspective so why all of a sudden is he going to "see the light"? Not to mention the fact that Romney has designed a Bush 2.0 cabinet that will override any foreign policy proposal from Ron.

Ron Paul won support by standing his ground and not caving to the establishment. Sure, he may gain more attention from the average Republican but they're going to see/hear Romney's rhetoric. With that in mind, Paul will mostly be associated with Romney's wrongdoings. He will be blamed for either going along with it or not doing enough to stop Romney. That is not the way to grow a principled,enthusiastic, and influential movement. We've come this far without compromising so why all of a sudden should Paul turn his back when he can take a more active role in the grassroots movement (without the help of Benton)?

None of those downsides would be an issue so long as Ron Paul remained true to himself and spoke out against the actions and, heck, he could even resign if something bad enough happened, to great media attention. He'd be kind of a brake on Romney imho. He would never have Cheney's power, but he would have a newly relevant bully pulpit because there has never in the last 100 years been a VP like that.

However, that is also why I think Romney won't choose him. Romney's advisers are neocons and they would much rather Romney lose than that Ron get that bully pulpit. After all, it isn't as if Obama is a peace candidate or anything. Their bread is buttered either way.

 

[CaptUSA]

None of those downsides would be an issue so long as Ron Paul remained true to himself and spoke out against the actions and, heck, he could even resign if something bad enough happened, to great media attention. He'd be kind of a brake on Romney imho. He would never have Cheney's power, but he would have a newly relevant bully pulpit because there has never in the last 100 years been a VP like that.

However, that is also why I think Romney won't choose him. Romney's advisers are neocons and they would much rather Romney lose than that Ron get that bully pulpit. After all, it isn't as if Obama is a peace candidate or anything. Their bread is buttered either way.

This. Once again, you have provided the best post in the thread. It would be great if it happened, and it would be wise if we supported it if it did, but it ain't going to happen. They'd rather Romney lose to their other pet than have a wild animal around...