Comments on: Ron Paul’s Potential Running Mate

By: Mariano Laxson

Mariano Laxson — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 19:33:40 +0000

1 impartial voice about Msnbc inside the Television show. He includes a actually difficult immigration law coverage. This individual graduated around the Harvard Higher education. At present he provides their a single Airwaves Show. He do not just like any Usa us president.

By: commercial factoring

commercial factoring — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:33:31 +0000

Well, your post is actually the freshest on this noteworthy topic. I agree with your conclusions and anxiously look forward to your next updates. Just saying thanks will not be sufficient, for the fantastic clarity in your writing. I will immediately subscribe to your feed to stay abreast of any updates. Delightful work and much success in your business dealings!

By: Jonny H.

Jonny H. — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:08:46 +0000

John Stossel.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:13:21 +0000

Lou Dobbs. Similar views of what is ailing this country. Name recognition. Not afraid to say what he thinks. Not a flip-flopper. In any case, a careful choice needs to be made, since the person stands a very good chance at being President. I don’t see the military/industrial/banking cartel allowing President Paul to finish a term.

By: Christopher Witmer

Christopher Witmer — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 04:11:01 +0000

sorry for not closing the italics!

By: Christopher Witmer

Christopher Witmer — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 04:10:19 +0000

Carla, Ron Paul has stated in public that he would be interested in someone like Walter Williams as a VP, so I don’t think Dr. Paul has any major problems with Dr. Williams’ views.

Folks, two sobering points for us all to consider:

1) The field of well-known and really high caliber people from which Dr. Paul can choose is not very large, is it? Just to come up with the people listed above, you already get a sense that we’re scraping the barrel, no? I’d like to think there are a lot of really high caliber people out there, but they are not well known. Probably they are known to Dr. Paul, and that’s what counts. Fortunately he does not have to choose a running mate until after he gets the nomination: it is hard to imagine a running mate who would really BOOST Ron Paul’s image in the eyes of the public at large. (Most people have a high opinion of Dr. Paul personally, even if they think he is not electable. Of course there are people like Lew Rockwell known to long-term libertarians, and he would surely be acceptable to the hard core, but it is hard to imagine Lew Rockwell helping Dr. Paul among the electorate at large — at least not right off the bat.) At any rate, my point is that the shortage of no-brainer choices for VP just goes to show how far the overall caliber of America as a nation has slipped. I include myself when I say that . . .

2) On the bright side, the Ron Paul Revolution is all about restoring the concept of local government and self government in terms of the principle of love (i.e, “love your neighbor as yourself”). Thus, the real issue is not how good a running mate Dr. Paul can find, but how good an ELECTORATE can he find? Folks, we REALLY need to start working ourselves more. We have to make a personal commitment to “walking the walk” as well as “talking the talk” of libertarianism. That’s a sobering, as well as a liberating, realization. If the government is to be returned to us, that’s a heavy responsibility on our shoulders. Our forefathers were up to that responsibility; are we? We need to start practicing what we preach, and we need to start mentoring others. If we DON’T do our part, the Ron Paul Revolution could fizzle even if he gets elected. On the other hand, if we DO do our part, the Revolution might succeed in the long run even if he doesn’t get elected.

By: Joshua Katz

Joshua Katz — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 07:04:44 +0000

I really have two choices. The practical side of me says that the most important issue is the war, that’s what he’s going to beat Hillary on, and that our priority needs to be winning the election. That side of me says Dennis Kuchinich. The principled libertarian side of me says there’s simply no option other than Lew Rockwell, in my mind the undisputed leader of modern American libertarianism. Some other people who might seem like good choices, but who I would disagree with:
Karen – no good, he needs her as Sec of Defense
Napolitano – Attorney General, and the likely first pick for any SC openings that develop during his 8 years
Buchanan – he doesn’t add what Kuchinich adds as far as electability, he carries a ton of baggage, and his libertarian streak is impaired by his farm socialism and protectionism
Walter Williams – the running mate can’t be pro-war, period
Stossel, Gillete, Dobbs, Eastwood, Colbert – come on, let’s put up someone who’s run for office before. Putting in a magician or comedian will pretty much guarantee a Dem victory
McCain – are you joking?
Huckabee, Keyes – again, no pro-war VP

Mackay, well, not too bad, really. I wouldn’t have much of a problem with Ventura either. Bloomberg, come on. Can you think of a less libertarian politician?

I think Barr would be a good choice as well.

By: eaglescout

eaglescout — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 05:17:07 +0000

Huckabee *was* listed twice. This is now fixed and didn’t affect the vote count.

By: Carla

Carla — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:06:12 +0000

It’s hard to pick from so many good candidates but keep in mind Ron Paul is a no-compromise politician and I don’t see him choosing anyone who would oppose his own views. Candidates that are pro-war such as Huckabee and Tancredo just wouldn’t have a chance and rightfully so. It would have to be a very strong supporter of all of Dr. Paul’s ideals as he will need that tackling with the establishment in Washington. You’re right about Walter Williams and his skin color but his credentials are what’s most important. Ron Paul supporters would not want Dr. Paul to chose based on anything but absolute qualifications and credibility. I would expect that from Ron Paul. Mike Huckabee is listed twice, why is that? He would be a poor choice since he is pro-war and as you say, has liberal fiscal policies that would clash with Ron Paul’s. Remember the VP has to complement Ron Paul not oppose him.

By: Christopher Witmer

Christopher Witmer — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 05:44:22 +0000

A few comments.
1) Why is Mike Huckabee listed twice?
2) I would really like to see a vote where people could enter their first, second, and third choices for VP.
3) I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Relfe’s endorsement of Mike Huckabee. I’m as much of a Bible-thumper as you could find, and I’m inclined to follow Ussher’s chronology that says the age of the earth is measured in thousands, not millions or billions, of years. So I think Mike Huckabee’s born-again Christian faith is just great. But ever since the sharp disagreement between Huckabee and Paul over the Iraq War, I think the chances of them ending up on the same ticket are very small indeed, unless perhaps Huckabee has a change of heart. Also, Huckabee’s views on taxation seem to be quite out of synch with those of Paul. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pLOC4krZI4 ) If somehow that clip has managed to completely mis-represent Huckabee, I will be more than happy to be corrected! In fact, I would love it if someone like Mike Huckabee could be reconciled with Ron Paul, but those two issues I referred certainly count as among the biggest and I think they are not on the same page to a degree that I would want to recommend Huckabee. I will grant you one thing — he has valuable high-level political experience, and that certainly counts for something. But I think such experience is less important for the VP candidate than for the person running for the office of president.
4) For what it’s worth, I voted for Walter Williams as VP. Not only do I think the color of his skin would be a great asset (sorry for the crass way of putting it), I think he would do a great job of running the country in the event that Ron Paul got bumped off by the “New World Order” international bankers who stand to be the big losers if Paul gets elected and pulls the plug on their counterfeiting scheme.

By: Michael Relfe

Michael Relfe — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:20:14 +0000

Huckabee has proven conservative values, experience as a Governor (just like Ronald Reagan), is young, intelligent and energetic and has a strong presence. That is, he projects himself well.

He agrees with most of the important things that Ron Paul promotes.

In addition he is well known within the Republican party, which is very important.

He doesn’t come from from big money and is not beholden to special interests.

He brings with him political support which is very important for winning the election.

Watch his videos at his website. He would make a fine Vice President and apprentice to Ron Paul.

Michael Relfe

By: Mark Erwin

Mark Erwin — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:43:58 +0000

I vote for Paul Craig Roberts, former Undersecretary of the Treasury under Reagan and the father of supply-side economics.

He is as anti-war and pro-peace, Constitution, sound money and freedom as they come.

With Paul Craig Roberts as veep, the criminal spook-state wouldn’t dare assassinate President Paul.

By: Clare

Clare — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:56:02 +0000

Hank Williams Jr. would be a wonderful running mate for Ron Paul. Paul / Williams 2008

By: Erik

Erik — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:57:41 +0000

Suggestions: Dr. Mary J. Ruwart - activist and author (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Ruwart) John Mackey - founder of Whole Foods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mackey_(businessman)) Russell Means - activist, lecturer, businessman (http://www.russellmeans.com/)

By: eaglescout

eaglescout — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:28:02 +0000

Michael Badnarik was just added. Thanks.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:35:22 +0000

Add Michael Badnarik. He understands the constitution and would be a good choice. Otherwise I voted for John Stossel because he has an understanding of free markets, and speaking ability from being a reporter.

By: eaglescout

eaglescout — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:57:03 +0000

Giuliani and Robertson are not on. They will never be.

By: Kyle M

Kyle M — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:48:15 +0000

Lets see, if any of these candidates endorse Giuliani, they should be ruled out.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/11/robertson_to_endorse_giuliani.html