Donald This Election's Ralph Nader?

[Teatownclown]

\Encourage Ron Paul to run as an independent....

Not that Newt can win anyway. Romney could be a problem.

Go Ron Paul, run independent!

[Conan71]

Encourage Ron Paul to run as an independent....

Not that Newt can win anyway. Romney could be a problem.

Go Ron Paul, run independent!

There's also rumors the Trumpster might go 3P.

[Ed W]

I don't like his politics, but unlike the front runners in the Republican contest, there's no doubting his sincerity and unwavering principles.

[AquaMan]

If it weren't for some extreme views, the guy appeals to me on a lot of fronts. I can see that any mainstream party would find it difficult to get behind him.
Just like Nader, there is enough in his platform to pique interest but also enough to alienate. Both of them serve as R&D for the parties.

One example is his campaign ad touting how he would effect a trillion dollar reduction in budgets in the first few days of office?!

[we vs us]

He's definitely authentic, but sometimes I wonder whether or not that has to do with his marginally supported views.  Would he be (or be able to be) so authentic if he was actually able to wield serious mainstream power?

[OpenYourEyesTulsa]

If it weren't for some extreme views, the guy appeals to me on a lot of fronts. I can see that any mainstream party would find it difficult to get behind him.
Just like Nader, there is enough in his platform to pique interest but also enough to alienate. Both of them serve as R&D for the parties.

One example is his campaign ad touting how he would effect a trillion dollar reduction in budgets in the first few days of office?!

What other views do find extreme?  His ad says he wants to cut one trillion dollars the first year not the first days.  I think that is a good thing.  No other candidates have any plans to fix the economy.  I think most Republicans have trouble with Ron Paul's foreign policy and want to keep the war machine going because they drank too much of the kool aid.

There really isn't a lot of difference between Bush, Obama, and any of the Republican candidates except Ron Paul.  The only choice is Ron Paul or more of the same thing that is destroying the USA.

[nathanm]

Ron Paul has some good points, but takes it altogether too far. That's to be expected, given that he describes himself as libertarian. He thinks that not only is it a bad idea to have government involved in certain things, but that government isn't allowed to be involved in those things. I think he fails to give the commerce clause as much weight as it deserves. That said, I do think the Supreme Court has taken to giving it too much weight in recent years, so I see where he's coming from, even if I wouldn't take it that far.

If we had a government that took white collar crime as seriously as it takes street crime and reinstituted strong criminal sanctions for white collar crimes, it might just work, but I haven't seen him jump on that particular train.

The absolute dealbreaker, IMO, is his gold bug stance. Too little money chasing too many goods is just as bad as too much money chasing too few goods.

[Gaspar]

I like much of what Paul says, but he takes his philosophy to the extreme and that combined with his personality make him unelectable. I am more of a moderate libertarian.  That is to say that I believe in the platform and philosophy, but I don't believe that we can get there as quickly as Paul does by drastic legislation, (and the drastic elimination of much legislation).  I think there would need to be a few steps and a few presidents before a Ron Paul platform could be considered realistic.

Unfortunately, history teaches us that we cannot go in that direction.  It is our destiny to take a progressive path, add more layers of regulation, and inject government into more areas of our lives. I think candidates like Paul are good because they motivate large numbers of people to think about their relationship with government, but they are no more than a fart in a progressive wind-storm.

We do not have the power to stop the natural evolution of government, only the power to slow the process.

[RecycleMichael]

I like much of what Paul says, but he takes his philosophy to the extreme and that combined with his personality make him unelectable.

I love his personality. I would love a neighbor like him. He makes his arguments, doesn't get upset when ignored, and stays on his message. During the debates he seemed the only one who actually thought about what he was saying, rather than delivering his practiced lines.

Would I vote for him? Absolutely not.

[Gaspar]

I love his personality. I would love a neighbor like him. He makes his arguments, doesn't get upset when ignored, and stays on his message. During the debates he seemed the only one who actually thought about what he was saying, rather than delivering his practiced lines.

Would I vote for him? Absolutely not.

He is likable, and he is honest.  That resonates with people, but we understand that to engage in politics, you must have the mind of a politician, and that he does not!

[nathanm]

Unfortunately, history teaches us that we cannot go in that direction.  It is our destiny to take a progressive path, add more layers of regulation, and inject government into more areas of our lives. I think candidates like Paul are good because they motivate large numbers of people to think about their relationship with government, but they are no more than a fart in a progressive wind-storm.

Unfortunately, history also teaches us that regulations on commerce are absolutely necessary to prevent companies from doing shady things, whether it be share price manipulation, putting crap (of the poisonous kind, if not unhealthy) in our food, flying unsafe airplanes, operating nuclear reactors unsafely, dumping pollutants, or any of the many other things that we've caught them doing at various times. History teaches us that self regulation is no regulation at all. Self regulation is largely what the banks got, and look where that got us.

I'm right with the libertarians on keeping government out of our private lives, and I think that we should always be evaluating whether our regulation of business is too heavy-handed, too light, or just right and making any necessary changes. Unnecessary regulation isn't any better than the lack of necessary regulation.

I'm glad Ron Paul is in Congress, just as I'm glad that Bernie Sanders is. It takes all kinds. Everybody should have a seat at the table.

[Teatownclown]

Trump dumps GOP

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/23/trump-dumps-gop/


welcome the Trump card.....

[Teatownclown]