(04-17-2015 08:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To me, Ron sounds like a breath of fresh air. He's honest. I don't agree with his view on the Fed though, because what he advocates is to give the power to print money BACK to elected officials. DO YOU REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS THAT WOULD BE??? Overall I like Rand the best out of the rest of the GOP bunch; however, I fear that he will ultimately toe the line with the rest of the GOP establishment and not have the fortitude to drive long overdue changes - like real cost cutting. Until the GOP gets serious about welcoming libertarian POVs into the party, they will continue to keep the status quo and play the same game with the Dems.

I think Ron's call to audit the Fed is fine. That alone would bring some transparency to the system and open up the eyes of the public to this organization that controls damn near everything behind closed doors.

(04-17-2015 08:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To me, Ron sounds like a breath of fresh air. He's honest. I don't agree with his view on the Fed though, because what he advocates is to give the power to print money BACK to elected officials. DO YOU REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS THAT WOULD BE??? Overall I like Rand the best out of the rest of the GOP bunch; however, I fear that he will ultimately toe the line with the rest of the GOP establishment and not have the fortitude to drive long overdue changes - like real cost cutting. Until the GOP gets serious about welcoming libertarian POVs into the party, they will continue to keep the status quo and play the same game with the Dems.

I have no idea what Rand would do, but he seems to have sold his soul to McConnell. He could very well get elected and stab him in the back, but who knows? His voting record is solid, but he is a wildcard.

(04-17-2015 08:13 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 08:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ive been saying all along that Rand is being very calculated in his strategies. He has been forced to abandon publicly much of his personal philosophy to become more "electable". I still think he is much more Libertarian that he allows people to know. He is not Ron...but...I believe he is closer to him than we think. It will be interesting to see if he can make major end roads with even the limited amount of Libertarianism he projects. Any positive gains IMO will be historic for that political philosophy.

I'm sure he has. Honestly, my guess is that Christie has done the same in New Jersey given the Democratic majorities in that state's congress. He couldn't govern if he didn't.

With both of these guys, they can't draw a line in the sand on everything and never waver, if they do - they become unelectable.

I'm not saying I think either are the best Republican choice, but do believe either would be much better than Hillary.

This is not good though. I hate seeing this type of crap from leftists when they pretend to be moderate. If Rand is doing the same thing, I think that's a huge disservice to the long term movement towards more freedom. My personal take is that Rand is not actually doing this. I believe that we are seeing his real views. There's nothing wrong with that - just be honest so that we can make an informed decision.

(04-17-2015 08:16 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 08:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To me, Ron sounds like a breath of fresh air. He's honest. I don't agree with his view on the Fed though, because what he advocates is to give the power to print money BACK to elected officials. DO YOU REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS THAT WOULD BE??? Overall I like Rand the best out of the rest of the GOP bunch; however, I fear that he will ultimately toe the line with the rest of the GOP establishment and not have the fortitude to drive long overdue changes - like real cost cutting. Until the GOP gets serious about welcoming libertarian POVs into the party, they will continue to keep the status quo and play the same game with the Dems.

I have no idea what Rand would do, but he seems to have sold his soul to McConnell. He could very well get elected and stab him in the back, but who knows? His voting record is solid, but he is a wildcard.

I have a feeling Rand is playing his L cards very close to his chest. I don't think anyone really knows what this guy might do if he became POTUS.

(04-17-2015 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 08:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To me, Ron sounds like a breath of fresh air. He's honest. I don't agree with his view on the Fed though, because what he advocates is to give the power to print money BACK to elected officials. DO YOU REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS THAT WOULD BE??? Overall I like Rand the best out of the rest of the GOP bunch; however, I fear that he will ultimately toe the line with the rest of the GOP establishment and not have the fortitude to drive long overdue changes - like real cost cutting. Until the GOP gets serious about welcoming libertarian POVs into the party, they will continue to keep the status quo and play the same game with the Dems.

I think Ron's call to audit the Fed is fine. That alone would bring some transparency to the system and open up the eyes of the public to this organization that controls damn near everything behind closed doors.

Unless I'm mistaken, Ron wanted to abolish the Fed and put the power back into the hands of elected officials. With fiat money, you wouldn't want to do that. And honestly you can never go back to the gold standard so that it would be feasible to put that power back into the hands of elected officials. The problem is that gold and silver are finite. Eventually, you run out of room to grow the economy if you don't have the oz's of gold and silver there to back up the currency.

(04-17-2015 08:21 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 08:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To me, Ron sounds like a breath of fresh air. He's honest. I don't agree with his view on the Fed though, because what he advocates is to give the power to print money BACK to elected officials. DO YOU REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS THAT WOULD BE??? Overall I like Rand the best out of the rest of the GOP bunch; however, I fear that he will ultimately toe the line with the rest of the GOP establishment and not have the fortitude to drive long overdue changes - like real cost cutting. Until the GOP gets serious about welcoming libertarian POVs into the party, they will continue to keep the status quo and play the same game with the Dems.

I think Ron's call to audit the Fed is fine. That alone would bring some transparency to the system and open up the eyes of the public to this organization that controls damn near everything behind closed doors.

Unless I'm mistaken, Ron wanted to abolish the Fed and put the power back into the hands of elected officials. With fiat money, you wouldn't want to do that. And honestly you can never go back to the gold standard so that it would be feasible to put that power back into the hands of elected officials. The problem is that gold and silver are finite. Eventually, you run out of room to grow the economy if you don't have the oz's of gold and silver there to back up the currency.

Yes that was his ultimate dream. I think he always knew that was going to be a very hard sell so he also advocated for auditing of the Fed.

Paul also advocated using more than just precious metals and a return to fractional backing of our currency instead of our fiat paradigm.

(04-16-2015 08:49 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:45 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Rand can appeal to the masses. Ron couldn't get over 4%.

Ron actually performed pretty well in 2012. He was very close to winning both Iowa and NH.

Ron had zero chance of winning the Republican nomination. Then he'd have to run as a third party nominee and he'd get about 4% or 5%. Rand can win the nomination and possibly the general election.

I could easily see myself getting on board a Rand Paul nomination, as well as a few of the others considering a run.

I wouldn't have voted for Ron, ever. Don't dislike or "hate" the guy or anything, but nope. Wasnt going to happen.

(04-17-2015 03:14 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 08:49 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:45 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Rand can appeal to the masses. Ron couldn't get over 4%.

Ron actually performed pretty well in 2012. He was very close to winning both Iowa and NH.

Ron had zero chance of winning the Republican nomination. Then he'd have to run as a third party nominee and he'd get about 4% or 5%. Rand can win the nomination and possibly the general election.

I could easily see myself getting on board a Rand Paul nomination, as well as a few of the others considering a run.

I wouldn't have voted for Ron, ever. Don't dislike or "hate" the guy or anything, but nope. Wasnt going to happen.

Why do you think his son has a shot? I'd say Rand is more personable and less stiff while speaking, and might share a little less extreme views on specific issues, but I guess I don't get why his dad was such a non-option if he is one.

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Ron couldn't get over 4%.

You didn't pay close attention to the returns, did you?

(04-18-2015 10:12 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Ron couldn't get over 4%.

You didn't pay close attention to the returns, did you?

In what presidential election did he get more than 4% or 5%? If he ever got more than that, I stand corrected.

Primaries don't count. I was talking about presidential elections.

(04-18-2015 12:31 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(04-18-2015 10:12 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Ron couldn't get over 4%.

You didn't pay close attention to the returns, did you?

In what presidential election did he get more than 4% or 5%? If he ever got more than that, I stand corrected.

Primaries don't count. I was talking about presidential elections.

In what modern era Presidential election did a third party that didn't have several billion dollars to spend ever get more than 5%?

Had Paul won the nomination, he would have obviously outperformed that. And frankly, based on polling, he probably would have beaten Obama.

(04-18-2015 11:01 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-18-2015 12:31 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(04-18-2015 10:12 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 06:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Ron couldn't get over 4%.

You didn't pay close attention to the returns, did you?

In what presidential election did he get more than 4% or 5%? If he ever got more than that, I stand corrected.

Primaries don't count. I was talking about presidential elections.

In what modern era Presidential election did a third party that didn't have several billion dollars to spend ever get more than 5%?

Had Paul won the nomination, he would have obviously outperformed that. And frankly, based on polling, he probably would have beaten Obama.

I don't think Ron ever had a chance to win the Republican nomination. His elbows are too sharp. Libertarians may not like Rand as much, but I think he has a decent chance at winning the nomination, and I think he can beat Scooby Doo in a pantsuit.