<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8mPZlysCAm0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I know. I was commenting on pouhe's quote that, "If he was a little younger, had better speaking skills and had won a statewide election or two; he'd probably resemble an ascendant Ronald Reagan." Gary Johnson's speaking skills aren't that much better, but he's younger, has won two statewide elections, and has views very similar to Ron Paul. And no one is calling him an ascendant Ronald Reagan. Ron Paul's policies are popular, but there's a personal appeal there too, that Gary Johnson couldn't match.
Unlike Ron, Johnson is running for the Libertarian nomination for president; what "base" are you talking about?
He was running for the GOP nomination, and that is what I mean. Where I notice he is different from Paul is He does not talk about Christian values. He's a "Lutheran" but I imagine he's more of an agnostic. He's pro-choice and does not believe government should interfere with marriage, Paul supports states making the decision. I think these views are why he will never be taken seriously as a GOP candidate, even though it's a pitty because he has proven in state elections he can get moderate liberals to vote for him. He approves of the National ID, something I'm sure Ron Paul, and most Libertarians are against.
I think Rand is a good bet. I think Obama will win this election fairly easily embarrassing the GOP. If anything goes wrong in the next 4 years swing voters will look to put another Repub in office. If the GOP learns from this joke of an election they might support a candidate like Rand. But that's a big if.
To be honest, I don't think they'll pick Rand Paul. If anything, they'll probably pick a social conservative after Romney loses.
^^^ To clarify, I mean elected in 2016. There's almost no way that he'll serve as President until 2017.
Got it! To be clear, I'd love to see him run against the Democratic candidate. It would make for a very interesting election, depending on who the Democratic nominee is.
As a non-American, I think I can see a different perspective on this. Pretty much any Middle Easterner is hoping that Ron Paul wins. Reason being one key factor that hasn't been brought up: Paul's policies means less people die as a direct or indirect result of US foreign policies in the Middle East, which is pretty neat for us down here.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/lyV9Owe3ojA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Holy**** this is insane, I've never seen Ron so riled up, but then again I've never seen a show go off the edge so much. Brace yourself though people, the ignorance is overwhelming and may make you nauseous. Any body ever watch this show in the 80s though?
Well that should put Ron Paul out of it. He has less than 50 delegates, and Mitt has more than 400. In fact Mitt has more than Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul combined.
