If Paul is the GOP nominee against Obama

[Colin]

Besides me leaving the Republican Party in disgust/being quite embarrassed for a while, a complete and utter redux of 1964. Obama is re-elected in a large landslide. Paul takes the Mountain West and possibly Mississippi and Alabama. The prospect of a Paul candidacy is a literal nightmare for the GOP but would probably have the benefit of forcing them into a more moderate position in advance of 2016.

Why are you even in the party then?

To be honest a variety of reasons. Family tradition, a general distaste for being an independent, general anti-democratic sentiment, general rightward bias in my voting history, general support for smaller government, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really, now? So a man who supports total drug legalization, a return to the gold standard, and an isolationist foreign policy, which often elicits him serious booing from conservative audiences, will be able to win against a divisive but not horribly unpopular sitting President. While I will admit that he has a rabid fan base and grassroots network, this is rather small in comparison to even the Republican electorate let alone the entire American electorate. A group of rabid fans does not correlate to broad electoral success.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Besides me leaving the Republican Party in disgust/being quite embarrassed for a while, a complete and utter redux of 1964. Obama is re-elected in a large landslide. Paul takes the Mountain West and possibly Mississippi and Alabama. The prospect of a Paul candidacy is a literal nightmare for the GOP but would probably have the benefit of forcing them into a more moderate position in advance of 2016.

Why are you even in the party then?

To be honest a variety of reasons. Family tradition, a general distaste for being an independent, general anti-democratic sentiment, general rightward bias in my voting history, general support for smaller government, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really, now? So a man who supports total drug legalization, a return to the gold standard, and an isolationist foreign policy, which often elicits him serious booing from conservative audiences, will be able to win against a divisive but not horribly unpopular sitting President. While I will admit that he has a rabid fan base and grassroots network, this is rather small in comparison to even the Republican electorate let alone the entire American electorate. A group of rabid fans does not correlate to broad electoral success.

Polling already has Paul neck-in-neck with Obama. The American people are getting tired of the establishment status quo which you seem to support.

[Colin]

Polling already has Paul neck-in-neck with Obama.

Yes the Rasmussen poll. I saw it. Now how many of those 42% actually knew who Ron Paul was and what his positions on the issues are? Very, very few, I would imagine. If anything the poll just shows that 42% of people are willing to vote for generic Republican over Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if the poll had the exact same results if Ron Paul was replaced with "John Smith".

This is a link to a Gallup poll conducted in February that had a generic Republican receiving 42% of the vote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh yeah the establishment status quo. I just love that. The secret American establishment meeting was earlier today and it was great. We talked about going to Ivy League Schools and controlling the Financial System. Also had a nice French Bordeaux and some Camembert, to highlight our anti-American, pro-European ways.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Polling already has Paul neck-in-neck with Obama.

Yes the Rasmussen poll. I saw it. Now how many of those 42% actually knew who Ron Paul was and what his positions on the issues are? Very, very few, I would imagine. If anything the poll just shows that 42% of people are willing to vote for generic Republican over Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if the poll had the exact same results if Ron Paul was replaced with "John Smith".

Uh, Ron Paul is well-known at this point, at least as much so as any 2008 Republican contender is. His positions on the issues have been made crystal clear.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh yeah the establishment status quo. I just love that. The secret American establishment meeting was earlier today and it was great. We talked about going to Ivy League Schools and controlling the Financial System. Also had a nice French Bordeaux and some Camembert, to highlight our anti-American, pro-European ways.
[/quote]

You're not part of the establishment, buddy, sorry. There's no place at the table for you.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It will be 1964, most Evangelicals consider Libertarians to be the same as Rinos. Anti-War Liberals won't be motivated to vote for someone who is 180 from them on economics. He is also erratic and a little crazy which will also not reflect well when it comes to voting for him.

[Bull Moose Base]

Why are you even in the party then?

To be honest a variety of reasons. Family tradition, a general distaste for being an independent, general anti-democratic sentiment, general rightward bias in my voting history, general support for smaller government, etc.

Family tradition strikes me as a poor albeit common (on both sides) reason for how people vote.  I think that you listed it first is evidence of its influence.  Can't help but wonder how much of the subsequent sentiments would still be there or be different if the first one were different.  That's impossible to measure obviously.  But your aversion to Ron Paul suggests your general support for smaller government is more nuanced when it's more specific.  Nor do Democrats support unlimited government despite the caricature.  Obviously, there are social issues on which Republicans (though not Paul) generally favor "big government" compared to what most Democrats do.

[HappyWarrior]

Polling already has Paul neck-in-neck with Obama.

Yes the Rasmussen poll. I saw it. Now how many of those 42% actually knew who Ron Paul was and what his positions on the issues are? Very, very few, I would imagine. If anything the poll just shows that 42% of people are willing to vote for generic Republican over Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if the poll had the exact same results if Ron Paul was replaced with "John Smith".

This is a link to a Gallup poll conducted in February that had a generic Republican receiving 42% of the vote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh yeah the establishment status quo. I just love that. The secret American establishment meeting was earlier today and it was great. We talked about going to Ivy League Schools and controlling the Financial System. Also had a nice French Bordeaux and some Camembert, to highlight our anti-American, pro-European ways.

Colin don't try arguing Paul with Libertas.  He thinks all America needs is Paul to become raving libertarians and that Paul could gain a 400 EV victory against Obama without trying.

[Iosif]

Look at all of you humouring the delusions of a teenager.

[rebeltarian]

Really, now? So a man who supports total drug legalization, a return to the gold standard, and an isolationist foreign policy, which often elicits him serious booing from conservative audiences,

That's because the Republican Party has become swollen with a bunch of closet Democrats who love big intervenionist government.  They left the Democratic Party in the 60s, 70s and 80s because it had gotten too "hippie" for them.  I am a Republican from a Republican family and I am sick of these faux conservative morons running our party.  I've had it with the wars, nation-building, UN, "war on terror", it's time to come home.  

As for Ron Paul, he wants to pull us out of the UN and NATO and close all of our overseas military bases.  It may be a little too simple and sweeping, but it's definitely a step in the right direction.  China, Russia and India are rising and we cannot afford to be going around the world telling other people how to live, especially when we're not even going to be the sole super-power.  I want to see America cut back on foreign adventures, become energy independent and focus on maintaining her sovereignty to remain economically and culturally competetive with these new rising superpowers.  Ron Paul may be a little crazy and too ideological, but he is running more as a catalyst for what needs to happen in the future.  Like it or not, Republicans, Democrats and America in general are going to have to go back to more isolationist ideas if we still want to be around at the end of this century.

[pbrower2a]

One thing that could endear some conservatives to President Obama -- he has been tough on crime, whether against street drugs or against Wall Street corruption. Sure, he will lose the meth fiends in rural America -- as if they were an important part of the electorate.

[old timey villain]

I'm a 20 year old college student and I am proudly not riding the Ron Paul bandwagon, although a lot of my friends are. Libertas, you seem to think that the American people would just LOVE to vote for a man who wants to privatize and legalize almost everything. You're delusions harken back to when the Democrats thought America wanted a non interventionist almost hippie liberal like McGovern in 1972. Richard Nixon is the only Republican my father ever voted for because of that election. The main difference between McGovern and Paul, however,  is that even most Republicans don't want to see him in the White House. Ron Paul can try to move to the center, but his current stances speak for themselves.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I'm a 20 year old college student and I am proudly not riding the Ron Paul bandwagon, although a lot of my friends are. Libertas, you seem to think that the American people would just LOVE to vote for a man who wants to privatize and legalize almost everything. You're delusions harken back to when the Democrats thought America wanted a non interventionist almost hippie liberal like McGovern in 1972. Richard Nixon is the only Republican my father ever voted for because of that election. The main difference between McGovern and Paul, however,  is that even most Republicans don't want to see him in the White House. Ron Paul can try to move to the center, but his current stances speak for themselves.

Most Republicans and more importantly, most Independents want to see Paul in the White House.

Paul's positions are the change this country needs.

I see you have a legacy of preferring crooks though, and opposing decent men like George McGovern and Ron Paul.

[Phony Moderate]

In all fairness, Richard Nixon had more integrity than most libertarians.

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

In all fairness, Richard Nixon had more integrity than most libertarians.

WhaWHAT?

[HappyWarrior]

I'm a 20 year old college student and I am proudly not riding the Ron Paul bandwagon, although a lot of my friends are. Libertas, you seem to think that the American people would just LOVE to vote for a man who wants to privatize and legalize almost everything. You're delusions harken back to when the Democrats thought America wanted a non interventionist almost hippie liberal like McGovern in 1972. Richard Nixon is the only Republican my father ever voted for because of that election. The main difference between McGovern and Paul, however,  is that even most Republicans don't want to see him in the White House. Ron Paul can try to move to the center, but his current stances speak for themselves.

Most Republicans and more importantly, most Independents want to see Paul in the White House.

Paul's positions are the change this country needs.

I see you have a legacy of preferring crooks though, and opposing decent men like George McGovern and Ron Paul.

Most indepedents don't know who he is.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I'm a 20 year old college student and I am proudly not riding the Ron Paul bandwagon, although a lot of my friends are. Libertas, you seem to think that the American people would just LOVE to vote for a man who wants to privatize and legalize almost everything. You're delusions harken back to when the Democrats thought America wanted a non interventionist almost hippie liberal like McGovern in 1972. Richard Nixon is the only Republican my father ever voted for because of that election. The main difference between McGovern and Paul, however,  is that even most Republicans don't want to see him in the White House. Ron Paul can try to move to the center, but his current stances speak for themselves.

Most Republicans and more importantly, most Independents want to see Paul in the White House.

Paul's positions are the change this country needs.

I see you have a legacy of preferring crooks though, and opposing decent men like George McGovern and Ron Paul.

Most indepedents don't know who he is.

The most recent showed Paul beating Obama among independents 47-28.

[HappyWarrior]

I'm a 20 year old college student and I am proudly not riding the Ron Paul bandwagon, although a lot of my friends are. Libertas, you seem to think that the American people would just LOVE to vote for a man who wants to privatize and legalize almost everything. You're delusions harken back to when the Democrats thought America wanted a non interventionist almost hippie liberal like McGovern in 1972. Richard Nixon is the only Republican my father ever voted for because of that election. The main difference between McGovern and Paul, however,  is that even most Republicans don't want to see him in the White House. Ron Paul can try to move to the center, but his current stances speak for themselves.

Most Republicans and more importantly, most Independents want to see Paul in the White House.

Paul's positions are the change this country needs.

I see you have a legacy of preferring crooks though, and opposing decent men like George McGovern and Ron Paul.

Most indepedents don't know who he is.

The most recent showed Paul beating Obama among independents 47-28.

Who did the polling?

[California8429]

If Paul somehow managed to be the nominee....he would win. But he'd actually need to win the nomination first.

Religious voters would turn out to defeat Obama as long as Paul had a Palin religious/conservative type on the ticket to energize the right as Paul could reach to moderates and libertarians.

But he'd actually NEED TO WIN the nomination first...not going to happen

[CultureKing]

If Paul somehow managed to be the nominee....he would win. But he'd actually need to win the nomination first.

Religious voters would turn out to defeat Obama as long as Paul had a Palin religious/conservative type on the ticket to energize the right as Paul could reach to moderates and libertarians.

But he'd actually NEED TO WIN the nomination first...not going to happen

lolz

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

If Paul somehow managed to be the nominee....he would win. But he'd actually need to win the nomination first.

Religious voters would turn out to defeat Obama as long as Paul had a Palin religious/conservative type on the ticket to energize the right as Paul could reach to moderates and libertarians.

But he'd actually NEED TO WIN the nomination first...not going to happen

lolz

A-bob's assessment was pretty accurate.


Why are Obamacrats so arrogant?

[Devilman88]

Wow, that is funny.. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul would win against Obama, needs their head checked.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Wow, that is funny.. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul would win against Obama, needs their head checked.

Why, we're so smart you want to figure out how our brains manage to do it?

[Devilman88]

Wow, that is funny.. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul would win against Obama, needs their head checked.

Why, we're so smart you want to figure out how our brains manage to do it?

No, because you are crazy and living in your own fantasy land.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Wow, that is funny.. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul would win against Obama, needs their head checked.

Why, we're so smart you want to figure out how our brains manage to do it?

No, because you are crazy and living in your own fantasy land.

Why does the thought of President Paul taking office in 2013 scare you so much?

[Devilman88]

Wow, that is funny.. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul would win against Obama, needs their head checked.

Why, we're so smart you want to figure out how our brains manage to do it?

No, because you are crazy and living in your own fantasy land.

Why does the thought of President Paul taking office in 2013 scare you so much>

It doesn't scare me at all. I'm just not dumb and know it is never going to happen.