Comments on: Ron Paul 2012 Run A Possibility?

By: RBurnett

RBurnett — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:11:49 +0000

I’ll take that bet.
What’s the important war issue is the amount of opposition to the wars of Obama–recall that early on in the wars of Bush there was scant opposition. So even if Obama begins another in say, 2012, the MSM will give Obama a break and not drop on him. The anti-war and anti-Bush sentiment of many media types materially helped the opposition, be it Obama’s or Paul’s against Bush.
As to getting Paul coverage now is quite irrelevant as whatever is said now will be forgotten in a few months.
And it doesn’t matter if the economic solutions are all wrong–the economy may revive nevertheless, and if the last several recessions are any guide, this one will be recovering at the time of the next Presidential election.
As to that 20 years of Constitutionalism, well, Paul’s Constitutionalism is the ability to say No to everything–hardly what Jefferson did.
And, of course, there’s Paul’s age and more importantly, his health in 2012–
“If there is someone better” is the invitation to the usual libertarian infighting that produced a Bob Barr–
By the way, Barr didn’t do very well, did he?

By: spinnikerca

spinnikerca — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 00:46:48 +0000

“not to mention that the issue that drove the Paul campaign, the war, will not be a factor in 2012…”

Care to bet on that? Maybe not the SAME war, but Obama is no noninterventionist.

Moreover, the issue that is getting Ron Paul coverage right now — the economy– is unlikely to be solved given that they are going about it exactly the wrong way.

If there is someone better, I’ll support them.

But so far, a 20 year record of Constitutionalism is head and shoulders better than anything I’ve seen.

By: RBurnett

RBurnett — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 07:41:49 +0000

We know now and it’s No.
How old will Paul be in four years? People at his age have the bad habit of losing thier health rather rapidly. Any Presidnetial run, unless done Fred Thompson like aka lazily and for fun, will probably be too much, even for our bycyle riding Congressman.
Considerering also that Paul’s campaign was sabotaged by at least amatuerism and at worst by the good old ideological split between purists (who’d rather not get anyone libertarian elected, focusing on some sort of so-called education) and pragmatists (who’d like to get Libertarian Party members in Congress, or at least some more Ron Pauls elected), not to mention that the issue that drove the Paul campaign, the war, will not be a factor in 2012, if Obama doesn’t go back on his promise to get us out, and to include if the economy improves, then any run by anyone against such an Obama success will be foredoomed–indeed, the purist’s cup of tea as they will be assured that Paul or whomever will not be elected.
Paul may then run for fun, to get on SNL or The Daily Show–but not much else.
As to a serious run–No, if Obama succeeds or can take the credit for an economic recovery and the US out of the Middle East.
The best you people can do is to pray for more drought, more economic woes and more war–