All these comments bemoaning how "crazy" and "extreme" Ron Paul is supposed to be would have gotten under my skin at one time, but now they just amuse me, The enemies of liberty finally see the long-term impact of Ron Paul's campaign on the minds and hearts of Americans and they are going into full-blown panic mode.
Unfortunately - civility and a firm grasp of logic not being most garden-variety statists' strong suit - the only tools left in their arsenal now are sophomoric shaming and social ostracism attempts using flaccid and meaningless buzzwords. "Radical!" "Crazy!" "Extreme!" is the kind of rubbish they bleat about when they can no longer find coherent justifications for their barbarically coercive models of society.
PUBLIC OPINION > A Libertarian Can Be Elected President One Day
SodaHead News
2012/05/16 22:00:00
As with his 1988 and 2008 presidential campaigns, Ron Paul was able to accumulate an enormously active and responsive following this year, but once again, he's wound up a little short. He's run as a third-party libertarian and as a Republican; he's run in good times and bad; he's remained (relatively) honest and incorruptible in the eyes of the public. Still, nothing. If he can't make it to the Oval Office, will a libertarian candidate ever have a shot? We asked the public.
The results were pretty close, but in politics, you don't need much of a margin to win. 53% is more than enough to land the presidency, even if you're Grover Cleveland. If we acted like everything that hasn't happened yet could never happen, humanity would never move forward. Will it happen? Who knows. But the point is, it could. This isn't about whether or not you'd want a libertarian president, but whether or not it would be possible to break the two-party system and elect someone outside of the box. As the Top Comment wrote, "At this point, they can only try to forestall the inevitable. A free and voluntary society is coming."
Libertarians Have Faith
Conservatives were a little more likely than liberals to trust that a libertarian president could win, but they were both unconvinced. Same goes for moderates. The only political demographics that thought it could happen were libertarians (obviously) and political "others." The real kicker was how many voters fell into those categories -- 45% combined.
Smokers Could See It Happening
One thing we've noticed in the past is a correlation between smokers and libertarian thinking. We've suggested that maybe recent proposals threatening to slap graphic warnings on packs, or jack the price of a pack up to $100, are the reason smokers are so like-minded. Here, again, smokers were much more likely than nonsmokers to believe libertarians could take the presidency.
High School Hot Spot
In his books, Ron Paul describes the overwhelming response he's gotten from college students who are frustrated with the rigid two-party political structure, but the breakdown shows that college students are no more likely than anyone else. In fact, high school students were the real supporters here. 84% of high schoolers said it's possible -- almost as much as the libertarians themselves.
If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about libertarian candidates. We'd love to hear from you!
The reality is that our national political environment will never elect 3rd party candidates. The whole system is stacked against it. For practical and strategic reasons, I've come to the point where I agree wholeheartedly with Reagan's view that what we need is not a 3rd party alternative to the Republicans & Democrats; what we need (as conservatives and libertarians) is a re-vitalized and conservatively re-oriented Republican party.
The TEA party movement began this process a few years ago, I think. The natural home for serious limited-government libertarians is the Republican party -- but not the current establishment RINO dominated Republican party.
We libertarians need to abandon the Libertarian party and attempt to take over the Republican party the same way the Progressives took over the Democratic party over the past decade. Thanks to the TEA party movement, the takeover is already well underway. We...
The reality is that our national political environment will never elect 3rd party candidates. The whole system is stacked against it. For practical and strategic reasons, I've come to the point where I agree wholeheartedly with Reagan's view that what we need is not a 3rd party alternative to the Republicans & Democrats; what we need (as conservatives and libertarians) is a re-vitalized and conservatively re-oriented Republican party.
The TEA party movement began this process a few years ago, I think. The natural home for serious limited-government libertarians is the Republican party -- but not the current establishment RINO dominated Republican party.
We libertarians need to abandon the Libertarian party and attempt to take over the Republican party the same way the Progressives took over the Democratic party over the past decade. Thanks to the TEA party movement, the takeover is already well underway. We need to register to vote as Republicans and keep purging the party of progressives such as Dick Lugar and Arlen Specter.
You hear a lot of whining and complaining from the Left-wing media about how the Republican party has moved so far to the Right, but it's not true. Not yet. But that's what they fear is happening. The truth is that the Democratic party was hijacked by the Progressive movement and moved so far Left that even moderate RINO Republicans seem like conservative firebrands to them, and they're frustrated that the Republicans won't move even further to the Left anymore.
And now the conservative and Libertarian-minded TEA party movement threatens to take over the Republican party, and the Progressives are terrified.
I believe so.
I don't make the distinction (lib, mod, con), i just call it the way it is: If you do this, you are not a libertarian. Just look at those "close the border and increase military spending" libertarians. We call those Republicans.
Libertarianism is popular these days. Instead of having 100 libertarians in a room disagreeing about a certain issue, you now have 1000 more libertarians disagreeing about a certain issue.
The fauxbertarians will be easily spotted. They are usually found rallying behind some neocon at a Tea Party rally. The rest will be found using an ipod in a dirty tent just outside the city hall.
What libertarians oppose, on principle, is excessive and overreaching federal government intrusion into the lives and decisions of free citizens. There is no "moderate" version of this basic position.
I only use this term due to the amount of LINOs here. My definition may not be accurate, but it makes logical sense to me. I'd consider supporting a moderate degree of libertarianism in the future. I am not interested in abolishing public libraries or universities.
Are we done now because I really am not interested in keeping this convesation going.
He has often said that he wants to return the Republican Party to its roots. So no as defined today he does not follow the Republican Party values. This is why the GOP has backed a neocon and globalist for the current status quo.
None so blind as those who refuse to see ... this country was made great by following our Constitution.
On another note, I think its 3 Supreme Court judges who are coming up to retirement or ready to die in office ... I'd rather have a proven constitutionalist picking the next supreme court judges than a lying flip-flopping failed one-term governor gloabalist who supports the Patriot Act and the NDAA!!
The roots of the Republican party isn't libertarianism
NDAA and patriot act have nothing to do with this discussion.
The NDAA and the Patriot Act have everything to do with the Constitution ... still haven't a clue have you.
Do you even know what the NDAA is? Its not a single policy...The NDAA is a yearly fiscal policy which allocates money for defense spending under certain guidelines...Section 1021 was block a Judge a couple days ago because of the wording used.
The patriot act doesn't affect you unless you are a terrorist? NO liberties were taken from you..
And Obviously, both the NDAA and patriot act are constitutional...
Neither the Patriot Act of the NDAA is constitutional ... lol